The World Economic Forum as Anti-Christian By James Reed
Perhaps it is stating the obvious, but for really important things, the obvious sometimes needs to be repeated. All Christians should be on red-alert about anything the World Economic Forum tosses out its front door, and back door too for that matter. The real give-away are the outpourings of the World Economic Forum philosopher Yuval Noah Harari, who apart from looking forward to AI replacing humans, and apparently himself as well, has speculated that before that, advances in Chatbots will enable a “scientifically correct” “bible” to be generated. I imagine that this text will amount to a repeat of World Economic Forum New World Order proclamations, and pseudo-metaphysics. It is all contrary to Christianity, in the most obvious way, and the churches should be opposing this stuff, and if not, then individual Christians.
https://www.americanthinker.com/articles/2023/06/the_world_economic_forum_and_un_agenda_2030.html
“Many articles are being published about the globalist agenda being put forward by the World Economic Forum and its megalomaniacal leadership, first and foremost Klaus Schwab, but also including Bill Gates and a mysterious figure Dr. Yuval Noah Harari who boasts a Ph.D. from Oxford in world history and now teaches at a university in Jerusalem.
Harari, like many of the globalists can sometimes sound non-threatening and even benign. For example, he writes, “There is no contradiction between nationalism and globalism. Because nationalism isn’t about hating foreigners. Nationalism is about loving your compatriots. And in the twenty-first century, in order to protect the safety and the future of your compatriots, you must cooperate with foreigners.” This is a kind of Rodney Kingism on a global scale. What could be more benign than “cooperation?” Remember, there were riots in Los Angeles in 1992 after the jury found the police “Not Guilty” of criminal assault and wanton brutality after they beat up King, who had resisted arrest. As the riots were going on, Rodney attempted to defuse the situation by saying, “Why can’t we all just get along?”
Harari sometimes makes more controversial comments than the need for “more cooperation.” We sometimes find shocking one-liners such as his claim that there were originally six species of humans, but only one -- homo sapiens -- has survived. How he “discovered” or “justifies” knowledge of six types of human beings is anything but obvious. He has no proof.
He founded a company called Sapienship with his “husband,” and they are committed to finding solutions to world problems in the areas of technological disruption, ecological collapse, and global war. One of Harari’s most radical views is that human beings lack free will. He wrote in the Guardian, “Unfortunately, ‘free will’ isn’t a scientific reality. It is a myth inherited from Christian theology. Theologians developed the idea of ‘free will’ to explain why God is right to punish sinners for their bad choices and reward saints for their good choices… “ Here, free will is not accepted as an almost universal premise, but is “Christian theology.” Patently, this premise is false. Joshua, the first Jewish judge in the Old Testament, said “Choose ye this day whom ye shall serve, but as for me and my house, we shall serve the Lord.” Jesus said, “Seek ye first the kingdom of God and His righteousness…” And the Islamic murderous hordes as they swept across North Africa in the seventh century cried, “Convert of die!!” to the Christians unfortunate enough to be in their path. These were all “choices” presented to different populations.
The above quote from this sinister professor is a red flag for this writer pointing to positions that deny free will, deny morality, deny faith in Almighty God Creator of Heaven and Earth, and is a precursor to immoral and hateful propositions that the author and pundit Harari will justify as predetermined and thus “reality.”
But in 2015, the views of the WEF and Sapienship were reinforced by the United Nations which produced a new document, Agenda 2030, which positioned that body to move towards world governance. The U.N.’s Universal Declaration of Rights of 1946 was supplemented (read “replaced”) by the new Agenda 2030. In this document, “sustainability” and “meeting needs” became the two most important terms, and rights were diminished to being referred to only once in the entire document in Article 19. The Agenda begins with five lively terms designed to turn the reader’s mind to a more lively appreciation of the Agenda: People, Planet, Prosperity, Peace, and Partnership. These are catch-phrases or rhetorical devices intended to appeal to readers’ emotions, not appeal to reason per se. We can herewith look at three of those “Ps.”
People: “We are determined to end poverty and hunger… and to ensure that all human beings can fulfill their potential in dignity and equality…” Meanwhile in the USA, which is more than $30 trillion in debt, students at the college where I teach were notified that if they are hungry they can get free food at an office, and even find some items that are halal or kosher. And if they do not show up for most classes in a course, they can receive a WU (Unofficial Withdrawal) instead of an F so their grade point average (GPA) will not be adversely affected. One student requested special accommodation for the final exam. When asked how she would take the final since she had missed the last 10 classes, she replied, “I know. But I’m pregnant and just don’t feel up to going to class.” Needless to say, she did not take the final. This is in the USA. Now we have signed up to bring “dignity” to the rest of the world. How can anyone not be convulsed with laughter and disdain for this “goal” in light of there being so many irrational, contaminated policies in our own country?
Planet: The document says, “We are determined to protect the planet from degradation, including… sustainably managing its natural resources… so that it [“the planet”] can support the needs of the present and future generations.” So the idea is to stop using up our resources like oil or gas so we do not run out of oil or gas which we will have in the future even though we will not be using them. We become more secure by having these resources in the ground and knowing they are there rather than risk using them up. Thus, we shall lower the standard of living of all developed countries and start carrying pitchers of water on our heads from some giant reservoirs because we do not wish to use pipes or “waste water.” However, we used up the buffalo meat by killing off the buffalo, but we are still eating meat. We used up the whale oil, but we still have light in our homes.
Peace: The Agenda states, “We are determined to foster peaceful, just and inclusive societies which are free from fear and violence. There can be no sustainable development without peace and no peace without sustainable development.” This is an updated Marxist idea that true peace in society comes from meeting economic needs. Yet, no societies on Earth have prospered more than the capitalist societies of the world. Even those sinister Chinese with their attachment to Maoism established empowerment zones in the 1980s where multinational corporations were allowed to operate, and after doing so, the Maoists gradually enriched themselves (bribe-taking is rife in the PRC) and the per capita incomes of their populations. Yet they are on a war footing. War is not caused by unmet “needs.”
We must openly and aggressively as a country withdraw our support from Agenda 2030, and our leaders must aggressively and openly rebuff the claims of the World Economic Forum if we are to prosper again as a country and be the exceptional center of hope in the world.”
Comments