Libertarian ping! Click here to get added or here to be removed or post a message here!
Posted on 12/08/2008 5:58:43 PM PST by ricks_place
I have never believed that there is a secret United Nations plot to take over the US. I have never seen black helicopters hovering in the sky above Montana. But, for the first time in my life, I think the formation of some sort of world government is plausible.
A “world government” would involve much more than co-operation between nations. It would be an entity with state-like characteristics, backed by a body of laws. The European Union has already set up a continental government for 27 countries, which could be a model. The EU has a supreme court, a currency, thousands of pages of law, a large civil service and the ability to deploy military force.
So could the European model go global? There are three reasons for thinking that it might.
First, it is increasingly clear that the most difficult issues facing national governments are international in nature: there is global warming, a global financial crisis and a “global war on terror”.
Second, it could be done. The transport and communications revolutions have shrunk the world so that, as Geoffrey Blainey, an eminent Australian historian, has written: “For the first time in human history, world government of some sort is now possible.” Mr Blainey foresees an attempt to form a world government at some point in the next two centuries, which is an unusually long time horizon for the average newspaper column.
But – the third point – a change in the political atmosphere suggests that “global governance” could come much sooner than that. The financial crisis and climate change are pushing national governments towards global solutions, even in countries such as China and the US that are traditionally fierce guardians of national sovereignty.
Barack Obama, America’s president-in-waiting, does not share the Bush administration’s disdain for international agreements and treaties...
(Excerpt) Read more at ft.com ...
“INTREP” What is this?
Please see my Profile page :-)
Uh, hate to tell you this, but the UN's teat is filled with your taxes.
What this moron is finally realizing, is that we average citizens aren't quite as stupid as he would like to believe. We *do* understand that "global" means exactly that, global. This means that if you don't like what the "global" government is doing, there is currently no method available to "vote with your feet".
So, of course they wish to shove it down our throats. They certainly have no intention of buying out the stakes in this planet, and its resources, of those who don't think that a global government, with no way to "vote with the feet", in the only fair price, that of intergalactic space travel, and a viable destination for those of us who wish no part of their "Utopian Dream", realizing that it would more likely be *our* distopian nightmare.
Thus it will be by force...
the infowarrior
"Instead of having a set of policies that are equipping people for the globalization of the economy, we have policies that are accelerating the most destructive trends of the global economy."
"The globe has shrunk economically, environmentally, and in terms of accessibility of knowledge. Everything is interconnected, and the pace of change is accelerated. It is harder for us to insulate ourselves from the effects of events overseas… Kids here are competing with folks in Bangalore and Beijing, and they need to be ready."
This comes out while the EU starts wanting to redefine hate speech to be more liberal in what constitutes hate speech. They honestly think we will give up such freedoms of speech, right to cross examination and half of our Bill of Rights to blend with them. I have talked to many and they really think we will to join in the ICC and a semi world government.
“The EU has a supreme court, a currency, thousands of pages of law, a large civil service and the ability to deploy military force.”
Uh, we had that 200 years ago. The EU was late to the table.
I agree with you on the EU. That’s someone else’s quote in response to mine.
>>As soon as they start trying to make me pay a tax to the UN, I am in for the Revolution!”
So what would you call the United States sending millions to the U.N. in dues?
I call that a global tax to keep a global entity operational.
I have a hunch that there are a lot of europeans that think pretty much along the same lines as we do, who are speechless at what their “government” has brought Europe to.
Let them think about it.
The “one world government” was ancient Rome; it has nothing to do with modern America.
Not that Obamarama doesn’t bear similarities to the Roman beast and its Neronian heads, but still.
The Book of Revelation was written after Jesus had died, risen, and ascended. It was written after the fall of ancient Rome. So a book of prophecy about FUTURE events can not possibly be talking about ancient Rome.
It’s obviously about the end times in the future.
Check your sources; Rome did not fall until the 400s, and was very much alive for quite a while after Jesus. Revelation was written in either the 80s or 60s AD (I side with the latter group).
The “great tribulation” of which Jesus spoke was to be fulfilled within a generation (see Matt. 24:34).
What awaits us in the future are the Resurrection and Final Judgment, and not necessarily any specific world political scenario.
Sorry, you said “ancient Rome” in your original post. “Ancient Rome” is BC Rome and was not around when John wrote the Book of Revelation. Whatever was left of it was already in a decayed state and far from the majesty of “Ancient Rome”. That is why Constantine had to compromise with that new fangled religion Christianity because it was making such an impact.
The Rapture of the saints has yet to occur. The Great Tribulation has yet to occur. The Resurrection of the unsaved has yet to occur. The Judgment Seat of Christ has yet to occur. The Final Judgment, the White Throne Judgment, has yet to occur. There are many many unfulfilled prophecies in Scripture.
So, the minute terminological distinctions aside, “Rome” was still very big at the time of the writing of Revelation. Nero was about to start a full-scale persecution. Constantine didn’t come till a couple centuries later.
The “Rapture” in the sense of people mysteriously disappearing from earth, as in “Left Behind,” is unbiblical nonsense. What 1 Thess. 4 describes, along with Romans 8 and 1 Corinthians 15, is the resurrection of God’s people to participate in the new creation. Of course, that hasn’t happened yet, nor has the Final Judgment, nor Christ’s bodily reappearing.
However, the Great Tribulation was the time of trial for Israel, when the Romans utterly wiped it out and millions of Jews were slaughtered in A.D. 70. Jesus said this would happen, again, within a generation, on account of Israel’s unfaithfulness to the covenant and desire for revolutionary violence. His “coming on the clouds” at that time was his vindication and exaltation as the Son of Man, Israel’s Messiah (see Daniel 7:9-10, in which the “coming” is “up” to the Ancient of Days, not down to earth. “Coming on the clouds” is a common biblical term for judgment anyway; see Isaiah 19:1 or Micah 1:3; also compare to the “coming” language found in Revelation 2:5 or 2:16, in which it is figurative and does not literally denote Christ coming down to each church).
It’s not nonsense to a pre-millienialist and that’s the only way to properly divide the Bible.
You obviously are a postmillenialist or amillenialist and the Lord blinds those people to the truths of Bible scripture. I suggest you study more deeply. Since this isn’t a thread on religion I won’t post anymore but the rapture is most certainly in the scriptures. You have to compare scripture with scripture though to see it, not just take one or two verses out of context.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.