Archives for posts with tag: World Peace

This Blog “A New Paradigm in Christian Thinking” has been combined with “The Philosopher on Politics”to form a new Blog   http://gadflyblog.com/ effective 12/12/2016.

New Posts will appear on https://anewparadigminchristianthinking.wordpress.com and http://gadflyblog.com/

Thanks for your interest in these topics.

The Philosopher

                            The Path to World Peace Ver. 1.1.4

The Philosopher

https://anewparadigminchristianthinking.wordpress.com/tag/World-Peace/

http://thephilosopheronpolitics.wordpress.com/tag/World-Peace/

Revised 3/21/2016

Copyright 2016

Introduction

There are many factors that cause conflict in the world, but one of the largest divides between people on a microscopic social scale and between nations on a macroscopic social scale is religion.  Religion can be divided into two parts: faith and tradition. The difference between faith and tradition is that faith does not need to be defended, protected, preserved or expanded, while Tradition must be defended, protected, preserved and expanded.  The promotion of tradition can be by peaceable means or by aggressive armed conflict.  Faith is something that can be shared with others but only by the personal testimony and by example of/by the faithful.

The Visit by the Representative of the Creator of the Universe (RoCoU)

Planet Earth received a visit by the Representative of the Creator of the Universe (RoCoU, a.k.a. Jesus) in the Common Era (C.E.) (in common terms) or the Era after the Birth of our Lord Jesus (in religious terms). The RoCoU came to planet Earth in the most advantageous time and place.  He came when the Homo sapiens had developed to an agrarian society, making the transition from “hunters and gatherers” due to a warming climate moving from an Ice Age.[i]  The Romans had conquered much of the known world and had built roads that made communications from community to community possible.  The RoCoU arrived into a culture that was a monotheist society, making known the Creator of the Universe more possible versus a society that was multi-theist, as was most of the known world at this time.

The purpose of the visit by the RoCoU is best described in the book of Luke in the Book of Books, the Bible.  Luke was writing as a journalist reporting to excellent Theophilus, a person or a group of persons. [ii] He not only interviewed eyewitnesses of the events that took place during this visit of the RoCoU, but was an eyewitness himself in his travels with Paul on his missionary journeys as reported in the Book of Acts, a.k.a. Luke II.  More insights can be obtained in the Book of Mark, as Mark was writing as a historian and in haste, so he was direct and did not offer any interpretation of the events. He just recorded the events for history.  From the accounts of Luke, we see that the RoCoU was on planet Earth to teach the Homo sapiens how to live life successfully on this planet and that Homo sapiens’ existence on this planet Earth will be finite, as planet Earth’s existence will be finite.

The Resurrection Problem

The Resurrection of the RoCoU, a.k.a. Jesus, has been interpreted through history as a religious event. He died for our sins, was resurrected from the dead as a forecast of our own resurrection, and He ascended into Heaven as a forecast of our own ascension into Heaven. [iii]  It is important to note that Paul the Apostle was a Jew’s Jew, an Israelite’s Israelite and an expert in Jewish Law.  He was chosen to represent the RoCoU (Jesus) to the Jews and the Gentiles (non-Jews) because he was persecuting the followers of the RoCoU by Jesus Himself in a very dramatic way, and he had the leadership personality and skills to accomplish the mission of establishing the “Living Church” of the RoCoU and to accomplish the mission of the RoCoU on planet Earth. [iv]  Paul, therefore, was humbled by the RoCoU and he put the focus of the Gospel message on the RoCoU himself and tied this event to the Jewish religious teachings of the time.

The RoCoU, however, put the focus of his message as being totally independent from – not tied to or a progression of – the Jewish religion.  “He told them this parable: ‘No one tears a piece out of a new garment to patch an old one. Otherwise, they will have torn the new garment, and the patch from the new will not match the old. And no one pours new wine into old wineskins. Otherwise, the new wine will burst the skins; the wine will run out and the wineskins will be ruined.  No, new wine must be poured into new wineskins. And no one after drinking old wine wants the new, for they say, ‘The old is better.’’” This is clearly a teaching of a “Paradigm Shift” which is a term that was not coined until the seventeenth century by the Philosopher Immanuel Kant and Thomas Kuhn in 1962. This term was first applied to the paradigm shift of the mathematics of the Greeks and to Newtonian Physics, and was later applied to social science by H.L Handa and to the paradigm shift of Christianity by Hans Kuhn. [v]

In general, a Paradigm Shift is a new way of thinking or a new way of understanding or acting.  The New Paradigm is totally independent from – not tied to or a progression of – the existing Paradigm. Therefore, the message brought to planet Earth by the RoCoU was indeed a Paradigm Shift from the Jewish Religion, which was the religion of the Homos sapiens where the RoCoU made His appearance on planet Earth.

The Return of the RoCoU to His Home Base

The RoCoU came to planet Earth in the form of the existing Homo sapiens on planet Earth by the immaculate conception of Mary, His surrogate mother.  He was raised in the Jewish society to which he was born and had complete knowledge of this Jewish religion and tradition.  To return back to His home base somewhere in the universe, He needed a change in form that would allow him to make that transition.  If He were to be interned on this planet as a corpse, he would not be able to return to His home base and go onto His next assignment, another planet, like the planet Earth in the “Goldilocks Zone,” to advance the life that has evolved on that planet as it did on planet Earth.  Therefore, the death, resurrection and the ascension of the RoCoU was necessary for him to continue His work in the universe created by the Creator of the universe – His Father.

The Science behind the Visit of the RoCoU

Astrologers have determined that there are approximately four billion other planets like Earth in the universe.  These plants are in the “Goldilocks Zone,” which means they are not too hot, not too cold, and are not too large and not too small. And given the possibility that water exists on these planets, which along with amino acid [vi] are the two requirements to produce life on these planets, all the other elements to create life are readily available in the universe (a.k.a. “star dust”). The conclusions that can be drawn from this data are that the RoCoU may have a lot of planets like planet Earth to visit.  That makes planet Earth a very small number amongst all of its peers.  Therefore, planet Earth is not just a singular miracle as it has been reported in the past.  Astro physicists estimate that the sun has about four billion years of fuel left to burn, and then it will extinguish and life and the planet Earth will cease to exist in this solar system.  The RoCoU stated the end time would come like a “Bolt of Lightning.” [vii]

Negotiating a Workable Compromise is Key to World Peace

The RoCoU stated that negotiating a “workable compromise” was one of the most import things to do to be reconciled with an adversary.[viii] Only children, or children who are widely separated in age or distance from their siblings (functional only children), have the disadvantage of having grown up in their family of origin without near-in-age siblings and not gaining the natural ability to negotiate a workable compromise.  These special children, who are becoming more numerous in our and other nation’s societies, have also shown themselves to be world leaders.  There have been five Presidents of the USA, including our present President in this first quarter of the twenty-first century, as well as the leader of Russia, who have not developed the natural skill of negotiating a workable compromise. Who knows how many other world leaders did not have an opportunity to develop the natural skill of negotiating a ‘Workable Compromise’? Their communication style incudes statements like, “I want this” and “I want that,” and they usually got what they wanted in their family of origin and this communication style carried over into adulthood.[ix]  Being the oldest sibling with a near-in-age same sex sibling also tends to show an aggressive communication style and does not demonstrate they learned how to negotiate a workable compromise in their family of origin.  Learning to negotiate a workable compromise, once majority has been obtained, often comes only with intervention and intensive training.

The Effect of Divorce on World Peace

Looking at world peace on a microscopic scale leads to exploring the changing families of origin.  Sociologists have presented three perspectives on the cause of the increasing divorce rate in the USA and Western Europe, as only Japan has been able to minimize divorce and hold families together under the same roof.  The three perspectives are:  Symbolism, Functionalism and Conflict Theory. Taking Religion into account, a fourth perspective would be the effects of religion on the rate of divorce.  All of these four perspectives must be taking as parts of the whole, since each perspective only gives a partial view of the changing societies of the world.

Symbolism Interaction

Symbolism interaction is a microsociological examination on small-scale patterns of social interaction.  Its focus is face-to-face interactions and how people use symbols to create social life.  Industrialization and urbanization change marital roles and lead to a redefinition of love, marriage, children and divorce. The increasing divorce rate is explained in terms of changing symbols (or meanings) associated with both marriage and divorce.  Changes in people’s ideas—about divorce, marital satisfaction, love, the nature of children and parenting and the roles of husband and wife—have put extreme pressure on today’s married couples.  No single change is the cause, but taken together, these changes provide a strong ‘push’ toward divorce. ” [x]

Functional Analysis

 “The central idea of functional analysis is that society is a whole unit made up of interrelated parts that work together.  Society is viewed as a kind of living organism.  Just as a biological organism has organs that function together, so does society like an organism. If society is to function smoothly, its various parts must work together in harmony.  The group is a functioning whole, with each part related to the whole.  Whenever we examine a smaller part, we need to look for its functions and dysfunctions to see how it is related to the larger unity.

The family has lost many of its traditional functions, while others are presently under assault.  Especially significant is that economic production is no longer a cooperative, home-based effort, with husbands and wives depending on one another for their interlocking contributions to a mutual endeavor.  Husbands and wives today earn individual paychecks, and increasingly function as separate components of an impersonal, multinational, and even global system.  When outside agencies take over family function, this makes the family more fragile and an increase in divorce inevitable.  The fewer functions that family members have in common, the fewer their ‘ties that bind,’ and these ties are what help see husbands and wives through the inevitable problems they experience.” [xi] 

An early and similar living organism view of society was applied to the Christian Church by the Apostle Paul. “Just as each of us has one body with many members, and these members do not all have the same function, so in Christ we who are many form one body, and each member belongs to all the others.” [xii]


 

Conflict Theory 

Applying conflict theory to explain why the U.S. divorce rate is high, conflict theorist look at men’s and women’s relationship in terms of basic inequalities—men dominate and exploit, while women are dominated and exploited.  They also point out that marriage reflects the basic male-female relationship of society and is one of the means by which men maintain their domination and exploitation of women.

Conflict theorists see marriage as reflecting society’s basic inequalities between males and females.  Higher divorce rates result from changed male-female power relationships, especially as wives attempt to resolve basic inequalities and husbands resist those efforts.  From the conflict perspective, then, the increase in divorce is not a sign that marriage has weakened but, rather, a sign that women are making headway in their historical struggle with men.” [xiii]

Religion and the Rise in Divorce Rate

Following the lines of conflict theory with women gaining power in the U. S., religion is playing an important function with the diversity of religions in the U.S.  In western nations, the percentage rate of births to unmarried mothers (UMM) is increasing (from greatest to least of UMM rates is: Sweden, Denmark, France, United States, Great Britain, Canada and Germany).  Only the monotheist nations Italy and Japan have low UMM rates. [xiv]  Women have been gaining power; states have accommodated this change in the power structure of marriage with community property laws, no-fault divorce, and amicable attorney guided divorce.

A Lesson from History

“King Solomon, however, loved many foreign women besides Pharaoh’s daughter—Moabites, Ammonites, Edomites, Sidonians and Hittites.  They were from nations about which the Lord had told the Israelites, ‘You must not intermarry with them, because they will surely turn your hearts after their gods.’ Nevertheless, Solomon held fast to them in love. He had seven hundred wives of royal birth and three hundred concubines, and his wives led him astray.” [xv] Historically this number of wives may have become inflated due to the verbal nature of passing down historical information in this time period, as there was not a great many people living in this area in this time period.

Effects of Men Marrying Wives of a Different Religion

There are several instances in which men find themselves married to a woman whose religious beliefs become objectionable.  This usually happens when the husband or mate attains the age of thirty-five to thirty-nine.[xvi]  At this age a maturation process begins [xvii] and the religious teaching of their youth (often from their mother) kicks in and they make a major life changing decision to follow the religion of their youth, which is now in conflict with the religion of their mate.  But as seen in Solomon’s case, these women do not change their religion, at least not easily.  Women are governed under different rules of life than men. They do not seem to go through this mid-life transformation; they have their own bodily changes at about the age of fifty.

In this changing of religions situation, mothers often take the position that they must protect their children form the heretical teaching of the new religion of their mate.  In community property states and no-fault divorce states, this can lead to some dicey situations and long discussions in courts, about the future of the children, and may result in court orders in regard to child custody.  Our courts do not seem to have the wisdom given to Solomon [xviii] when it comes to establishing what is best for the family, but they usually follow the letter of the law which does not put much substance in negotiating a workable compromise.

The Path to World Peace

What then is the “Path to World Peace?”  The Path to World Peace has two roads to follow.  Route one is to come to terms with the visit of the RoCoU to planet Earth twenty plus centuries ago and come to grips with the notion that He did not come to Planet Earth to set Himself up as a person or deity to be worshiped, but rather He came to instruct us how to live successfully on this planet Earth. [xix] This, in effect, was part of the evolutionary process of the Homo sapiens species.

The RoCoU taught that the teachings he was bringing to us was not tied to, in conjunction with, or a progression of anything that had preceded His visit.  “One does not put new wine into an old wineskin. The new wine is too volatile and will burst the old wineskin and he will lose both the new wine and the old wineskin.  New wine must be put into new wineskins.[xx]

Regarding The Path to World Peace, the RoCoU taught two parables that He hoped would be understood by his disciples and handed down through the generations.  Unfortunately His disciples were not at the development stage that they could understand these parables. They themselves were caught up in a religious society and could not separate their thinking in religious terms from that of scientific terms.  Parable 1, (One-on-One Peace): “As you are going with your adversary to the magistrate, try hard to be reconciled on the way, or your adversary may drag you off to the judge, and the judge turn you over to the officer, and the officer throw you into prison.” [xxi] Parable 2, (Nation-to-Nation Peace): “Or suppose a king is about to go to war against another king. Won’t he first sit down and consider whether he is able with ten thousand men to oppose the one coming against him with twenty thousand? If he is not able, he will send a delegation while the other is still a long way off and will ask for terms of peace. In the same way, those of you who do not give up everything you have cannot be my disciples.” [xxii]

The Path to World Peace: Negotiate a Workable Compromise with your personal adversaries and with other nations that have a different view of the world than your own nation.  Accept the overwhelming evidence that planet Earth is but one of a billion or so other planets like Earth and the RoCoU paid us a visit in a special place that was most advantageous for Him to get His message to the world’s inhabitants.  The RoCoU’s message was to teach us how to live on this planet Earth peacefully with other people and other nations, and these teachings were based on science not religion.  “People who are unable to understand perfectly both the Bible and the science far outnumber those who do understand them.” – Galileo (1564-1642).

There is one caveat to negotiating a workable compromise.  Most of us grew up in our family of origin with another sibling(s) somewhat close to our own age (within five years).  We learned naturally how to negotiate a workable compromise and how to share with another sibling.  Only children and those with distant siblings (greater than five years) did not receive this natural training to share and negotiate a workable compromise.  As a result, they got most of everything they wanted without outcries from their siblings, resulting in a communication style of “I want this” and “I want that,” and they usually got what they wanted.  They never outgrew this early training.

Food For Thought

Our greatest economic competitor, China, has a one-hundred percent national population of people age about thirty-five and younger, in this first quarter of the twenty-first century, that are only children and are coming into power positions in their country. This could prove challenging for leaders of the world’s nations to deal with since they would have little training in how to negotiate a workable compromise and would be accustomed to getting everything they want.  If the USA continues to elect only children as their President and Commander-in-Chief of the Armed Forces, this could be devastating to the USA, as neither nation would have leaders with the natural training to share and negotiate a ‘Workable Compromise’.

QED

 

[i] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Agrarian_society

[ii] Luke 1:1-4, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Luke_1

[iii]I Corinthians 15,  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Resurrection_of_Jesus

[iv] Acts 9, https://www.bible.com/bible/111/act.9.niv#!

[v] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paradigm_shift

[vi] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Amino_acid

[vii] Luke 17:22-24, https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Luke+17:22-24&version=NIV/

[viii] Luke 12:58-59, https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Luke+12%3A58-59&version=NIV/,

Luke 14:31-32, https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Luke+14%3A31-33&version=NIV/

[ix] http://thephilosopheronpolitics.wordpress.com/tag/adlerian-psy/

[x] James M. Henslin, Sociology “a Down-to-Earth Approach 5th ed. Allyn and Bacon, 2001 pp24-26

[xi] Ibid pp27-30

[xii] The Apostle Paul, Romans 12:4-5, The Book of Books, (The Bible), NIV

[xiii] Ibid vi pp 30-31

[xiv] Ibid vi p26-28

[xv] I Kings 11:1-3, The Book of Books (The Bible)

[xvi] C. G. Jung and personal observations

[xvii] The President of the USA must be Thirty-Five years old, USA Constitution

[xviii] 1 Kings 3: 16-28, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Judgment_of_Solomon

[xix] Book of Luke, The Book of Books (The Bible)

[xx] Luke 5:36-39, https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Luke+5:36-39&version=NIV

[xxi] Luke 12:58, http://biblehub.com/luke/12-58.htm

[xxii] Luke 14: 31-33, http://biblehub.com/niv/luke/14.htm