What Christ says about the nations, immigration, and open borders

We have a crisis of the nations of spectacular proportions. Debates rage over immigration, refugees, and even the very right of that thing called a nation to exist. Neither side of the binary poop parade called politics has any answers. Let us go to the word of God for the answer, because He is the only One who has the answers.

Before there were nations.
Nations did not always exist. Man once existed in  the state of nature. Adam and Eve did not have to answer to government. They only answered to God in the garden, and they broke the only rule He gave them. The result of this rebellion was that paradise was lost. Government did not immediately come into existence. People did “whatever was right in their own eyes (i.e Judges 17:6).” When it was time for judgment, God brought the Great Flood as judgment (Genesis 6-9).

At the end of the Flood Noah landed on Ararat in what is now Turkey. As the human race grew a desire for a one world government and a one world religion emerged. They moved from Turkey to Shinar (Babylon) and set up Etemenanki, a Ziggurat or house of worship that is better known as “The Tower of Babel.” This was birthed in  a desire to make man into god on earth in the form of a one world religion and a one world government. They wanted to “build us a city…make us a name (Gen 11:4).” This is in fact the spirit of Babylon. A more detailed account of the history of this evil system can be found in my book Mystery Babylon Rising.

Needless to say, this displeased the Lord. This is what He had to say concerning the matter.

And the LORD came down to see the city and the tower, which the children of men builded. And the LORD said, Behold, the people is one, and they have all one language; and this they begin to do: and now nothing will be restrained from them, which they have imagined to do. Go to, let us go down, and there confound their language, that they may not understand one another’s speech. So the LORD scattered them abroad from thence upon the face of all the earth: and they left off to build the city.

(Gen 11:5-8)

The Lord understood the dangers of a one world government and one world religion unhinged from the restraints that His Law would provide. Such a system would ignore any concept of inalienable rights given by a creator. In such a system rights would be seen as nothing more than constructs of government. What happens if a one world governmental system  with a monopoly on religious, military, social, economic, and police power goes rogue. There would be absolutely nothing the people could do about it. The existence if numerous threats to freedom globally should give us pause about whether we want  a one world government. Most nations of the West have gutted freedom of speech through speech codes that crush all dissent from the party line. The West has a burgeoning police state problem. Do we trust a world order where many of the leading politicians are c0nnected to a billionaire pedophile and have spent time on the Lolita Express.

Two reasons why nations exist
God created nations as a deterrent to the incorrect-able excesses of a global police state. Ambitions for world domination or other harmful behaviors by one nation can be countered by other nations. God created nations as system of  checks and balances. Genesis 10 documents the creation of the ancient nations.  Three times we see the phrase “every one after his tongue, after their families, in their nations.” According to verse 32, this is referring to the process by which God divided the nations after Flood at the Tower of Babel. This describes an organic process of nation  building. God divided the languages along genetic and family lines. Nations formed around  a common culture, a common language among a common group of people with closer family and genetic ties. This path to nations building would produce a sense of people identifying with their nation as an extended family and a sense that the purpose of the existence of the nation is to promote the common wealth of its people. This fact sets up the second purpose of the existence of a nation: promoting the general welfare of its people.

Today there is a mistaken notion that nations must tend to the general welfare of all people globally. It has been vogue to  twist Scripture toward this end. People have cited Leviticus 19:33-34 as a proof text to argue that the Bible requires opens borders.

And if a stranger sojourn with thee in your land, ye shall not vex him. But the stranger that dwelleth with you shall be unto you as one born among you, and thou shalt love him as thyself; for ye were strangers in the land of Egypt: I am the LORD your God.

(Lev 19:33-34)

There are several problems with this interpretation. One is that the modern concept of open borders and fluid definitions of  nationality simply did not exist at the time of the authorship of this passage. Nationality was thoroughly tethered to ethnicity. An example of how his was so thoroughly ingrained can be found in the Greek word translated “nation” in the New Testament. It is ‘ethnos’ which is also the root word for  the modern English word ‘ethnic.’ The idea of open and ethnically agnostic nations is simply not in view here. The point being made was that nations must give foreigners who dwell within the nation the same human rights as native born citizens. There is another thing to keep in mind here that is rooted in an observation gleaned from studying the Mosaic Law: some laws have instructions to the community for enforcement and others do not. The obvious implication of these distinctions is that not all of the laws in the Mosaic Law were intended to invoke the police power of the community.  Leviticus 19:33-34 does not instruct the community to enforce it. As such it is analogous to a Congressional or legislative resolution which gives an official definition of morality but is not actually enforceable. It was only intended to as moral instruction  to Israelites on how to treat their neighbors who are aliens. It did not invoke or inform the use of the police power of Israel.

Leviticus 19:33-34 does not address the question of who is allowed to come within  the borders. There are numerous other passages that do. We know from the book of Joshua in its entirety that the Canaanites were not allowed to live within the land and that the first act of the Israelites when they entered the land was to wipe out the Canaanites. There was no open border policy for Canaanites. Israel’s reputation for being ruthless closed to Canaanites was so reknowned  that Gibeonites resorted to deception to trick the Israelites to enter into a covenant of peace with them (Joshua 9).

The obligations of  nations.
Nations are obligated first and foremost to their own citizens. Romans 13:4 tells us that governing authorities  are God’s servants “for your good.”  Government exists for the general welfare of the governed, thus nations exist for the benefit of the people they govern, which are the people that make up its body politic. Nations do not have obligation to individuals who are outside of its body politic and outside its borders.

Due to the organic nature of nations being built around a common familial relation and divided along lines of language and culture, nations should be good neighbors to other nations, seeing them as brothers and cousins and the family of humanity that descended from Noah. Nations should only act in the vital interests of their people and refrain from acts of aggression against nations and individuals who do not pose a threat to those vital interests and limit just wars to advance only those vital interests. Because nations are grounded in familial human relations, the common humanity of all should be respected in every act that nations do. While aliens living within a nation do not share in the same civil rights as citizens, they do have the same human rights as citizens.

Current immigration crisis manufactured by the Mystery Babylon New World Order
The current immigration crisis is a scheme of the New World Order to destroy national civilizations and replace them with a one world civilization, a one world government, and a one world religion. A two-prong attack is being used  here. First, the major powers bomb the tar out of as many nations as possible. Second, the same globalist elites who sponsored the bombing campaign tell the citizens of the countries that they are obligated to abolish their borders and let as many refugees as they can cram in, and if they object it is because they are Nazis. Nazism itself was sponsored by leading industrialists in the West for the purpose of poisoning the well against nationalism so that the New World Order could be brought in.  In this fight it is the New World order globalists who are showing themselves to be as ruthless as Hitler and Stalin and not those who want to keep the sovereignty of their nations intact.

The result of promoting this out of control immigration is that the national civilizations of the countries hosting these refugees will collapse due to the sheer numbers of people and the clash of cultures that will inevitably happen. It also collapses the countries that the refugees come from due to “brain drain” of the best talent. The endgame is to create a crisis so severe that nation civilizations collapse and the only answer left is to bring in a one world government, one world civilization, and a one world religion.

The Lord’s Plan for future open borders, and why we should oppose the current one.
The Bible actually speak about open borders, albiet a much different message than that of the Babylonian New World Order. Zephaniah 3:8-9 speaks of the return to a “pure language.”

Therefore wait ye upon me, saith the LORD, until the day that I rise up to the prey: for my determination is to gather the nations, that I may assemble the kingdoms, to pour upon them mine indignation, even all my fierce anger: for all the earth shall be devoured with the fire of my jealousy. For then will I turn to the people a pure language, that they may all call upon the name of the LORD, to serve him with one consent.

(Zephaniah 3:8-9)

When does God gather the nations for such judgment? This is referring to Armageddon and the return of Christ. It is after this He will  return a pure language. Christ Himself will reverse the curse laid at the Tower of Babel. He will restore a common language to the earth.  Isaiah 19 also speak of this

In that day shall Egypt be like unto women: and it shall be afraid and fear because of the shaking of the hand of the LORD of hosts, which he shaketh over it. And the land of Judah shall be a terror unto Egypt, every one that maketh mention thereof shall be afraid in himself, because of the counsel of the LORD of hosts, which he hath determined against it. In that day shall five cities in the land of Egypt speak the language of Canaan, and swear to the LORD of hosts; one shall be called, The city of destruction. In that day shall there be an altar to the LORD in the midst of the land of Egypt, and a pillar at the border thereof to the LORD. And it shall be for a sign and for a witness unto the LORD of hosts in the land of Egypt: for they shall cry unto the LORD because of the oppressors, and he shall send them a saviour, and a great one, and he shall deliver them. And the LORD shall be known to Egypt, and the Egyptians shall know the LORD in that day, and shall do sacrifice and oblation; yea, they shall vow a vow unto the LORD, and perform it. And the LORD shall smite Egypt: he shall smite and heal it: and they shall return even to the LORD, and he shall be intreated of them, and shall heal them. In that day shall there be a highway out of Egypt to Assyria, and the Assyrian shall come into Egypt, and the Egyptian into Assyria, and the Egyptians shall serve with the Assyrians. In that day shall Israel be the third with Egypt and with Assyria, even a blessing in the midst of the land: Whom the LORD of hosts shall bless, saying, Blessed be Egypt my people, and Assyria the work of my hands, and Israel mine inheritance.

(Isa 19:16-25)

The first fifteen verses speak of the judgment of Egypt, one so severe that her entire civilization collapses due to fear ( vs 1-3.) In verse 16 it speak of Judah being a terror to Egypt. When has Judah ever been such a terro0r to Egypt that her whole civilization collapses? This has not happened yet. This will happen when Christ assumes His Throne in Jerusalem upon His return.

The text refers to Egypt having the same language as Canaan. The text speaks of open borders in the form of a highway from Egypt to Assyria. Assyria is often a short hand for Babylon and was the living head of Mystery Babylon during Isaiah’s lifetime. This is therefore a reference to the entire world with open borders after the destruction of Mystery Babylon and the dragonous beast system.

 

The current move to open borders is a conspiracy of the “kings of the earth” to conspire against the Lord and His Anointed, Jesus Christ( Psalm 2), to establish an evil system and a coming world ruler who will claim to be god on earth (2 Thessalonians 2:1-4) and demand worship (Rev 13).  Jesus Christ will destroy this evil system at His Coming.

0

ChristianNetGuide is now launched!!!

ChristianNetGuide is now launched as beta software. Feel free to join and connect. We offer the ability to create pages for your organization and connect to others in your local Christian community. We also have built-in devotional software  a cutting edge public blog, and a referral system for businesses who did not want to “do business with the public .” Let us create enduring networks that can be useful to God and help us stay connected.

Join ChristianNetGuide

0

A new way to counter the social network censorship cartel

The past several years there has been growing concern over the dominant social networks using their market power to censor information. By censorship I mean that these networks have been imposing a bias in how they determine whether a given content violates their terms of service. An example of such bias would be a Conservative Evangelical Page having a post that asserts that homosexual activity is a sin removed for violation of a given terms of service for hate speech while allowing an LGBTQ page keep posts that call Christians Nazis who deserve death.

As early as 2012 people were starting to notice a particular pattern of bias in  the social network cartel’s performance in enforcing their terms of service. There began to emerge a pattern of Leftist political and cultural bias in how site admins and moderators parsed the terms of service. There have been multiple instances of ex employees alleging such bias, including this instance, and this one. The resulting uproar resulted in  Congressional hearings. There is a pattern of repeated censorship of high profile Conservative and Libertarian platforms. Dr Michael Brown of AskDrBrown program has  written extensively concerning this very thing.

Starting in 2017 there has been a push in  certain Conservative  and Evangelical circles to start their own social networks. ChristianNetGuide was birthed in the same impulse. Niche groups need their own network that can better serve the interest of their communities than a large conglomerate network like Facebook or Twitter. While some of these have had moderate success, the social network cartel still has a lock on the general population. In fact according to data published by Statcounter , just seven networks control 99.5% of social network market share.  What this means if you want to access the digital public square and have access to the general population, you must be able to use at least one of these networks.

A new model for social media.
The historic answer that is often given as that these networks are private companies, and as such, can do what they want. This response is found wanting once one realizes that these people have a virtual lock on the digital public square. Are we simply to surrender the public square to a few corporate fatcats  to let them run it as they wish? If so then freedom of speech online is  all but dead. This view, however, is not without challenge. There has been an upswing in talk concerning the legal status of social media. The current legal landscape presents a binary option of “publisher” and “public utility platform.” The public utility option is also sometimes called “common carrier.” Currently social media occupies a netherworld between these two options birthed in early twentieth-century jurisprudence.

 

What is a public utility?
A public utility maintains an infrastructure for a public service. The status of public does not mean that they are publically owned. Most public utilities are actually private owned. They are public in that they are a common carrier of one or more services available to the public. Telephone service, for example, are public utilities. Public utilities typically ( though not always) enjoy monopoly status in their markets. Public utilities, due to such market power, have restrictions placed on them that normally do not apply to private companies. The telephone company, for example, cannot terminate a customer’s phone service because they find offense in the political or religious views shared on the service. With very few exceptions, they are not allowed to monitor phone calls to filter for content.

There are two things that mark a utility. The first one is universal availability. Public utilities do not cater to niche markets but serve all comers in the marketplace. The second is pass through. Passthrough simply means that the end product of the transaction is not something that the utility must maintain on  its own property. Water and electricity end up on a customers property for the customer to use as he wished. Phone calls simply pass through to the end point; the telephone company does not typically store conversations on a server.

What is a publisher?
A publisher disseminate content produced by itself and other parties. As owners of the mean of producing the published material it possesses full freedom of speech and editorial discretion. There are three essential properties to being a publisher. The first is that publishers typically have the ability to exercise prior restraint to prevent publication of material it does not wish to publish. Publishers also retain control of content after publication. I cannot simply take my favorite book, print off copies, and sell them. The publisher still has rights to that content. I would also add that publishers can serve any of a number of markets as they are not obligated to serve all comers

Is Social Media a utility or a publisher?
Social Media has elements of both. Like a utility they typically do not exercise prior restraint. Like a publisher they have control over content after it is published on their networks. Like a publisher, social networks are not obligated to serve all comers.  It is this ambiguity that the social network cartel exploited to gain dominance over the digital public square. They marketed themselves to the public as a public service platform  that anyone could use, but once they got market power over the digital public square they began to act as publishers. It is apparent that the current regime where the big networks always get the benefit of the doubt is lethal to liberty.

It is also apparent that the current dichotomy between utility platform and publisher is not adequate to describe the nature of social networking. A social network may be either one or have some mix. A social network may serve only an exclusive community ( not a platform) but otherwise act like a platform, A social network may  fail to exercise prior restraint ( not a publisher), but do some gate-keeping to ensure that the terms of service are followed.

It is apparent that a new way is need to  legally categorize this. If we are not careful, introducing government regulation will create greater problem. If you classify all social networks as publishers, you would knock smaller networks out of the market. This is because they would now be required to exerciser prior restraint to avoid being legally liable for the posts of its users. Only the big boys have the resources to do this in an automated way. Smaller networks would either have to use the tools of the big boys (which opens a back door for them) or resort to manual prior restraint which would grind most activity to a halt. If you classify social networks as a traditional utility platform,  then you eliminate all niche  networks and gatekeeping.

The paradigm that needs to emerge is one that is compatible with liberty principles. In a free society the right to freely contract is essential. The other side is that parties in a contract are required to  do what they commit to do and subject to legal consequences for failure to do what one promises to do. Without this legal accountability to insure that parties in a transaction do what they commit to do, a free society ceases to exist in any meaningful way. The following is a guide on how to parse the legal status of a social network.

Social networks typically have more resemblance to platforms rather than publishers. The legal underpinnings of platforms need to be updated to accommodate the requirements of 21st century technology and communication.  Any legal paradigm that governs social networks must also make provision for the minority networks that are actually a closer fit to a publisher to be set up as a publisher.

A social network should be considered a platform by default, unless they have explicitly identified otherwise and have a historic development  consistent with their definition.

Unlike a conventional utility platform, a social network platform can have terms of service and a scope of service. Terms of service represents the rules under its users are subject. The scope of service represents which groups of users  the networks serves. A social network may serve everybody or they  may serve a defined subgroup.

Any terms of service that a social network platform enforces must be generally applicable and consistently enforced across the scope of their operations, with each individual person getting the same treatment under the rules. Any biases in their enforcement must be explicitly stated. For example, ChristianNetGuide serves the Christian community and enforces terms of service compatible with general Christian orthodoxy (not to be confused with Eastern Orthodoxy). Non-Christians and those who identify as Christian but deny this orthodoxy have no reasonable expectation that their perspectives will carry any weight or that they will even be allowed on the network. Social network platforms that fail to do this are subject to legal remedies.

If a social network uses any variation of the principles of  intersectionality to give differing groups within their networksdifferent rights,   they must disclose that they are using intersectionality with a user-friendly explanation of what intersectionality is. They must also disclose  how and what weight is given to what groups.

Legal recognition of pre-existing social networks should take into account their historical development. Networks that marketed themselves as platforms to grow their user bases cannot, upon gaining market power, switch to being publishers. Networks such as Facebook, Twitter, and Youtube marketed themselves as platforms that serve everybody, and would be reckoned as such under law. These  networks would be required to treat each iindividual the same under their terms of service, and be subject to legal action by injured users for failure to do so. If an existed social network wishes to switch to a different classification, it must  reboot under a different domain name and require it’s current members to register with the new site as new users.

Social networks that have explicitly identified as publishers, have the historic development of publishers, and meet the legal criteria of publishers, shall have the same rights and responsibilities of publishers. Digital publishing platforms of established publishing houses shall be considered publishers.

Enforcement of rules based on this paradigm should be done under breach of contract law, with social network relationships being considered legal contracts under the law.  I would caution against setting any government bureaucracy to regulate this using any executive power. To limit both the risk of government censorship and the risk of regulatory capture of the bureaucracy by the social network cartel, any and all regulation of social networks should be done through judicial, mediative, and arbitrative means in accordance with law.

0
Worship Playlist
Prayer Guide
Bible Study
  X  

This model prayer was given by the Lord Jesus as a outline for our prayer life. Use this as an outline for adoration, supplications, and petitions to God

Our Father who art in heaven, hallowed be thy name.

1.By Calling God as Our Father we invoke Our identity in Christ
2.By Calling God as Our Father we invoke the Covenant Relation
3.By Addressing Him in Heaven we address Him on His Throne
4.By Hallowing His name we are addressing the Divine Court in session
5.We have come to discuss both matters of family and of law. Convinced that God will always act for His glory and our good

Thy kingdom come. Thy will be done on earth as it is in heaven.

1.God's will is done instantly in Heaven.
2.From Heaven God see the entire history of the world as a done deal.
3.He has already done that which we requested.
4.Prayer is the act of petitioning God to manifest what has already been established in Heaven.
5.Let us seek God to work in history to lead events to a place where Christ can return and set up
the new Heavens and New Earth where His will is instantly and absolutely done, mentioning specific requests.

Give us this day our daily bread.

1.God owns everything.
2.God is Jejovah-jireh (our provider) Gen 22:14.
3.Literal meaning of Jireh (ra’ah) is for God to make established realities visible by conducting measurements on the wave function.
4.The eyes of the Lord travels throughout the earth to show Himself strong by collapsing wave function (QM) for those who trust in Him (2 Chr 16:9).
5. Ask Him to provide financially and give us the power to get wealth so that His covenant may be confirmed and that we can not only meet our needs but finance the work of the Kingdom (Deut 8:18).

Forgive us our debts, as we forgive our debtors.

1.Forgiveness for all has been purchased through the blood of Jesus.
2.Jesus blood has already taken away all sins past, present, and future.
3.God credits faith in Christ Jesus as our righteousness.
4.When we sin we can simply confess our sins to God, thanking Him for this already purchased forgiveness.
5.Because Christ has forgiven us, we do not hold grudges or bitterness against others. forgive them as God forgave us.

Lead us not into temptation.

1.The steps of the righteous are ordered by the Lord.
2.The eyes of the Lord seek out those who are faithful towards Him to show Himself Strong.
3.God has given us his Word, that through these promises can can partake of Christ’s nature.
4.He has given us the Holy Spirit that we might know both the things of god and commune with God.
5.Ask God to direct our paths to avoid excessive worldly entanglements and habits that encourage the lust of the flesh, the lust of the eyes, or pride of life

Deliver us from evil.

Praying for a Hedge of Protection, Praying for God to deploy angelic support, confessing the word of God, and deploying counter-arguments against the enemy as a profession of faith.

For thine is the kingdom, and the power, and the glory, for ever and ever.