Here’s the picture as I see it: The left-right paradigm is false. There is no left and right, only a collection of minor disagreements between two brands of elitist plutocrat controls. In a certain sense, the entire range of government is some variation on leftism. It’s all socialist, with some minor dispute over which plutocrats gets the plunder from policy. They are two competing teams wearing the same uniform. It’s more like an eternal scrimmage between the offense and defense, appearing on the field with reverse color schemes. The difference between globalist and imperialist is very thin. Nobody in government is actually nationalist by any means. But the population as a whole is instinctively nationalist, always seeking someone to represent their interests, always hoping that someone will come close to matching the rhetoric of typically deceptive courtship of elections.
Trump is just a figurehead; most of those still running around making noise in his favor actually represent the nationalist campaign promises he made, whether he keeps them or not. Those activists represent the nationalist ideal, which is neither left nor right as those terms are commonly used. It’s not that Trump is their messiah, but that he hasn’t openly disavowed all of his nationalist promises, so the voters are still supporting him as their figurehead. They are the majority-in-effect of American citizens and they are rising up in revolt against the establishment.
The Antifas are part of the establishment. If you pay attention to the mainstream media, the Antifas are supposed to win. They are just poor, beleaguered protesters trying to have their say against the unquestionably evil morals of the revolting rabble. Except, it’s all false. The only genuine hatred and bigotry is coming from the Antifas. The Trumpites aren’t looking for violence, but they are increasingly willing to answer the violence of the Antifas. As this conflict becomes more bloody, the nationalist majority will be forced to assume the role of revolutionaries. Once they embrace that, we will have our full throated revolution. It’s called by many a “civil war” but it’s nothing of that sort. It’s not two ostensibly equal establishment sides; it’s a revolution against the established order.
I remain utterly certain that this will not bring us an apocalypse. It will be messy and loaded with inconveniences, but it won’t be a total destruction by any means. The turmoil will be the result of decentralizing controls — for some, a total catastrophe in itself. However, while regular daily commerce will change, it would hardly cease. I believe I have God’s promise on that. It will be more of a very highly disorienting social shift. While there will be blood in the streets, the harshest warfare will be in terms of norms and expectations. This is why I insist the greatest weight of warfare will be online where such things take shape these days — and that in itself is the revolution. This is the rise of the Networked Civilization, and part of that is the breakdown of the old social order and it’s concrete centralization. The concrete system will be shattered and replaced by a virtual system. The unifying factor will not be in meat space, but will be rooted in virtual space.
And as some of you have already discovered, the very essence of online society is radically different from meat space. While there remains a dominant social etiquette, it is totally different from meat-space etiquette. To those of us old enough to remember not having an Internet, this new social order seems totally fragmented. The mixture of what is uniform among participants is shocking. From the old viewpoint, there are no social norms at all; you can get away with almost anything. But that’s not true. The newer generation that grew up with the Internet simply approaches the whole question from a different angle. The definition of “rudeness” is vastly different.
So a critical element in the social revolution is a rapid displacement of the old order with the new. The tension between them has risen to the breaking point. It’s not that the new generation is so much more nationalist; it’s that they don’t pay attention to the whole question. The kids are ripping off the reins of the old system of control. The means of control has shifted into a different realm and old order refuses to adapt. The new generation is focused on an entirely different range of issues, so the nationalist revolt that has been smoldering since the very beginning of humanity is now breaking out into open conflagration. It’s two different kinds of revolt on two different planes of awareness, but they do have overlapping effects in the lives of individuals, and in the broader social mood.
I want you to see this because this is the future of our shared faith. If you haven’t noticed before, everything I teach is designed to take advantage of this new state of affairs. However, I didn’t arrive there through a conscious effort, but realized afterward that where my heart led me was to meet the coming changes. The religion defined by Radix Fidem [PDF] arose from my internal moral compass, but it just happens to be a good fit for the Networked Civilization. This is how God works.
And those of you who find a home in Radix Fidem will be ready to evangelize to that foreign land of souls waiting to hear God’s truth. For the most part, they won’t be crushed and oppressed in the flesh so much as disoriented by the collapse of everything they once knew. With the collapse of the old political order comes the collapse in the old religious order, too. Some part of their awareness will realize that they are in a different world, with a different language and different social rules. American Christians will be outside their comfort zone, and if they can’t raise up their old home church atmosphere in this new land, they’ll need a new religion altogether. Their souls will be seeking some kind of anchor of identity that gives them stability and makes functioning possible in this foreign land. We have that anchorage.
I’ve been wondering how to balance between being loving towards individual immigrants/refugees and at the same time being pro nationalism and against Islam, EU and mass immigration from Islamic countries.
People from Islamic cultures haven’t chosen their religion or behavior, but their “invasion” can wreck your country.
So, on the other hand this could be a test from God (how loving can we be?) or a Satanic plot (destroy the last vestiges of Christian societies through Islam?) or both.
Pretty difficult stuff, yet people are still political animals and having political opinions probably isn’t entirely ungodly. And obviously nobody really knows and opinions would vary widely among liberal and conservative Christians.
Related: this prophecy: https://lamarzulli.wordpress.com/2017/05/01/prophecy-from-90-year-old-woman-in-1968/
“4. “People from poor countries will stream to Europe. (In 1968 there was no such thing as immigration. —E. Minos.) They will also come to Scandinavia and Norway. There will be so many of them that people will begin to dislike them and become hard with them. They will be treated like the Jews before the Second World War. Then the full measure of our sins will have been reached (I protested at the issue of immigration. I did not understand it at the time. —E. Minos.)”
Any opinions or insight?
Re: Muslim invasion — First, we have to remember that the Bible does not speak to the modern concept of Human Rights. In Scripture, there is no inherent right to anything at all. Consequently, there is no moral obligation to welcome refugees. And how right you are the Muslim invasion does destroy the host country. However, there is also a serious problem with Western nations poking their nose into the business of Islamic nations and creating conflict, so that refugees are unavoidable. In broader terms, European civilization may not be worthy of saving if it gets involved in such things. There’s enough injustice to go around so that everyone gets a surplus of doom and wrath.
Given time, Islamic culture will change. It will change far more quickly if we leave their countries alone. As long as there is this consciousness of “Islam under attack” we should expect retrenchment of the most annoying and threatening aspects of that culture.
I really cannot comment much on the prophecy you linked; it would require investigating the background of both the prophet and the reporter. The content of the prophecy seems harmless enough, and much of it could have been predicted with rather good moral insight, and it echoes predictions from older sources. You have to keep in mind that most prophecy passes through genuine fallible humans who tend to apply their current moral valuations to what they see. You would expect someone with a 1960’s European Protestant morality to report such a vision in those terms. But you would also expect people who were far more cynical, and even secular minded, to have foreseen something similar in terms of cultural drift, and stated it in different terms. And so we do find literature like if we look for it. Every prophetic message comes with an element of plausible deniability. So it is with miracles.
The question for you and I is: What does God require of me from this? That plays back into the question of how to address the Islamic invasion. We are allowed to see it on multiple levels. There is no single moral significance we are all compelled to share. It remains murky on an objective level. For me: I would oppose Islamic immigration to the US. Sure, we have some good Muslim people here, and they do good things. But that’s not the question. Where do you draw the line when we start getting bad Muslims who kill and destroy in the name of their religion? Have we not noticed that bringing them here was as traumatic for them as for us? They need to live where their culture is not a problem. It will be a while yet before they can relax about such things and not feel like they have betrayed their faith if they have to change their culture to adapt.
I’ve also been pondering the “it’s always the end of the world” [on a small planet going around in space] aspect of Christianity. There are many ways the world can end and it seems everyone has their favorite. You can end up being pretty cynical about this aspect.
The untrustworthiness of prophecy, visions and NDE’s has also been on my mind: they all can’t be true and the more you read the more you realize that prophecy and visions go wrong all the time. The spiritual realm definitely is extremely hard to get a grasp on. Any answers or guidance?
“Always the end of the world” — That’s one of the bad things about mainstream Western Christian religion. Despite all that Jesus and the Apostles did to teach us to relax about the Second Coming, we still have a whole industry based on that frantic expectation. Let me encourage your cynicism about it. We don’t need to correct it every time we see it, but we should distance ourselves from believers who make it central to their religion. His Return will not be convenient for anyone but God, and not even Jesus had the faintest clue when it might be. Let Him find us faithfully doing what He said to do.
You wrote, “The untrustworthiness of prophecy, visions and NDE’s has also been on my mind…” Quite so. Part of my answer is pointing back to the number of times when I said that there is no objective reality; that reality has always been conditional. Sure, there is a body of common experience we all share as humans, but God and His Creation is alive and sentient on its own terms. It doesn’t treat any two of us precisely alike. Some of us experience things no one else will encounter. Yet, for the person with this uncommon experience, it might as well be as real as any imaginary objective reality. They aren’t wrong and they aren’t lying, but you and I will have no means of sharing it with them, either. They got from reality what they got, and you and I will encounter our own unique experiences. This is the norm is what I’m trying to teach. I’m trying to vanquish the Western instinct to test such stories with some kind of external measure of objective reality. Reality is not static and not inert. It can vary between us and still be reality.
The question for each of us is not whether some story is “true” but whether it matters in God’s calling on our lives. If you have no place for it, then smile and nod your head, but then go about your own mission. If you can’t use it, then put up a conditional barrier against it. So long as the person remains attached to it, they will have to stay outside the barrier to fellowship. To the degree they think it really matters to them, to that degree I cannot fellowship with them. It’s not anger and hatred; it’s moral necessity. I can’t do God’s work with distractions of that sort. Let them collect other friends; God bless them and all of that, but I can’t go that path.
Thanks, very good points and gives some perspective for a beginner still!
“Every prophetic message comes with an element of plausible deniability. So it is with miracles.”
Though I don’t know what to think about for example levitating monks (video) or boys. There are magicians on Youtube as well whose “special effects” quite possibly are powered by spirits as well. But these kind of phenomena are still quite local and small scale and probably couldn’t be scientifically verified or maybe even always replicated. But apparently video is allowed to be recorded. It’s a strange and sometimes confusing world.
We don’t have to worry about whether someone somewhere can levitate. It won’t change what God calls us to do.
Re: anything to do with online presence…I’ve always advised clients, in my freelancing days, to buy a domain to keep for a lifetime, as an anti-fragility measure. Just about every Saas/free thing we can sign up for online can be taken away, but barring extreme and unlikely legal action, your domain will always be yours. Even if you just use the domain as an email forward…
Quite so, Jay. Depending on what your mission is with God, a long-term and memorable identity hook like a domain name is critical to hold, even when fallow. Even if that server space I’m renting goes away, I plan to keep the soulkiln.org domain as long as possible.
I found that if we spend too much time looking for answers or explanations of what life is all about and how we should ‘be’ by searching out the words of others, we will only become more confused and have even more questions that we need to find answers to. Looking outside of ourselves is not the way to go. We must instead look to our heart-mind and listen as it communes with Father. And this can only be done from within. Once we start to see/know truths, then can we determine if what others are saying or espousing as expansions of that truth are legitimate based on what we learn/know from within. It can start by simply spending silent communion out and amongst Creation to carrying on an inward conversation with an opened up heart. He WILL speak if you free up yourself from muddled and confused thinking. He will guide you to the right paths and people to further expand your understanding. Like He did when He brought me to Ed. Life really is simple and the Truth is really simple. IF we keep it simple.