I recently began following Christian author, scholar and speaker Michael Heiser, whose work I find revolutionary and makes the most sense about Christian doctrine. He has an interesting Youtube channel called Fringepop321 where he tackles ancient aliens, UFOs, Bible analysis, cryptozoology, the occult and all the weird stuff from a Christian perspective.
But among Heiser’s videos, what got me writing were episodes where another Christian author, Carl Teichrib, was his guest. One of those episodes had the words “New World Order” in the title. So I watched, and what a revelation it was to me.
|SUPPORT INDEPENDENT SOCIAL COMMENTARY!|
Subscribe to our Substack community GRP Insider to receive by email our in-depth free weekly newsletter. Opt into a paid subscription and you'll get premium insider briefs and insights from us daily.
Subscribe to our Substack newsletter, GRP Insider!
Teichrib agrees that the New World Order I described in an earlier article, the secret society-manipulated thing, is a caricature. And, as I suspected, it covers up the real New World Order, something that is in the open, something that people may not find sinister at first, but it is when you get to the bottom of it.
Teichrib related that he had been going to New Age conventions to learn about their ideas and use the chance to evangelize. He had been to the various iterations of the Parliament of World Religions, for example, where representatives from all faiths converge. Christians, Bahai, Buddhism, Hindu, Shinto, modern pagans, Wiccans, Maharishi, Sufism, Satanism, occultists and even Ayahuasca attended these. He also described other organizations, including non-governmental organizations and special interest groups such as the World Federalist Organization/Citizens for Global Solutions. The goal of the group as claimed is world peace.
So what’s sinister with this, you may ask? They’re coming together and working for peace! The problem is that they want that peace achieved on their own terms and not anybody else’s, and this could degrade into something that undermines people’s freedoms.
First, Teichrib said that this group of world religions doesn’t stop at religion. Their consensus is that world peace is possible only by establishing a world government – likely one that they are the author of. In other words, they want to cross over from religion into politics. They want to establish their own order on the world, a New World Order under themselves. Teichrib called this spiritual politics.
Those involved want things like a world taxation system set up, payable to their government. And, wouldn’t a world government have tussles with sovereign nations? That leads to another point, they want to bring down the sovereignty of nations. It sounds attractive to “peaceniks” at first (I’ll admit it appealed to me before too), but it actually has more consequences than benefits in practice.
Teichrib’s website is named Forcing Change, which is a good way to put what the religions parliament wants. He also lays bare his biases: embracing an evangelical Christian perspective; pro-liberty versus politically imposed equality; pro-individualistic versus consensus collectivism; and pro-free market. I embrace the same things as the better path to true world peace. But these are also the areas that are threatened by this new world order.
Despite the participants being from different religious backgrounds and the claim of being tolerant of all beliefs, Teichrib hints that the actual goal is make all people accept one belief, which is Monism or Oneism. This is the belief that all is one and everything will eventually merge back into one mass. The likely expectation is that all belief systems will soon merge into one, so the parliament thinks, let’s speed that up.
I believe this expectation is wrong. This is because belief systems have elements that conflict. If I believe in Jesus Christ as my savior, should I also accept Buddha, Tammuz and Rhonda Byrne as my saviors if the parliament says so? Some religions take narcotic drugs; so should I be forced to take the drugs just for the sake of acceptance? What if another religion says taking narcotics is wrong? Problems like these should be obvious even when people don’t try to look at it closely. These and many other things are good reasons for Evangelical Christians to refuse to join.
Here’s something interesting: during a meeting in the 2018 parliament that carried themes of Love and Inclusion, a progressive baptist minister (yes, some Christians get misled) put together a Hindu sand mandala (a sort of sand painting) of the goddess Kali holding up a severed head of Judge Brett Kavanaugh and of people who confirmed him following his nomination to the US Supreme Court. Then the minister and other members proceeded to dance around it in a sort of cursing ceremony and they destroyed the representations of Kavanaugh and the others. Again, the event’s theme was Love and Inclusion. Yeah, right. I agree with Michael Heiser’s reaction, it is disturbing.
Next, politically imposed equality. As the mandala episode suggests, the parliament is dominated by left-leaning people and social justice warriors or SJWs. So you can expect people twisting ideas of justice here.
For example, when the Bible says, let he who has two blankets share one with an unfortunate fellow without one (or, for the Philippine context, someone with two electric fans), the SJWs will twist that into, patrol the houses and find someone who has two blankets. Forcibly take one and give it to someone without. And, there are sure to be some SJWs who will just take one’s blanket and give it to someone else (perhaps on the basis that the one with the blanket is purportedly rich and the other poor) – which means things are still at zero and someone still lacks a blanket.
In Teichrib’s own example, he says during a 2010 world religions summit, a Salvation Army representative proposed that instead of allowing each person to have their own bike, make them share one bike in the community (it’s in the LDBC 2019 video). That, Teichrib said, was tried in Venezuela, Russia and Eastern Europe and did not work.
What happens when socialism actually gets applied so fervently is that redistribution becomes middle-class to poor, not rich to poor; but the rich steal the credit for it. The rich actually stay rich despite redistribution policies, simply because they’re in control. Also, redistribution-based ideologies don’t solve the patron-client culture of poorer countries (like ours), but actually help maintain it. The rich as patrons use redistribution and poverty porn to keep their clients as clients. This would also be against the free market ideal listed above.
But we know that such ideas find their way into the Philippines. These are ideas that Filipino wokes, such as those among the anti-Duterte crowd, hold. And yes, even among Christians and Catholics. The statements a while back of Leni Robredo and Socrates Villegas on vote-buying seem to reflect such influences. Of course, there’s that observation that the social justice agenda of the local Catholic Church, perhaps even “liberation theology” in the Vatican itself, reflects infiltration by pagan humanistic and leftist ideas (I recall the ridiculous “no to war toys” movement before, which I believe had its origins from outside Christianity).
Next, pro-individualistic versus consensus collectivism. Monistic ideas seem to imply that, since we are all supposed to be one, human free will can be called an aberration. Some people want to break down the natural, God-endowed individuality that people have in order to make them part of the oneness. According to Teichrib, group members have expressed the intention that, if people in the world don’t embrace their ideals, they could use force. Of course, why else are they trying to transition to political control?
So some will ask, what’s wrong with you? Who cares if some rights are trampled on. that thing is for peace! But it’s forced peace, which is oppressive. In effect, it’s not peace at all. It will lead to persecution of people who hold on to their beliefs, which is a basic human right. It should alarm those who value liberty.
It’s both interesting and alarming that politicians and former world leaders attend this. Former Canadian prime minister Kim Campbell attended. Hillary Clinton also sent a letter when she couldn’t attend. I also saw anthropologist Jane Goodall and Queen Rayna of Jordan listed in a report. Al Gore’s daughter Karenna attended the 2015 parliament and afterwards went on to promote climate change stuff at Paris. Members of the group are among the staunch supporters of the Carbon Tax and similar environmental efforts, so I’ll not be surprised if Greta Thunberg or those close to her are involved. Come to think of it, Teichrib says some environmentalists at the parliament want humanity to worship the Earth as a goddess. Christians might be told to go along with it, and if they refuse, political strong-arming may be used against them.
So with this, I think of Maria Ressa. She was granted the Nobel Peace Prize, but what she does is actually challenge the sovereignty of the current Philippine government… Hmm, Peace through challenging sovereignty? Could there be a connection between her and the parliament of religions? It’s possible that some wealthy people attend the parliament and are encouraged to use their funds for initiatives that undermine the sovereignty of nations and the rights of people who disagree with them. That’s why I believe the idea of George Soros, Pierre Omidyar or other businessmen funding efforts to overthrow governments is not far-fetched. Teichrib also mentioned connections with the International Criminal Court, which intends to try President Rodrigo Duterte for purported crimes.
I believe that, in the Philippines, a community of similar people is already working their way into politics to try to make into policy politically imposed equality, anti-individualistic consensus collectivism and anti-free market views. Then resistance to these will also be branded as being a racist, fascist, dictator, or whatever pejorative normally lobbed against “evil people.” This is terrible to put in a world government.
I remember that my church’s founder, Herbert W. Armstrong, used to parrot that a world government was also the way to peace. But instead of being under humans, Christ, a real divinity, is the one expected to run this world government. I of course believe that this is better. Humans are not suited to rule the world.
Like I said about communism, strong centralized control in the hands of a few flawed people is susceptible to serious mistakes, the worst being deaths. For example, most plane crashes have been traced to human error. Some pilots with issues even crash planes deliberately, bringing loads of people with them. What if you find people like these in a world government, in charge of millions of people? This sounds like a nightmare. This is also why the powers of consensus over individuals should be greatly limited.
The underlying theme of this Monist movement as Teichrib implies is the same as Rhonda Byrne’s The Secret that I discussed before: that humanity should not worship any god anymore and should declare itself as god. But, for me, this is one of the sources of, not a solution to, the world’s evils. What this movement seems to be doing is making a sort of exclusive club, whose members believe that the world should be populated only by other people who think like themselves. They want to remake the world into their own image. Or they believe their ideas are so “good” that others must try them. Those who refuse or have different ideas are “evil,” so these must be dealt with and not tolerated. Since they’re after political power now, things may go beyond just making a mere sand mandala or effigy and reach the point of institutionalized discrimination, having someone jailed on trumped-up charges, or even worse.
If you think I’m scaremongering or badmouthing others, Teichrib said he had been receiving threats from members of the group. I haven’t read his book Game of Gods, but I’m sure all that information is there. This is something that people who value their liberty need to be wary of and be ready to resist when the time comes.
You might say, perhaps there are people who are sincere in that parliament about doing good? Yes, I believe there are. Teichrib himself could be considered one of them. But I also believe such people walk out from meetings when they disagree with what members of the parliament propose (Teichrib in one of the videos linked below tells of when he and another Christian walked out of a heated meeting). Those who stay are likely the people who’ve compromised their values just to go with the crowd.
For me, no hegemony, school of thought, ideology or whatever thing that is humanity’s creation should rule the world. That includes whatever the parliament I described is pushing. They claim that it is for peace, but I find it misguided if they are resorting to political power to enforce it.
I also disagree also with Monism. Everything is not one (even if that is a famous line from Transformers the Movie). For me, merging consciousness like the Eternals’ Uni-mind and losing our free will as a result is a farce. It also doesn’t make sense – we have free will at first, then we lose it later? I prefer evangelical Christianity because it recognizes that we are individuals (Rom. 14:12, each of us makes an account of ourselves), each of us a “one” that has a responsibility to one’s self as well as others and God. And when people help others under this condition, rather than under forced redistribution, it is more sincere and helpful. Peace is more peaceful when individuals freely embrace it rather than get forced into it.
Episodes of Michael Heiser’s Fringepop321 with Teichrib:
1. Re-enchantment – Oneism, Paganism and Myth
2. Transhumanism: What Makes Us Human?
3. What Is the New World Order? Divine Identity Theft
4. What is the Parliament of World Religions and Why is it Disturbing?
Teichrib’s book Game of Gods (Amazon link)
I believe, as my cohorts here do, that what Filipinos embrace as their culture is what actually pulls the country down. And those who seem to be anti-dictators, who may also believe themselves to be “heroes,” are the real dictators.