I've been busy at work, and working on projects external to the steem blockchain, but today I encountered an article that I thought I needed to post about.   It is kind of a BIG PICTURE article and while I don't agree with a few things in it myself, I do agree with it on many of the points.   Whether I agree or not is really not relevant though.   You should always make your own decisions and there are some deep things to think about here.

The article...
<a href="https://www.naturalnews.com/2018-12-21-convergence-the-inescapable-explanation-that-connects-world-events-cosmic-truth.html">
CONVERGENCE: The inescapable explanation that connects all world events unfolding now… can you handle the cosmic truth?
<img src="https://cdn.steemitimages.com/DQmbHSJw2gwntU67guTa82YVv6cDroggobBhMLzSq6MEUUN/image.png"/>
</a>

> Taken one at a time, the events unfolding across our world seem unconnected, insane or random. However, there is an overarching pattern to everything you’re witnessing and experiencing. That pattern exists because there is intention to deploy world events, cultural trends, economic control and political obedience to achieve a desired aim.

>If I tell you that aim right up front, you will discard it as unbelievable.

>1 The desperate effort by globalists to end all national sovereignty

>2 The aggressive ramping up of efforts to disarm all law-abiding citizens

>3 The “blowout” economics of endless money creation

>4 The terraforming of planet Earth with “stratospheric aerosol injections”

>5 The increasing talk by cultural leaders and thought leaders about escaping Earth and colonizing Mars

>6 The rapid acceleration of cultural attacks on fertility

>7 The global installation of 5G cell towers

>8 The complete transformation of the food supply

>9 The utter collapse of logic, reason and rationality, to the point where nearly half the population of America’s youth now believe that men can get pregnant and that chromosomes have nothing at all to do with gender.

>10 The increasing celebration of Satan and death

>11 The increasing concentration of all power and influence into the hands of the few

>12 The sense of panic and urgency among globalists to defeat nationalism

Those were the points it initially covers in a lot more detail than what I quoted.   I highly recommend you read it yourself.

For me the only one that I really disagree with is #10.  Why?  I don't believe in Satan.   I don't think we need an avatar of evil to scapegoat/blame as a cause.   It then becomes an out for the true motives.   The choices of fellow humans.

I also don't believe in Satan because I have thoroughly research him and hell and know that he did not exist in that role until after those that practiced Judaism intermingled with those who practiced Zoroastrianism.  Prior to that point there was no "*Devil*" or "*Agent of Evil Opposing God*".   There was no such thing as Hell.   In fact Judaism was truly monotheistic up to that point.   Zoroastrianism claimed to be monotheistic as well, but I disagree.

Zoroastrianism had the concepts of Heaven and Hell, and it had the one God, and his opposition who they would semantically not treat like a god.   Yet if you have studied religions (*I have, a great deal*) then you learn that Polytheistic religions all have invariably some gods that are greater than others, or that created the others.   They even often have the concept of demigods.   Even if there is a single god that created all of the others that still makes it polytheistic.    There are other entities worshiped by, given credit to, or blamed for events in these religions.     This too is true of Zoroastrianism.   They like to claim to be monotheistic, but as far as I am concerned they were Polytheistic and just were doing some semantic word play on how they labeled the opposition.   Yet in reality he was functionally no different from the many gods in Polytheistic religions.

Zoroastrianism was highly popular.   It had a great number of followers.   At the time it had more than Judaism.   Yet up until that point there was no "Devil",  or "Satan" as we know him in Judaism.  It truly was monotheistic.   They also did not need the threat of hell.   There was only one place people went to in the afterlife.

Zoroastrianism was very good at controlling people.   What did it use?   Did it compel people to behave by advocating love?  No.  It used ***Fear*** and the concept of damnation.   It used the opposing deity (*their equivalent of Satan*) to give a scapegoat/agent to blame for that fear, and the risk of damnation.   It truly is a great way to control the population.   Make them afraid of something they truly cannot experience until they die.     Then put priestly classes in charge of dictating what will lead to that damnation.

It had phenomenal success.

Judaism altered, and out of that was born Christianity, Catholicism, and all the many derivatives since then.   They all took the model of the Zoroastrians and their religions changed.   Hell was created as a concept.   Satan was created as the adversary.

To me all of these things are creations of man.   I don't buy into the blaming of things on Satan.   I don't believe Satan exists.  That doesn't mean there are not a great many people that believe in him.   There are.   There are also that believe they are acting in his service.   I believe they are deluded, but that doesn't mean they are not dangerous.

It is a scapegoat used to shift the blame rather than people owning up to the responsibilities for their own choices.

To me there is an easy way to define evil.   It does not require religion, it does not require an avatar of evil, it does require morality.   Evil is the application of force against another human.    If an idea requires involuntary compliance of people then it is evil.   If it is voluntary and they are allowed to make a choice then that is the path to good.   That doesn't mean they will make the right choice, but the choice is theirs none the less.   We sometimes call this free will.   If their choice does not lead them to forcing other people against their will then it should be no concern of others.   They will be responsible for the outcome of their choices.

Attacking, killing, etc are obvious extreme examples of involuntary situations.   They involve physically stopping or altering a chosen path of someone.   One even involves attempting to forcefully end the life of another.

Self defense is not force.   Defending others is not force.   Force requires the attempt to remove choice from another.

To me that is the simple way to define evil.   It doesn't require I bend to any of the speculative mazes that have lead to the hundreds of thousands of variants on our religious systems.    It does not require a hell.   It does not require and anthropomorphized being to blame the root of evil upon.

It does not require me to believe that the only way to learn morality is via religion.

It does not require me to discount historical and moral teachings in many religions.   It simply helps me see which ones are truly evil and which are not.

If you believe a person should be beheaded, burned at the stake, or stoned for example because they don't agree with something you do then you are an evil person.   Their belief has no effect on you, but you wish to force their belief to comply with your desires and you offer FEAR (*the threat of attack, death, damnation*) if they do not comply.   So the same religions people can seek to get moral teachings from are typically also full of examples of immorality as well.

So if you are going to learn from them it is a good idea to truly simplify and define evil.   Evil has pervaded all of our religions.   They also require the continued unwavering Appeal To Authority of the priest class.   A.k.a your fellow humans who in some cases dictate what you should believe.

Now I didn't actually intend to go into this diatribe on evil at the lengths I did.   I kind of hijacked my own purpose for this article.   Yet as you can see I have strongly held beliefs (*they likely will change*) related to that particular number and why I don't buy into it.    I do believe there is an increasing admiration for evil.   No Satan is required for that.   So perhaps you could say I temper that particular number with the concept of evil, and not some being or specific scapegoat.

For those interested.  I am a ***Deist***.   I do believe in a creator.  I just don't believe it is anything found in any of our religious tomes.   The bible for the deist is reality itself.   Observe, and use reason.    I see value in religious studies, I just don't believe in dogma, revelation, or that some humans have authority over me, are elevated above me, etc.   Nor am I elevated above them.

As to the afterlife.  I believe there is one.   What it is, we'll all get a chance to find out.   I don't need to let fellow humans manipulate me by turning it into a thing to fear.

<h1>Back on Point</h1>

There was a point I intended to make before I totally side tracked myself with religion and evil.   Whenever I read things like this Natural News article I invariably am drawn back to thinking about the Georgia Guidestones.     For those of you that already know about the Guidestones, the message on them, and then consider that message in light of what this Convergence is talking about it can lead you to some motive behind it all.

<a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Georgia_Guidestones">Georgia Guidestones - Wikipedia</a>
<img src="https://cdn.steemitimages.com/DQmZ7URCzybxp4hFZ6sm9ffQUwV3gJNxnJpXXeEAEoD2k6m/image.png"/>
<img src="https://cdn.steemitimages.com/DQmaG1Aboe52Do8yQ6G2EsehskAM5oi2C4r4r6ZW8rkLG5e/image.png"/>

To me that is also a potential explanation that doesn't require the person pushing the agenda to be non-human.   They could also be humans that know the plan, and have taken steps to insure they and those they wish to survive have means of survival.   For example:  Our food supply is being increasingly tainted, manipulated, and polluted.    Yet that doesn't mean they don't have their own food supply that is free from this.

This agenda does not require an anti-human opposition.   It simply requires some humans that are so fixated on eugenics that they believe there are only a certain number that are worthy.

Are they evil?  Without a doubt.