The Kingdom Acculturation

The Kingdom Acculturation (1)

May 15, 2016

Hyung Jin Moon

We're going to be in Matthew 22, so if you brought your bibles, get them open to Matthew 22.  And we're going to be in Matthew 23 today too.  In Matthew 22, there's one analogy that Jesus is talking about with reference to the Kingdom of Heaven.  And then in Matthew 23, another one.

Let's go to Matthew 22, and read together.

1 "And Jesus answered and spake unto them again by parables, and said, 2 The kingdom of heaven is like unto a certain king, which made a marriage for his son, 3 And sent forth his servants to call them that were bidden to the wedding; and they would not come. 4 Again, he sent forth other servants, saying, Tell them which are bidden, Behold, I have prepared my dinner: my oxen and my fatlings are killed, and all things are ready: come unto the marriage.  5 But they made light of it, and went their ways, one to his farm, another to his merchandise: 6 and the remnant took his servants, and entreated them spitefully, and slew them. 7 But when the king heard therefor, he was wroth: and he sent forth his armies, and destroyed those murderers, and burned up their city. 8 Then saith he to his servants, The wedding is ready, but they which were bidden were not worthy.

9 Go ye therefore into the highways, and as many as ye shall find, bid to the marriage. 10 So those servants went out into the highways, and gathered together all as many as they found, both bad and good: and the wedding was furnished with guests. 11 And when the king came in to see the guests, he saw there a man which had not on a wedding garment: 12 And he saith unto him, Friend, how camest thou in hither not having a wedding garment?  And he was speechless. 13 Then said the king to the servants, Bind him hand and foot, and take him away, and cast him unto outer darkness, there shall be weeping and gnashing of teeth. 14 For many are called, but few are chosen.

Oh, my, my, my.  That's quite an amazing parable.  When we look at this parable, it seems like there are so many things going on, right?  There's this king and he sends his servants to invite people to his son's wedding, and they didn't come, and they killed some of his servants. And so the king gets angry and kills the murderers, and then he says, "Let everybody come in." And all these people come in, and then one guy's not wearing a wedding garment which was given to him, and he's like, "Bind him, and toss him out into the outer darkness where he will weep and gnash his teeth."  Whoa, Jesus what are you talking about? Talking about the Kingdom of heaven, what kind of nation are you talking about?  It's really hard to decipher. But let's look closer.

Remember, as we are doing this study, we are trying to keep our mind disciplined on looking at what Jesus is talking about --  the Kingdom of heaven, a kingdom, national level, looking at these parables at the kingdom level, in the context of the Cheon Il Guk Constitution; in the context of Christ's return and who has set up his kingship in the kingdom that will come.  So we're looking at this in the national level, then it makes a little more sense.

"The kingdom of heaven is like unto a certain king."  Remember, in Cheon Il Guk, yes there is a kingship, there is a king of king's bloodline, a kingship, but who are the kings of Cheon Il Guk?  Remember it's a nation of kings.  Co-heirs with Christ, right?  So it's a nation of kings.  Who are the kings? The citizens.  The citizens have all the rights that, traditionally, in Satan's world, the kings only had.  The right to a kingdom, a territory.  The right not to be forcibly taxed and some entity stealing your wealth.  The citizens also have the right to defend their territory like any king.  If you are a king, and you have a territory, but you can't defend your territory, you're not that much of a king. 

Anybody can just walk in and say, "Get out of here."  And if you say "Okay…”  You are not much of a king.  You have to be able to defend your territory, so of course the second amendment right is the right of the citizens to bear arms and to have the means to defend their territory because that is a kingdom.  Father talks about this very clearly, about tribal messiahships as kingdoms.  Isn't that interesting?  And then that, as a tribal messiah, you would become the king of your tribe.  It's very interesting.  So the kingdom is like a certain king.

So there is a certain citizen, and we have to understand also, that he made a marriage for his son.  Marriage, folks, in the kingdom is so important. Marriage is critical in the kingdom, actually in the First Principles of the Constitution, it talks about the Principles of God, the first one being, 'do not defile the lineage.'  And of course that the federal government and/or congress cannot pass any laws or aid or abet or facilitate other forms of "family structures." God having intended man and woman for matrimony, and it being the safest and most powerful, sociologically for raising the next generation. It is not just religious thoughts, this is statistically proven, the husband and wife,  a married, biological parent family is by far the most stable and the safest for children to be raised in.

Look at the rates, we've seen this many times, right?  Serious child abuse in married biological families' homes is 2.4 per thousand, single parents with a partner, jumps to 20.8 incidents out of one thousand.  So it's like ten times more dangerous to have children in single parent homes.  Especially in single parent homes with a non-biological parent, right?  So you can see the massive amount of danger that children get put in.  This is all statistics; this is proven by evidence, right?  Here, in moderate forms of child abuse, you have married biological parents, look at that comparison; you have 4 compared to 33. So you can see, massively, how science and math proves God's plan.  Proves God's ideal.  The marriage and the married biological husband and wife, daddy and mommy, is by far the most powerful sociological unit in which to raise strong children, healthy kids, right?

So, when you look at Conservative Theory, we see strong families as being the core.  Strong families are the core.  Now remember, just because you have a biological dad and mom, it doesn't mean it's perfect, they still may fight sometimes, but you are about ten times better off than having a single mom with a boyfriend.  Does that make sense?  It doesn't mean that they are perfect and that they fly and they play harps all day, and they are angels.  But, that child's environment is now ten times better.  If you could put your child into a school that was ten times better than the one that you were going to now with no extra cost, would you do it?  If you could get a car that was ten times better than the one you are driving now, with no extra cost to you, would you do that?  If you could get a house that was ten times better or electricity that was ten times more efficient, with no extra cost to you, would you do that?  That's a good thing, right?  That's a good thing.  So for kids, it is ten times safer to be with biological parents.  That creates strong families on the whole.  This of course then creates childhood success, it creates an environment where the children are not oppressed and beaten and abused all the time.  But they're in a safe environment in which they can grow. And then become successful.

That then helps the pursuit of competition because they accept inequalities, they accept that if you work hard for things, and if you have responsible parents, they teach the values that if you work hard for something you can achieve it, or you'll do better if you work hard at it and invest your energies, your creativity, etc.  You'll do better.  And that acceptance of inequality and having no fear of competition, seeing competition not as a negative thing, but something that makes you stronger and better, right?  That then of course enhances the free market, it enhances people being able to produce better things for other people and serving people better, and having more convenient things that people can freely exchange.  You see?  Not by coercion, not by force, right?

And so this cycle then perpetuates and then there's a beauty that arises in society.  It doesn't mean that society is completely perfect.  It's not completely perfect, but we all see in almost all of Jesus' parables that the kingdom is not a place where there is total perfection.  Remember the parable of the weeds, where all those weeds start coming up?  And the sower says, "Ok, let the weeds grow amongst, let those dangerous weeds grow amongst the other crop, but when the harvest comes, they'll be taken out."  Remember this one?  So there are so many parables where Jesus shows about the kingdom that it's not going to be place where there's absolutely no evil because you have free will.

So there will be some people that choose evil, but they will be minimized because of the culture.  What is really a culture?  It is a group of not only common beliefs but also definitions.  It's culture that is attached to language, linguistic culture. It's attached to how we define certain things.  We define marriage as man and woman in our culture; in the Judeo-Christian culture, and that promotes the sociological health for children, sociological safety for children in the next generation, it promotes the strongest environment for freedom and responsibility to arise in, right?  Do you see how those things are connected?  So that definition of how we define the common understanding of definitions too, is a critical part of culture.  Isn't that interesting?  How our language and what our definitions are of things influences our culture.  This is why, for example, in the modern world you have these fascists and these globalists who are trying to change the definitions of everything.  "No, no, there's not man and woman, there's 71 genders."  There's not man and woman, there are 71 different genders.  Facebook is one hundred percent behind that, Zuckerberg and all those globalists are behind that, they are supporting it one hundred percent.  You can choose whatever you want, give up all your rights, you don't have any rights in the modern world, this is the vision we have for you.

You people have no rights but you can have your special little category in gender.  How about that?  You give up all your rights, but you can be your own special superman and superwoman in your delusional little gender role, but just make sure you bow to the people in the big buildings and in the uniforms, and costumes.  Does that make sense?  So people are trading these mental or these delusional identities for what?  For real rights.  Give up your real rights, we'll give you a special little identity marker, You can be your own little special superhero in that world.  [laughter]   Do you see this game?  That's the game.

So, now we see the opposite to be true in the Liberal Progressive theory, or communism, fascism, totalitarianism, socialism, all fall in this system.  You have an emphasis on weak families.  Plato, who was probably one of the most delusional minds that has influenced the study of politics and the understanding of government in the history of western civilization --  he was a total totalitarian.  He was saying that the state should actually own children.  Did you know this?  In his Republic.  Parents should not own children, the state should own the children, so that when they're sent to war, etc., they will have no loyalty to their parents, no emotional bonds and they will be able to fight to protect the state.  Plato was totally delusional, he was a total totalitarian.  Aristotle rebelled against him, and said, "No, no, this is bad."  Aristotle was his student, he argued with him for twenty years, and Aristotle was basically saying, "No, we have to protect individuals.  We cannot go for this collective concept."  Right?

We have to be able to protect individuals.  So even in that ancient philosophical debate, you have the same issue, right?  So you have the idea of weakening the family, it's an important part if you want centralized authoritarian power, because you have to weaken family structure to have obedience from those people to that centralized government.  Does that make sense?  So every totalitarian government, every socialist, communist country's system always weakens families.  It does it by many means.  In America it did it by the welfare state.  Incentivizing divorce, "get rid of your husband, if you can show divorce papers, you get welfare."  You get paid for divorcing your husband, getting rid of your husband.  "You don't need no man!" it promotes that kind of culture. "I don't need no man, I'm superwoman."

Promote that kind of culture, and then you incentivize it with money that you've stolen from people.  Because stealing money is immoral, correct?  Stealing from somebody; theft is immoral, yes?  By any standard that is immoral because you are coercively taking something from somebody else without them wanting to freely give it to you, right?  And, of course, if theft is immoral, then what is the definition of an institution that uses coercive power to take from people that don't want to pay those taxes?  That is theft.  So we can see that taxation is logically immoral.

So then every sociological structure, socialism, communism, totalitarianism, these structures will always go after the family, break up the family, allow them to become more dependent on the system.  That of course enhances childhood failure, that of course enhances the avoidance of competition, and then of course they push for equality of outcomes.  So the big socialist push is always, "Oh, he gets paid more than you. Oh, he gets a hundred thousand, you get fifty thousand, or you get twenty thousand, he gets seventy thousand.  Oh, let's fight for equality!"  There's always this.  Even though that guy may work ten times harder than you, even though you may work fifty times harder than another person. No, no, equality, equality, equality.

But of course, in socialist countries, in communist countries, totalitarian countries, is it ever equal?  No. The answer is no.  You always end up with a ruling elite class that has all the special privileges inherently owning the entire land, and then you have the slave class.  So people are sold the ideal of equality, sucked into the trap, and then eventually become slaves under oligarchs, a couple of families who end up owning that entire nation.  You look at North Korea; you look at Venezuela, any country that has adopted it --- same old, same old, same old.  And of course this perpetuates the same cycle of destruction and perpetuates the same cycle of weak families, childhood failure, avoidance of competition, etc.  Until the civilization crumbles and collapses.

So this is of course the reason why Obama, on May 14th, issued a decree saying that, "Oh, all transgender, to prevent sexual discrimination, all transgender must be able to use the women's bathroom and locker room in public schools."   And girls have to show their naked bodies, shower in front of boys who are biologically boys but they think they are girls.  This is created by these bisexual pedophiles who are pushing this kind of culture on top of everybody so that girls are at risk, young women are at risk, your daughters are at risk, my daughters are at risk.  And as they normalize becoming naked in front of boys, well then sexual inhibitions start coming down, and you have worse sexual life.  You see how that's all connected?

And of course when you have sex, and you have your abortion, if you have your baby, just remember to kill it so that you are paying for the Planned Parenthood system.  See how wicked and evil the system is.  And now they are trying to force that, saying, "We won't fund your school if you don't let boys who say that they are girls, they can just say, 'I think I'm a girl Mrs. Warren.  I'm going to go shower with the girls."  What kind of predator are you going to have in this situation?  If you wrote this in a book, saying thirty years later America will be like this, nobody would be believe it.  It would be the worst selling book, and nobody would believe it.  We are living in it folks.  Do you see how insane and satanic this culture has become?  We've become so hedonistic, so decrepit, so wretched that we can't even decipher that this is dangerous.

And girls who have been brainwashed in public schools are so dumbed down that they actually think, "Hey, that's cool, that's so whoooo, that's Hollywood baby!  That's so cool!  Ok, I'm an empowered woman, I don't care.  I have nothing to hide."  Brain dead girls who bought into the popular culture.  You see what kind of people they are creating?  Have no ability to recognize threats and danger.  Oh my goodness!  Such insanity.  So in terms of a nation, marriage is critical for the stability and prosperity of the nation, the health of that nation.  The strength of that civilization.  Marriage and those values, those cultural norms, that culture, that agreed upon and common belief and definition are critical.  Does that make sense?  It influences everything in that society.

And now look, he sends forth his servant, remember in Cheon Il Guk, who are the servants?  The politicians, the government workers are the servants.  So in Cheon Il Guk, remember the government servants are checked and balanced, they are properly checked and balanced.  The House of Representatives, if you want to become a politician, you can make a good living, you can still serve your people, but you can't become corrupt.  It's much harder for your to become corrupt because your voting pool is 2100 people, so if you start doing all these corrupt things, if you start lobbying for big business, if you start lobbying for central banks, if you start lobbying for things which are totally against your community, nobody is going to vote for you, you're out.

And how hard is it for big conglomerations to buy out fifty thousand members of the House of Representatives? With all constituencies of only 2100 people, to which they are accountable?  Does that make sense, folks?  The reason why these criminals want to centralize everything, because all you have to do is buy out a couple of people at the top, and you've got the whole system.  Now you have all these people who are elected by very small groups that you have to try to buy out all of them, but even if you are trying to buy them out, the people, because the groups are so small, only 2100 people, they can smell that.  You come into Newfoundland, and there's some big company here, that wants to come and take over Newfoundland, to do environmental things. They want to save the black and blue moth that is here, so they want to lock down everything, they want to make this into a total green zone so you can't use it, you have to have special permission to even walk in the parks.

Do you think the people here would let those people in?  If you're a politician, 2100 people are supporting that kind of agenda; do you think this small population of 2100 people will support that guy?  No.  They'll say, "What are you talking about? What are you talking about trying to come here and make this into a green zone and take away our land and kick us off our farms, and kick our five generations off this land, do you see?  Does that make sense?  This is real, real.  So in that context, the servants have to, they are legally bound because they cannot support, by law, they cannot create laws that support other types of family structures, because why?  We know of course that it isn't God-centered, it’s not the ideal, and scientifically it's dangerous.   We know that this is the most stable system, right here, married biological parents.  Not lesbian parents, not gay parents, not bisexual parents, not transgender parents, not gender fluid parents, whatever it is, 71 different genders they have.  In your own little delusional ghetto you can live in, but just give up your rights first.  This is the deal.

So they go forth, and these politicians really have to represent the will of the people, they have to represent those local communities.  These servants have to represent that, so these servants are representing the kings here.  They're going out and they're trying to get people to come to the marriage, right?  Now we can see this in sociological terms, but also look at the national level here.  They are inviting people to come to this marriage, they're inviting people to come to this type of nation, they're inviting people to come to this type of culture.

They're inviting people to come into this type of world, this kind of kingdom.

Next part