What is wrong with the One World Order?

[Socrates92]

I’m not going to argue this point further, so I will mute now and let whoever wants to disagree and have the last words do so. I don’t indulge these types of theories.

What is the point of chiming in in the first place if you don’t have any intent of supporting your arguments? What does that add to the discussion?

 

[Socrates92]

Meh. I think Christ is right and you’re wrong. See above post.

Which one? Could you quote it?

 

[Nicene]

Post 36, your first post is after it.

 

[Socrates92]

To be honest I’m going with Jesus on this one:
] And you will hear of wars and rumors of wars; see that you are not alarmed; for this must take place, but the end is not yet.
7 For nation will rise against nation, and kingdom against kingdom, and there will be famines and earthquakes in various places:
8all this is but the beginning of the birth-pangs.
9 "Then they will deliver you up to tribulation, and put you to death; and you will be hated by all nations for my name’s sake.

I’m not sure there is necessarily a contradiction. This could easily be referring to a difference time period. A one-world government could easily be preceded by, or succeeded by world wars. For example, this easily could be referring to WW1 and WW2 of the last century.

After all, it says “the end is not yet”, and references “the beginning of the birth pangs”. This begs the question, what follows the beginning? What is being “birthed” by these “pangs” (international war). I don’t think it’s as clear-cut as you think.

Revelation 13, 16-18: All alike, little and great, rich and poor, free men and slaves, must receive a mark from him on their right hands, or on their foreheads, and none might buy or sell, unless he carried this mark, which was the beast’s name, or the number that stands for his name. Here is room for discernment; let the reader, if he has the skill, cast up the sum of the figures in the beast’s name, after our human fashion, and the number will be six hundred and sixty-six.[3]

To me the idea that “all” will be subject this mark implies that there is some central authority mandating it. (Assuming that “all” refers to a global “all” - since I’d assume Jesus is speaking for the benefit of all the faithful, I think it would be difficult to think otherwise.)

 

[Adamek]

How many of the 193 world governments would actually relinquish power?

Very few have actual power.

 

[twf]

Yet in both the Catholic and Orthodox tradition we do have the concept of an ecumenical Christian Emperor… while modern Christians seemed to have largely rejected the idea, prayers for the Emperor remained part of the Mass until 1955 (even when there was no Christian emperor anywhere in the world)… and I bet there are still liturgical texts in Orthodoxy that support the concept…
(As an aside, as a Canadian and a monarchist, I get a huge kick out of the image of circa 1950 American priests reciting all these prayers about the Emperor protecting Christendom lol).

 

[Nicene]

Wasn’t talking about power vs the rest of the world, but power to run heir governments over or for their people. Doubt very much they would be willing to give that up for an outside authority.

 

[Carmel]

The back of the one dollar bill , you will see the words ’ Novus Ordo Seclorem’
i.e. New world order. This appeared
in the year 1933- it wasn’t there before then. It announces the Masonic plan to bring about the New world order .

 

[Theo520]

From a Catholic perspective.

My intuition tells me it is destructive to the world. However admittedly, I am unsure as to why. Any comments, documents, book recommendations would be greatly appreciated.

A one world order is in conflict with the organizing principle of SUBSIDIARITY

Catholic teachings support subsidiarity.

 

[twf]

It does, but that doesn’t mean there isn’t a hierarchy of authority. The Church traditionally supported the concept of a Christian Emperor at the very top of that hierarchy who outranked all other kings / princes. But that doesn’t mean that local lords were to be deprived of their natural right to govern local communities as they saw fit.

 

[Motherwit]

To me it seems that we should ask why. Why exactly is there a need to conserve all power under one single roof or ruler or set of rulers? What is the reasoning?

We don’t exactly have everything figured out now…obviously, so to me this is one of the scariest things that could ever happen. There is nothing wrong with having different nations and countries, that ISNT a problem. So its confusing to me why a one world government is necessary unless you ask yourself who exactly is going to control this one world government?

There’s absolutely no desire by this humanitarian movement, to dissolve national sovereignty. They are a movement that finds it unconscionable that in this modern era, so many nations are being exploited by greed, leaving whole societies with want of food and basic essentials. We can objectively know good from evil and must call nations who are depriving some of its citizens of their human rights, to account.

The United Nations? Please don’t make me laugh, they require the United States help more often than not because IMO we have things more put together better than even they do. We in the USA don’t need their problems too.

Americans used not to have that attitude. It used to be more humble in recognizing it’s greatness and that by using it’s power and privilege to bring other nations up, all would be better off.

If not the United Nations…who? Do you feel comfortable being ruled by someone you do not have a say in? What about someone you can’t understand? How about someone who thinks completely different than you? (Not that there is anything wrong with any of these things, but would you feel comfortable with someone or a group like this to have a say over ever aspect of your life?)

I personally wouldn’t. I think many, many American’s wouldn’t either. A lot of the values that we hold dear in our beloved country are also not shared in other countries. The push for the one world order in the United States is just a push to make us more like Europe, and I don’t think that is a very good idea for our Nation. (Remember we started this country to get away from distant nations, so that we could establish our own values.)

America wasn’t built on isolationism. That’s a modern narrow vision interpretation.

 

[Aulef]

Babylon the great is coming

 

[Erundil]

Babylon the great is coming

Yeah, my exact thought…
The whole idea is fishy, reminds me of :

Then they said, “Come, let us build ourselves a city, with a tower that reaches to the heavens, so that we may make a name for ourselves; otherwise we will be scattered over the face of the whole earth.” [Gen 11]

 

[MNathaniel]

It’s also shameful that some of the world lives in unearned luxury while the other part lives daily with want and hopelessness. It’s hard to feel ok about that as you fall asleep each night.

If it helps your feelings, the part of the world living in “luxury” deals with more “hopelessness” than the part of the world dealing with “want”.

At least if you consider suicide rates a reasonable metric for measuring hopelessness.

(Please Note: This uploaded content is no longer available.)

 

[Aulef]

The new world order is exactly the new tower of babel. In fact, the latter is a figure of the former.

And they even use it as a symbol of their model of union among many nations. Just look at this poster related to the early stages of the EU, for instance. Either they were trying to provoque or they really intend it…

(Please Note: This uploaded content is no longer available.)

 

[Motherwit]

Ironically depression and suicide can also be symptoms of selfish, self absorbed culture that doesn’t value the virtue of “it is in giving that you receive”.

Do you think it is wrong to care about people around the world who are needlessly suffering. Data shows that 30% of the food produced annually in the US, goes to waste while 820 million people in other parts of the world are starving.

Those facts are hard to ignore. There are many motivated people who want to do something about that and that is the basis of global think tanks and organizations who want to find solutions.

What do you suggest we do in the face of that sort of data?

 

[Aulef]

Catholics should look at the bright side though.

God allowed us to live in such harsh times. If we survive spiritual death with the help with His abundant graces, our place in Heaven will be glorious…!

 

[Adamek]

Wasn’t talking about power vs the rest of the world, but power to run heir governments over or for their people. Doubt very much they would be willing to give that up for an outside authority.

To a large degree that is the situation in the European Union which strives to strip all power from sovereign states.

 

[MNathaniel]

Do you think it is wrong to care about people around the world who are needlessly suffering.

You nailed it, friend. That must be what I think.

 

[Motherwit]

But that’s what I’ve done from when I left work to have children, I never went back to paid work. I’ve been volunteering right up until my mothers care became my fulltime job. But even those organizations require government (name removed by moderator)ut and oversight to be effective. Those organizations have to be held to account so they aren’t exploited by bad agenda’s.

The global humanitarian movement knows that there needs to be a co operative effort with oversight. That’s the only way to address these global issues,