UN Resolution 2178- A mandate that forces religious leaders to bow to the GLOBAL WAR on terrorism

As of Sept 24, 2014 there has been a major update to RES 67/178 and RES 60/288 in the form of Security Council Resolution 2178.   It was a direct response to the appearance of the terrorist organization “ISIS” also known as the “Islamic State”.  Resolution 2178 is a very serious update because it involves more than the General Assembly or the Human Rights bodies of the UN.  Being a Security Council resolution, it implies a binding mandate to enforce the measures outlined to combat terrorism for the sake of “peace and security”.  You can observe the tone as you survey the resolution yourself.   Also consider how it outlines the need to combat intolerance as a condition that leads to terrorism.  Below are relevant portions of the resolution:

“Reaffirming that terrorism in all forms and manifestations constitutes one of the most serious threats to international peace and security …

…“Noting with concern that the terrorism threat has become more diffuse, with an increase, in various regions of the world, of terrorist acts including those motivated by intolerance or extremism, and expressing its determination to combat this threat,

…“Emphasizing that terrorism cannot and should not be associated with any religion, nationality or civilization,

…“Recognizing that addressing the threat posed by foreign terrorist fighters requires comprehensively addressing underlying factors, including by preventing radicalization to terrorism, stemming recruitment, inhibiting foreign terrorist fighter travel, disrupting financial support to foreign terrorist fighters, countering violent extremism, which can be conducive to terrorism, countering incitement to terrorist acts motivated by extremism or intolerance, promoting political and religious tolerance, economic development and social cohesion and inclusiveness, ending and resolving armed conflicts, and facilitating reintegration and rehabilitation,

…“Recognizing also that terrorism will not be defeated by military force, law enforcement measures, and intelligence operations alone, and underlining the need to address the conditions conducive to the spread of terrorism, as outlined in Pillar 1 of the United Nations Global Counter-Terrorism Strategy (A/RES/60/288),

http://www.un.org/en/ga/search/view_doc.asp?symbol=S/RES/2178%20%282014%29

.
Did you notice RES 2178 refers to“the need to address the conditions conducive to the spread of terrorism, as outlined in Pillar 1 of the United Nations Global Counter-Terrorism Strategy (A/RES/60/288)”.  What does Pillar 1 of RES 60/288 say in regard to combating “the conditions conductive to the spread of terrorism”?   The following is of particular interest.  The solution proposed by RES 60/288 back in 2006 was to have civil society including its religions involved in the global campaign against terrorism.  As you read it you can see how details of these resolutions are designed to promote peace among religions through inter-faith and intra-faith dialog.  That means in essence that these differing religions and faiths are being asked to promote tolerance by accepting each other as differing paths to God:

Measures to address the conditions conducive to the spread of terrorism

2. To continue to arrange under the auspices of the United Nations initiatives and programmes to promote dialogue, tolerance and understanding among civilizations, cultures, peoples and religions, and to promote mutual respect for and prevent the defamation of religions, religious values, beliefs and cultures. In this regard, we welcome the launching by the Secretary-General of the initiative on the Alliance of Civilizations. We also welcome similar initiatives that have been taken in other parts of the world;

3. To promote a culture of peace, justice and human development, ethnic, national and religious tolerance and respect for all religions, religious values, beliefs or cultures by establishing and encouraging, as appropriate, education and public awareness programmes involving all sectors of society. In this regard, we encourage the United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization to play a key role, including through inter-faith and intra-faith dialogue and dialogue among civilizations;

Going back to Security Council Resolution 2178 notice how it too involves the use of religion particularly its religious leaders to counter terrorism and the conditions conductive to the spread of terrorism:

Countering Violent Extremism in Order to Prevent Terrorism

“16.  Encourages Member States to engage relevant local communities and non-governmental actors in developing strategies to counter the violent extremist narrative that can incite terrorist acts, address the conditions conducive to the spread of violent extremism, which can be conducive to terrorism, including by empowering youth, families, women, religious, cultural and education leaders, and all other concerned groups of civil society and adopt tailored approaches to countering recruitment to this kind of violent extremism and promoting social inclusion and cohesion;

After examining the details of all these resolutions what conclusions can be reached?  Certainly these efforts all seem noble, what normal person doesn’t want peace?  But look past the obvious idea of peace and you find the promotion of religious compromise.  What do I mean?  Religions and faiths are being forced to moderate their teachings for public dissemination and for some that may mean a compromise of some fundamental principles associated with their faith.  In other words a teaching such as the idea of a single “true religion” practiced by the “faithful” can now be viewed as intolerant if promoted publically, because it could incite or provoke intolerance or violence.  Likewise, to publically declare another religion false would be viewed as intolerant as well.

.For example: How would a religion be viewed if it publically called the religions involved in the interfaith peace efforts of the UN – false, misleading or wrong, and refused to comply for reasons base on sacred texts?  Even if such religions were non-violent, at the very least they would be viewed as sectarian or a fundamentalists religion that is divisive and promotes intolerance. 

The reader should understand that based on recent UN resolutions, the authorities have been given the potential to view such expressions and actions as seditious or treasonous toward the UN policy.  Non-compliance, which of course would be trumpeted by the media, could be equated with provocative extremist ideology.  Remember all religions are expected to accommodate the global inter/ intra-faith peace initiatives promoted by the UN for the sake of combating intolerance and fighting terrorism; those religions who refuse would most certainly be vilified and associated with terrorism somehow.

As Resolution 2178 shows, religious bodies or leaders are expected to promote tolerance and lead their flocks in accord with UN resolutions, especially if they want to remain free from accusations of extremism.  However, the details of these UN resolutions reveal a potential of deep intrusion or breach into fundamental religious principles including the fundamental purpose of evangelizing or proselytizing.  What many have failed to notice or grasp is how the true purpose of proselytizing or evangelizing, which is the public advocacy of a “true” form of worship is being completely undermined by these resolutions.  In other words, Security Council RES 2178 by definition is an enforcement of resolutions that will affect religions that proselytize or evangelize by demanding that they operate within the confines or limits of religious tolerance and conflict prevention.  This has the potential of turning efforts to “make disciples” or converts into a community service performed on behalf of the UN for the sake of peace and tolerance, rather than a fulfillment of the true purpose of evangelizing.

This struggle can be observed in the Catholic Church as they debate tolerance or “mercy” toward gay marriage or atheists.   People have not really woke up to the fact that these UN resolutions force religions to bargain away some fundamental principles of their faith in order to avoid the label of extremism.  In essence, those religions are bargaining with the federal authorities for acceptance so as to be allowed to continue their ministry associated with their legal religious operations and functions.  In a nut shell, religions are being manipulated and coerced into supporting the global war on terrorism or esle forfiet thier right to exsist and function.

Whether religious bodies realize what is happening or not, these resolutions allow governments to takeover religion for the purpose of promoting an international ideology of tolerance for the sake of peace.  What will happen as religions and individuals begin to wake up to this slow and gradual death of true religious freedom, and what will happen if religions should speak up or refuse to comply?   This research has been compiled to help you know the answer. 

The Ideology of a “true religion” is incompatible with NATO, the UN, and 9/11 policies

As we have already witnessed “moderate” religious voices such as Tony Blair are working hard to identify the ‘false religious views’ they feel are contributing to intolerance, extremism, religious violence and sectarianism.  In view of all of the developments mentioned above, attacking the central religious teaching of  a single “true religion” is what is at the heart of the matter.  A casualty of 9/11 policies enshrined by NATO and the UN, is the ability of a religion to say it’s “true” and others are “false”.  It seems religion is now loosing the ability to stay neutral with regard to the global war against terrorism.  Pressure to abandon core beliefs which a person views as fundamental to their faith is growing.  It is my humble opinion that soon if not already, it will become mandatory for religious organizations, their legal entities and their religious bodies, to compromise fundamental beliefs for the so called peaceful coexistence of the three great “moderate faiths” or else face liquidation and dissolution for “extremism”, similar to Russia’s prosecution of the conscientious objectors known as Jehovah’s’ Witnesses.

As discussed already, recent UN mandates are designed to enforce tolerance between religions and faiths for the sake of “peace and security”.  It bears repeating that the true purpose of evangelizing or proselytizing, which is the advocacy of “true” religion in order to gain converts or make disciples, is being completely undermined.  For example, the enforcement of UN RES 2178 and all related resolutions undermines the true intent of preaching the Christian gospel, which is to ‘make public declaration’ of Christianity and Christ for the purpose of making “disciples” and to “save” those who would listen.  The following are viewed as commands to be followed among Christian evangelical preachers and those that proselytize:

“If you declare that Jesus is Lord, and believe that God brought him back to life, you will be saved. 10 By believing you receive God’s approval, and by declaring your faith you are saved.”  – Romans 10:9-10  God’s Word Translation (GW)

“So wherever you go, make disciples of all nations: Baptize them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Spirit. 20 Teach them to do everything I have commanded you.”  -Matthew 28:19-20 (GW)

 As has been demonstrated there has been an intrusion into the sacred ground of religious freedoms in the West which has turned true religious free speech into “intolerance” or “extremism” that must be “watched” by the authorities.  The reason I am repeatedly reporting this is not to involve myself in the political affairs of the world, change the world, stir political controversy, revolution, extremism, or terrorism, but to show the reader what the enforcement of these UN resolutions means.  People still don’t seem to grasp how seriously these endeavors affect religious freedoms. These UN resolutions are similar to Rome’s struggle to maintain its dominance through its PAX-ROMANA or Roman peace.  Anglo America, her successor is striving to remain dominant by utilizing the UN to create an international religious ideology that can compromise “true” Christianity not just maintain peace and security.  Even for peaceful Christians, the involvement or participation in these enforced UN peace initiatives will mean the compromising of core religious values to support interfaith disguised as tolerance between religions.