One World Government II - (the real thread)

[boxcar]

I'd like to continue with this interesting topic by making a case for why I believe the entire world is heading in the direction of a global governing body.

In that mistitled One World Government thread, I demonstrated from scripture that there was precedence in human history for all men coming together -- for all mankind "uniting", but that was not in God's game plan at that time. So, he slowed man's plans down a bit by putting a pretty big crimp in man's communication apparatus and further complicated man's life by scattering all men across the earth.

But it's also important to understand why the sons and daughters of Shem, Ham and Japheth wanted to build this tower. What was their motivation? In a word: Idolaltry. The Achilles heel of Man is idolatry. Man must worship something. And it was customary in those times to build places of worship and sacrifice in "high places" (Lev 26:30, Ps 78:58, Jer 7:31, etc.). In these "high places", they would, then, erect their graven images, altars, etc.

In this Tower of Babel account, we read that men wanted to occupy God's space -- they wanted to ascend to his throne in heaven. I have to think they desired to be like Him, but not in a good way. And this was not an isolated or unique desire. Human history is replete with records of Man worshiping himself. But there is no more graphic account of idolatry in all the world than what is revealed for us in the bible -- in Daniel 3:ff when Nebuchadnezzar, the great king of Babylon, ordered that a huge image of gold be erected (probably of himself, for he was full of pride) and that the command go out in all his great kingdom that "all" the peoples, nations and men of every language fall down and worship the image that Nebuchadnezzar ordered to be built. To be sure, this account was but a microcosm of what is, yet, to come. It's no wonder at all that the world system in the Book of Revelations is likened to "Babylon"; for the entire world is filled with spiritual idolatry and harlotries. All the godless world fits the ancient Babylonian mold perfectly. Once again, we have precedence in human history for all the end time prophetic events to come to past. While man's technological advances, throughout all these many centuries, might have changed the outward look and feel of this world, man himself, however, still has the same ol', same ol' sin nature. What Man was back in ancient history, man still is now. He has not changed one iota.

Over a year ago, I wrote about a universal presumption that is prevalent in all cultures, in all societies in all the world. This presumption dealt with Human Relationships in that all men are presumed to be untrustworthy until proven otherwise. In my next post in this thread (not to be confused with that other thread with that misleading name :) ), we'll take up another Universal Experience -- a fundamental characteristic of all life -- life in the Animal Kingdom and in the Human Realm, and I will show you how sin-filled human institutions try to capitalize on this universal human experience for purposes of gaining and retaining power and wealth. There is a very clear and recognizable direction in which world governments are headed. Most world governments have been moving in one direction for quite some time now. And certainly, if this is true, this would be a prerequisite to a "unified" world -- to a world eventually "uniting".

Boxcar

[ddog]

do your god a favor and stop now!

[exactaplayer]

Don't stop Boxcar.
He is the all knowing one. He knows the truth about why we bombed the moon. Actually Obama was not born in the U.S. he was created on the Moon. The recent bombing was an attempt at obliterating Obama's actual creation certificate.
The Moon folk have been trying to take over here and create their One World Government for years. It dates back to about 1765 when, according to the London Press, the cow jumped over the moon.
This pissed the moonies off, and today we are seeing the results of their anger.
It is not just the implantation of Obama that they are implementing in their quest for total control
They have infiltrated the MSM and convinced them to promote H1N1 vaccination. Boxcar knows this is just a ploy to get our youth doped up enough to sing songs in praise of Obama.
Boxcar is also privy to the truth behind the health care reform crowd. He knows the real reason for this is to force feed our fellow patriots Green Cheese. The moon of course having an over supply of Green Cheese.
I could go on but will yield the balance of my time to the chair.

[mostpost]

Don't stop Boxcar.
He is the all knowing one. He knows the truth about why we bombed the moon. Actually Obama was not born in the U.S. he was created on the Moon. The recent bombing was an attempt at obliterating Obama's actual creation certificate.
The Moon folk have been trying to take over here and create their One World Government for years. It dates back to about 1765 when, according to the London Press, the cow jumped over the moon.
This pissed the moonies off, and today we are seeing the results of their anger.
It is not just the implantation of Obama that they are implementing in their quest for total control
They have infiltrated the MSM and convinced them to promote H1N1 vaccination. Boxcar knows this is just a ploy to get our youth doped up enough to sing songs in praise of Obama.
Boxcar is also privy to the truth behind the health care reform crowd. He knows the real reason for this is to force feed our fellow patriots Green Cheese. The moon of course having an over supply of Green Cheese.
I could go on but will yield the balance of my time to the chair.
Post # 3 makes a lot more sense than Post #1 ;)

[Tom]

It does?
How so?
It totally fails to address any of the point Boxcar made.
It was a shallow, troll reply to a serious thread starter.
I assume you are more interested in troll replies than discussion?

Help me out here.

In another thread, the poster claimed he did not engage righties in discussions here. I can see why if this is an example of his debating skills.:rolleyes:

[Bochall]

I could not have written a better post myself...well done!:ThmbUp: :ThmbUp: :ThmbUp:

[Bochall]

.

In another thread, the poster claimed he did not engage righties in discussions here. I can see why if this is an example of his debating skills.:rolleyes: He probably just refuses to get into an intellectual discussion with an unarmed man.

[exactaplayer]

why so harsh Tom?
I was supporting Boxcar and his visions. I did mention the actual non-U.S. birth of Obama which you have supported. Was there a point I missed that you would like me to comment on ?
I will not respond to your sarcastic :rolleyes: statement regarding my debating skills as this is the area where the boss comes in and throws a flag on me.

[Tom]

You are the same level of debate as he is, so I can understand your bewilderment. Being afraid to engage is not the same thing as winning. IF you have no faith in your position, you should probably not advertise that fact. Better let people wonder about you that to prove their suspicions.

[exactaplayer]

You are the same level of debate as he is, so I can understand your bewilderment. Being afraid to engage is not the same thing as winning. IF you have no faith in your position, you should probably not advertise that fact. Better let people wonder about you that to prove their suspicions.
I see and what, precisely have you added to this debate ?

[boxcar]

I see and what, precisely have you added to this debate ?

Far more than you have, since he has refrained from making a fool of himself via gratuitous insults that add nothing to and, in fact, only serve to detract from the substance of my post. Therefore, since you, sir, have have tried to divert attention away from the subject matter at hand, whereas Tom has not (whether he agrees with me or not), that puts him in a gentleman's league and leaves you with the dubious honor of being recognized as a distinguished charter member in The League of Fools.

Boxcar

[Greyfox]

In my next post in this thread (not to be confused with that other thread with that misleading name :) ), we'll take up another Universal Experience -- a fundamental characteristic of all life -- life in the Animal Kingdom and in the Human Realm, and I will show you how sin-filled human institutions try to capitalize on this universal human experience for purposes of gaining and retaining power and wealth. There is a very clear and recognizable direction in which world governments are headed. Most world governments have been moving in one direction for quite some time now. And certainly, if this is true, this would be a prerequisite to a "unified" world -- to a world eventually "uniting".

Boxcar

I applaud Boxcar for opening this thread.
He's right. The other thread should have been entitled:
"Should Obama sign the Copenhagen agreement?"
Responses to that question should be addressed on that first thread.

From what I've read Boxcar can quote The Bible perhaps as well or better than any posters on this board and certainly better than me.
I'm not sure that he can quote the Koran.
However, from what I've observed, independent of what big money and governments of the world try to do, there is a large impediment in the way of having One World Government.
That impediment is the "Clash of Religions."
Any way you carve it, radical Islamicists have a single purpose of exterminating Christianity.
Naturally Christians defend or even attack their jihads.
Maybe I'm blind but personally I can't ever see the possibility of
One World Government unless we were attacked by extra terrestrials.
Of course, some like the late William Cooper (see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Milton_William_Cooper)
have suggested that their is already a "Secret Government" or "The Illuminati"
already run the world and we don't know about it.
That I don't know about.
But I do know that the clash between religions is the major obstacle at this point in the planet's history.
The internet, modern communications, discussion, may help improve relations. In contrast, as modern technology evolves so will the resources of terrorists who would destroy the Western World if they could.

At any rate, good for you Boxcar in starting this thread.

[Tom]

I find it very interesting, and will have to read it more carefully, and put it into some kind of perspective before I have the audacity to comment on it.

[hazzardm]

I find it very interesting, and will have to read it more carefully, and put it into some kind of perspective before I have the audacity to comment on it.

He that answereth a matter before he heareth it, it is folly and shame unto him. (Proverbs 18:13)

[boxcar]

He that answereth a matter before he heareth it, it is folly and shame unto him. (Proverbs 18:13)

Very good Haz. Very good.

Boxcar

[boxcar]

I applaud Boxcar for opening this thread.
He's right. The other thread should have been entitled:
"Should Obama sign the Copenhagen agreement?"
Responses to that question should be addressed on that first thread.

From what I've read Boxcar can quote The Bible perhaps as well or better than any posters on this board and certainly better than me.
I'm not sure that he can quote the Koran.
However, from what I've observed, independent of what big money and governments of the world try to do, there is a large impediment in the way of having One World Government.
That impediment is the "Clash of Religions."
Any way you carve it, radical Islamicists have a single purpose of exterminating Christianity.
Naturally Christians defend or even attack their jihads.
Maybe I'm blind but personally I can't ever see the possibility of
One World Government unless we were attacked by extra terrestrials.
Of course, some like the late William Cooper (see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Milton_William_Cooper)
have suggested that their is already a "Secret Government" or "The Illuminati"
already run the world and we don't know about it.
That I don't know about.
But I do know that the clash between religions is the major obstacle at this point in the planet's history.
The internet, modern communications, discussion, may help improve relations. In contrast, as modern technology evolves so will the resources of terrorists who would destroy the Western World if they could.

At any rate, good for you Boxcar in starting this thread.

Well, I never said that there weren't obstacles. But then...is there anything too hard for God to overcome, since he's directing this play to its finale?

But I will address this religion issue later. Everything in its time.

Boxcar

[46zilzal]

It is hard to believe in this day and age that someone could still cling to mythology to direct their lives...Pitiful

[bigmack]

It is hard to believe in this day and age that someone could still cling to mythology to direct their lives...Pitiful
Let me get this straight. You lose a wife to her addiction & then ridicule and disparage others because of their addictions for your amusement...

You're a 60 something year old adult and you pimp someone because of their faith and call it pitiful?

Swell that you and the other adolescents in this thread had your little fun in the pile on. Most folk have figured out how to handle such matters in a decorous fashion irrespective of their stance/beliefs.

Someone crack out a folding table. We've got several to park at the kiddie table.

[boxcar]

It is hard to believe in this day and age that someone could still cling to mythology to direct their lives...Pitiful

I just don't know what I'd do without your brilliant and insightful posts, zil. :rolleyes: But the prophet spoke well when he said about these times "...but the wicked will act wickedly and none of the wicked will understand..." (Dan 12:10)

Meanwhile, enjoy the blissfulness of your ignorance while you still have your life breath within you.

Boxcar

[exactaplayer]

Let me get this straight. You lose a wife to her addiction & then ridicule and disparage others because of their addictions for your amusement...

You're a 60 something year old adult and you pimp someone because of their faith and call it pitiful?

Swell that you and the other adolescents in this thread had your little fun in the pile on. Most folk have figured out how to handle such matters in a decorous fashion irrespective of their stance/beliefs.

Someone crack out a folding table. We've got several to park at the kiddie table.
speaking of adolescents why don't you blast em with your giv-o-meter ?

[boxcar]

No, I did not make an error in the sub-title. I used the definite article and capitalized if for good reason. Why? Because while we all share other common experiences in this life, there is this one experience that is the "mother" of them all. There is this one experience which can best sum up all those others. There is one experience that can best characterize all living things.

In that other "one world" thread, I stated that the world is a stage upon which we are the willing actors acting out our roles, and the sovereign God of the universe is the grand director of everything under the sun. If this is true, then how would we characterize this play? Is it a Comedy? A Love Story? An Action Thriller? A Horror Story? Yes, to some extent it's all these things. All of us have had these kinds of moments, haven't we? But none of these best describe the prevalent Mood of Life. But wouldn't Drama fit here very well? Pure, unadulterated drama? This would best describe the "mood of life". Drama that is sprinkled with moments of joy, happiness, love, peace -- but also with a host of unpleasant and darker experiences, as well. These latter experiences would include suffering, turmoil, misery and death.

So, what would the central theme of this drama be? What one word would best describe our life experience? What would best sum up all our experiences -- the good and the bad? What would the overarching experience be? For example, many of us don't read newspapers because they are filled with bad news. Reading newspapers or even listening to the news can be depressing, can it not? The world certainly seems to have more than its fair share of bad news coming out if it, doesn't it? If the world was filled with good news -- pleasant reports -- we would gladly want to read about these things, wouldn't we? But sadly, this isn't the case, generally.

The reason so many us don't want to listen to the news, don't want to read newspapers is because we're reluctant to read about other people's struggles when we have our own hands full tending to our own! I think the best word that would succinctly sum up The Universal Experience is Struggle. From beginning to end, life is, generally, one huge struggle. If any of us are nature buffs, enjoy nature documentaries, etc., we know this is true in the Animal Kingdom and it's just as true in the human realm. Each of us struggles with our problems -- our own "demons". These struggles can take on many forms, assume many shapes and different proportions. Some of us struggle with health issues all our lives. Some of us struggle with finances. Some of us struggle with our personal relationships. Some of us struggle with our careers. Others struggle with their addictions. And some of us struggle spiritually with God, not necessarily on the order Jacob did (Gen 32.22ff), but a genuine struggle nonetheless. In short: Life can be downright hard to live for the vast majority of us!

This universal experience resulted from the Fall. God did not intend for it to be this way. But all creation was cursed after the Fall, including the animal kingdom (Gen 3:14). The Woman would struggle during birth because her pain would be multiplied greatly and she would struggle with the battle of wills with husband (Gen 3:16). And the Man would struggle just to obtain his sustenance from the earth. But most importantly, the struggle for life itself would be swallowed up in death. The ultimate struggle would inevitably be lost.

But the apostle said about this age and the one to come:

Rom 8:19-23
19 For the anxious longing of the creation waits eagerly for the revealing of the sons of God. 20 For the creation was subjected to futility, not of its own will, but because of Him who subjected it, in hope 21 that the creation itself also will be set free from its slavery to corruption into the freedom of the glory of the children of God. 22 For we know that the whole creation groans and suffers the pains of childbirth together until now. 23 And not only this, but also we ourselves, having the first fruits of the Spirit, even we ourselves groan within ourselves, waiting eagerly for our adoption as sons, the redemption of our body.
NASB

The whole creation longs to be set free once and for all from all its struggles.
What Paul wrote above about the creation's present condition perfectly characterizes life as we all know it -- reality as we know it. Life is pure, unadulterated drama that is characterized by all its various struggles -- certainly punctuated with lighter and more cheerful moments, for which, even for these, we should all be thankful to God above. But a life full of struggles is the norm for most of us.

Int the next segment, I will show how godless human governments tend to exploit and capitalize on this Universal Experience for their ascendancy to power over the masses.

Boxcar

[Greyfox]

This universal experience resulted from the Fall. God did not intend for it to be this way. But all creation was cursed after the Fall, including the animal kingdom (Gen 3:14). Boxcar

"God did not intend for it to be this way?"
If God couldn't get what he intended, was he God?
If even God couldn't get what he intended, how can man ever hope to?

[boxcar]

"God did not intend for it to be this way?"
If God couldn't get what he intended, was he God?
If even God couldn't get what he intended, how can man ever hope to?

No! God told Adam and Eve what the penalty would be for disobedience. God simply gave our first parents all the rope they wanted. They hung themselves. He didn't. Besides, would you want God messin' with your will? With your choices?

Furthermore, God will eventually get what he wants when Jesus returns to restore all things to their former glory. Score One for God and 0 for the Evil One and his merry band of followers.

And just what are the intentions of man?

Boxcar

[Tom]

46, you had better ask the stupid question to the billions of believers on this planet. You are the minority.

[Greyfox]

No! God told Adam and Eve what the penalty would be for disobedience. God simply gave our first parents all the rope they wanted. They hung themselves.
Boxcar

Yes. But being "All Knowing" he would have known what their decision would be sooner or later. So I guess you can say that this is not the way he intended it be, but he knew the way it would become. That begs the question as to why did he make them with that weakness? One can only glean that he intended to make them that way and hence things became the way he intended them to be.
So your original comment that God did not intend for it to be this way
has to be wrong. Either God knew what he was doing or he didn't. If he didn't know what he was doing, he wouldn't be God. If he knew that he had built a weakness into them, he knew they would succumb to it. Hence I conclude that God did intend for it to be this way.

At any rate, I'll concede you know Biblical text better than I do so won't disagree further. I just felt that your comment, human, was logically flawed.

[boxcar]

Yes. But being "All Knowing" he would have known what their decision would be sooner or later. So I guess you can say that this is not the way he intended it be, but he knew the way it would become. That begs the question as to why did he make them with that weakness? One can only glean that he intended to make them that way and hence things became the way he intended them to be.
So your original comment that God did not intend for it to be this way
has to be wrong. Either God knew what he was doing or he didn't. If he didn't know what he was doing, he wouldn't be God. If he knew that he had built a weakness into them, he knew they would succumb to it. Hence I conclude that God did intend for it to be this way.

At any rate, I'll concede you know Biblical text better than I do so won't disagree further. I just felt that your comment, human, was logically flawed.

No, it's not. You're confusing intent with omniscience. Two very different issues. God did not want our first parents to fall. It was not his intention to have them sin. But knowing that they would sin, he nonetheless permitted the fall to achieve his divine purposes. He allowed sin to enter the world, although in a very real sense, sin entered the universe when Satan fell, which is a another topic. (Don't forget: The "serpent" tempted Eve with a lie.)

Now, you might ask the really good question as to why did God permit the temptation? Why did he allow Adam and Eve to sin, knowing they would sin? The very short answer to this thorny theological question is that God's standard for communion and fellowship with him is righteousness. This standard, though, goes well beyond mere innocence or even goodness because righteousness requires a test for obedience to divine law. Consider the facts of the Fall for a moment.

In the Garden, there was only one law -- only one command -- keeping in mind that Adam and Eve had no knowledge of good or evil prior to the fall. Interestingly, this "law" in the garden prohibited them from eating fruit from a certain tree. But when did fruit eating become sinful? It's not in a post-fall world. But in a pre-fall world, where our parents had no knowledge of good or evil, it became "sinful" for one particular tree. But was the eating or not eating of the fruit the real test? No, it was not! The fruit from a specific tree was merely the instrument used in the test for righteousness. The real test involved Adam and Eve's faith. The real test was whether or not they would believe God or believe the tempter's lie.

Did not the serpent immediately plant the subtle seeds of doubt in Eve's mind with respect to God's veracity, when he asked, "Indeed, has God said, 'You shall not eat from any tree of the garden'?" Then when Eve told the serpent what God said, the serpent became more audacious and more direct by essentially calling God himself a liar when he replied, "You surely shall not die!" He clearly implied that God was a liar!

So, the reason for the Fall was that man had to be tested before he could commune and have open fellowship with his Creator for all eternity. Righteousness demands a moral testing. Scripture is quite clear on this:

Rom 4:1-3
4:1 What then shall we say that Abraham, our forefather according to the flesh, has found? 2 For if Abraham was justified by works, he has something to boast about; but not before God. 3 For what does the Scripture say? "And Abraham believed God, and it was reckoned to him as righteousness."
NASB

Abraham believed what? What did God tell him that he believed? For one thing, he believed God when God told him to pack his bags and get out of Dodge because he was going to give him a great tract of land and make a great nation out of him. And Abraham believed all the promises of God even after God told him to take his only son (Issac) up to the mountain and offer him up as a sacrifice, etc. Now there was a real test!

And this is why Abraham was "justified", that is to say, "declared righteous". Abraham wasn't an innocent man or merely a good man -- He was declared righteous (justified) in God's sight because he believed God, totally unlike Adam and Eve. Abraham's faith was tested and he passed with flying colors.


Boxcar

[hazzardm]

Furthermore, God will eventually get what he wants when Jesus returns to restore all things to their former glory. Score One for God and 0 for the Evil One and his merry band of followers.
Boxcar

Knowing this first, that no prophecy of the scripture is of any private interpretation. (2 Peter 1:20 )

[boxcar]

Knowing this first, that no prophecy of the scripture is of any private interpretation. (2 Peter 1:20 )

And your point is?

Boxcar

[hazzardm]

Some of these interpretations sound pretty personalized

[boxcar]

Some of these interpretations sound pretty personalized

So that's what you took away from that verse? You think the verse is talking about people who read and interpret scripture? You never tried understanding that verse in its context, have you? You know, context does count for something when trying to understand scripture -- maybe it contributes only 80% or so -- but it's something, right?

Do yourself a favor: Read the surrounding verses -- let's say from 2Pet 1:12 - 2:3, and then tell me who Peter is talking about here. Is he talking about prophets who claim to give prophetic utterances from God, or is he talking about readers of scripture? You tell me.

Boxcar

[Show Me the Wire]

Yes. But being "All Knowing" he would have known what their decision would be sooner or later. So I guess you can say that this is not the way he intended it be, but he knew the way it would become. That begs the question as to why did he make them with that weakness? One can only glean that he intended to make them that way and hence things became the way he intended them to be.
So your original comment that God did not intend for it to be this way
has to be wrong. Either God knew what he was doing or he didn't. If he didn't know what he was doing, he wouldn't be God. If he knew that he had built a weakness into them, he knew they would succumb to it. Hence I conclude that God did intend for it to be this way.

At any rate, I'll concede you know Biblical text better than I do so won't disagree further. I just felt that your comment, human, was logically flawed.

Greyfaox:

A better way to phrase your question about GOD'S knowing about human decisions, is contained in Genesis.

And it came to pass, when men began to multiply on the face
of the earth, and daughters were born unto them, That the
sons of God saw the daughters of men that they were fair;
and they took them wives of all which they chose. And the
LORD said, My spirit shall not always strive with man, for
that he also is flesh: yet his days shall be an hundred and
twenty years. There were giants in the earth in those days;
and also after that, when the sons of God came in unto the
daughters of men, and they bare children to them, the same
became mighty men which were of old, men of renown. And GOD
saw that the wickedness of man was great in the earth, and
that every imagination of the thoughts of his heart was only
evil continually. And it repented the LORD that he had made
man on the earth, and it grieved him at his heart. And the
LORD said, I will destroy man whom I have created from the
face of the earth; both man, and beast, and the creeping
thing, and the fowls of the air; for it repenteth me that I
have made them." (Genesis 6:1-7)

According to this passage GOD regrets, grieves and is sorry that HE created man, because angelic beings (sons of GOD) saw the daughters of men and put GOD'S incompatible spirit with flesh into the flesh. It seems GOD is having doubts about HIS creation.

I post this to further the discussion and to illustrate the complexity of scriptural study.

[Greyfox]

Greyfaox:

According to this passage GOD regrets, grieves and is sorry that HE created man, because angelic beings (sons of GOD) saw the daughters of men and put GOD'S incompatible spirit with flesh into the flesh. It seems GOD is having doubts about HIS creation.

.

So God didn't foresee what he was making? That paints him/her out to be a bit of a bumbler.

[Show Me the Wire]

So God didn't foresee what he was making? That paints him/her out to be a bit of a bumbler.

Maybe or maybe not. I pointed out a better passage to frame your question to Boxcar about intent.

[boxcar]

Karl Marx was right: "The opium of the masses is religion" -- not to be confused, however, with true religion; for "pure and undefiled religion" requires that one keep himself "unstained by the world", i.e. the world system. It requires that we love our neighbor who is in the world, while simultaneously rejecting the ungodly world system (Jas 1:27).

It cannot be refuted that the world, generally, is quite religious. Religions abound upon this earth. Even within the realm of Christendom, there are more sects, denominations and cults than one could ever imagine. But the overwhelming, vast majority of all these religions are false, simply because they are worldly in nature. They are useless and vain religions that find their ground in dark ignorance such as what Paul encountered in Athens on his missionary travels (Act 17:20-23). And what makes them worldly is that when it comes down to it, Man is at the center of all these false religions. In the final analysis, Man worships himself through own his man-made religion.

But in this day and age, Man worships a new god. In the old style religion, man pretended to worship a god "above" (made in man's image, of course). In this "new style", more modern religion, Man much more overtly worships the State. The State, in very many nations, have all but replaced God. And this was a pretty easy thing to accomplish because governments learned that that they could become preeminent, powerful and controlling by merely exploiting their citizens' Universal Experience.

If we were to ask if there exists in this world a dominating political theory or philosophy for the governance of people, how would you respond? Is there one dominating theory? Yes, there most certainly is! Let's call this philosophy Collectivism because this is a very good umbrella-like term. And, of course, there are degrees of collectivism. Certainly, mild, limited forms, such as what formerly existed in this nation, are perfectly fine and legitimate. But the stronger forms such as Socialism (the clear path the U.S. is presently on) and Communism are inherently wicked and perverse.

Collectivism has become so popular and so widespread in the world for several reasons -- even among democratic societies. All politicians have to do in these kinds of societies is 'barter' with the electorate. Politicians only have to promise the people help to ease their Struggle in Life in return for the people's votes in the next election. This is how Socialists or Workers parties stay in power so long. What we have in this situation are two groups of leeches sucking each other's life blood -- or another way of looking at it, the classic quid pro quo situation.

Collectivism, for the most part, is a pretty easy sell because it appeals mainly to the Have Nots in the world who greatly outnumber the Haves (middle + upper classes). On the surface, Collectivism appears to the gullible masses to be a very humane, altruistic and even virtuous form of government. But to those of us who know what it is really is in its stronger forms, we recognize that beneath all those glorious, great sounding promises of human rights, equality and equal outcomes, lies a rotting cancer that ultimately and inevitably will eat away at a society. Collectivism, in its stronger forms, is a thoroughly self-defeating system of government!

The central idea behind collectivism is that advocates for the state to control production and distribution of goods and services. And when a state can do this, it also controls the purse strings of all its citizens! And herein is the Achilles heel to the strong forms of Collectivism because this system of government can only limit real economic growth. It can only stifle it because the system demands bigger and bigger and more expensive government. The system itself demands state spending in order to try to deliver on its ever-growing list of promises. Increased spending requires increased taxes. But the promises never stop. Now that a large segment of the masses are hooked on the state opium, the state dare not stop providing it -- not if the politicos hope for reelection! Pandora's Box has been opened, and now no one can close it! This is precisely why virtually all the socialist countries in the world are steeped in economic problems, and why they sport second-rate economies at best. They are succeeding in spreading the misery of many and easing the pain of some, but it's costing them a fortune!

But this gets much worse. Because the world is, generally, traveling on this Path of Collectivism and the nations' economies are becoming increasingly intertwined, increasingly dependent upon one another, the Have Not Nations are demanding their fair share of the pie. They want a part of the "utopian dream". That paragon of virtue called the U.N. wants to tax the wealthier Nations so that money can be sent to the poor ones. Now, talk about spreading and sharing the misery! But wait! Isn't Collectivism supposed to ease our Struggle -- everyone's struggles?

This is why this system of government is self-defeating. You cannot sustain a society indefinitely on endless Tax and Spend policies. You cannot! it's impossible! Sooner or later, the state will pick the straw that will break the poor camel's back. And when this happens, civil unrest will occur. And things would rapidly go down hill at that point because now the state will encounter bipartisan opposition! Their former allies in the electorate will turn against them for failing to deliver on The Great Promise -- the promise for a better life. And their foes will join forces with the state's former allies because they knew all along that the Collectivist Scheme of governing was just a huge Sham. It was the Mother of all Cons.

But remember: Because nation's economies are so intertwined, so interdependent that the Economic and Political Fall of one or more powerful governments would probably have a domino effect on all the other nations. Nations are no longer isolated entities. Why do you think there is so much global nervousness over the U.S. debt, for example?

As someone once said, "Money is what makes the world go around". Later, it was said, "Follow the money trail". But someone else at a much earlier time wrote,

1 Tim 6:10
10 For the love of money is a root of all sorts of evil...
NASB

In the next segment, I'll show how the structure for a global oligarchy is already in place.

Boxcar

[boxcar]

So God didn't foresee what he was making? That paints him/her out to be a bit of a bumbler.

God doesn't "fore" see or "fore" know anything because these terms imply that he did so merely in Time. God transcends time. God is eternal. God knows all things; for he is the I AM. Yes, God knew that our first parents would fall, just as he knew that Satan and his minions would fall. And he also knew what he would do to remedy the fallen state of many, while allowing others to remain in their condition.

Remember: God gives Man the desires of his sinful heart to show man that, even wen doing this, Man's attempt to usurp God's authority will ultimately fail. A great example of this can be seen when the Israelites insisted on becoming like the sinful nations that surrounded them by having a human king rule over them. They spurned God's rule. Instead of God striking these ungrateful reprobates dead on the spot for even entertaining the thought in their heart, he granted them their wicked desire (1Sam 8:19ff.)

Boxcar