Member Training – “Spiritual” Vs. Religious & Its Impact On Liberty

Member training from February 10th 2025. In our discussion tonight, we explored the growing trend of identifying as ‘spiritual but not religious,’ a concept that has gained traction in modern society, particularly within the entertainment industry. This movement often promotes the idea that traditional religions, especially Christianity, are restrictive and harmful, while spirituality is seen as liberating. However, we examined the underlying implications of this shift, that it leads to a rejection of moral principles that are essential for maintaining a free and just society. We highlighted how this spiritual movement is intertwined with broader agendas, including the New World Order, which seeks to undermine monotheism and promote a one-world religion devoid of true moral guidance. Ultimately, we emphasized that true liberty cannot exist without morality, and morality is deeply rooted in religious principles that have always provided a foundation for societal order and peace.

Another interesting book on the subject is “Get Married: Why Americans Must Defy the Elites, Forge Strong Families, and Save Civilization” By Brad Wilcox. You can get your copy by clicking on the title of the book.

Help support ad free content with a one time donation or becoming a member today.

TRANSCRIPT

Heavenly Father, we are grateful to meet together tonight to discuss true principles and the things we can do to be free. We pray for thy blessings and guidance as we seek to do what is right. We say it's in the name of Jesus Christ. Amen. Amen. Thank you. And how that really does affect a free society. And I hope by the time we're done with this, that it'll be clear how this really does affect us as a free society. Trying to get rid of these boxes. There you go. Okay. So as we see, this is a popular saying that I'm hearing more and more often, and it's important for us to understand what it leads to. Here's a quote. He says, I'm not religious. I would say I'm more spiritual than religious. Paul McCartney. Paul McCartney says, I'm not religious, but I am spiritual. And if you remember what the Beatles were doing during the 60s and early 70s and their push to India, that'll make a lot of sense as we get into tonight's presentation. A lot of books coming out.

This one's titled, I'm Spiritual, Not Religious. Christina Aguilera says, I'm not really religious, but very spiritual. Janet Jackson, I'm not really religious, but very spiritual. I don't believe in things like guilt. another book spiritual but not religious spiritual but not religious spiritual i'm not religious i'm spiritual and so lots of different this the subtitle of that book is shed your dogmatism and legalism in order to live meaningfully and passionately and so they're trying to say that you know being religious is bad but being spiritual is good and this is something that we see from the Of course, those involved in the occult, in the entertainment industry. And the occult is ultimately the origins of this concept of being spiritual but not religious. And so its origins go back to Madame Blavatsky. And she actually had a magazine, a publication called Lucifer.

She was the founder of the Theosophical Society, its original. name of the organization was the lucifer trust and then it became the theosophical society and their magazine was called lucifer so they didn't you know amongst themselves they did not um hide really who their master is and so they they are worshipers of satan while claiming to be spiritual so getting more of their origins another a a person that was mentored by madame madame blavatsky uh adam annie besant and she wrote the book called modern socialism leading up to karl marx and uh the people around that time and i i talk about this a lot in um invasion about uh the occult that uh william godby was a part of and and how that leads to the connections to karl marx with that as well and so she wrote a book uh piggybacking off of madame lavazzi's book of the secret doctrine called Theosophy and the Theosophical Society, where she says, Theosophy is the mysticism or esotericism common to all religions thrown by Theosophy into a scientific form as in Hinduism, Buddhism, Roman Catholic Christianity, and Sufism.

Theosophy, in a secondary sense, the above being the primary, is the body of doctrine obtained by separating the beliefs common to all religions from the peculiarities, specialities, rites, ceremonies, and customs, which mark off one religion from another. It presents these common truths as a consensus of world beliefs, forming in their entirety the wisdom religion. or the universal religion, the source from which all separate religions spring, the trunk of the tree of life from which they all branch forth. And so it's claiming to be basically the truths of every other religion grabbed from each of the different religions, put together into this new theology called theosophy. And in there, they have a hatred of Christianity. Cohorts, raise his hand. Go ahead, Rod. Oh, I just want to mention Sufism.

A lot of people don't know what that is. That's actually a mystical branch of Islam. Okay, thank you. So with the raised hands again, we're just going to have you put your comment in the chat and then I'll let the co-hosts address it or let me know if it needs to be addressed. So just to let you know. So in the... The Theosophical Society published pamphlets to let people know about their beliefs and who they were, and they have a deep hatred of Christianity. They wrote, to challenge the materialism of science and all forms of strict religious dogma, especially Christianity, which the society's leaders see as harmful, to reveal the suppressed truths about Eastern religious philosophies, their ethics, chronology, and symbolism. And to counteract the misleading efforts of missionaries toward non-Christians about the true origins and teachings of Christianity and its effects on people in Christian countries.

So, you know, they pretend to say, OK, we grab the truths from Christianity and get rid of the rest. But really, they are claiming that Christianity has suppressed the Eastern religions and that they don't tell the truth about the effects of Christianity. on the population. And so their job is to expose the harmful nature of Christianity. They see Christianity as harmful. Esoteric philosophy reconciles all nations, strips everyone of its outward human garments, and shows the root of each to be identical with that of every other great religion. It has never rejected God in nature, nor deity as an absolute. and abstract being so they they talk about of course that reconciling again of all these different ideas and putting just stripping them down to uh to the root of everything is what their claim is while bagging on christianity and claiming to never reject god in nature and we see that a lot in spirituality is you know i i don't but i don't not believe in god i just believe in you know this abstract being out there And so on one hand, they claim so that that way they don't push Christians and people that believe in God away.

But at the same time, their idea of God is basically this ether, whatever the powers of the universe are. It only refuses to accept any of the gods of the so -called monotheolistic religions. So they do come out and say, yes, we do reject the gods of Christianity, of Judaism, of Muhammadism. Those are the things that they reject. We see that the Theosophic Society started again by Madame Blavatsky. And this is the symbol, the logo of the Theosophic Society, which is very occultish. And this is the room. The only organization that's allowed to have a prayer room within the United Nations is Madame Blavatsky and her and the Theosophic Society's prayer room. These other movements also have their roots in spiritualism. Energy healing, and that's whether you call it energy releasing, Christ-centered energy healing, Reiki, this crystal stuff, they have crystal witchcraft. Really what it comes down to is it's a form of witchcraft and all of these things, which goes back to, of course, because they believe in this paganism, with all of these other religions that they're coming together, so-called healing powers it goes back to witchcraft and the occult and so the spirituality that actually has a roots in socialism as well as we talked about earlier with madame blavatsky and i mentioned how she was a part of the training of an individual by the name of robert owen who then trained karl marx and frederick ingalls And so we have this broad connection between the spirituality and socialism. But there is also a direct connection between spirituality and socialism.

So I'm going to open it up real quick. Does anybody recognize who is this? You can unmute and chime in. Who is this? Anybody recognize what this is? That was Jim Jones. Yeah. And they were the ones that, you know, call it, you know, drinking the Kool-Aid, referencing the Jim Jones people and Jonestown and how they drank the Flavor Aid and to all commit mass suicide. Well, before this happened, he was actually praised and he was actually set up as a leader amongst the theosophists and their spiritualism. So in this book, this is their monthly publication. I'm sorry, yearly publication, Spiritual Community Guide, where they got into more in depth of this being spiritual, not religious, and what are some of their goals and what are some of the things that they're working on and how they're doing it. And so in the, I think it was the 72 issue of the Spiritual Community Guide, they wrote, Jim Jones's role was to teach Christian socialism in preparation for the new age.

So the New Age movement, spiritualism, those are all interconnected. They're all part of the same movement. And they have their different tentacles out there whose job is to promote different parts of this New World Order, this religious aspect of the New World Order. So spiritualism and the New Age is the religious aspect, the one world religion aspect of the New World Order. that we think of typically along political lines. But to be able to get everybody on board, they also have to have their spiritual lines, which promotes the political part of it. Like they have here, Jim Jones's job was to promote socialism and bring out the new age of the new world order. And so Alice Bailey was another person that was trained by Madame Blavatsky and was a mentor. of Madame Blavatsky, no, Madame Blavatsky mentored Alice Bailey and wrote the book, The Externalization of the Hierarchy, and talking about its connection to the New World Order, where she writes, the New World Order will be founded on the recognition that all men are equal in origin and goal, but that all are at differing stages of evolutionary development.

OK, so again, using the spiritual to implement the political and how we see here, everybody's equal. Now we have the Declaration of Independence that says all men are created equal and they are endowed by their creator by certain inalienable rights. And so in that sense of equality, it is, you know, the government has no ability and no authority to be able to prevent somebody from. exercising their god-given rights but here they're saying that that they're we're all equal but that all are at differing stages of evolutionary development so if you have that in effect that means they get to uh treat different people um you know some people some animals are more equal than others would be i guess the most simple way to put that where because that there's state different stages of evolutionary development again promoting the antichrist doctrine of evolution. But in addition to that, saying because of their different stages of evolutionary development, there are different levels of control, just like children, you know, anybody under the age of 18, they can't get a tattoo or get a credit card or join the military without a parent's permission. If your evolutionary development is not at the stage that they feel is enlightened enough, then of course they get to step in.

So the New World Order is going to be founded upon this idea of the government being able to step in depending on what your evolutionary development is. So also spirituality promotes drug use. And so we have these different ideas of LSD, magic mushrooms, DMT, These are all promoted by these spiritualists as ways to get to a higher plane, to be able to access spirits from another realm, to be able to access a higher plane of reality, supposedly. And some people will promote this idea that the conspiracy is trying to shut this stuff down because they want to control us and they don't want us to reach these higher levels of consciousness. But what's really going on is what we see is state legislators, even in Utah, have actually introduced legislation to legalize magic mushrooms. And they have worked on also legalizing acid. And so we see lots of different states across the country that are legalizing these drugs. And what's really going on, it wasn't that we're finally overcoming the oppressiveness of the past. It's that the fact that it wasn't the conspiracy trying to shut down spirituality.

It was our common sense of morality that said, you know, these are not up to our community standards. We are not going to allow these things in our community because we see the dangers that they pose and they remove people's free will to be able to make their own choices. And so now they're basically like a child where they are no longer in control of their faculties. These things don't happen so that everybody has their freedom and is not affected by the dangerous side effects of these drugs. And so we see this new age spiritualism. And of course, the conspiracy is working to introduce the. mass distribution of these drugs, as we saw during the 80s, the CIA in distributing cocaine in the inner cities and things along those lines. The conspiracy wants people to get on these drugs and to make these drugs as a normal part of society, as we're starting to see with these drugs and others. And so the spirituality movement in encouraging these are actually a way to encourage really demon possession and to be able to remove the person's ability to maintain and their agency, their ability to be able to control their own actions. And so a part of the spirituality movement is to remove self-control and agency from the individual. And drugs is one of the ways to do that. And so we see that spirituality, of course, leads to one world religion. One world religion equals no true religion.

And so they are using this idea of being spiritual, not religious, to get the population to reject the barriers that religion puts on us because those are time-tested principles that have protected society against The, you know, the cultures that were immoral that led to chaos, crime, immorality, and the licentiousness and the results in society that leads to, which we're going to get to in a second, those specific results that happen to society when we become spiritual, not religious. But before we do that, I think this is a good time to take a little, just a pause and get any comments, thoughts. questions that we've had so far. Anybody want to chime in? Yeah, this is Mark. There's so many things I'd like to mention, but going back to spirituality, what's very clear is they're saying no dogma, no beliefs, no law, no God's law. So you can have God, but you can't have any. Anything he says, you can't obey him. You can't follow any of his laws. There's no ethics there.

There's no Christian ethics or any other ethics. Nature abhors a vacuum. Anybody study a little physics. And so something moves in there. And what moves in there is the devil. But I think that's really important to realize that they're saying, You cannot practice anything of morality. There's no good or evil. And God's not good. God's not evil. He's just there. The devil's not good. He's not evil. He's just there because you can't practice any dogma. But the other thing I wanted to mention there with drugs, actually, I think it's just the opposite of the way you're presenting it, Ben. Okay. That's fair enough. We can disagree. That's fine. People have a right. to decide if they own their body, they have a right to put what's in it. You can't keep your body to God if you don't already own it. And so you're taking away partial ownership if somebody decides to put something in their body, whether it's something relatively innocent like marijuana or something that's dangerous. So society, you put it, the way you phrase it, society should decide, the community should decide. The community is a collective. The collective decides that's exactly the foundation of Marxism, communism, that the group decides group rights, collective rights, individual rights.

The individual should decide what goes into his body or not. Now, if he wants to be a fool and violate God's law, now God's law is different, but... a free society you have to have the right to choose what to win and that's the foundation of our country was founded upon it you know there were no uh well the founding fathers actually were very much to disagree with that that's why they allowed um different states to be able to you know have those types of sumptuary laws um amongst themselves and many of the states that were founded by the you know the founding fathers and they helped write the constitution they had those sumptuary laws because they recognized that on the local level that they had not only the right, but the ability, because as people have talked about, and I've mentioned many, many times before, is that it is essential that everybody in a society to maintain peace has to have an agreement, a perfect agreement on what the rules of government are. And that's in the Constitution. It's right there in the second paragraph. The only rule of government is to protect the individual from its individual right. Right.

And so that's to the national government. And it doesn't talk about limiting freedoms at all. And so that's the ideology that the state should be practicing. Many states did. Camp was marijuana was legal throughout the whole country when it was the nation. I'm not talking about marijuana specifically. I didn't mention that. But it is a part of the conspiracy is to demoralize the people. And the founding fathers only delegated. That's why it's not in the Constitution, because. Because that was just a delegation of certain authority to a central body, whereas everything else was retained to the states. Jefferson, Washington, Adams, Massachusetts, Virginia, they all had sumptuary laws. And Thomas Jefferson, who wrote the Declaration of Independence, saw no problem with that on the local level. They understood the importance of morality to maintaining free government. And so they took steps to ensure that morality. was implemented or if you didn't believe in what their form of morality was then you had the right to leave and to associate with others that had the same morality as you did because they knew that they had to have a society based on biblical laws otherwise they would tend towards tyranny.

Those different restraints were vital. to preventing the big attacks on your liberty when a society devolved into immorality and anarchy and so that's what we see the record of the founding fathers and not just one or two of them but even the ones that are seen as strictly libertarian like Thomas Jefferson and so they really had a different record on that on the local level but I think overall we can agree definitely that that what this new idea of spirituality new ageism is getting rid of god and what the result of getting rid of god is in society is dangerous to everyone's liberty yeah well there's several points here one is you're we're not talking about encouraging the use uh you're actually arguing for immorality because you're compromising away liberty. If you compromise it at all, you're not going to have liberty. You're going to have tyranny. So you're actually advocating for tyranny by taking away people's individual choices that aren't affecting or harming anybody else. So I think it's just the opposite of what you're saying. And whether some founders believe with you or not, it doesn't matter.

It's what God says and what logic says. Okay. Definitely appreciate that. I'd like to say something on that issue. Yeah, go ahead. um i think people cry a lot for well not as much as they should but people cry a lot for liberty freedom, whatever, but the thought is like, what does that really mean? Like, what is freedom in its most fundamental form? And you can argue all kinds of things and particulars, but I think the most prudent way to really define what freedom is, is to put it into a sentence. And that would be freedom from evil. And one of the key components of evil is the destruction of morality. Part of the destruction of morality is the destruction of people's cognitive abilities to choose, which certainly drugs do. And we all know that drugs increase crime, increase immorality. It's not even debatable. It's just a straight up fact. Well, the founding fathers disagreed with you. They said it in the second paragraph of the Declaration of Independence. Mark, Mark. Every member of that second Congress agreed with that. This is just funny. The role of government is solely, solely. Mark, we're going to mute you because we're moving on. We can all agree on the fact that. A society that has a drug culture is going to be a society that degenerates and into slavery.

And so whether you want to be in a society that outlaws drugs or doesn't outlaw drugs, that's a different point. The point is a society that makes drugs popular and rampant is a society that degrades into tyranny. That's just a fact. Is that the role of government? That's the role of your religion. That's not the role of... So we'll just, yeah. And anybody can, we can debate that and have a discussion on that another time. But I think that the overall arching issue is what happens when you have that in society. So we'll go ahead and move on to the next part of the topic. Spiritually is the idol of self. So this is really what it breaks down to. It is the worship of the self, as Mark pointed out very eloquently, that it is the getting rid of God's laws. And so if you don't have God's laws, that means you have to make up your own. And so you're idolizing yourself as the ultimate law giver. It's a form of a golden calf. A golden calf cannot set up its own rules. You're the one that decides what the golden calf says the rules are. And of course, it's ultimately a worship of self. And spirituality is a... a form of Satanism.

We look at even atheism is a form of Satanism because they hate God. Atheists claim to not believe in God, but we see with their own logos that they are mocking the idea of Christianity and their materials. They don't not believe in God. They hate God. And so they are establishing a society that is godless, which spirituality is an outgrowth from because they know that, you know, I'm going to get into this in a minute, is that it is the natural inclination of an individual to understand and recognize that there is a God. And so their job is to get rid of that natural law within ourselves of worship of a deity. And this really breaks down to, so if they hate God, they're getting us to worship ourselves. That is what Satanism is all about. Satan wanted to dethrone God. He wanted all of us to worship him instead of God. And so spirituality, idol worship, and atheism are all really, when you break them down to their fundamentals, is Satanism. And if we understand that, then we will start to see the dangers of spirituality versus being religious. So for further study in this concept of spirituality, I recommend these two books, The Hidden Dangers of the Rainbow and Unmasking the New Age. Is there a new religious movement trying to transform society? Those really get into having a lot of documentation and getting into the details of the New Age movement of spiritualism.

And so George Washington, again, he says that it is religion and morality are vital supports to free government. And so he says, let us with caution indulge the supposition that morality can be maintained without religion. So we need religion in society because religion is what produces morality. And if you have morality, then you can have a free government. So if you don't have religion, you don't have morality, and you don't have a free government. Those three things are inseparably connected to each other. And getting into Pufendorf's book, The Duty of Man, he says, that there is indeed some supreme being upon whom this universe depends. That is the first notion that we have. We believe in his existence, which if any man denies himself to be able to comprehend, he is not therefore to be excused for his atheism.

So you can't excuse somebody for their atheism because they're denying just himself. For all mankind, having been perpetually, as it were, possessed of this, persuasion that man who undertakes to oppose it ought not only solidly to confute all those arguments that are brought to prove a God, but should advance reasons for his own assertion, which may be more plausible than those. So basically what he's getting into is that it's just, it's perpetually in our nature to be possessed of the persuasion to believe in God, to know of his existence. And so we don't really need to that point. We don't need to prove God because we it's we don't need to prove what is naturally obvious. He goes on to continue to say, since by this belief of the deity, the wheel of mankind may be supposed to have been hitherto preserved. He ought to show that atheism would better answer that end than sober religion and the worship of God. Now, seeing this can by no means be done.

The wickedness of those men who attempt any way to eradicate this persuasion out of the minds of men is to be above all things abominated and restrained by the severest punishment. So this man, read by the founding fathers, quoted by the founding fathers, this book was what they read and what they studied to be able to decide what kind of society we want to have, either both on the national level or the confederated republic level. as well as on the local level, whether that be city or state. And that atheism, of course, the idea of getting rid of God in society was something that need to be just shunned at all costs. And so he continues on. He says the external worship of God is chiefly shown in these instances. This is how we show our worship of God. Irregardless of what denomination you are, these are the basics of showing our devotion to God and society. We must render thanks to God for all the manifold blessings he has so bountifully bestowed upon us.

We must conform as far as we possibly can all our actions to his will. That is, we must obey all his commands. And with New Age movement, with spirituality, there are no commands because that's religion. And so... It is obviously clear, self-evident, that to recognize a God, he has laws that we must conform to. We must admire and adore his infinite greatness. Otherwise, why are you going to obey him? We must offer up to him our prayers and supplications. to obtain from him those benefits we stand in need of and to be delivered from those evils we are in fear of. When we find it necessary to take an oath, we must swear by no other name than the name of God. And then we must religiously observe that what we have engaged ourselves in to calling God to witness. So we want to show, if we're going to actually go that far to say we're swearing to God, we're saying that we're calling him to witness what we're doing. And so, That is the seriousness of it. We are a blasphemer if we are going to violate that. And blaspheming is, of course, one of the most serious of crimes. We must never speak of God, but with his the highest respect and utmost reverence. So making sure that we don't treat holy things lightly, that we only speak of them in a reverent way.

So we're reading in the Gospels, right? Not to do your alms before men. That way you're not just, you're not trying to get credit for yourself but here he's saying to worship him publicly so i think those aren't in contradiction but what he's saying is that when we are worshiping god we do it in public because that is a testimony to others when we hide our devotion to god it is hard for others to see the benefits of it the blessings of it and um and they might think that they're alone and so they will be more apt to um falling for being made fun of for believing in God. And so we can be a strength to others in our public observance and worship of God. We are to use our utmost endeavor to observe the laws of nature as it is an affront to slight the commands of God. So the laws of nature are the laws of God. And so when we break ourselves against God's laws, we are basically being an affront to God. And so as far as we can, And when we fail, we need to repent and do better. But it is one of the ways that we, of course, apply this religious aspect that is so important to liberty. This is how it's applied.

And further on in this book, if you don't have it, I really highly recommend it. He says it might be helpful to think more clearly about the benefits that religion provides to society. So he's saying, so after we've done all that, let's look at the benefits. that religion provides to us when it's made a part of the whole religion is truly the strongest and most important bond holding humanity together without the fear of a higher power in a state of natural freedom any strong person might harm weaker individuals without hesitation so the founding fathers they got together they believe this all together even though they were of different denominations they understood that religion was the strongest and most important bond holding them together. They would see honesty, modesty, and truth as meaningless and would ignore any argument that urges them to act morally. This is exactly what we see going on with the New Age movement and with spirituality. There's no such thing.

Modesty is especially out the window. Instead, they would only follow what is right if they feel unable to do otherwise. So if they get caught, they're in a situation they don't want to look bad, all of a sudden without religion, their morality becomes situational depending on the topic. And when they're having a disagreement, they don't think that the laws of God are something that they want to follow. They will just say, well, that's not my truth. And that's where this idea of a non-stagnant, static truth. that truth is in the eye of the beholder, whereas when we have religion, we understand that truth is eternal no matter when and where you are. Moreover, without religion, people would be much more likely to harm each other. In a world where legal systems only deal with hard evidence, secret wrongdoings that could be hidden would often be seen as clever tricks. So we see this in societies today that are irreligious. Those societies are um you're afraid to go to those countries because you know you can get robbed you might get kidnapped um you might get killed and so we we just see the natural fact that that is a society either even if you go to a country or even in america you go to these cities where religion is not a part of that uh that city's culture and the crime that is prevalent there compared to cities where religion is a important integration of their society where you are actually everyone feels safe you leave your doors locked at night he says also that no one would do charitable acts or good deeds unless they expected recognition or reward these transactional relationships i'm doing something nice for you because i expect you to do something nice for me as opposed to i'm doing something because it's the right thing to do as a result without the fear of punishment from a higher power People would constantly live in fear and mistrust of one another, worried about being cheated or hurt.

Governors and rulers would be just as bad as the people they govern. Now, you just we see that in society today. You look at you go back to the 90s even and how everyone was going after Bill Clinton with Monica Lewinsky and how important, you know. conservatives would say or morality is important with our leaders we can't have a leader that is going to be immoral and then you had um people that were of course you know this is the left-right paradigm that was being presented to us but you had the democrats um saying that um morality um private morality is separate from you know public duty and there's no connection between the two and so that has been the idea that was presented by The Democrats during the 90s is something that now both parties have embraced and they don't expect nor desire a person that is privately moral any more than they would publicly. And so we see the result of that in society today. Without any moral obligation, rulers would sell out their offices and even justice for personal gain, oppressing their subjects and weakening them to prevent rebellion.

Do we not see that in society today? In turn, the people would always fear their rulers' violence and would seek ways to rebel, but would also distrust one another, making society unstable. Immoral culture leads to immoral leaders, leads to fear of violence and fear of your neighbor. Fear of violence from government, fear of violence from your neighbor. You cannot separate those things from each other. It is foolish for those who claim to be wise and political. to promote looseness and irreligion as they fail to see how much religion helps to maintain order and peace. What he was doing was he was just observing what happens in nature, just what is something that is self-evident and obvious. And as he looked at different societies and different cultures, what was it that led to one thing? What was it to lead to another? And he just wrote down. the natural consequence of both was this this to an honest person this is as undebatable as arguing about the color of a clear blue sky and we look at what happened to those that looked to their own understanding right we see with moses those moses said you know that if they just looked to the brass serpent that they would be healed but you can almost say that these people that didn't obey him they said well you know that's that's your truth or that you know I'm a spiritual person, not a religious person. I'm going to see what makes sense to me as opposed to, hey, you know what? God has laws. God has rules that he sets forward and that he sets apart people to do so. And so when we reject God's laws and how he reveals truth and we reject those truths as they are manifest through natural society. We see the results of them. And that's exactly what the conspiracy wants.

They want us to become irreligious and to be so-called spiritual because they know they can't get rid of this nature that we have inside of us to recognize a higher power. And so they want to just make it this ambiguous self-worshiping spirituality as opposed to religion. And again, as I stated earlier, there is no liberty without morality and there is no morality without religion. We have to make sure that we do not fall for the lies that are being put out there that say that we can separate those things and that they don't matter because it is clear by the scriptures, by the founding fathers that we respect and the natural law thinkers that they quoted and they read from and established their society. And as we look at society as a whole, these things are indisputable facts and they're irrefutable. Go ahead and open up. It looks like we got a lot of comments in there, but we got a few minutes because this gave us a gap.

This gave us 10 minutes to kind of have a discussion, ask questions. Feel free to raise your hand and we can go one at a time of comments or questions that you may have about the topics that we covered tonight. I don't know how to raise my hand. Will this work? It'll work. You didn't ever make it good. Okay. With my ADD, I'm going to jump way back on the drug thing. Okay. I think in an immoral society, drugs are the number one thing. Here in Utah, it's supposed to be one of the top states for antidepressants. Yep. So we're all, I'm not going to say we, there's a lot of drugged up people in Utah. The next thing I wanted to say is I made some comments, but I wasn't sure they were clear. So it's a drug to these people to have the feeling that they're smarter than God himself. Yeah. That they would do anything to destroy the morals of the people. I don't usually watch. uh award programs but my daughter-in-law was watching i don't know if it was globes or whatever and while i was watching the people it reminded me of j-lo wore a dress looked like it was taped on her many years ago lady gaga wore uh steaks on her um mead on her and it seemed like the morals were so bad that now They don't want to have a malfunction like Janet Jackson did on the Super Bowl, but they all want to push the limits as far as they can. And that's as immoral as you can get. Yeah. But immorality, our immorality today is much like the children of Israel during Moses' time. It's we're smarter than God. We don't have to listen to him.

And if we do listen to him, then we're going to have Aaron or what was most, Miriam. You're going to have someone else say something. And that fits today because President Nielsen says things that we know don't go along with the scriptures. And so we make up excuses that maybe we don't have to follow what God has said. Now, I'll go back to my ADD and turn off. okay that's sad denise that somebody would say that it's horrible so she oh just talking to most didn't see it she was saying yeah um can i explain for a sec yeah please go ahead oh sorry yeah so i just when you were describing that about clinton and how it came nor became normal for well that was his private life so it doesn't matter because you know that's not his public life and so we that exact reasoning a friend i he's really very religious very you know i just think of him as a good man but yet we kind of we actually debated at a caucus on abortion and he used that reasoning of Because he said to support abortion. And he wouldn't come out right and say he supports abortion, of course. But I had said how I don't support it or whatever because that was the question and we had to go in a line and answer. But then he went in this whole roundabout way of, well, I do not support abortion, but I cannot put on someone else. Like, oh, in my private life, I would, I just, you know. But he really roundabout way came around to, but it's okay that someone else, he's not going to force his ideals on someone else, right? So to me, if it makes sense that when you explain that private versus public, it made sense to me that that's the reasoning he was using to actually support abortion. Though he wouldn't come out right ever and say he supports abortion. Right.

You would just say, oh, that's, you know, I wouldn't do that. But whatever you do in the privacy of, you know, you're with your doctor, that's up to you. And, you know, to me, that's the same thing because it's murder is murder. And so it'd be like saying, well, I'm not going to kill my spouse. But if what you do with your spouse, you know, you kill them in the privacy of your own home. That's, you know, you do you. That's what that's what that mindset leads to. Yeah, Moses just said it matters more what you do in private than what you do in public, but that's who you really are. Mark, go ahead. Yeah, a few quick points. I'll go quickly through these. I'm going to give you my highly agreeable expanding on points. I'm expanding on what you've said. First of all, there's nothing as close to innate human quality or belief than that in a deity.

They've seen it in cultures from the very beginning. mankind, to human beings, believe in a deity or deities like the Romans, many gods. So that goes along with this, what you were saying, and on that point, public practice of our religion, it's mandated a number of times in the scriptures, where evangelism, is a public display of religion. You're going to church, that's required in the scripture. That's a public display. So there's the Great Commission, that's a public display. So I think that's really important. Just one quick statement on the drugs. Christ drank alcohol. Alcohol is wine. It's a drug. Anyway, but one of the, oh, on Clinton, I think if you can measure sins, the greatest sin from a political perspective of somebody who should be president is his deceit, his fraud, his lie, his lie to God when he took his marriage vows. I think that's the greatest. We shouldn't have liars in the presidency, and that's all we're getting these days. Adulterers and liars, yep.

But one concern I have, I see this among some. I see it in the talk show I called into the host, and I've seen it many times, and it's a very disturbing trend. People are just getting more and more lazy reading and understanding God's law. And what they seem to do instead, they say, we've got to be open and let God guide us in our meditations and our prayers in response to our prayers. So in a way, that's not only a discounting, it's an application of our responsibility to follow the laws. To just say, well, I'll just open up and let God... Direct me. And that's very close to what many people define spirituality. It's just let God talk to you. Well, I think probably Satan's going to be talking to you more than God is. Well, exactly. Yeah, that's something that happens. People are too wary of it because, like you said, they're too lazy to know what God's laws are.

And they're just saying, I'm going to take whatever the universe tells me to do. And what they end up doing is listening to a false revelation. There's a saying that I like a lot, as you can tell. a bad angel or a false revelation because it contradicts a former one well how are you going to know what a what a former one is if you're not doing your duty to study them you you're going to unmute again mark there there's a trend among some denominations and some more than others to just discount parts of the law yeah you know There is no hell. That's been torn out of the Bible. There's a number of denominations. There's several homosexuality and so forth. So that's contributing to this problem to ignore the law and just sit back and let some spirit talk to you. Whether it's God or Satan. I'm butting in again. Is that okay? Alan, just hold on. We're going to have a closing prayer and then you can butt in. We'll open the forum and everybody can talk about whatever they want.

Let's go ahead and have an open forum. Denise Croft, would you say the closing prayer for us? Thanks. Dear Heavenly Father, we're grateful for this day and that we could meet again together in our Liberty Tree Society to learn of truths that have been presented. We're grateful for Ben and his time. Help us to all continue to study out in our own hearts and minds so that we can always find what real truth is and not be deceived on the way that they say today our personal truths. But know that real truth is out there and it comes from thee and help us all to diligently seek it, especially in the matters of liberty. thank you for all of our blessings and may the may thy spirit be with all of us that are on this call throughout the week and we say things name i son jesus christ amen