I don’t “Believe” in “Unity”, “Green” or “Life”. I believe in the Lord Jesus Christ (2)

Bagati de seama sa nu va insele cineva.

(Marcu 13:5)

Christianity is under attack. Formidable forces are actively working to undermine what remains of the biblical worldview once prevalent in the United States and to distort the Gospel around the globe. These forces are powerful, well connected, well funded. They dominate key christian media outlets and constitute the single greatest threat to the Church today. What is most frightening, however, is that they profess to be and are widely believed to be Christian.”

(Justin Peters, fragment preluat din “Religious Trojan Horse” de Brannon Howse)

“This coming age will be as predominantly the age of group interplay, group idealism and group consciousness.…for the will of the individual will voluntarily be blended into group will.”

(Alice Bailey, The Rays and the Initiations)

Cine sunt vorbitorii de la “Believe in Unity 2015”?

Nelu Brie – despre Nelu Brie nu am foarte multe informatii. Stiu doar ca este pastor si rectorul ITP Bucuresti. Inclin sa cred ca dumnealui a acceptat sa participe la eveniment fara a se informa in prealabil cine sunt organizatorii si ce fel de idei promoveaza, desi un rector al unui institut teologic ar trebui sa fie mult mai la curent cu ceea ce se intampla in mediul evanghelic national si international. Va rog sa intelegeti ca lucrurile acestea sunt foarte serioase si consider ca indiferent cine suntem nu ne putem permite sa ne jucam cu ele. Cu atat mai mult o persoana care este intr-o pozitie precum cea detinuta de Nelu Brie. Globalistii sunt vanatori de elite aflate in pozitii cheie, iar din acest motiv il consider pe Nelu Brie doar o victima (deocamdata).

Ravi Zacharias – Dumnealui este o persoana foarte respectata atat la nivel national cat si international. Respectul pe care si l-a castigat in randul evanghelicilor de-a lungul anilor este folosit pentru a duce in eroare pe cat mai multi. Din pacate pe fruntea domnului Zacharias astazi scrie “ECUMENISM/GLOBALIZARE”. Desigur exista si o forma de ecumenism sanatos, dar in cazul dansului e din acela nesanatos si foarte nesanatos. Dumnealui e in armonie cu toata lumea, inclusiv cu cei din NAR, Word of Faith sau si mai rau cu mormonii

zacharias

(Sursa foto)

Cristian Barbosu – CEO-ul “francizei” Harvest-Metanoia din Romania. Mai multe detalii intr-un post viitor.

Cine sunt organizatorii evenimentului “Believe in Unity”?

Se pare ca este vorba despre “comunitatea bisericilor evanghelice din Cluj”. De pe pagina web a evenimentului aflam cateva dintre acestea: Biserica Speranta, Biserica Betel, Biserica Elim si Biserica Baptista Manastur. Din cate stiu eu (va rog sa ma corectati daca gresesc) cel putin doua dintre aceste biserici (Biserica Betel si Biserica Manastur) sunt in sfera de influenta a organizatiei “BIG Impact” (cei cu “Summitul Global de Conducere”, varianta romaneasca a “Global Leadership Summit” promovat de organizatia “Willow Creek Association” condusa de Bill Hybels). Cand auziti de “Bill Hybels” si “Willow Creek” ganditi-va la urmatoarele concepte: seeker-sensitive, pragmatism, customer friendly, church growth movement, leadership network etc.

Multe dintre persoanele implicate in organizarea “Believe in Unity” sunt membrii “BIG Impact”. Reteaua de biserici “Harvest-Metanoia” condusa de Cristian Barbosu (unul dintre vorbitori) este asociata la organizatia “BIG Impact”. Aceasta organizatie a fost implicata si cu alte ocazii[1] cand Ravi Zacharias a venit in Romania. O alta organizatie numita “RZIM Romania” se afla intr-un parteneriat mai mult sau mai putin oficial cu “Harvest-Metanoia” si “BIG Impact”. Prin urmare mi se pare destul de evident ca in spatele acestui eveniment se afla oameni asociati si implicati in “BIG Impact”, “RZIM Romania” si “Harvest-Metanoia”.

Un interviu realizat de catre Credo TV ne aduce si mai multe detalii despre evenimentul de la Cluj:

Pe scurt: “Lasand la o parte dogmele”, “intr-un soi de armonie”, sa promovam impreuna “pe Hristos intr-un mod relevant” si intr-o “forma contemporana”, “sa le oferim tinerilor raspunsuri la intrebarile profunde despre viata, credinta si adevar”.

Ma indoiesc profund de faptul ca raspunsul “intrebarilor profunde despre viata, credinta si adevar” se poate afla in contextul unui astfel de eveniment, mai ales cand stiu ce fel de idei sunt promovate in cadrul “retelei de relatii” construite in jurul acestuia. Dar nu se stie niciodata, Dumnezeu li se poate descoperi oamenilor in cele mai neasteptate momente si in cele mai ciudate locuri.

Care este contextul local si global in care actioneaza organizatorii?

Pentru a fi in stare sa patrundem si mai mult in tainele organizarii unui astfel de eveniment trebuie sa reusim sa intelegem cat mai bine “reteaua de relatii” din jurul acestuia. Daca in capitolul anterior am discutat putin despre “reteaua de relatii” locala, in acest capitol as vrea sa vedem si contextul global al “retelei de relatii”. In acest sens vom incerca sa descoperim conexiuni din aproape in aproape…

Un alt element interesant in contextul de fata este faptul ca editura [2] care ii traduce cartile lui Ravi Zacharias (vorbitorul principal la “Believe in Unity”) in limba romana (cel putin o parte din titluri) este aceeasi editura care ii publica si cartile lui Cristian Barbosu. Tot la aceeasi editura este tradus si James MacDonald, liderul Harvest Bible Chapel (HBC sunt cei de la care Cristian Barbosu a preluat “modelul Harvest”, un model ce se se incadreaza la categoria “purpose driven church” a la Rick Warren via Peter Drucker). Editura respectiva pare un fel de editura de casa a retelei Harvest-Metanoia. Mai nou acestia il traduc si pe Os Guinness (un amanunt important in contextul in care vorbim despre globalizare). Os Guinness (“third way” communitarian dominionist) este colegul lui Ravi Zacharias (ecumenist/globalist change agent) la RZIM International. Organizatia “RZIM Romania” este cea care ii promoveaza pe cei doi in Romania. Aceasta organizatie este de asemenea foarte apropiata de “BIG Impact”.

ravi-os

(Sursa: pagina Facebook Ravi Zacharias)

Comunitarismul este fratele geaman al socialismului fabian, promovat de Tony Blair prin “Tony Blair Faith Foundation”, o asociatie in care sunt implicati atat mega-pastorul Rick Warren [3] cat si “crislamistul” Miroslav Volf [4]. Os Guinness este tot un comunitarist, doar ca termenul pe care dumnealui il foloseste este acela de “spatiu public civil“.

“Communitarianism,” or “civil society” thinking (the two have similar meanings) has many interpretations, but at its center is a notion that years of celebrating individual freedom have weakened the bonds of community and that the rights of the individual must be balanced against the interests of society as a whole. Inherent in the philosophy is a return to values and morality, which, the school of thought believes, can best be fostered by community organizations. …

Bush’s inaugural address, said George Washington University professor Amitai Etzioni, a communitarian thinker, “was a communitarian text,” full of words like “civility”, “responsibility” and “community”. … Bush has recruited some of the leading thinkers of the “civil society” or “communitarian” movements to his White House. …

Communitarianism seems to look good on the surface; decisions will be made for the good of the community. But, in fact, like any government-based philosophy it is a sham.

(Sursa foto)

Communities don’t think, don’t believe, don’t want, don’t have needs, don’t have interests and don’t make decisions. Only individuals have minds that generate desires and needs — and only individuals can make choices and decisions.

Because “society” doesn’t make decisions, the issue isn’t a case of balancing individual rights against the interests of society. The question is: Will you make the decisions that control your life or will someone else impose his way upon you? That someone else won’t be the community or society; it will be whoever seizes the power to run the community.

By subsidizing “faith-based” charities, for example, George Bush isn’t acting on behalf of the community. He’s confiscating your earnings and giving it to the charities that please him and his political associates. He may do it in the name of society, compassion, community, or Snickers Bars. But it is simply raw political power — the same kind exercised by Bill Clinton and all his predecessors, preempting your right to use the money you earn in the way you think best.

The communitarians may say you’ve been enjoying too much individual freedom, and that you must give up some of that for the benefit of the community. But they really mean that they want more power over your lifeto force you to subsidize, obey and conform to their choices.

Revenim la Miroslav Volf (o sa intelegeti mai incolo de ce il aduc in discutie). Iata ce ne spune Wikipedia cu privire la una dintre misiunile domnului Volf: dialogul intre miscarea penticostala si cea catolica.

“In 1985 Volf became a member of the Pentecostal side of the official Roman Catholic and Pentecostal dialogue. The theme of the dialogue for the five years that followed was communio, and, together with Peter Kuzmič, Volf wrote the first position paper.”

“In 1989 he received a scholarship from the Alexander von Humboldt Foundation and started working on his Habilitation (a post-doctoral degree required by many continental European universities for a call to a professorship). The Habilitation was on “Trinity and Communion“, a topic stimulated by Volf’s long standing involvement in the official dialogue between the Vatican’s Council for Promoting Christian Unity and the international Pentecostal movement.” (sublinierile imi apartin)

In urma cu vreo cativa ani (2008 -2009) Miroslav Volf impreuna cu Tony Blair au sustinut o serie de cursuri despre “Credinta si Globalizare” [5] in cadrul Universitatii Yale, lucru care explica apropierea foarte mare mare dintre cei doi. Astfel “crislamismul” domnului Volf trebuie inteles in contextul globalizarii si a socialismului fabian. Miroslav Volf este unul dintre semnatarii documentului “A Common Word“. In cartea sa “The Global Public Square”, autorul Os Guinness afirma urmatoarele:

Interfaith dialogue has more to say for it then the no-label movement, and there are many examples of such initiatives today, including “A Common Word” initiative launched by Islamic religious leaders, Price Ghazi of Jordan’s “Amman Message”, Karen Armstrong’s “Charter of Compassion”, former Prime Minister Tony Blair’s Faith Foundation and many others. Such interfaith efforts are welcome and mostly beneficial, as they are the many new initiatives in citizen diplomacy” (p. 224) (sublinierile imi apartin)

Os Guinness, este de fapt tot un fel Volf imbracat in haine de oaie. Pana in urma cu cateva luni Os Guinness a fost membru in consiliul administrativ al unei organizatii cu scop globalist, numita “New Canaan Society (vezi aici [6] si in Web cache aici), ce ii are printre vorbitori atat pe Miroslav Volf, cat si pe Ravi Zacharias.  Ba mai mult printre vorbitori se afla si profeti NAR (Noua Reforma Apostolica) precum Rick Joyner sau Lance Wallnau. E de inteles deoarece “Biserica condusa de scopuri” (Dominionism Lite: Church Growth Movement/Leadership Network) si “Noua Reforma Apostolica” (Dominionism Dark) sunt doua fete ale aceleiasi monede.

new-canaan

(Sursa foto: www.newcanaansociety.org)

Iata care este viziunea [7] “New Canaan Society”:

Our Vision is to inspire a global connected network of men who are committed to friendship with Jesus and with each other.”

In consiliul administrativ al “New Canaan Society” gasim si alti lideri proeminenti care fac parte din miscarea NAR/Latter Rain sau “Dominionism Dark” (precum Jack Deere, Rick Joyner) sau “Leadership Network” (Bob Buford). Dar sa vedem si cateva nume din lista vorbitorilor [8] ce conferentiaza frecvent pe la diferite evenimentele organizate de “New Canaan Society”: Reinhard Bonke, Jim Cymbala, Chuck Colson, Bill Hybels, Miroslav Volf, Lance Wallnau, Rick Joyner, Tim Keller, N. T. Wright, Ravi Zacharias si multi altii. Imaginati-va ca toti acestia reprezinta o parte din “reteua de relatii” in jurul careia Os Guinness si Ravi Zacharias isi desfasoara activitatea. De exemplu cateva nume ce au participat de-a lungul anilor la conferintele “New Canaan Society”:

2008
Location: Gaylord National, Washington, D.C.
Theme: Friendship, Membership, Partnership
Keynote Speakers: Tim Keller, Rick Warren, Jack Deere

2009
Location: The Homestead, Hot Springs, VA
Theme: When the Foundations Are Being Destroyed, What Can We Do?
Keynote Speakers: Tim Keller, Skip Ryan, Jack Deere

Cam asa arata un retreat organizat de “New Canaan Society”:

Stiti ce fel de invataturi promoveaza Jack Deere? Stiti cine este Rick Joyner? Iar chestia cu Tim Keller pe aceeasi scena impreuna cu cei doi e… de rasu-plansu… si in acelasi timp un moment dureros pentru fanii socialistului Tim Keller.

Anul acesta la conferinta “New Canaan Society” din mai va participa si John Piper alaturi de newager-ul Paul Young, autorul cartii “The Shack“. Tim Keller e deja o prezenta obisnuita an de an. Iata cum este prezentat evenimentul: “Laughter, prayer, beer, friendship, communion, “bro-mance”, community and cigars!“.

L-am pomenit mai devreme pe Rick Warren si asocierea dumnealui cu “Tony Blair Faith Foundation”:

The vision and values of the Tony Blair Faith Foundation are desperately needed today…. In any effort to help people learn to live and work together, we must engage the vast networks, resources, wisdom, and influence of the faith communities. My friends, Tony Blair is uniquely prepared with the gifts of temperament, knowledge, experience, leadership, and global respect essential for a task this great. I honestly don’t know of anyone better suited for this challenge. It’s why I agreed to serve on the Advisory Board. The Tony Blair Faith Foundation’s potential for doing good is staggering.” — Rick Warren, Saddleback Church, Purpose Driven Network, P.E.A.C.E. Coalition [9] (sublinierile imi apartin) 

Desigur realitatea e cu totul alta, dar Rick Warren nu ne-o spune… prin urmare e necesar sa avem cateva informatii de baza.

Sa revenim iarasi la Os Guinness. Dumnealui a sustinut in toamna anului trecut cateva prelegeri in Romania: la UEO (Universitatea Emanuel din Oradea), la Centrul Areopagus din Timisoara si la Universitatea Babes-Bolyai din Cluj. Evenimentele au fost organizate de “RZIM Romania”. Fara sa inteleaga agenda politica din spatele ideilor expuse, oamenii care participa la astfel de “prelegeri” sau “conferinte de apologetica” au impresia ca sunt tot mai pregatiti sa apere valorile crestinismului, dar cand colo sunt din ce in ce mai incapabili sa fac acest lucru si nu realizeaza ca in loc sa devina crestini mai buni, devin doar niste activisti politici mai buni. Sau niste “change agents”.

Iata mai jos unul dintre aceste discursuri sustinute in Romania:

Am sa va redau pe scurt ideile principale:

Generatia noastra este generatia conglomeratului intr-o era globala.
Generatia noastra va trebui sa respunda provocarilor actuale.

Daca raspundem adecvat soarta umanitatii nu este in pericol.
Daca nu raspundem provocarilor sau daca nu raspundem adecvat suntem in mare pericol.

Intrebarea este: cum traim impreuna cu divergentele noastre cele mai profunde?

Un prim raspuns: demersul de a le da tuturor oamenilor indiferent de religia lor libertate de constiinta. Avem un spatiu public sacru. La cealalta extrema avem un spatiu public gol. Ambele modele refuza dreptatea, echitatea si libertatea pentru anumiti cetateni.

Care este acel al treilea model care poate sa aduca armonia, diversitata si libertatea de a locui impreuna?
Cea de-a treia varianta este spatiul public civil. Un factor pe care l-am putea lua in considerare este aparitia un spatiu public global. Toti cetatenii sunt incurajati sa participe la dezbaterea publica, dar acest model functioneaza doar in baza unui cadru compus dintr-un consens asupra lucrurilor care sunt echitabile, juste si dau libertate tuturor cetatenilor. Credinta fiecarui cetatean este respectata.

Cand ii auziti pe comunitaristi vorbind de libertate… ganditi-va exact la polul opus…

Aceleasi mantre despre “spatiul public civil” prin care Os Guinness a reusit sa-si impresioneze audienta din Romania le-a repetat [10] si in urma cu peste 20 de ani (si le tot repeta de atunci) in cadrul unor prelegeri sustinute la seminarul catolic “Woodstock Theological Center” (controlat de iezuiti, adica baietii responsabili de contra-reforma), cu ocazia aniversarii a 25 de ani de la moartea teologului iezuit John Courtney Murray. Unul dintre conferentiari spunea urmatoarele:

“In the 1950s Murray declared that “modernity is dead” and that his generation was entering “a new world order.” He went on to say that a “post-modern” America finally was escaping the individualism, materialism, and “technologism” that had been so much part of our social history. Now, he said, the nation was entering into a communitarian age in which religions would deeply inform our public life.”

A urmat apoi Os Guinness:

“The public square: sacred, naked, or civil?

For the last 12 years we have seen the ugliness of members of the religious right who have what we might call a “re-imposer mentality.” They would like to re-impose their vision of an earlier state of things on everyone else, regardless of diversity, for the sake of assuring a so-called “sacred” public square. They represent one extreme. On the other extreme and partly as a reaction to the religious right, there are the “removers.” They would like to remove every trace of faith from the public square and to produce, thereby, a “naked” public square.

The ideal surely is what I would call a “civil” public square which is neither “sacred” nor “naked.” To achieve it will take enormous leadership, vision, and courage, along with proposals that are very, very practical. What makes it so difficult is the fact, as Peter Berger puts it, that in America the general population is as religious as India, whereas the elites are as secular as Sweden! Dissonance between the two makes it very difficult to create a “civil” society where all faiths and perspectives can participate harmoniously.

I, personally, owe a great debt to… John Courtney Murray for helping me think through the first principles of religious liberty…” (sublinierile imi apartin)

Remember Hegel? Neither “sacred” nor “naked” => third way “civil” public square.

Os Guinness este unul dintre autorii documentului “An Evanghelical Manifesto” in care gasim aceleasi idei:

“Keenly aware of the hour of history in which we live, and of the momentous challenges that face our fellow humans on the earth and our fellow Christians around the world…”

“This manifesto is a public declaration, addressed both to our fellow – believers and to the wider world. To affirm who we are and where we stand in public is important because we Evangelicals in America, along with people of all faiths and ideologies, represent one of the greatest challenges of the global era: living with our deepest differences.”

“Learning to live with our deepest differences is therefore of great consequence both for individuals and nations.”

“In contrast to these extremes, our commitment is to  a civil public square — a vision of public life in which citizens of all faiths are free to enter and engage the public square on the basis  of their faith, but within a framework of what is agreed to be just and free for other faiths too. Thus every right we assert for ourselves is at once a right we defend for others. A right for a Christian is a right for a Jew, and a right for a secularist, and a right for a Mormon, and right for a Muslim, and a right for a Scientologist, and right for all the believers in all the faiths across this wide land.”

“On the other hand, we are also troubled by the fact that the advance of globalization and the emergence of a global public square finds no matching vision of how we are to live freely, justly, and peacefully with our deepest differences on the global stage.”

“The challenges of living with our deepest differences are intensified in the age of global technologies such as the World Wide Web.”

We urge those who share our dedication to the poor, the suffering, and the oppressed to join with us in working to bring care, peace, justice, and freedom to those millions of our fellow – humans who are now ignored, oppressed, enslaved, or treated  as human waste and wasted humans by the established orders in the global world.”

“With God’s help, we stand ready with you to face the challenges of our time and to work together for a greater human flourishing.” (sublinierile imi apartin)

Sa vedem acum si cateva fragmente din ceea ce se numeste “Earth Charter” [11]:

“We stand at a critical moment in Earth’s history, a time when humanity must choose its future. As the world becomes increasingly interdependent and fragile, the future at once holds great peril and great promise. To move forward we must recognize that in the midst of a magnificent diversity of cultures and life forms we are one human family and one Earth community with a common destiny. We must join together to bring forth a sustainable global society founded on respect for nature, universal human rights, economic justice, and a culture of peace. Towards this end, it is imperative that we, the peoples of Earth, declare our responsibility to one another, to the greater community of life, and to future generations.”

The choice is ours: form a global partnership to care for Earth and one another or risk the destruction of ourselves and the diversity of life. Fundamental changes are needed in our values, institutions, and ways of living. We must realize that when basic needs have been met, human development is primarily about being more, not having more. We have the knowledge and technology to provide for all and to reduce our impacts on the environment. The emergence of a global civil society is creating new opportunities to build a democratic and humane world. Our environmental, economic, political, social, and spiritual challenges are interconnected, and together we can forge inclusive solutions.”

“To realize these aspirations, we must decide to live with a sense of universal responsibility, identifying ourselves with the whole Earth community as well as our local communities. We are at once citizens of different nations and of one world in which the local and global are linked. Everyone shares responsibility for the present and future well-being of the human family and the larger living world. The spirit of human solidarity and kinship with all life is strengthened when we live with reverence for the mystery of being, gratitude for the gift of life, and humility regarding the human place in nature.”

We urgently need a shared vision of basic values to provide an ethical foundation for the emerging world community. Therefore, together in hope we affirm the following interdependent principles for a sustainable way of life as a common standard by which the conduct of all individuals, organizations, businesses, governments, and transnational institutions is to be guided and assessed.”

“This requires a change of mind and heart. It requires a new sense of global interdependence and universal responsibility. We must imaginatively develop and apply the vision of a sustainable way of life locally, nationally, regionally, and globally.”

“Our cultural diversity is a precious heritage and different cultures will find their own distinctive ways to realize the vision. We must deepen and expand the global dialogue that generated the Earth Charter, for we have much to learn from the ongoing collaborative search for truth and wisdom.”

“Life often involves tensions between important values. This can mean difficult choices. However, we must find ways to harmonize diversity with unity, the exercise of freedom with the common good, short-term objectives with long-term goals. Every individual, family, organization, and community has a vital role to play. The arts, sciences, religions, educational institutions, media, businesses, nongovernmental organizations, and governments are all called to offer creative leadership. The partnership of government, civil society, and business is essential for effective governance.” (va amintiti conceptul de “3-legged stool” al lui Rick Warren?) (sublinierile imi apartin)

Mi se pare mie sau “Manifestul evanghelic” e o versiune de “Carta pamantului pentru ochisorii incetosati ai evanghelicilor naivi”?

Mai are rost sa mai mentionez si faptul ca Os Guinness este printre semnatarii documentului “Evangelicals and Catholics Together“?

Prin urmare ramane sa ne intrebam: ce fel de “apologeti” si “mari analisti sociali” promoveaza “RZIM Romania“?

M-am gandit ca multi s-ar putea sa nu fie de acord cu mine pe motiv ca sunt doar un amarat de inginer IT si nu am studii de specialitate in teologie/filozofie/istorie/politica, prin urmare am decis sa imi verific o parte din aceste concluzii referitoare la Os Guinness impreuna cu cei de la “Discernment Ministries”. Le-am scris un email in care am prezentat pe scurt cateva dintre observatiile prezentate mai sus in legatura cu Os Guinness si i-am intrebat ce parere au despre teoriile acestuia. Am fost placut surprins sa primesc un raspuns tocmai de la dr. Martin Erdmann, autorul cartii “Building the Kingdom of God on Earth” si directorul institutului Verax. Dansul este un expert in “Dominionism”. Am sa redau cateva fragmente din raspunsul dumnealui:

“I was quite excited about Mr. Guinness’ earlier views. This is totally change once I realized how deeply he was involved in the Trinity Forum and like ventures. He is nearly the perfect embodiment of a dedicated dominionist. And this is most certainly not good.”

“Every negative observation of yours is correct.  He may be a Christian (I wouldn’t doubt his confession to be one). If he is, he is very much deceived and deceives others. As I said, in his earlier years he had many good things to say, but I suppose he took Schaeffer’s more or less dormant dominionism to the extreme end of the spectrum.”

Oamenii precum Os Guinness si in general toti globalistii stiu un singur lucru: elitele trebuie seduse, acaparate si influentate cu scopul de a produce o transformare lenta a societatii spre un final globalist. Universitatile sunt tinte pe care globalistii le urmaresc cu predilectie, in speranta ca se pot infiltra si influenta in primul rand profesorii, apoi studentii. Nu degeaba Adolf Hitler facea urmatoarea afirmatie: “Nothing makes me more certain of the victory of our ideas than our success in the univeristies” (G. E. Veith, Modern Fascism)

Mai mentionez si faptul ca Os Guinness a fost un lider al comunitatii L’Abri [1], precum si membru in Woodrow Wilson Center si Brookings Institution. L’Abri este o comunitate reconstructionista (adica o forma de dominionism), iar celelalte doua sunt “think-thank”-uri globaliste. De ce credeti ca Os Guinness participa la forumuri despre globalizare [12] impreuna cu Amitai Etzioni, membrii CFR (Council on Foreign Relations) si alti globalisti?

Succesul unor astfel de evenimente/discursuri despre “binele comun” si “spatiul public civil” (precum cele de la UEO si UBB), este asigurat insa (si) de tot felul de postaci. Unul dintre acestia, participant la discursul sustinut de Os Guinness la UEO (pasiv in sala, dar activ online) a inteles perfect mesajul transmis:

“Saptamina asta a fost Os Guinness la Universitatea Emanuel. Imi venea sa tisnesc in picioare si sa zic: dar profesorii astia de aici nu scriu NIMIC in presa locala sau nationala, nu sint LUMINA pentru societate!”

exista un aspect mult mai amplu al responsabilitatii, care este de tip COMUNITAR

Individualismul neoprotestant e cumplit!

energia individului neoprotestant e limitata!

influnenta UNEI biserici neoprotestante in societate (mai ales in momentele de cotitura) e limitata!

Ceea ce conteaza e CUM se formeaza reteaua de relatii pe baza unor IDEI comune.

Bisericile neoprotestante nu reusesc sa formeze retele!” (via Google)

Sper ca ati retinut cuvintele cheie: responsabilitate, comunitar, societate, influenta, reteaua de relatii, idei comune, energie samd. Mai sunt si altele: civil society, public life, synergy, transformational leadership, leadership potential, community, marketplace… si lista poate continua. Dar pentru a-i recunoaste foarte usor trebuie sa fiti atenti la faptul ca infiereaza individualismul (desigur prin tot felul de dileme false si erori de logica) in timp ce ridica in slava comunitatea sau “reteaua de relatii”. Daca o sa va uitati in jur o sa observati ca termenul de biserica (cu sensul de biserica locala sau adunare) e din ce in ce mai putin folosit fiind inlocuit cu termeni precum “comunitate” sau “retea”. Toate au un scop si nu sunt asa la intamplare.

Sa revenim putin la seducerea elitelor. Am redat mai sus numele unei fundatii numita “BIG Impact“, care se prezinta a fi o “retea de pastori” doritori sa aiba un “impact global”:

Reţeaua de pastori există pentru a sprijini pastorii evanghelici din România în dezvoltarea lor holistică. Dorinţa noastră este să ajutăm bisericile locale să aibă impact global, iar pentru atingerea acestui deziderat cheia sunt pastorii şi echipa cu care aceştia lucrează. (sublinierile imi apartin)

Astazi nimeni nu mai vrea sa aiba impact local, toti vor sa aiba impact global. “Think Big” sau “Think globally, act locally” sunt alte mantre ale globalistilor.

Dupa cum am precizat deja, cei de la “BIG Impact” sunt organzatorii “Summitului Global de Conducere” in Romania, iar coordonatorul acestei fundatii (Gelu Paul) este si coordonatorul echipei pastorale din biserica “Vox Domini” Timisoara, o biserica baptista in care se vaneaza elite cu scopul de a fi re-educate si de a deveni “change agents”. Mai jos vom vedea cum se prezinta elitismul celor de la “VOX Domini”:

EXEMPLU DE STRATEGIE: BISERICA VOX DOMINI

4. Formarea unei comunităţi dinamice de creştini autentici şi relevanţi în lumea academică din Timişoara

5. Crearea unor facilităţi care să permită integrarea şi mobilizarea creştinilor care aparţin lumii academice la împlinirea viziunii bisericii

9. Instruirea creştinilor în evanghelizare de iniţiativă şi prin relaţii, prin întruparea Evangheliei în rândul studenţilor şi absolvenţilor

10. Ucenicizarea holistică în grupuri mici sau dezvoltarea gândirii biblice, critice şi creative, însuşirea îndemânărilor necesare îndeplinirii misiunii bisericii şi formarea caracterului creştin al fiecărui membru al comunităţii Vox Domini [13] (sublinierile imi apartin)

De ce “autentici si relevanti” doar in lumea academica? De ce “integrarea si mobilizarea” doar a crestinilor care apartin lumii academice? De ce evanghelizare doar in randul “studentilor si absolventilor”? De ce o biserica orientata spre elite? De ce nu mai degraba o biserica orientata spre absolventii de scoli primare si gimnaziu? Aaaa… ei nu pot fi “change agents”… Nu ne invata oare Biblia ca trebuie sa dam mai multa cinste tocmai “madularelor lipsite de cinste”?

S-ar putea merge pana in panzele albe cu acest studiu si s-ar putea prezenta mult mai multe informatii despre modul in care functioneaza actioneaza aceste “retele de relatii” elitiste, dar consider ca deocamdata e suficient. Mai multe in episodul viitor.

Resurse:

1. http://www.big-impact.ro/2010/programul-i-detaliile-conferinthei-cu-ravi-zacharias-i-michael-ramsden/

2. http://www.newordpress.com/carti/

3. http://tonyblairfaithfoundation.org/foundation/leadership/religious-advisory-council

4. http://tonyblairfaithfoundation.org/religion-geopolitics/contributors/miroslav-volf

5. http://www.yale.edu/divinity/news/080430_news_volf.shtml

6. http://www.newcanaansociety.org/new-canaan/team/os-guinness/

7. http://www.newcanaansociety.org/new-canaan/our-vision/#tab-1-1-our-vision

8. http://www.newcanaansociety.org/speaker-bios

9. http://www.crossroad.to/Quotes/spirituality/global/blair/foundation.htm

10. http://web.archive.org/web/20040205123314/http://www.georgetown.edu/centers/woodstock/report/r-fea33.htm

11. http://www.earthcharterinaction.org/content/pages/Read-the-Charter.html

12. http://www.pewforum.org/2008/03/04/between-relativism-and-fundamentalism-is-there-a-middle-ground/

13. http://www.big-impact.ro/uploads/big51complet.pdf – p. 94

2 Comments

  1. Frate Paul,

    Multumesc ca mi-ai facut cunostinta cu personajul OS GUINNESS. Nu stiam de el pana acuma, desi se pare ca este o veriga importanta in “reteaua de relatii”. Da, se vede din expunerile lui ca are un apetit fanatic pentru ecumenism si globalizare, dar se pare ca e un maestru al cuvintelor si are un stil destul de prudent si camuflat de a-si disemina otrava.

    INTERESANT CA UEO L-AU INVITAT RECENT LA EI ! Asta spune ceva…

    Foarte bine compilate informatiile in articolul tau !

  2. PRECIZARE PENTRU CITITORI ( despre autorii citatatelor de la inceput) :

    Justin Peters e apologet evanghelic foarte bun, in schimb Alice Bailey e foarte foarte rea ( profetesa oculta New Age, consideratea “bunica” miscarii esoterice New Age).

Leave a Reply