|
|||||||
|
|
|
|||||
|
|
|||||||
|
|||||||
|
|
|
|||||
|
|
|||||||
THE PURPOSE OF DIVERSITY! Part I
Updated
10/18/2001: Made easier to copy
We have noticed that everywhere we have been hearing this great call for DIVERSITY. We have heard it loudly from our government. We have heard it clearly from our media, and we have definitely heard it loudly and clearly from our churches. All of these entities tell us that we MUST have DIVERSITY. What do they mean? What are they talking about? IT'S NOT WHAT YOU THINK!!
In our society, we have heard about DIVERSITY in the form of multiculturalism and the many blessings it has brought upon the world. Is multiculturalism bad??? Why are these things happening so rhythmically and universally? When did this change come and what is the purpose of this idea about DIVERSITY? Was there always this great hype about diversity and multiculturalism in the United States in previous decades? Was it really always considered a part of the American Dream? Well the actual answer to why there is this great push for diversity is found in the distant past before this nation was born. The period of time in which to find the answers can be found during the Protestant Reformation. Arguments took place during the Protestant Reformation which can enlighten us about what is going on among us today. It goes like this:
When this great nation came into being, it was established upon two basic principles: Republicanism and PROTESTANTISM. This should give us a clue as to what is taking place and who or what is behind the changes which are now coming fast upon us; for during the Protestant Reformation, the question we are now absorbed with as we are on the brink of disaster was the same absorbing one which produced this great nation: WHO OR WHAT WILL LEAD! WHO HAS THE ANSWERS!! All we need now is for some unforeseen crisis to hit and we will find ourselves back at square one asking the same questions that were asked when people started to realize what freedom was. If an unprecedented major crisis hits, how will we get out of it? If that happens, will we not hear all kinds of different opinions flying around the air telling us what we should do to get out of it?? In a situation like this, who will lead?
A typical example of this question in debate is exemplified by the confrontation between Queen Mary of Scotland and the great Reformer, John Knox. Both the Queen of Scotland, representing the Vatican, and John Knox, representing Protestantism, declared that the source of right decisions came from God's Word: the Bible. The Vatican had always stated that the church was what created and gave the bible to the world, and that the church alone could interpret that word to the people. She only will make the decisions. The issue here was who or what will lead: who will make the right decisions for the civil and religious governance of the people. It requires right decisions to preserve nations in prosperity. WHO WILL MAKE THOSE RIGHT DECISIONS?
Queen Mary said concerning the controversy between the Vatican and Knox:
"Ye interpret the Scriptures in one manner, and they [the Roman Catholic teachers] interpret in another; whom shall I believe, and who shall be the judge?"
Right here therefore we see DIVERSITY. Two different entities have different opinions or views about crucial matters. According to this quotation AND TO COMMON SENSE, this is not a desired circumstance. THIS IS CONFUSION! It doesn't profit anything to be in confusion. Is this condition regarded the same way today?
John Knox responded to the queen with the typical Protestant response:
"Ye shall believe God, that plainly speaketh in His word. And farther than the word teaches you, ye neither shall believe the one nor the other. The word of god is plain in itself; and if there appear any obscurity in one place, the Holy Ghost, which is never contrary to Himself, explains the same more clearly in other places, so that there can remain no doubt but unto such as remain obstinately ignorant." -- David Laing, The Collected Works of John Knox, Vol. 2, pp. 281, 284.
Knox was here stating that the decisions for who or what will lead and where the right decisions will come from centered upon each individual; that each individual could find something called TRUTH from the Bible and that this is what will build and preserve society in stability, equity and peace; for if you found out the truth about a particular subject or topic, and I found out the truth about the exact self-same subject or topic, would we disagree with each other? Obviously no.
This was the typical Protestant argument. Each individual will study the bible and seek wisdom from God for himself and this study will enable each one to find THE TRUTH. When that happens then unity will be created. When they all know the truth, naturally they will all agree with each other. THEY, IN THE PROCESS OF TIME, WILL ALL COME TO THE SAME CONCLUSIONS! Each individual with his own unique and diverse habits, customs, cultures and temperaments will ULTIMATELY arrive at the same conclusions and ideas which will establish the laws and decisions that will govern the nation.
THE PEOPLE WILL LEAD!
LADIES AND GENTLEMEN, THIS WAS THE MISSION OF PROTESTANTISM! Do you understand what is being said here?! The Protestants were saying that they did not need A DICTATOR!
It was to free the world from the tyranny of Rome so that all people could discover THE TRUTH from the Bible for themselves why Protestantism arose, and the basic reason why it was necessary to find the truth was not only to preserve society, but to enable everyone to properly prepare for the coming of the Lord. When truth is found, everyone who finds it becomes "free".
Indeed it was not all kinds of different opinions warring against each other that started the Constitution of the United States. We ourselves today and now can NEVER duplicate such a document again, for we have been sabotaged into thinking that DIVERSITY of belief is a vital necessity leading us to our full potential. We will show you that this isn't true!
Yet of course, as we just saw the Catholic argument and the Protestant argument, we can plainly see that the Protestant position was a much harder act to follow. In the Vatican position, with one man at the head rendering the decisions over a host of people sworn to obedience and surrender, it is easily understood why there would be unity. One man decides. All the decisions come from one man. If everyone is sworn to surrender his individual opinions to that one man, how can there not be unity and agreement?
Yet the Protestant position was that unity could be secured in a most miraculous way--a way which passes all understanding: That bible would be given to everyone translated into his own diverse language, culture, upbringing and situation, and would possess in it definite instruction which all would be then expected to understand and abide to. This book will then bring them to the same conclusions about everything relating to life, morality and politics. The question therefore was, can Protestantism in the process of time fulfill such a seemingly impossible expectation? From that day to this, there has been a mission to thwart this purpose. Can you see the signs pointing to this mission?
The typical response to this from Rome was, "You can't find the truth without us! Only we have the truth! If we just gave you the Bible to do as you please, you will misinterpret it!" Rome said, "Only we can interpret the Scriptures!" The Vatican then said--listen now, for this is crucial: "IF WE GAVE THE BIBLE TO YOU TO INTERPRET THE SCRIPTURES, THERE WOULD BE NOTHING BUT CHAOS AND CONFUSION."
Ladies and gentlemen, look around you! What do you see! Do you see chaos and confusion? ROME WAS RIGHT! Isn't this exactly what Rome said would happen if she allowed us to have the freedom to interpret the Bible for ourselves according to the dictates of our consciences? That's exactly what we established this nation to do! To show the miraculous power of the Bible to create unity from each individual going up. LOOK! ROME WAS RIGHT! We established this nation, AND MADE FOOLS OF OURSELVES! ROME WAS RIGHT! But was she? How did we get as confused as we are now?
This nation was around for over 200 years. It passed many years when it was recognized as a stable fortress and a bastion of freedom. It was considered the most secure nation in the world, and there was a time when it was the undisputed superpower of the world. WHAT HAS HAPPENED SINCE?!! What happened was that certain "changes" began to take place. Did you not see and hear people preach to us that DIVERSITY IS THE SECRET OF OUR STRENGTH?? Did you not notice people around who were plainly not happy until we had all kinds of different views?? Who are they, and why are they here?
Haven't you noticed that seemingly all of a sudden we see people of influence and authority coming in and telling us we must have different ideas about everything? Even in church we notice that it has become a terrible burden for members to have all kinds of differing and conflicting ideas. In both church and state the necessity for diversity is all consuming. Those of influence and authority in both church and state therefore urged us to be different and to be diverse in everything--ESPECIALLY IN DOCTRINE AND MORALS which also encompasses political theory and decision making. What are they up to?
The truth is that they often flaunt diversity of races and cultures, but that is not their real target. They merely use diversity of races and cultures as a coverup in order to appeal to you to accept another kind of diversity which is their real target: diversity over doctrine and morals: What is right and what is wrong. There is nothing wrong with having multiple cultures in any country. That, however, is not what the plan is. Those who are pushing multiculturalism for change, really do not give a hoot about multiculturalism. They have another agenda up their sleeves.
Do not be fooled. The great hype now created in all our trusted media and institutions for racial and cultural diversity is unexplainable outside of a conspiracy. For your information, in the United States of America, racial and cultural diversity was always prevalent, and was never anything new. There was never any big hype about it practically until the late 80s and 90s. Immigration here was always big because it was a nation which provided freedom from oppression. Just go visit the Brooklyn Bridge in New York City, and observe the pictures taken of the people who worked to construct it. You will find that most of them were immigrants. The Brooklyn Bridge was built in the 1880s. Yet with all this hype over racial and cultural diversity, we are given the impression that this is something new. Don't believe it! All this hype over diversity of races and cultures is to bring in another kind of diversity designed to weaken the nations. That is where all this relativism comes from.
Is it true that Protestantism could have proved that indeed the Bible in the hands of the common people itself can provide peace, sure direction, a stable society and unity? Why would anyone have a burden to teach us to think differently or to have different ideas? Why would anyone not be happy unless they create an environment of confusion with gray areas? LADIES AND GENTLEMEN. THE SECRET TO THE CHANGES TAKING PLACE IN SOCIETY TODAY, THE SECRET TO THE DECLINE OF OUR SOCIETY, THE LOSS OF POWER OF THE CITIZENRY FOR GOVERNANCE AND GOVERNMENT, THE CRIME WHICH TORTURES OUR NATION AND THE FORESEEABLE ECONOMIC COLLAPSE LIES IN A CERTAIN AND VERY COMMON EXPRESSION WE HEAR MOST EVERYDAY. THAT EXPRESSION IS:
THE SECRET OF OUR STRENGTH LIES IN OUR DIVERSITY!
--probably one of the biggest lies in the history of the earth! Since the inception of this principle we have seen nothing but trouble!
What could be wrong with such an expression you say?
TO THE ADVENTIST BETRAYAL PAGE
