Debate the Logic of a World Order.

[Truthseeker]

Personally, I favor a balance of power.

A balance of power in the form of global competition for dominance will go a long way to bring the world to it's knees, and then perhaps we can pick up the pieces and have a better state of affairs.

 

[Truthseeker]

If human rights ever become universal then we would have sufficient common values to unite under, but until some of the basic ideas of what constitutes a human right are shared I can't see any advantage to not fighting off external sources that would seek to impose their own ideas upon us.

What do you think, would you agree to peace if it meant covering your women in a burka and forcing them to stay indoors and out of school? If it meant silencing intellectuals who have scientific disagreement with your beliefs? I think a degree of disunity is justified until some basic issues can be sorted out.

In my opinion.

Each country could do what it wants within it's own borders. That's an expression of diversity. However, in matters between countries there needs to be agreements that affect all of the countries in common. There would be no infringement on the countries right to what they want in matter only affecting themselves internally.

 

[Truthseeker]

@Tony Bristow-Stagg

Am I right in thinking that what the JWs would see as a sign of end times (a global government) would likewise be seen by Baha'i as a positive step in our evolution as a species?

Very possible.

 

[Truthseeker]

It can only be achieved by tyranny and invasion.

And conquer the world? Impossible in todays world. See my other posts.

 

[stvdv]

In this debate, even though this is a teaching of my faith, remember it will not be the Baha'i that will do this, if it is to happen. So will it and does it need to happen?

Step 1: Take out all Religions/Atheism
Step 2: Appoint world leader(s)

BUT: First step = Choose Dharmic Leader(s)
(and this is impossible IMO)

Sai Baba: IF God had to kill the Adharmic people then none would be spared

It's Kali Yuga (worst of the worst of times), we need a Divine miracle to turn Adharmic leaders into Dharmic leaders. Who to choose: Kimmy, Putin, Xi, Biden, Trump, Dutch King, Macron, Tedros? (Just to mention a few). I don't trust none for being able to rule Dharmic

I see the world heading towards a global Big Brother, Big Tech, Big Pharma fully controlled, imposed, dominated China2.0 (using, misusing covid)

At least they made the Big Brother part to be a fact, more than obvious, calling themselves Big Pharma, Big Tech, Big Egos

To end on a good note:
I know that Heaven on earth is possible on an individual level, but I do not believe this will happen on a global level any time soon

 

[stvdv]

A World Order might lead to a One World Dictatorship at this chaotic point in time.

"might"?
You are more optimistic than I am

 

[firedragon]

And conquer the world? Impossible in todays world. See my other posts.

Yep. Its impossible.

 

[TransmutingSoul]

Step 1: Take out all Religions/Atheism
Step 2: Appoint world leader(s)

BUT: First step = Choose Dharmic Leader(s)
(and this is impossible IMO)

Sai Baba: IF God had to kill the Adharmic people then none would be spared

It's Kali Yuga (worst of the worst of times), we need a Divine miracle to turn Adharmic leaders into Dharmic leaders. Who to choose: Kimmy, Putin, Xi, Biden, Trump, Dutch King, Macron, Tedros? (Just to mention a few). I don't trust none for being able to rule Dharmic

I see the world heading towards a global Big Brother, Big Tech, Big Pharma fully controlled, imposed, dominated China2.0 (using, misusing covid)

At least they made the Big Brother part to be a fact, more than obvious, calling themselves Big Pharma, Big Tech, Big Egos

To end on a good note:
I know that Heaven on earth is possible on an individual level, but I do not believe this will happen on a global level any time soon

From what I have read, step 1 will be attempted and step 2 will not happen until the following unfolds.

The reality will set in that is impossible to eradicate God and religion, as such, the leaders will look back to religion to see if any do have the Vritues and Morals needed.

When that time comes, it will be interesting indeed.

Regards Tony

 

[TransmutingSoul]

Yep. Its impossible.

I wonder, as we can consider that the Spirit can be all conquering, but man against man in war, definitely not.

Regards Tony

 

[firedragon]

I wonder, as we can consider that the Spirit can be all conquering, but man against man in war, definitely not.

Regards Tony

Hmm. In principle, I agree with you.

Theologically, I dont use words like spirit because my monotheism is against divination of anything other than "the deity". I hope you understand.

 

[TransmutingSoul]

Hmm. In principle, I agree with you.

Theologically, I dont use words like spirit because my monotheism is against divination of anything other than "the deity". I hope you understand.

When I talk of the Spirit, to me it is all that I will ever know of Allah and is 100% monotheism, albeit in a different frame of reference.

Regards Tony

 

[firedragon]

When I talk of the Spirit, to me it is all that I will ever know of Allah and is 100% monotheism, albeit in a different frame of reference.

Regards Tony

Okay okay. I get it.

 

[viole]

This topic is dear to my heart, as this is what I live for, a day when as a citizen of the World we all work together for the common good for all humanity.

This is not about your faith verse my faith, or faith verse atheists.

In the big picture I see faith teaches about the possibility and inevitability of a united humanity and I would assume many people of no faith long for a day when they an live in peace with equal opportunities in life.

Way back in the 1800's, just as the world was considering the smallness of our part in the universe it was said that peace would only come in one way, that path is to the extent we choose to submit to given laws, that will need to be establish by a world tribunal.

So this is the wisdom to be considered and debated, is this what we need, will it be what we need?

"... The time must come when the imperative necessity for the holding of a vast, an all-embracing assemblage of men will be universally realized. The rulers and kings of the earth must needs attend it, and, participating in its deliberations, must consider such ways and means as will lay the foundations of the world’s Great Peace amongst men. Such a peace demandeth that the Great Powers should resolve, for the sake of the tranquillity of the peoples of the earth, to be fully reconciled among themselves. Should any king take up arms against another, all should unitedly arise and prevent him. If this be done, the nations of the world will no longer require any armaments, except for the purpose of preserving the security of their realms and of maintaining internal order within their territories. This will ensure the peace and composure of every people, government and nation. We fain would hope that the kings and rulers of the earth, the mirrors of the gracious and almighty name of God, may attain unto this station, and shield mankind from the onslaught of tyranny."

In this debate, even though this is a teaching of my faith, remember it will not be the Baha'i that will do this, if it is to happen. So will it and does it need to happen?

I agree. As long as you keep Switzerland out of it.

ciao

- viole

 

[TransmutingSoul]

I agree. As long as you keep Switzerland out of it.

ciao

- viole

It will be have to be all in, I would offer that no one person, country or Nation can go it alone in this day.

Regards Tony

 

[danieldemol]

Each country could do what it wants within it's own borders. That's an expression of diversity. However, in matters between countries there needs to be agreements that affect all of the countries in common. There would be no infringement on the countries right to what they want in matter only affecting themselves internally.

Sounds like a blank cheque for dictators to do what they want free of international interference.

In my opinion.

 

[Secret Chief]

People can't even get on with their neighbours. Anyway, the sixth great extinction and global warming will put paid to any such fantasy.

 

[Spirit of Light]

This topic is dear to my heart, as this is what I live for, a day when as a citizen of the World we all work together for the common good for all humanity.

This is not about your faith verse my faith, or faith verse atheists.

In the big picture I see faith teaches about the possibility and inevitability of a united humanity and I would assume many people of no faith long for a day when they an live in peace with equal opportunities in life.

Way back in the 1800's, just as the world was considering the smallness of our part in the universe it was said that peace would only come in one way, that path is to the extent we choose to submit to given laws, that will need to be establish by a world tribunal.

So this is the wisdom to be considered and debated, is this what we need, will it be what we need?

"... The time must come when the imperative necessity for the holding of a vast, an all-embracing assemblage of men will be universally realized. The rulers and kings of the earth must needs attend it, and, participating in its deliberations, must consider such ways and means as will lay the foundations of the world’s Great Peace amongst men. Such a peace demandeth that the Great Powers should resolve, for the sake of the tranquillity of the peoples of the earth, to be fully reconciled among themselves. Should any king take up arms against another, all should unitedly arise and prevent him. If this be done, the nations of the world will no longer require any armaments, except for the purpose of preserving the security of their realms and of maintaining internal order within their territories. This will ensure the peace and composure of every people, government and nation. We fain would hope that the kings and rulers of the earth, the mirrors of the gracious and almighty name of God, may attain unto this station, and shield mankind from the onslaught of tyranny."

In this debate, even though this is a teaching of my faith, remember it will not be the Baha'i that will do this, if it is to happen. So will it and does it need to happen?

Personally I think unity in humanity are not to be seen as everyone become totally agree with each others, or that there will be a one government ruling the world.

But spiritually it might be that we come to a unity from within our heart and realizing that fighting each other is not the solution. So we become more accepting toward other human beings. And hate ends

 

[TransmutingSoul]

Personally I think unity in humanity are not to be seen as everyone become totally agree with each others, or that there will be a one government ruling the world.

But spiritually it might be that we come to a unity from within our heart and realizing that fighting each other is not the solution. So we become more accepting toward other human beings. And hate ends

I do not see that will happen either.

A world parliament will be elected by the governments of all nations who send representatives of that Nation, so all Nations still have their own government and still control their own affairs.

Also it will have to be a unity in diversity, not a unity of conformity.

Regards Tony

 

[TransmutingSoul]

People can't even get on with their neighbours. Anyway, the sixth great extinction and global warming will put paid to any such fantasy.

Good time to take all this on board and become good neighbours.

I think we will reverse what we have done to the planet, unfortunately we have lost many species, but I see the new climate will sporn new species.

Regards Tony

 

[Mock Turtle]

This topic is dear to my heart, as this is what I live for, a day when as a citizen of the World we all work together for the common good for all humanity.

This is not about your faith verse my faith, or faith verse atheists.

In the big picture I see faith teaches about the possibility and inevitability of a united humanity and I would assume many people of no faith long for a day when they an live in peace with equal opportunities in life.

Way back in the 1800's, just as the world was considering the smallness of our part in the universe it was said that peace would only come in one way, that path is to the extent we choose to submit to given laws, that will need to be establish by a world tribunal.

So this is the wisdom to be considered and debated, is this what we need, will it be what we need?

"... The time must come when the imperative necessity for the holding of a vast, an all-embracing assemblage of men will be universally realized. The rulers and kings of the earth must needs attend it, and, participating in its deliberations, must consider such ways and means as will lay the foundations of the world’s Great Peace amongst men. Such a peace demandeth that the Great Powers should resolve, for the sake of the tranquillity of the peoples of the earth, to be fully reconciled among themselves. Should any king take up arms against another, all should unitedly arise and prevent him. If this be done, the nations of the world will no longer require any armaments, except for the purpose of preserving the security of their realms and of maintaining internal order within their territories. This will ensure the peace and composure of every people, government and nation. We fain would hope that the kings and rulers of the earth, the mirrors of the gracious and almighty name of God, may attain unto this station, and shield mankind from the onslaught of tyranny."

In this debate, even though this is a teaching of my faith, remember it will not be the Baha'i that will do this, if it is to happen. So will it and does it need to happen?

I think the logic is obvious for such - given that we are likely to face existential threats from without and possibly from within our planet - and having a unified stance as to resolving any of these, if such was possible, is likely to be the only way we could do so. In what form it took would no doubt be a problem for many, but faced with existence or no existence which option would you think most would choose, if you could convince them of the true nature for whatever it was? Our global response to this latest pandemic might indicate as to how our attitudes might change when presented with sufficient dangers.

But I am a bit pessimistic, and only see such happening after and if we do survive something a lot worse than pandemics.