Tag: Simon Dixon

The New World Order Has Already Begun

Posted on

The New World Order Has Already Begun

I have already featured this video and I appreciate Simon Dixon’s take on Geopolitics and Finance. I find myself in agreement with much (not all) of his geopolitical analysis which is nuanced. Where I diverge is with his spiritual approach which is driven by the fact that he believes human nature is essentially “good” when even Jesus refused  to be called “good” (Mark 10:18 and parallel passages in Luke 18:19).  Man is a fallen creature and the evidence is all around us.  To assert otherwise is delusional.  Dixon’s rejection of Christianity has to do with his world view on finance or usury which he blames on Judaism and Christianity.  There is obviously a lot wrong with Christianity which has been deliberately subverted as we were warned by Jesus ( Matthew 13:25) and by Paul ( Galatians 2:4  and 2 Corinthians 11:14 ). We have Christian-Zionism, Dominionism, Gnosticism etc. all disguised as Christianity. I have know devout Muslims and appreciate the fact that they regard Jesus as a great prophet who will usher in the end-times but I diverge with Simon’s assertions about Scripture and “corruption” because I know that both the Old and New Testament have complex mathematical structures (known as Gematria which is absent in the Koran) which preclude post-revelatory corruption. Moreover, we have ancient Old Testament writings (the Isaiah scroll and DSS) that testify to reliable transmission and we even have ancient Greek Old Testament translations.  I post his video again with my comments underneath. The religious part of the discussion starts at 1:23 min.

The New World Order Has Already Begun | Peter McCormack interviews Simon Dixon

 

My Comment: Well, great discussion but Simon needs to stay in his lane. I have done Islamic studies and read the Koran, I have also written a number of commentaries on Christian Scripture. Islam is an Abrahamic religion and it has a huge Jewish input. The Hadith are basically the reformulation of Rabbinic literature but even the Koran is a reformulation of Jewish and Christian literature, indeed it was not written by Muhammed as he was illiterate (but had a Jewish wife) and the ealiest copy is between 568 CE and 645 CE and was an attempt to fuse Jewish and Christian religion. The Sufis can be traced back to theosophist (British) influence. The big difference between true Christianity and any other religion is that true Christianity is the only religion that says you cannot save yourself. Every other religion will tell you than humanity is basically good and that man can transcend and become a "God" . It is the original lie that the technocrats and transhumanists push. The problem is not usury. Usury is a symptom. People were killing each other before money existed. The problem is human nature..

Someone Responded: Do you think that fusion was with the Talmud?

My answer: Very likely as between 1 million and 2 million Jews lived in Parthia (Babylonia) under the Exilarch and the Babylonian Talmud was formulated during this period with dozens of Yeshivas (schools) teaching the law (think here of Sharia) and Kosher (halal) food etc. Abraham Geiger demonstrates that the hadith have rabbinic origins. The book by Patricia Crone and Michael Cook called Hagarism: The Making of the Islamic World (1977) is a good read. It challenges traditional Islamic narratives of the faith's origins by relying almost exclusively on contemporary non-Muslim sources (Greek, Syriac, Armenian, and Hebrew). The Islamic faith was a way to unite the Arabic warlords and direct them away from idolatry and dissolution. It was a halfway house between Judaism and Christianity who had argued for centuries (also Christianity internally) by settling the status of Christ as nothing more than an important eschatological prophet. What attracted Simon is the Islamic approach to "usury" but here is the kicker; money itself has a cost. Inflation robs money of its value as $100 US dollars a hundred years ago is now worth $5.62 if you kept it under the mattress. Moreover, the Islamic approach is still a work around. Asset-Backed Financing (Murabaha) still comes with a markup, or it is linked to variable leasing (Ijarah) to account for things like CPI. Is that not similar to charging interest? In my view it is just semantics. If I give someone $100K over 10 years and they buy a field and plant 10 crops earning 20K and then pay me back 100K who is the loser? Money has a cost as it devalues over time and needs to be put to work which entails risk. In any case usury is not the same as charging reasonable interest (costs). Usury is oppressive and is also not tolerated in Christianity.

 

My tweet to Simon Dixon: