What Must We Do Pre-Collapse?

submitted by EddieC from self.finance

sorted by:
top
newinsightfulfun
you are viewing a single comment's thread.

view the rest of the comments →

[–]UbiquitousCultOfSelf 1 insightful - 2 fun1 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 2 fun -  (24 children)

Nah, skillet, we done.
I'm polite to people who are polite,
one's that are not? Can f' right off.
I get why you get hate on this site, sox is it? You're a dipshit. I can't help if you have sub-par reading comprehension.
You eat all the fecal matter you want, count me out amigo.

[–]Vulptex 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (16 children)

No, Jesus was right. Do good to those who do good to you and those who do bad to you.

[–]UbiquitousCultOfSelf 1 insightful - 2 fun1 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 2 fun -  (15 children)

Of course, He was always right.
But He also threw out the money changers.
He also stated, "You brood of vipers" "You are like whitewashed tombs, which look beautiful on the outside but on the inside are full of dead men's bones and everything unclean. In the same way, on the outside you appear to people as righteous but on the inside you are full of hypocrisy and wickedness."
Said He came to bring the sword, not peace.
Stated that "unless you repent, you will likewise perish"
And told His talmidim to not cast pearls to swine, and that if any town did not receive Him, to shake off the dust as witness against them on the day of judgment.

But yes, peace and love are good.

[–]Vulptex 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (14 children)

None of those things he did with the intent to harm. And he only warned that people would draw the sword because of him, he wasn't doing so or encouraging it. And he was right. Look at all the religious wars in the middle ages.

[–]UbiquitousCultOfSelf 1 insightful - 2 fun1 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 2 fun -  (13 children)

That's a wonderful assertion, but you're incorrect.
Let's instead agree on a better worded compromise.

His intent was not to harm good!

For the words, "you brood of vipers" could not be seen as anything other than harmful (to a contingent working against His plan. That contingent was hypocrisy.)
Likewise He will be The Rider of the White Horse and will lead a battle. Battles are not won by tickle sticks and sticking daisies in rifles. They are won by... not surprisingly, waging war.

Additionally, He didn't decree judgment on the first born of Egypt and their 'gods' and their army by using niceties.
No, there was certainly harm there.
For good measure, realize that all judgment was ceded by haShem to Yeshua, and therefore when He rules and reigns from Jerusalem, He will rule with a rod of iron.
We cannot imagine that a nation that does not send up at least 2 representatives who will have a judgment of rain being withheld will think it is not harming them.

So any milquetoast representation of Him as being only the worldly imagining of "love" and kindness ignores a whole lot.
The Day of the LORD is a day of fierceness and wrath, that day? It's carried out by the judgment of G-d.
And as you'd be well informed to make note of, The Father has entrusted all judgment to the Son.

But I will learn to respect you, as you seek to honor Him.

[–]Vulptex 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (12 children)

The Old Testament is almost all allegorical, and even much of the New. And there was a lot more corruption from scribes and forgers than you realize. He was not afraid to rebuke the Tanakh and religious leaders if they broke the golden rule.

Almost all of the war and judgement type stuff in the New Testament comes from Revelation, which was far from accepted in ancient times. Furthermore, it is the least straightforward book, all mysteries so the Roman government couldn't understand it. And what it prophesies already came to pass 1500 years ago. As for the rest it's mostly "Don't be evil or you'll destroy yourself". Yes, destroy yourself, and many mentions of this were altered by orthodox scribes and changed to "destroyed by God" (1 Corinthians 3:17 is a famous example).

This is all good, but unacceptable for religious institutions that want to control people. So they added in a whole bunch of disgusting pagan ideas like hell.

[–]UbiquitousCultOfSelf 1 insightful - 2 fun1 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 2 fun -  (11 children)

Yeah, no.
Allegorical? Yes, we can reach that level, but things have to be accepted on the Peshat level, the literal and then the higher levels of interpretation, the ones that need 'teased' out.

I reject that there has been any altercation and that any books are missing or not included that should have been included.
A sovereign/supreme G-d who is all powerful watches over His Word to perform it.
Likewise when we have line upon line, precept upon precept, here a little there a little with the guidance of the Ruach, Believers start to become a honed vessel of Adonai Tzevaot.
There is two witnesses many places (that is, corresponding Scripture) for a "Great and Terrible Day of the LORD" and as such, I wouldn't be quick to dismiss it as allegorical. Rather it's those who scoff at the idea that are predicted will be the norm.
They will say, "Where is the return that we've heard of? For since the falling asleep of the fathers such has been promised." (Paraphrased)

We can talk about sheol, gehinnom and how, I agree, it does differ from the norm that Christianity has embraced. Yet, to diminish the impact it will have on anyone living a rebellious sinful life would be a grave (pun) mistake.

[–]Vulptex 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (10 children)

The only sources we have to for that are the Roman Catholic Church and the Chicago Statement on Biblical Inerrancy. Which isn't exactly trustworthy.

Look back in early history. There was no canon of scripture, everything was deuterocanonical and each person used the ones they judged to have been inspired. No two people used the same set of books. The first person with the concept of a Bible was actually Marcion. And the idea that it was literally written by God and dropped out of the sky and impossible to corrupt still wouldn't come about until 1978.

Moreso, early believers did not subscribe to literal interpretations, nor do the authors of or characters in the New Testament.

[–]UbiquitousCultOfSelf 1 insightful - 2 fun1 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 2 fun -  (9 children)

The thing is though, I have zero concept of Catholicism and have studied zero of the "church fathers"
My caring about when things allegedly happened and the wild west idea you have of a canon are also very miniscule.
The TaNaKh was indeed a thing and had nothing to do with Roman Catholicism.
Furthermore, there are many quotes by the talmidim (apostles if you like) whereby they instructed and stated, follow what you've been taught and had personally handed down.
That is not a, "do what seems right in your own eyes" nor is it a "this is all allegorical and everyone alive today and hereafter should think so".

Anything else?

It really boils down to this, either you believe in an All Powerful, All Knowing, All Good and Omnipresent or you do not.
Either you believe as Creator, He has the right to call the shots, and it is to Him you will answer to, or you do not.
Your or my, or any church father you throw a farthing at matters little to the objective truth of it.

[–]Vulptex 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (8 children)

In the days before Israel had a king, everyone did "what was right in his own eyes". That was preferrable; they only got a king because they demanded one. God chose the most trustworthy one among them to be king; and still, every single one of them showed they couldn't be trusted with that kind of power.

If you believe in Jesus, notice how he wasn't afraid to break even the most sacred religious traditions. He criticized the Jews' blind obedience to them, as well as their overly literal interpretations of the Tanakh. A defined Tanakh did not exist back then either. Even the Sadduccees only accepted the Torah (and the same is true of Samartians to this day). The book of Jude quotes the book of Enoch, and there are plenty of apocryphal references in the New Testament. The Jewish Bible wasn't canonized until after the first century, just like the Christian Bible.

Now that we have that out of the way; it was actually a common early Christian (and even Jewish) belief that God is not the creator, the one we call Satan is. True or not, it is hard to dispute that the world as we know it is ruled by evil beings. Just look at all the laws of the universe, they're all horrific; and everything that seems to be good in the world is only something bad deceiving you. The gospel of John and Paul both explicitly state that Satan is the god of this world and the ruler of this world. The contradictions are clearly later insertions.

[–]Site_rly_sux 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (6 children)

What? Dude you kept pestering me with this totally off topic question which you refuse to spell out, just giving me waffly paragraphs

Read this whole rhead again. My comprehension is just fine, thanks, perhaps it's you who should review what a tard you have revealed yourself to be..

"do you think the power dynamic then will shift?"

What the fuck are you talking about? I asked you clarifying questions and this is all you can say to account for yourself.

Hence I am pretty sure this is a white fragility thing. Yeah douchebag, if you have to share a UN with brown people and "pygmies and cannibals" (or whatever other Victorian nonsense words you want to call people) then I HOPE you have diluted power dynamics because you're a dipshit

[–]UbiquitousCultOfSelf 1 insightful - 2 fun1 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 2 fun -  (5 children)

What? Dude you kept pestering me with this totally off topic question which you refuse to spell out, just giving me waffly paragraphs

Read this whole rhead again. My comprehension is just fine, thanks, perhaps it's you who should review what a tard you have revealed yourself to be..

"do you think the power dynamic then will shift?"

What the fuck are you talking about? I asked you clarifying questions and this is all you can say to account for yourself.

Hence I am pretty sure this is a white fragility thing. Yeah douchebag, if you have to share a UN with brown people and "pygmies and cannibals" (or whatever other Victorian nonsense words you want to call people) then I HOPE you have diluted power dynamics because you're a dipshit

lol. You have me laughing bigtime here, twinkletoes.
You're like straight out of a babylon bee parody with your "Victorian nonsense words"
Charming, simply charming. Douchebag coming from the queen of monostat 7. Bro, your dipshitedness will hopefully clear up in a few years. Get some life.

In the meantime, my point since you're too thickheaded to ascertain, but heavy on the ass, was that a one world government will have requirements. Derp.

[–]Site_rly_sux 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (4 children)

Wow. Requirements. Totally a deep and on-topic point bro thanks

[–]UbiquitousCultOfSelf 1 insightful - 2 fun1 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 2 fun -  (3 children)

haha ya got me! Yeah it was a simple point. Guilty.
Your sarcasm is grade A. I'm ok with it.
Makes me wonder why you didn't get it though... but that's something we can bury.

Ok, back to being on-topic points.
Are there any requirements (personal ones on global citizens) that you would not be OK with?
A 'for-example' to most churched people would be the mark of the beast. If you care to, answer the above.

[–]Site_rly_sux 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (2 children)

There are no requirements to live in a world where air travel is happening according to the intl civil aviation org.

There are no requirements to live in a world where phone companies follow protocols agreed via the intl telecoms union.

There are no requirements to live in a world where you can send mail overseas according to Universal Postal Union systems

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_specialized_agencies_of_the_United_Nations

Nothing about world (or local or national) government needs microchips in arms.

Somehow we're managing to handle international maritime traffic without chipping anyone

[–]UbiquitousCultOfSelf 1 insightful - 2 fun1 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 2 fun -  (1 child)

You're right on those things, I would assume.
But the status quo is not progress.
Right now it is clear banks are not happy with the amount of loss they have to suffer on account of identity theft crimes.
Agreed?

Also, it has been alleged here that the CIA or other intelligence agencies, whether with complicitness or 'accidentally' allowed known terrorist to infiltrate the US's borders while being on a blacklist for flights or entry.

Those two things ALONE are enough to warrant a more "secure and sure" way of establishing with (in their mind's) an absolute certainty of identification.

Couple with that a desire by people for a robust system of payment that is "easy" and requires little user intervention to "just make it work" seamlessly.

Now instead of a pledge of allegiance, a social credit score tying each decision whether major or minor would be infinitely valuable to a global government which in order to operate would need to outsource a fair amount of decision making.
Algorithms already exist in the insurance industries for real time ROI calculations. Such calculations will be vital to a social credit score system.

Additionally, there's been a push by HIPAA standards compliance and by patients' advocacy groups to both lock down medical records on a need to know basis, but also have it accessible and portable to the person, and easily accessed by the individual in question and their medical team doing triage or what have you.

And go!

[–]Site_rly_sux 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

I'm sure you can add on a lot of fake paranoid pre-conditions, that make it seem really dystopic.

Fortunately none of the features of global government that we've talked about require any of the fake paranoid pre-conditions.

Mail gets routed between countries without looking up anyone's social credit score.

Cargo liners have a common JSON format for manifest that's shared with all ports on route. Thanks to the International maritime bodies. And the CIA don't need to get involved once