Sheep and Goats

Tag: Peter Breggin

  • Predators on Earth?

    For a time, the Witness organization had a thing for Arnold Toynbee. (See para 2) There is a skit somewhere in the archives—was it presented at a District Convention?—in which a Witness teen quotes the historian’s words likening nationalism to a divisive scourge on the planet. Wasn’t it witnessing to her teacher, presenting a class project, explaining her non-participation in rah-rah politics, or something like that?

    The intent was that the recipient would see the plain choice between human rule (which meant nationalism) and God’s rule (which meant the kingdom). Matthew 6:10 says: “Let your Kingdom come. Let your will take place, as in heaven, also on earth.”

    Never did those brothers imagine a third choice would emerge. Never did they imagine that humans would see the shortfalls of nationalism and devise another human scheme to get around it. Never did they imagine a movement of “globalism” would emerge—a separate means of maintaining human rule.

    It has emerged. And it is what fuels “conspiracy theories”— the suspicion that someone is doing end runs around their cherished national identities. Of course, it must be done by powerful persons—nobody ordinary would be able to pull it off. And it must be done clandestinely—the ordinary people would never allow it. Paul McCartney notwithstanding, the globalist movement does not wait for the broken-hearted people living on the earth to agree, for it knows they never will. People love their national sovereignties. So they must be bulldozed over.

    Here the Breggin book stumbles, methinks, after getting so much right in a book that is very thorough and assiduously documented. I’m reminded of those Watchtower articles differentiating between knowledge, wisdom, and understanding. The first is the accumulation of facts. The second is the application of those facts. The third is appreciating how all the parts fit together.

    Breggin is just my chosen example—most of them do it. He doesn’t present current events as nationalism (popularism) versus another scheme of human rule. He presents it as present government versus underhanded schemes to scuttle it. Why does he do that? The globalists are “saving the world” in their eyes. They may be evil but are they more evil than those in the status quo? They are, he firmly believes, and in the context of a vaccine debate, they don’t fare well at all in his book. All systems of human rule give with one hand and take away with another. And, of course, he is completely unaware of the third choice, God’s kingdom, which is the only choice that can be trusted to do a “great reset.” Absent knowledge of the third option, one can rail against the great reset and lose sight of the truth that things really do need resetting—it is just that you can’t trust humans to do it.

    He labels certain massive organizations of government and business, and even some individuals, as global predators, and “we are the prey.” Why does he do that? Rather than present how they are motivated by a quest for “wealth, self-aggrandizement, and power”—the phrase occurs at least a dozen times, in their eyes they are “saving the planet” from the scourge of nationalism that has consistently failed it—and now the back of that planet is up against a wall. People saving the planet are not going to saw off the branch they are sitting on. Given the self-interest that the world runs on, the only question to ask is to what degree will they fortify it?

    At first glance—no, you don’t call them predators, because it implies their motive is to rip and tear solely for their own benefit. Though—at second glance—aren’t the very rulerships on earth likened to “beasts” in the Bible? (Daniel 7:17) Maybe predators is not so inappropriate after all. The beasts also issue high sounding statements of how their intention is only to benefit the people, but the Bible likens them to beasts all the same.

    I was dubious—who would not be—at any claim that certain individuals, no matter how wealthy, could be on the same predator list that includes entire organizations. Had not this author watched too many James Bond movies? However just after President Trump discontinued US funding for WHO (World Health Organization) Bill Gates compensated. WHO promptly accommodated his interests and redefined ‘herd immunity’ to remove any concept of natural protection from exposure and make it only a goal achievable by vaccine. (see para 6)

    For one man to substitute for the budget of an entire nation, and for one man to within a day reframe a century-old health definition—it is enough for me to concede why someone might put him on the list.

  • Doesn’t That New Wild Beast Look an Awful Lot Like the Bible Wild Beasts?

    It didn’t take long for word to spread about the new UN statue—doesn’t it look a lot like one of those end-time Bible beasts? "Did they really think that they could put this up without anyone noticing?" said Michael Snyder, who runs a religious blog.

    EFE99333-4C96-4E0E-AA20-5A05FBC41CF1

    UN Photo: Manuel Elias

    The statue reminds me of Geoffrey Jackson’s words that, not only does Jehovah do something, but he does it in style. No, not that Jehovah prods them to erect that statue, or any other. It is a gift from the Mexican government. But it’s like when people do something unknowingly that fits right in to the narrative, almost like one of those hooks in jaws scenarios.

    I mean, come on! Here the JW organization has for 80 years identified the UN organization as the wild beast that “was, but is not, and yet is about to ascend out of the abyss,” the wild beast that is the image of the one that “was like a leopard, but its feet were like those of a bear, and its mouth was like a lion’s mouth [which] the dragon gave to the beast its power and its throne and great authority,” the wild beast that draws its power from the seven world powers of Bible history it reflects, the wild beast that through it ALL the (ten) kings of the earth get a temporary crack at world rulership—who can forget that Daniel vision of the beast like a lion with wings of an eagle?—the JW organization puts such identification on the table, and then the UN itself erects a statue as though to say, “Yep—that’s us!” A guy can be forgiven the feeling that someone is manipulating the minions.

    Enter Scopes.com, the secular fact-checking site. Snopes.com, who wouldn’t know the significance of a scripture if they choked on one as a chicken bone. Snopes.com, who explains it all away by observing that, yes it is a composite beast, and yes, there are similar beasts in Daniel and Revelation, but this beast says it is good and the beasts of the Bible say they are bad—and besides, the Bible vision is a flying lion, whereas the UN displays a flying jaguar, and don’t those Bible crazies know the science of zoology? With this bit of secular theology, Snopes figures it has fact-checked the case closed.

    Don’t get your wild beasts from Snopes, who wouldn’t know a wild beast from a gerbil. Get them from Jehovah’s Witnesses who would and who have written it up here.

    It’s not enough that the UN erects that swords-into-plowshares statue from Isaiah and it’s but inspirational sloganeering for them without a prayer of it ever becoming reality and then Jehovah’s Witnesses come along and implement it without fuss?

    …

    Now, the fly in the ointment of saying that international organization for bringing peace and security to the world, presuming to do what only God’s kingdom can do and thus betraying its ‘blasphemous’ nature—the fly in the ointment of saying that international organization is the mighty eighth king that draws its power from the seven is that it sure doesn’t act mighty. The sky-blue helmeted troops that nobody pays any attention to trying to enforce peace, whereas everybody knows you don’t put troops in sky-blue helmets. I mean, they’re sort of like Boy Scouts—they mean well but are not to be taken seriously.

    Maybe what must be done is reappraise the beast giving breath (Revelation 13:15) to the image of the beast, and figure just when does it do that? At its creation, yes, first as its 1919 forerunner League of Nations, then, after it goes into the abyss and re-emerges, as the United Nations, yes, then it “tells those who dwell on the earth to make an image to the wild beast that had the sword-stroke and yet revived.” (Vs 14)

    But there’s not a lot more breath breathed into it. You don’t breathe life into it while the harlot is riding high, hailing it as the “political expression of God’s kingdom on earth” at exactly the same time as Jehovah’s Witnesses are galvanized to “advertise, advertise, advertise the [real] king and his kingdom. You breathe life into it once is has grown weary of the harlot and is showing signs of bucking it—once the dominant culture has turned atheistic.

    You don’t breathe life into it until the times immediately ahead? That humanistic framework is put in place as of the image’s founding, and then not much is done with it—until what is just ahead of us? Is it with the UN Agenda 2030 that life is breathed into it, and with that human scheme “the wild beast should both speak and cause to be killed all those who refuse to worship the image of the wild beast [as] It puts under compulsion all people—the small and the great, the rich and the poor, the free and the slaves—that these should be marked on their right hand or on their forehead, and that nobody can buy or sell except a person having the mark, the name of the wild beast or the number of its name.”  (Vs 15-18)

    The humanistic way of saving the earth—tamp down that population growth. What can be better than pushing sexual conduct that won’t result in babies? Cool down that planet. How better to do it than squeezing out fossil fuels so that sun and wind will pick up the slack and if it doesn’t—well then, adjust. Redistribute that money. How better to do it that destroying the economy and re-emerging it in a great reset? Tamp down those freedoms people fixate on—they can’t handle them. Remake religion so that it’s ‘my way or the highway’—if it comes on board for backing human schemes, it can stay for now.

    None of this can be done openly, for people love their own comfort and they love their own nations. They won’t stand by to see them eviscerated. It must be done clandestinely and it must be done by trillionaires—nobody else would have the wherewithal to pull it off. Oh, yeah—plenty of conspiracies can be spun from this. The problem with conspiracy theories is that, once a few of them turn out to be true, you tend to believe anything that comes down the pipe.

    Some of the current conspiracy theories involve COVID 19, its origin, its trajectory, and regimens to deal with it. I’ve read the Breggin and the Mercola books and they do make for good reads—both of them heavily endnoted. The trouble is their solution to thwarting a conspiracy always lies in reverting to the status quo—as if all was hunky dory before COVID-19 revealed itself. Breggin keeps referring to those who benefit—and there are those who benefit enormously—as “global predators”fixated on their own “power, wealth, and self-aggrandizement.” If he says it once, he says it a dozen times. Why does he do that? They are humans fixing the planet—the humanistic way.

    On the other hand, the nations of this earth always paint themselves with laudable goals. They never paint themselves as beasts. Yet that is how the Bible paints them, for that is how they behave—ripping, tearing, and devouring each other and whoever is caught in the crossfire. Sometimes they even turn on their own citizens in the guise of helping them. So maybe Breggin is on to something after all.