Is the Love�

that we are:

Mother Earth

loving thoughts

loving kindness

to All.

via Declaration of Interdependency.

Please join Dr. Jane Goodall, DBE, and thousands of others in signing the Global Declaration of Interdependence

Preamble

In acknowledgment of the many existing documents and efforts that promote peace, sustainability, global interconnectedness, reverence for life and unity, We, The World hereby offers the following Declaration of Interdependence as a guiding set of principles. It is inspired by the Earth Charter, the essential values of which represent those of the many peoples of the Earth.

Declaration

Photograph from we.net

We, the people of planet Earth,
In recognition of the interconnectedness of all life
And the importance of the balance of nature,
Hereby acknowledge our interdependence
And affirm our dedication
To life-serving environmental stewardship,
The fulfillment of universal human needs worldwide,
Economic and social well-being,
And a culture of peace and nonviolence,
To ensure a sustainable and harmonious world
For present and future generations.

Since then, the Declaration has inspired people around the world to live lighter on the Earth

THIS WE KNOW

• We are the earth, through the plants and animals that nourish us.
• We are the rains and the oceans that flow through our veins.
• We are the breath of the forests of the land, and the plants of the sea.
• We are human animals, related to all other life as descendants of the firstborn cell.
• We share with these kin a common history, written in our genes.
• We share a common present, filled with uncertainty. And we share a common future, as yet untold.
• We humans are but one of thirty million species weaving the thin layer of life enveloping the world.
• The stability of communities of living things depends upon this diversity.
• Linked in that web, we are interconnected — using, cleansing, sharing and replenishing the fundamental elements of life.
• Our home, planet Earth, is finite; all life shares its resources and the energy from the sun, and therefore has limits to growth.
• For the first time, we have touched those limits.
• When we compromise the air, the water, the soil and the variety of life, we steal from the endless future to serve the fleeting present.

THIS WE BELIEVE

• Humans have become so numerous and our tools so powerful that we have driven fellow creatures to extinction, dammed the great rivers, torn down ancient forests, poisoned the earth, rain and wind, and ripped holes in the sky.
• Our science has brought pain as well as joy; our comfort is paid for by the suffering of millions.
• We are learning from our mistakes, we are mourning our vanished kin, and we now build a new politics of hope.

• We respect and uphold the absolute need for clean air, water and soil. We see that economic activities that benefit the few whileshrinking the inheritance of many are wrong. And since environmental degradation erodes biological capital forever, full ecological and social cost must enter all equations of development.
• We are one brief generation in the long march of time; the future is not ours to erase.
• So where knowledge is limited, we will remember all those who will walk after us, and err on the side of caution.

THIS WE RESOLVE

• All this that we know and believe must now become the foundation of the way we live.
• At this turning point in our relationship with Earth, we work for an evolution: from dominance to partnership; from fragmentation to connection; from insecurity, to interdependence.

Keep up to date with Friends of Dieppe Park on Facebook. 

Department of Justice

The report of the Department of Justice mentioned by Sally O’Boyle in her letter (see previous post on SPLC) has certainly earned the Department a place among America’s Enemies. There is so much drivel in this publication that to try to analyze and comment on the whole thing would take a small book. I’ve just taken some excerpts to illustrate my contentions regarding the DoJ and its report. For the most part, I’ve just dealt with the domestic end of it, leaving out the Middle East groups cited. Most of my comments are totally serious, but a few I may have made with tongue partially inserted in cheek because the whole report is so absurd.

“Investigating Terrorism and Criminal Extremism—Terms and Concepts is a publication of the Bureau of Justice Assistance U.S. Department of Justice Version 1.0 dated September 2005-2009.”

The report cites the source of funds:

“This project was supported by Grant No. 2007-NC-BX-K002 awarded by the Bureau of
Justice Assistance. The Bureau of Justice Assistance is a component of the Office of Justice Programs, which also includes the Bureau of Justice Statistics, the National Institute of Justice, the Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention, and the Office for Victims of Crime. Points of view or opinions in this document are those of the author and do not represent the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice.”

To me the most interesting thing here is not so much the source, but the number of bureaucracies within the DoJ bureaucracy. If anyone in government is serious about cutting costs, here’s a good place to start.

According to the authors, the purpose of this publication is to provide a tool to help criminal justice professionals understand the terms, organizations, and names they may encounter while conducting criminal investigations or prosecutions of members of an [alleged] extremist group.

The following appears to start out as a hedge of some sort, but the example makes no sense at all. “The fact that an entry appears in this publication does not imply a connection to illegal activity. As an example, the location Waco, Texas, appears in the glossary. Investigators may hear reference to this location while working on certain antigovernment cases.” Do “investigators” have to be told that the mention of a city doesn’t mean the whole city is connected to illegal activity? What does “certain antigovernment cases” mean? Is opposition to government now a criminal offense? Don’t answer that! I think I already know.

Here are the people responsible for this comic book:

“This publication was initially prepared by Mark Pitcavage, Ph.D., in 1998, as a Guide to Common Terms Used by Antigovernment Extremists. Subsequent revisions were expanded to include many terms used by left-wing and international terrorists and special-interest/single-issue extremists. The following individuals have contributed to this Guide: Pete Haskel, Ted Burton, Ralph Brock, Ed Higgins, Suzanne James, Chris Walker, Christine Nordstrom, Walter Wallmark, Bonnie Bergey, Darren Mulloy, Gregory Rosen, Patricia Henshall, George Richards, Michael Reynolds, Brad Whitsel, Ed King, Jerry Kling, Jon Drummond, Jack Plaxe, Richard Holden, Jonathan White, Richard Marquise, David Carter, Charles Tilby, Gary Clyman, Robert Harris, and William Dyson, Jr.”

I first thought that the people above belonged individually in americasenemies, but the more I read the more I think they belong in a school for the intellectually challenged.

“Terrorism and the extremist movement are dynamic and continually changing.”

I chose this sentence to illustrate the tone of the “report.” Throughout terrorism and extremism are closely connected and usually connected to “right-wing” organizations and causes, but “left-wing” organizations are seldom listed as extremist. Left-wing terrorists and anti-Constitutional government extremists are usually called “activists.”

One of the first things “law enforcement agencies” are cautioned against is the “Affinity Group.” This publication defines “Affinity Group” in this way: “a small band of individuals who work clandestinely as a team to perpetrate direct attacks on a targeted enemy.” The small band description is critical here. I guess it permits the federal government, with its targeted attacks on our Constitution, our national sovereignty, and the American people, to avoid arrest by local law enforcement agencies.

Other organizations, movements, and ideas that investigators and prosecuters should be aware of include:

Antiabortion Movement- while pointing out that some who hold this position have assassinated abortion physicians and their employees in the United States, nowhere do the authors mention the extremists of the Abortion Movement that have slaughtered countless unborn or partially born infants while developing a cadre of physicians hardened to the taking of human life. Doctor Mengele I presume?

“Antiauthoritarian: A political position in opposition to capitalism and government control, corporation or group, and supportive of decentralization and autonomy; generally, a libertarian position that is sometimes equated with anarchy.”

I’m not sure just what law enforcement officials are suppose to get from this rather fractured definition of “antiauthoritarian” other than a conclusion that the grant to this organization must have required it to hire the mentally handicapped and the hardcore unemployed to do the writing.

For the record, my dictionary defines authoritarian as: “believing in, relating to, or characterized by unquestioning obedience to authority rather than individual freedom of judgment and action.” Clearly the authoritarian government of the United States must keep a close watch on anti-authoritarian “extremists.”

“Anti-Defamation League (ADL): A Jewish organization founded in 1913, devoted to fighting hate crimes. Its mission is “to stop the defamation of the Jewish people and to secure justice and fair treatment to all citizens alike.” The ADL is one of the largest (and most aggressive) groups opposing right-wing extremism.”

Typical of the slant of this DoJ publication, minority racist and bigoted groups are condoned or even praised but majorities who might hold such views are worthy of DoJ investigation. Could it be that minorities, or a pretext of “minority rights,” are being used as an excuse to suppress the majority? I can’t help but wonder what “most aggressive” means as applied to the ADL. I also wonder how the Jewish militia known as the JDL escaped mention in the “report.”

“Anti-Shyster: A magazine published in Texas by Alfred Adask, an advocate of the sovereign citizen ideology. The ire of the magazine is directed largely at the legal/judicial system.”

Anti-Shyster magazine and its publisher get mention for attacking the legal/judicial system. If this publication, under the auspices of the Department of Justice, is an example of our legal/judicial system, then Anti-Shyster is likely well justified in its attacks.

“Bilderbergers (Bilderberg Group): Along with the Trilateral Commission and the Council on Foreign Relations, one of the three groups targeted by right-wing extremists for conspiring to dominate the world.”

Notice the use of the highly inflammatory “targeted” and, of course, the usual “right-wing extremists.” I wonder how many people on the “left” who have attacked these organizations for their major role in corporate control of America and the world are surprised to learn they are “right-wing extremists.”

“Christian Identity: A hate-filled religious sect descended from British-Israelism that has come to dominate much of the leadership of the extreme right in the United States today. The key belief of Identity adherents is that people of white European descent are actually the descendants of the ancient Israelites of the Bible. Therefore, the Bible is a message written expressly for whites, who are “’God’s chosen people.’”

I found this interesting for several reasons. Firstly, I know nothing of this “Christian Identity,” but the “hate-filled” epithet reminded me again of the movie “Revelation” that I mentioned in the post on SPLC and the term “haters” as applied to all who opposed the Devil’s One Nation Earth. Just a coincidence?

Secondly, the reference to “British-Israelism” intrigued me. I used to follow the machinations of BI when Herbert Armstrong and the World Wide Church of God was its front. I was predicting the give-away of the Panama Canal when some were still holding out hope that we would keep it. According to biblical prophecy as interpreted by BI, the enemies would control the gates of Israel’s (British) cities. Metaphorically, the canal was one of those gates. It had to go. When Armstrong died, BI left the church. I saw a manifestation of it about 10 to 15 years ago in the “Center for Constitutional Studies.” It often moves from one cover to another.

The earliest reference I’ve seen to BI was in a biography of Washington written shortly after his death. In the appendix was a letter from the former governor of Massachusetts to George III assuring his “majesty” that he still reigned supreme over his kingdom, British-Israel. To fulfill their interpretation of prophecy, one “tribe” had to become a “great nation” (the U.S.) and the other a “nation of nations” (the British Empire). To me, this letter was saying, “Pay no attention to surface appearances. We’re still in charge here.”

Regardless of who might be running America, for many years I’ve believed the one hope for defeat of the globalist Inter-Nazis is their self-destruction from within. It’s a hope that, when they see their world government pie coming out of the oven, the many groups who have been promised at least a slice if not the whole pie, will come out of their counting houses and corporate bakeries to try to claim a bigger slice. It’s my hope that the infighting will finally expose them to those who, until now, have refused to understand, and they will all be brought down. This report could be the first salvo of the Zionist faction, possibly entrenched in the DoJ, against the BI faction.

“Christian Patriots: A term used, especially in the 1970s and 1980s, to describe people sympathetic to right-wing ideology.”

Wow! Three dirty words in one brief description – “Christian,” “Patriots,” and “right-wing.” Someone’s going to censor the Department of Justice.

“Christian Reconstructionism: A theology common among many in the “patriot” movement. It essentially argues that biblical law should be the basis for reconstructing earthly societies—in other words, it espouses an essentially theocratic government.”

No argument! These people must be stopped! They would substitute belief in an Almighty God. Such an extreme belief would weaken the power of God, the Almighty State. It would undermine the First Commandment, I am the Lord Thy State, Thou shalt have no other gods. Also the Second, Thou shalt obey! They would replace them with antiquated, theocratic commandments like: Thou shalt not steal. Thou shalt not covet. Thou shalt not kill. The latter alone could cripple the abortion industry and create a hardship for the doctors and nurses who would have to learn life saving skills to replace their life taking training and conditioning.

“Civil Rights Task Force (CRTF): A “patriot” group headquartered in California (with members in many states) that primarily impersonates law enforcement. CRTF sells nylon jackets (with “Civil Rights Task Force” printed on the back, (just as law enforcement agencies have jackets with their names on the back), gold badges, business cards, and other paraphernalia.”

Other extremist groups also put their names on the backs of jackets just like law enforcement agencies. Some examples: Denver Broncos, New York Yankees, Philadelphia Flyers, Boston Celtics, and many others. May we assume they’ll be included in the big DoJ roundup?

“Constitution Party: A minor, right-wing extremist political party, formerly known as the U.S. Taxpayers Party (USTP), which is one of the primary parties that specifically try to appeal to the ‘patriot’ movement.”

This is just one of the many examples of the “left-wing.” statist bias of the writers of this pathetic joke. “Right-wing” is almost always accompanied by “extremists” and patriots is almost always enclosed in quotation marks. Contrast that with the handling of “left-wing” oriented groups who are generally called “activists” even when they resort to terrorism as do some of the environmental groups mentioned. I think they might have called them terrorists in one or two cases.

To avoid misunderstanding, I’d like to make it clear that I believe the left vs. right Itchy and Scratchy Show is applied Hegelian Dialectic.

“New World Order: A term used by conspiracy theorists to refer to a global conspiracy designed to implement worldwide socialism.”

Would the DoJ’s definition of “conspiracy theorists” include Congresswoman Marjorie Holt?

Hon . Marjorie S. Holt of Maryland, in the House of Representatives on Monday, Jan. 19, 1976 :

“Mr. Speaker, many of us recently received a letter from the World Affairs Council of Philadelphia, inviting Members of Congress to participate in a ceremonial signing of a “Declaration of Interdependence” on January 30 in Congress Hall, adjacent to Independence Hall in Philadelphia. A number of Members of Congress have been invited to sign this document, lending their prestige to its theme, but I want the record to show my strong opposition to this declaration. It calls for the surrender of our national sovereignty to international organizations. It declares that our economy should be regulated by international authorities. It proposes that we enter a ‘new world order’ that would redistribute the wealth created by the American people.

I post this comment made by Congresswoman Holt regarding the proposal of a “Declaration of Independence” to show that the “New World Order” is not “theory,” it is fact. Pushers of this “New World Order” knew full well that the American people and, for that matter, all of the peoples of the developed world would never accept a government that would “redistribute” their wealth to the undevelped countries of the world (minus 20 or 30% for handling). That’s the reason for the de-industrialization of our countries and the reduction of our standards of living over a number of decades. The pushers are taking everything we have in advance so we’ll have nothing to lose if we accept the world government they propose.

“Wise Use: A term used to refer to a loose collection of antienvironment and property rights groups that oppose government regulation of natural resources and absolute property rights.”

Did you know that groups opposed to the great government land and resources grabs are “antienvironment?”

Zionist: Generally speaking, a term used to refer to the Jewish movement earlier this century to establish a Jewish homeland in Palestine or to refer to pro-Israeli groups or organizations today (i.e., Zionist Organization of America). The term is used by many white supremacists to refer to all or any Jews, often in reference to “Jewish conspiracies.”

Disregarding the DoJ’s usual anti-white or anti-Christian slurs, what I find interesting is the apparent acceptance of racial separation when sought by the Jews in a “Jewish homeland.”

“New Black Panther Party for Self-Defense: Established by Khallid Adbul Muhammad around 1996 to resurrect the original Black Panther Party for Self-Defense, the New Panthers claim to have 80 chapters across the country, including in the areas of New York, Houston, and Washington, DC. They have shown their resolve by marching with weapons in plain sight in Jasper, Texas (following the dragging death of James Byrd, Jr., in 1998) and at the Texas State Prison in Huntsville, Texas, in 2000 to protest the impending execution of a black man. They continue to organize demonstrations that have been criticized for their racial and anti-Semitic tone.”

By “marching with weapons in plain sight” the DoJ thinks these black racist thugs merely showed “their resolve.” But that’s OK. Remember, minorities are permitted a lot of leeway when being used to suppress the rights of the majority. But, that’s just my opinion. Well! Maybe not just mine!

Given all of the absurdities and non-sequiters in this publication, doesn’t it give you a warm, fuzzy feeling to know your tax dollars paid for it?

The complete report in PDF can be downloaded at the site below.

http://publicintelligence.net/doj-terrorism-and-criminal-extremism-terms-and-concepts-guide/

Everything about this short speaks to me about participation. From the outsourced nature of its production to its clear message. Made by the same team who created “Connected”, its a humanist look at our present situation. We have been declaring our “independence” for so long, perhaps it is time to begin declaring our “interdependence” and truly look at how closely we are linked and in need of one another.   Click here to declare your interdependence on their map.

Republicans keep calling every national program – Socialism. They have been told to blame Democrats for social security, Medicaid and Medicare – all popular programs that they use and need. The inconvenient truth is that the entire world economy, controlled by the right-wing elites, is a Financial Socialist Order. The new Republican Elite Financial Socialism has caused this global destruction, destroyed the old GOP and failed to let their own party know – the good ol’ days are gone for the hypocrites too.

 I was blessed to have known Congresswoman Marjorie Holt (1920 – 2007), a Maryland Congressional representative and a good friend of our family. Now more than ever, 35 years later, I am proud to have been exposed to her awesome integrity. She stood up for what she believed in without caving to political pressures. Many times over the years, after I found her lone dove speech to Congress, I have mentioned that her sense of consequence was powerful.

Congresswoman Holt, stood by herself unsupported by her colleagues and spoke against the One World concept as it was being thrust at full speed ahead to our 1976 Congress. Her speech below is so compelling that I felt it should be posted in light of the current, Fed and Wall Street banking scandal that has led to the foreclosures and loss of jobs in our once great nation. Congresswoman Holt, stood alone with no support and warned against this very issue over 35 years ago. She was the only member of Congress to speak up and not to participate in this new Interdependence. As OccupyWallStreet is being silenced by police and media – maybe it’s now time to review and reflect upon the thoughts of an earlier generation before greed entirely took over the world and take heed.

Congressional Record (1/19/1976), p. 240, “Extensions of Remarks, World Affairs Council”

Hon. Marjorie S. Holt (MD), in the House of Representatives: Mr. Speaker, many of us recently received a letter from the World Affairs Council of Philadelphia, inviting members of Congress to participate in a ceremonial signing of “A Declaration of Interdependence” on January 30 in Congress Hall, adjacent to Independence Hall in Philadelphia.

A number of Members of Congress have been invited to sign this document, lending their prestige to its theme, but I want the record to show my strong opposition to this declaration.

Mr. Speaker, this is an obscenity that defiles our Declaration of Independence, signed 200 years ago in Philadelphia. We fought a great Revolution for independence and individual liberty, but now it is proposed that we participate in a world socialist order.

Are we a proud and free people, or are we a carcass to be picked by the jackals of the world, who want to destroy us?

When one cuts through the high-flown rhetoric of this “Declaration of Interdependence,” one finds key phrases that tell the story.

For example, it states that, “The economy of all nations is a seamless web, and that no one nation can any longer effectively maintain its processes of production and monetary systems without recognizing the necessity for collaborative regulation by international authorities.”

How do you like the idea of “international authorities” controlling our production and our monetary system, Mr. Speaker? How could any American dedicated to our national independence and freedom tolerate such an idea?

The declaration goes on to urge a strengthening of the United Nations and a broadening of the jurisdiction of the World Court, “that these may preside over a reign of law that will not only end wars but will end as well the mindless violence which terrorizes our society even in times of peace.”

Mr. Speaker, we have lately witnessed the United Nations organization in full cry against America and her allies of the Free World. We have watched the U.N. become an instrument of the Soviet Union and its shabby following of despots large and small.

America should never subject her fate to decisions by such an assembly, unless we long for national suicide. Instead, let us have independence and freedom.

A major threat to world peace is the Soviet Union, which imposes slavery on its people and devotes its economy to the single task of building a war machine to extend that slavery throughout the world.

It subverts governments of independent nations; it arms and impels its subservient client states to wage wars of conquest against their neighbors.

Mr. Speaker, there is one force that preserves freedom where it still survives in this world, and that is the strength of the United States, to the extent that we maintain a powerful, credible economic and military deterrent, we shall also have peace.

The Soviet Union seeks world empire. America asks only that free people remain unmolested by the slavemasters of the Kremlin.

If we resist the expansion of the empire that threatens to dominate the world and destroy the independence of every nation, we shall be fulfilling the ideas of our Declaration of Independence.

If we surrender our independence to a “new world order” dominated by the Soviet Union and its clients, we will be betraying our historic ideals of freedom and self-government.

Freedom and self-government are not outdated. The fathers of our Republic fought a revolution for those ideals, which are as valid today as they ever were.

Let us not betray freedom by embracing slavemasters; let us not betray self-government with world government; let us embrace Jefferson and Madison, not Marx and Lenin.

George H.W. Bush, a Republican leader of the New World Order Elite Financial Socialism.

____________________________________________________________________

The World Affairs Council of Philadelphia had a Ceremonial Signing of “A Declaration of INTERdependence” by Members of Congress of the United States of America, at the House of Representatives Chamber, Congress Hall, Independence National Historical Park, Philadelphia, PA, at 11:30 AM, January 30, 1976. Signing this U.N. Declaration of Interdependence numbered 32 Senators and 90 Representatives.

Sources: United Nations Secretariat, Revised System of National Accounts Draft Chapters and Annexes No. 90-24912-2005-AIC “Are you merely an institutional unit?”; Sec. F.5 International organization, 68(3); Sec. G The Residence of International Units; Sec. G1 Introduction 70.

The U.N. Declaration of Interdependence….

• Calls for surrender of our national sovereignty to international organizations
• Declares that our economy should be regulated by international authorities
• Proposes that we enter a “new world order” that would redistribute the wealth created by the American peopleExamine this closely. It suggests that world government will somehow cure the problems of crime and terrorism, not just the problem of war. The sponsors of this declaration have clearly lost all contact with reality.

A time of transition for you? Julie Norris sits solo on the Front Porch and talks about pioneering the future as the past with a discussion on the “New American Dream” and the Declaration of Interdependence. Anyone interested in these topics should definitely totally attend the Living Economies: Place Matters conference.

We hold these truths to be self-evident:
That all women are created equal -
but each is blessed with different gifts and talents.
That all women are endowed with certain individual rights -
but each must assume shared responsibilities.

For the happiness of all
depends on the commitment of each
to support equality and individuality,
rights and responsibilities.

We declare all women to be mutually interdependent -
banding together to support one another,
sharing our experience, strength, and hope,
that all may enjoy life, love,
and the pursuit of laughter.

We agree to encourage one another in tough times
and celebrate in good times.

We commit to taking turns leading and following,
inspiring and teaching,
listening and learning.

We agree to give credit where credit is due -
including us.

We commit to loving ourselves first -
because we can’t give what we don’t have.

With this Declaration of Interdependence,
we set ourselves free -
free from old beliefs that are no longer true,
free from self-doubt, insecurity, and loneliness,
free from self-imposed perfectionism.

We set ourselves free -
heeding our intuition in all her guises,
loving our bodies through every change,
finding our voices to speak our own truths.

We set ourselves free -
to create fulfilling work,
to form nurturing families,
and to build great friendships.

We are strong;
we are beautiful;
we are generous;
we are wise.
We are women -
committed to creating
a world that affirms us all.

The New Age Movement

Kerby Anderson

Rudyard Kipling once wrote that “East is East, and West is West, and never the twain shall meet.” But that can no longer be said now that a pantheistic Eastern philosophy has spread to this country. The primary vehicle for this transmission of ideas has been the New Age Movement.

Evidence of Eastern philosophy’s arrival can certainly be seen in many ways. Statements by movie stars, the growth of Eastern cults, and the popularity of films like the Star Wars trilogy testify to the growing influence of New Age ideas. In the movie The Empire Strikes Back, for example, Yoda espouses pantheistic ideas to his Jedi disciple, Luke Skywalker: “You must feel the Force around you. Here, between you and me. Between the rock . . . everywhere. Yes, even the land.”

Defining the New Age

The New Age Movement has taken on a variety of names including the Human Potential Movement, the Third Force, the Aquarian Conspiracy, Cosmic Consciousness, and Cosmic Humanism. Although most refer to it as the New Age Movement, many in the movement do not like that label, and many others would not even consider themselves part of the movement, even though they may hold to many of the core beliefs of the New Age Movement.

Accurately defining the New Age is a formidable task for several reasons. First, the New Age Movement is eclectic and diverse. It is not a cohesive movement but is exceedingly diverse in its composition and ideology. The unifying factors are shared ideology rather than a shared organizational structure.

Second, the New Age Movement is difficult to define because it emphasizes and encourages change. The New Age Movement is syncretistic and therefore evolutionary in its nature. Many proponents change their perspectives, and so it is frequently difficult to pin down the major beliefs of the New Age Movement.

Major Tenets of the New Age

Even given the diversity and transitory nature of the New Age Movement, there are still a number of major tenets generally held in common by most groups within this movement.

First is the belief in monism. New Agers believe that “all is one.” Everything and everyone is interrelated and interdependent. Ultimately there is no real difference between humans, animals, rocks, or even God. Any differences between these entities are merely apparent, not real.

Second is the belief in pantheism. Since New Agers already believe that “all is one,” the next logical assumption would be that “all is god.” All of creation partakes of the divine essence. All of life (and even non-life) has a spark of divinity within.

The third major tenet of the New Age follows as a logical conclusion from the other two. If “all is one” and “all is god,” then we should conclude that “we are gods.” We are, according to New Agers, ignorant of our divinity. We are “gods in disguise.” The goal, therefore, of the New Age Movement is to discover our own divinity.

Fourth, we discover our own divinity by experiencing a change in consciousness. The human race suffers from a collective form of metaphysical amnesia. We have forgotten that our true identity is divine and thus must undergo a change of consciousness to achieve our true human potential (hence the name, the Human Potential Movement).

A fifth tenet is reincarnation. Most New Agers believe in some form of reincarnation. In its classic form, the cycles of birth, death, and reincarnation are necessary to work off our bad “karma” and to reach perfection. The doctrine of karma says that one’s present condition is determined by one’s actions in a past life.

The Western version of reincarnation held by many New Agers places much less emphasis on bad karma and postulates an upward spiral towards perfection through reincarnation. This view has been espoused by such people as Shirley MacLaine, Sylvester Stallone, George Patton, and Henry Ford.

A final major tenet is moral relativism. New Agers think in terms of gray, rather than black or white. Denying the law of non- contradiction, New Agers will often believe that two conflicting statements can both be true. They will therefore teach that “all religions are true” and “there are many paths to God.”

A Biblical Evaluation

When the tenets of the New Age Movement are examined, they are not really new at all. The New Age is really old occultism in new linguistic garb. Many of these concepts can be found in basic form in Genesis 3. Notice these statements made to Eve in the Garden: “You will be like God” (pantheism), “You will not surely die” (reincarnation), “Your eyes will opened” (change of consciousness), and “Did God really say” (moral relativism).

First, a Christian view of reality rejects the concept of monism. The Bible teaches that God’s creation is not an undivided unity but a diversity of created things and beings. The creation is not unified in itself but held together by Christ in whom “all things hold together” (Col. 1:17).

Second, Christianity is theistic, not pantheistic. New Agers teach that God is an impersonal force, while the Bible teaches that God is an imminent, personal, triune, sovereign God. God is separate from His creation rather than merely a part of the creation as pantheism would teach.

Third, we are created in God’s image (Gen. 1:26) and therefore have dignity and value (Psalm 8). New Agers teach that we are gods and thus have divinity within our humanity.

Fourth, New Agers flirt with the occult in their attempt to achieve a change in consciousness. Although these practices are frequently described in benign terms such as parapsychology, they involve direct contact with spiritual entities. The Bible warns against the danger of these practices and lists such activities as divination and spirit channeling as detestable practices (Deut. 18:9-13) that are to be avoided.

Fifth, the Bible teaches resurrection of the body (1 Cor. 15), not reincarnation of the soul. Likewise, the doctrine of karma is foreign to the gospel. Salvation comes from grace, not through the works in this life (Eph. 2:8-9) or in any other alleged past life. We will not be reborn after death. Hebrews 9:27 clearly teaches that “it is appointed for men to die once and after this come judgment.”

Finally, the Bible teaches absolute truth. God has clearly communicated to us his moral law (Ex. 20:1-17), which we are to obey. Contrary to the New Age teaching that “there are many paths to God,” Jesus clearly taught “I am the way, the truth and the life. No one comes to the Father except through me” (John 14:6).

© 1992 Probe Ministries

About the Author

http://www.leaderu.com/orgs/probe/docs/newage.html

=======================================================

CLICK THE LOGOS ABOVE TO GO TO THE HOME PAGE AND LISTEN TO THE RADIO SHOW

—————————————————————————-