HUMANISM: The Most Evil Ideology Today

By Y.Marianov | Unification Family Therapy  HUMANISM: The Biggest Ideological Obstacle Today

Origins of Humanism
 
The most dangerous ideology today is Humanism. We live in age of Ideological War and the philosophy we have to combat and overcome is that of Humanism.

"Humanism is not only the biggest evil in the world, but it is also the most deceptive of all religious philosophies."

- Homar Dankan

Members often ask me, what exactly is 'Humanism'. Well, Divine Principle is very clear. Humanism reverses all Subject-Object relationships; it expanded as a Cain-type ideology (product of our Physical Mind reversing dominion over our Spirit Mind). After Satan left Communism his power moved totally in the secular culture of Humanism and Relativism that destroyed morality and the foundation of the family in the last half a century. If we want to stop the degradation of our children, win the cultural war and open the way for peace, it is vitally important to reveal the twisted satanic nature of humanism and overcome it ideologically with the truth.

As Tim LaHaye wrote in his book, Battle for the mind, "Most of the evil in the world today can be traced to humanism, which took over governments, United Nations, education, television and other most influential fields in life." Humanism controls the society today by a network of organizations - humanistic associations, the education, trade unions, pro-sex programs, universities, porn magazines, even the hospitals and the textbooks of our children. But how much the aims of humanism are beneficial for humanity? It turns out that the values they promote are extremely destructive to the family and society, and especially dangerous for our young people.

What Secular Humanism infiltrates in people's minds 

This becomes obvious when we check their main philosophical base expressed in the Humanist Manifesto:

1. Humanism rejects traditional moral values. They reverse good and evil. Not only values are made relative, but anyone who mentions what's right or wrong is marked by them as evil.

2. Humanism denies obedience to any authority, including parental, or the authority of God.

3. Humanism promotes selfish-individualism - extreme individualism, as the highest good: It propagates that everyone can do what he wants to satisfy his momentary desires.

4. Humanism directly attacks marriage and the family as outdated, claims free sex, homosexuality, sex with animals and sex with children are normal.

The culmination of the "humanist manifesto" is that the freedom of any kind of sexuality should be allowed: Including same sex relations, sex outside marriage, sex with many partners, or sex with small children and animals. At the same time Humanism's aim is that "the family" should be denied as an outdated and unnecessary unit.

This philosophy directly aims to liberate people from any moral standards and social responsibility. This Humanist mass-propaganda brought the collapse of morality in less than half a century. Understanding of it's essential nature and origin comes when we see that in fact Humanism promotes philosophically the four fallen natures.

The real evil in Humanism is REVERSING SUBJECT/OBJECT; Reversal of dominion on all levels... Thus destroying the order, destroying family, destroying society. And more and more, they are very open in proclaiming their evil goals. But they are very good in rationalizing why that's what what we should want. 

EXAMPLES: Forbidding parents to discipline and teach values to their children, meanwhile they are Killing children, Raping children, making children Homosexual and Lesbian etc.

Origin and Nature of Humanism

"Secular Humanism is an outgrowth of 18th century enlightenment rationalism and 19th... This insidious philosophy is at the heart and core of the cultural war", writes David Treybig, autor of "Secular Humanism: Dangerous Modern Philosophy With an Ancient Origin"

The origins of humanism are well explained in the Divine Principle: "The Cain-type... revival of Hellenism... gave birth to the humanism of the Renaissance. As this movement developed further, moving in Satan's direction, it gave birth to the Enlightenment, which... further matured in the satanic direction, giving birth to historical materialism, which is the core of communist ideology."

But what exactly is the nature of humanism and why it sounds so good and yet is so evil and destructive?

1. Humanism reverses all God's principles

From Principle viewpoint Humanism is the reversal of all God's principles. It sounds nice and has seemingly good aims for a better world, but it puts Object over Subject (Matter over the Spirit; Wife over Husband; Children over Parents; Students over Teachers); humanism is putting the external and horizontal over everything internal and vertical. Because of that, automatically humanism destroys all vertical and horizontal order in the society. 

2.  Humanism is a product of the Physical Mind

Why humanists do that? Remember, Humanism is a product of the Physical Mind. Humanism, same like the Physical Mind, puts the individual purpose over the purpose of the whole.  Materialism, Individualism (the individual human interests), are set above Spirituality and God (the purpose of the whole). Thus, it violates all Principle laws; claiming that as good and attacking any attempt to restore the correct principle priorities.

(1) The Physical Mind cannot see God's viewpoint;
(2) The Physical Mind left it's position as object to the Spirit Mind;
(3) The Physical Mind reversed the dominion over the Spirit Mind;
(4) The Physical Mind multiplies evil, going against God's will constantly

Consequently, the four fallen natures originate from the physical mind. This is the reason why people do not need to study humanism to be humanistic. It comes automatically from ones fallen nature. Humanism, is only providing our Evil Nature with ideological excuse.

3. Humanism is an Ideological expression of the Four Fallen Natures

Humanism, is in fact, the Ideological expression of the Four Fallen Natures. Physical Mind can never see from God's view point, no matter how much it tries - only Spiritual Mind can do that. Thus people led by their Physical Mind naturally go against God's will even when they want to follow it. Physical Mind left it's position as an object to the Spiritual Mind and reversed dominion over it, which is the root of the Second and Third Fallen Natures; Leaving ones position and reversing dominion. Once a person's physical mind reversed dominion over his spirit mind, automatically he multiplies evil, no matter if his intend is good or evil. Some people are more dominated by their physical mind, while others are more spiritually mature, this inevitably expresses in external ideological conflicts.

Internal war expressed as a cultural war

Since the Fall, Physical Mind constantly suppressed the Spirit Mind desires and rejects them as evil by multiplying evil thoughts and philosophy instead. This fierce cultural war is external projection of this inner unresolved struggle. Humanism developed as the philosophical expression of the external reasoning of numerous philosophers. Yet, being centered on their physical minds they ended up excusing the fallen natures and their own fallen desires, instead of bringing a true solution.

We can easily understand why even believers (members) who are lead by their Physical Mind will end up to be Humanistic; put External values over the Internal ones; aggressively reject spirituality though believing in the Principle. We should understand that this is only natural consequence of being led by the Physical Mind. So members should quickly develop their Spiritual Mind. Only then God can work through us. When Physical Mind is subject, Divine Principle says that we are channel for Evil spiritual world, no matter of our good motivation and desires.

A real ideological battle is carried out today for the minds of the youth


Most people have not even heard about the existence of a "humanist manifesto, and yet, young people are brainwashed with the propaganda of secular Humanism. They literally quote the above 4 points which humanism is based on.

	The International language of Love
	Secrets of the Holy Family
	Blessing that Overcomes Historic Boundaries
	Sun Myung Moon: Revolution of Heart

Humanists deny God and raise these materialistic, atheistic, immoral values of active promoters that the danger for the young today are interfaith, faith in God, faith in family, in true love, in moral values. They criticize other Christian denominations as sects threatening to deceive our children with moral values, while they themselves can without opposition pervert our children with immorality, individualism and free sex. They penetrate everywhere, even in our homes, in the schools, in the movies and the literature we read ...

We live in a really absurd society where good and evil are literally turned upside down.

Can we save our children from this godless, pervert ideology that is surrounding us from everywhere? I find in the Web statements such as: "Jehovah's Witnesses" is the most - dangerous sect in the world. Or, "It's interesting who will fight the most - dangerous sect - Orthodox. Sect, which is fully possessed by medieval thought and morality, and adheres to morals and principles."

This is the absurd - all the attention goes on the influence of dangerous cults. But how and to whom do they present danger? They endanger the immoral humanistic aims. Today, religions have little real impact in the lives of young people. They do not lead to immorality, in fact they teach us good moral values.

We Read meaningless threats of, "hordes of enemies - sects and Masons." At the same time, immorality is openly imposed everywhere. While "the devil turned believers to criticize each other," he undisturbed by anyone dominates our entire culture through secular Humanism and free sex.

Humanism, as rust, destroys families and corrodes us, our marriages and the morals of our children.

When will we open our eyes to reality? The most dangerous sect that actually destroys the foundations of faith is the sect of secular Humanism - relativism, which bombards us from everywhere and enters into our minds, our lives, our family and in the minds of our children.

	Basis for Unification Family Therapy
	Culture of Selfishness: More Couples Sleeping Apart
	Unification Family Therapy: Games People Play In The Family

This is a godless religion - a cult of selfishness, immorality and free sex. It works secretly and invisibly, like Satan himself, while quickly and permanently corrupting our minds and lives. Representatives of one of the most - dangerous sects in the world, humanism, are all around us.

Humanists literally control television, media, art, fashion, school ... massively brainwashing our children. We are not free. Our children go to schools encountering violence, drugs, anti-moral propaganda ... Humanism is the most dangerous religion of today. It is a sect - an ideology that undisturbed propagates to our children its immoral cause. And the world is still blind to its satanic and destructive influence.

 | Unification Family Therapy

Note: The first Humanist Manifesto was written in 1933 and directly denies the moral values. The Second Humanist Manifesto criticizes this approach and calls for mass propagation of humanist values and immorality by any means; even through books about God and faith. Only in the 90's a book revealed the scale of the propaganda activities drawn by Hollywood productions. This happened after some of the founders themselves have begun to realize the negative result of its influence. This article reflects the views of the Unification movement of Dr. Moon. The main motive for the persecution and criticism towards him is because of the key role Rev. Moon played in the fight against the Communism (during the Cold War). 

LaHaye points that humanists take repeated positions from an "amoral" or even immoral standpoint while condemning any opposition as "narrow-minded" and "bigoted". In 1980, humanists numbered no more than 275,000 persons in the United States, but most were in positions of influence in the media, higher education, foundations, and government and could widely spread their secular views. 

The humanists are fully dedicated to the propagation of their views by any means, manipulation and deception. LaHaye noted the humanist background of Vice President Walter Mondale, a contributor to The Humanist magazine who attended the 5th Congress of the International Humanist and Ethical Union held in August 1970. Indeed Robert Lester Mondale (1904-2003), Walter Mondale's older half-brother, was the only person to sign each of the three Humanist Manifestos of 1933, 1973, and 2003. 

By 1980, humanists had gained control over many organizations such as the feminist National Organization for Women and the American Civil Liberties Union, all three television networks, both news and entertainment coverage, as well as dominance in the national and state governments, and universities and public education too. Gradually, even churches could not remain free of humanist design. Some Christian denominations were influenced by repeated movement to the left through the National Council of Churches. 

Humanists believe world population is too large and must be curtailed through abortion, euthanasia, and assisted suicide. They also reject the spiritual well-being of human beings, oppose prayer in the public sector, and advocate in many cases for widespread pornography, justification or even encouragement of adultery and homosexuality, and decriminalization of marijuana and other narcotics. 

The humanist (sometimes called "progressive liberal" or "socialist") and Christian views are irreconcilable. Humanists have the upper hand in the struggle against Christians, many of whom were unaware and uninformed about the moral chasm dividing the nation. Clergymen are hesitant to become involved in political matters for fear of dividing their congregations along partisan lines and risking a decline in financial donations. 

Humanists had gained even greater control over American society in the last years. The results of the 2016 elections with President Donald Trump could swing the pendulum into the more traditional Christian direction, but the verdict is still very much unknown. Humanists expect to rebound whenever they face setbacks and believe still that the majority of Americans are on board with their set of secular beliefs.. e most dangerous religions sect today, brainwashing cult of Humanism

WHY LEFTIST-SOCIALIST HATE FAMILY AND BABIES? HUMANISM IS TO BLAME

HUGGING YOUR BABY MORE MAKES THEM SMARTER, NEW RESEARCH REVEALS

SOCIETIES THAT values fidelity prospers

 

Secular Humanism: Dangerous Philosophy With an Ancient Origin

Secular Humanism:
Secularism, Humanism - Dangerous Modern Philosophy With an Ancient Origin

by David Treybig

"Secular Humanism is an outgrowth of 18th century enlightenment rationalism and 19th... This insidious philosophy is at the heart and core of the cultural war.

One of today's most influential philosophies is that of modern humanism. Humanist way of thinking is having a profound influence upon modern nations and peoples. Humanist philosophy is at the heart and core of the cultural war taking place within the United States and many other Western nations. 

Although proponents of modern humanism point to a resurgence of interest and support in the last century, the underlying principles of humanism are really quite ancient.

Secular Humanism is the most dangerous religion (sect, cult) in the World today

Homor does a excellent job of describing the dangers of Humanism. He is absolutely right in saying that Humanism is the most dangerous religion in America.

Years ago Duncan Homor warned us about the threat of secular humanism to freedom. It is a pity that almost no one listened. Now our country is almost destroyed morally, educationally, and spiritually.

What is interesting about humanism is that it is the exact opposite of Christianity. Humanism is a religion based on pure atheism. Whatever Christianity says is right, Humanism says is wrong. Humanism is the pure evil. Unfortunately, it is also highly organized into political action groups with well defined purposes and goals. All other religions lie somewhere in between Humanism and Christianity.

Modern Humanism Defined

What Is Humanism? After summarizing literary humanism, Renaissance humanism, cultural humanism, philosophical humanism and Christian humanism, Edwords comes to modern humanism, the broad philosophy consisting of both secular humanism and religious humanism.

	The most dangerous religion of today: HUMANISM-RELATIVISM
	PERSONAL TESTIMONY: Jesus guided me...

"Modern Humanism, also called Naturalistic Humanism, Scientific Humanism, Ethical Humanism and Democratic Humanism, is defined by one of its leading proponents, Corliss Lamont, as 'a naturalistic philosophy that rejects all supernaturalism and relies primarily upon reason and science, democracy and human compassion.' Modern Humanism has a dual origin, both secular and religious, and these constitute its sub-categories.

"Secular Humanism is an outgrowth of 18th century enlightenment rationalism and 19th century freethought... Religious Humanism emerged out of Ethical Culture, Unitarianism, and Universalism. Today, many Unitarian-Universalist congregations and all Ethical Culture societies describe themselves as humanist in the modern sense...

"Secular and Religious Humanists both share the same worldview and the same basic principles. This is made evident by the fact that both Secular and Religious Humanists were among the signers of Humanist Manifesto I in 1933 and Humanist Manifesto II in 1973. From the standpoint of philosophy alone, there is no difference between the two. It is only in the definition of religion and in the practice of the philosophy that Religious and Secular Humanists effectively disagree".

The Focus of Humanism

These philosophies are all focused on humans. Human beings—not God—are at the center of all this thinking. Within secular humanism, anything dealing with the supernatural (including God, the Bible, angels, demons) isn't considered.

In general, secular humanists consider all religion to be superstitious thought that has held back the progress of humanity. "Secular Humanists maintain that there is so much in religion deserving of criticism that the good name of Humanism should not be tainted by connection with it.

Secular Humanism

While both branches of modern humanism, religious and secular, have had profound influences upon Western societies, the latter has received more attention and attained more success in both Europe and the United States in recent years.

According the Edwords, "The Secular Humanist tradition is a tradition of defiance, a tradition that dates back to ancient Greece. "Prometheus stands out because he was idolized by ancient Greeks as the one who defied Zeus. .. he continued his defiance amid his tortures. This is the root of the Humanist challenge to authority...

"Only a Humanist can suggest that, even if there be a God, it is OK to disagree with him."

Humanist myth: "Much of Human progress has been in defiance of religion or of the apparent natural order." The opposite is true, all progress speared where faith was strongest (Rome, Spain, North Europe, England, then US.. that's how power and progress moved based on faith). Powers that oppressed religion always collapsed.

Humanist myth: "Politically, the defiance of religious and secular authority has led to democracy, human rights... The opposite is true. French revolution was Humanist and brought only blood, destruction, corruption... it suppressed human and religious rights. Later it evolved into the Communist totalitarianism, based on Marks, who synthesized all humanist Philosophies into the Godless Ideology killing 150 million people in peaceful times. That is what Atheism, Materialism and Humanism does. Western Democracy however came based on Christian strive for religious freedom in England and later in US. It was bloodless, peaceful, and really guaranteed human rights.

Humanists make no apologies for this. For this is part of the tradition". Humanists are quite proud of their tradition of defiance of authority and believe that their actions have made the world a better place to live. They believe their approach is more caring and considerate of people and that their way of thinking is superior to others.

Secular humanists proudly live here and now as opposed to some supposed life after death. They believe in evolution—that man evolved from enamels. Thus Communist treated people as enamels.

They are advocates of contemporary sexual values determined by the momentous enamel instincts. Thus family is obstacle for their perverse sexual needs. Yet statistics show that married, faithful to each other spouses are happier and more sexually satisfied. While at the same time humanist lead society to drugs, free sex and destruction - a pure suicide.

The Origin of Humanism

Satan led Adam and Eve to cast away God's rules. Satan is the originator of humanism, Adam and Eve was deceived to believe that's good, but look at the world - it brought only destruction, wars, suffering. Yet, Satan turns back and blames all that on the religious people. Read more

The Humanist Bluff: Replacing Religion

	Superhuman HEROES: Real Super Powers Explained
	92 percent believe in God, angels, miracles and heaven
	PREDICTIONS OF NOSTRADAMUS ABOUT 2012
	Bahá'ís: A New Vision for Humanity's Future

GOOD & EVIL vs. YIN & YANG

Yin and Yang are not good and evil. Their unity is good, their struggle is evil.

GOOD & EVIL vs YIN & YANG

Can good and evil be represented as yin and yang? If yes, then there would be no hope for everlasting peace. NO they can't. Yin and Yang complement and enter in harmonious relationship creating something new and good. When Yin and Yang are in conflict, that is evil.

Therefore good can be seen as harmony between Yin & Yang and evil as disorder of the two.

There is one notable difference: the Book of Changes also sees good and evil as manifestations of yang and yin[27] where Divine Principle clearly does not agree.

Evil came when Yin & Yang stopped being in harmony, which means that the purpose changed due to human failure to follow that principle. Therefore it is human failure, not God's creation that Evil exists. One day humanity will awake and fulfill our original responsibility to perfect ourselves, living in accordance with God's principles. Then the original world of peace, harmony, goodness and prosperity for all will be realized.

When Yin & Yang stopped giving and taking together properly, the energies were blocked, or became evil and twisted, which led to unstable world. The first man and women came in disharmony, which resulted in raising bad children.

Through the generations that evil expanded; male and female struggles became the root of unhappy families and society full of social problems. History eventually was filled with wars, bloodshed, corruption and immorality. All in conflict with the harmonious principle of Yin and Yang.

In order to return to a world of harmony we need to recenter the Yin & Yang( for example uniting your mind and body on the individual level or match science and religion on the world level). All those complementary aspects have to come to unity and harmony. That's the main aim of the Unification Principle, revealed by Rev. Sun Myung Moon.

How can we recenter them? By re-connecting to the center of the Universe, The Ultimate Cause - God. We then get one point around which will rotate Yin & Yang and everything, an origin point. And that can be represented by God ( or whatever you decide to call Him).

We need an absolute standard to create a world of peace, a world of united Yin & Yang.

	Blessing that Overcomes Historic Boundaries
	Sun Myung Moon: Revolution of Heart
	Prophecy: "Christ will Return, Religions will Unite"

At first sight at least, they are not very helpful, as they maintain some of the ambiguity of traditional yin yang philosophy. When good memory, pleasantness, and joy (yang) are compared to forgetfulness, unpleasantness, and sorrow (yin), the impression that the two also have something to do with good and evil is maintained, even if that is not the desired outcome. In particular, analogies involving light and darkness, as in the original sunny and shady side of the hill, carry a feeling of imbalance between the two, though everyone knows that night is as inevitable and necessary as daytime.

For example:
Can we call the plus on the battery good, while the minus evil? No! When they unite, create circle it is good and the electricity can flow freely. Same is in the human body. When yin and yang energy does flow we are good and healthy, but when they are in dis-balance we become sick. The principle is identical in the family. Husband and wife love and support each other, it is good. If they fight it is evil, and the children will grow with evil hearts and conscience.

Therefore to create a world of goodness we need individuals with united mind and body; we need families of harmonious husband and wife love. Then the ideal world will be immanent.

Peace Messages from Rev. Sun Myung Moon
The Holy Marriage Blessing is the Path to Unite the Virtues of Heaven and Earth and Harmonize and Unify the Universe as One

Essay: What are YIN and YANG?

What's YIN YANG?

Posted by ying yang essay

WHAT IS YIN & YANG?

What is yin yang? It comes from Taoism. Taoism is one of the great religion of the world. Yin Yang represents everything, for everything comes from it.

femininity & masculinity, cold & warm, matter & energy, science & religion,...

Yin is object while Yang is subject.

When they give and take together, movement is created.

Like warm air and cold air rotating together to make a hurricane.

The characteristic features of the relationship between subject and object are those of central and dependent, active and passive, dynamic and static, creative and conservative, initiating and responding, extrovert and introvert, and so forth. This does not mean that a particular principal element and a particular subordinate element must have all of these relationships at any one time; they may sometimes be in the relationship of central and dependent, sometimes in the relationship of active and passive, and so forth. Generally speaking, the relationship between the subject and the object is that between one exercising dominion over the other and one receiving dominion from the other.

unification thought

02 Yang & Yin from Michael Callahan on Vimeo.

12 Existence as Orbits from Michael Callahan on Vimeo.

Yang and Yin of Sungsang

In the two-stage structure sungsang exists as an inner base of an inner sungsang and an inner hyungsang, and also relates to a triple structure.[42] Mind has intellect, emotion and will, and the triple color charge of the strong nuclear interaction can be associated with the inner base of an atom.[43] The three aspects of the inner sungsang are the functional aspects and can be either active (yang) or at rest (yin) with respect to processing the information of the inner hyungsang. We are dealing with a unity of two and three in the sungsang which, interestingly enough shows some correspondence to the trigrams of the Book of Changes.

The number of protons in the nucleus of the atom is responsible for the properties of the atom, and consequently for its overall yang or yin designation in the hyungsang manifestation. This is related to the information in the inner hyungsang of the atom. Protons and neutrons are each formed from three quarks. Protons have two up quarks and one down; neutrons have one up quark and two down. If we associate the up quark, which also has a fractional positive charge, with a yang line in the trigram, and associate the down quark, which has a fractional negative charge, with a yin line, then protons and neutrons can be represented by the eight trigrams (Figure 3).

Figure 3. Relationship between Protons, Neutrons, and the Trigrams

With the physical manifestation of the hyungsang, and now our two-plus-three structure of the sungsang, we have shown how yang and yin can be connected to the physical interactions important for matter.

	PERSONAL TESTIMONY: Jesus guided me to Rev. Moon
	Nostradamus Prophesied About Moon
	Spiritual drawing: Maitreya Buddha is coming - similarity to Rev. Moon

The use of trigrams in relation to the inner hyungsang can be taken one step further, to living systems. In living systems, the informational content of the inner hyungsang is primarily stored in the DNA in the nucleus of the cell. Now we are moving from an essentially point-like, zero-dimensional storage of information in the atom to a one-dimensional storage of information in the linear code of DNA. In the genes it is the sequence of four bases (guanine, adenine, cytosine, and thymine) that code for the sequence of amino acids in proteins when that information is copied into RNA. Interestingly it is a codon of three bases in the RNA that codes for a particular amino acid in the primary structure of a protein. The code in DNA is therefore a triplet code of four possibilities giving sixty-four possible codons in RNA.

The connection of this genetic code to the trigrams arises when we consider how the trigrams are constructed from the coin or yarrow stalk methods of consulting the Book of Changes.[44] In both methods the trigrams and hexagrams are constructed from the bottom up one line at a time. The coins, or stalks, give four possible numbers -- 6, 7, 8, or 9 -- for each particular line in the diagram. The 7 and 9 are yang and the 6 and 8 are yin,[45]but the 6 and 9 give marked (or moving) lines that have special significance in interpretation. So now we have trigrams with three lines of four possibilities. This gives sixty-four possible trigrams, just like the sixty-four codons, and we could in principle associate each codon with one of these new trigrams.

By analogy, we can also make some predictions for the inner hyungsang of mind. Moving from atoms to cells was a move that saw an increase by one in the dimensionality of the stored information. We moved from essentially zero-dimensional points to a one-dimensional, linear DNA. The move also saw the triplet code increase from three lines of two possibilities to three lines of four possibilities, though all four possibilities are still just variations on yang and yin. Both of these changes allow for a massive increase in the potential meanings encoded. By extension, we might expect the informational storage of mind to extend to a two dimensional surface and involve a triplet code of eight possibilities giving 512 basic codes or trigrams.[46] Though there is no experimental evidence for such a triplet code of mind, it is known that surface area is important in brain function. This is why the cerebral cortex is folded as it is. The folding increases the ratio of the surface area to the volume. Also from Unification Thought we do know that the number three is associated with mind in the context of intellect, emotion, and will.

6. Conclusion

The ontology of classical Greek philosophy, such as found in Western philosophical theism and concepts such as mind-body dualism, is presupposed by the very language we use in describing religious concepts in the West. In explanations of the ontological concepts of Divine Principle it is easy to use that language in attempting to make the concepts understandable to a wider audience. I believe this happens throughout the Unification movement, such as in descriptions of the need to develop mind and body unity, and, as shown here, in the ontology of Unification Thought. However, presupposing an ontology based in Greek philosophy brings with it a history of interpretation that I believe somewhat distorts the meaning of the fundamental ontological categories found in Divine Principle. Furthermore, it creates a gap with scientific explanation.

In the West, science arose in large part from the Christian philosophical tradition that also considers the matter part of material existence. This was part and parcel of adopting the ontology of Plato and Aristotle. Though giving birth to science, these Christian doctrines on God and Creation have not changed to keep pace with the developments in science over the last two hundred years. In fact, modern science overturns the ontology of Plato and Aristotle. Consequently a gap developed between traditional Christian ontology and natural science that has yet to be filled, and which resulted in a perceived conflict between them.

Chinese traditional philosophy, on the other hand, such as found in the Book of Changes, does not directly look at matter itself. Rather it looks at the relationships that develop from the manifestation of existing beings. The “stuff” of existence is not really considered. Consequently there is no overlapping area of explanation with science. Thus, though there is no direct conflict with science, there is also no direct connection with it either. So there is also a gap between traditional Chinese thought and science.

Both Eastern and Western philosophical traditions seem incomplete. In order to show the unity between science and religion what is needed is a new ontology. I think that this is part of the purpose of Unification Thought. That is, it can fill the gap between traditional thought, both Eastern and Western, and science. Consequently in my writing I have been trying to strip away classical Western ontology from the meaning of the fundamental ontological categories and then look for the resulting implications. This process lead to the proposed model of sungsang as an inner base inseparable from hyungsang, a new view of spirit realm, and, in this paper, to an understanding of three different types of yang and yin characteristics in an existing being. The proposed two-stage structure can serve as a bridge between Unification Thought, the Book of Changes, and science.

Yin and Yang: Religion and Science

yin and yang, yin & yang, harmony, Lao tzu, Tao-te ching, Lu-sih ch'un-ch'iu

YIN YANG and RELIGION SCIENCE

This symbol of Yang and Yin is often misunderstood. It is the Symbol of Harmony! But so many, mistakenly believe that it also represents Good and Evil. Really! Do plus (+) and minus (-) fight. No, they unite harmoniously, creating something new and higher. But Good and Evil are reconcilable. They fight, meanwhile bringing so much destruction on both sides.

CORRECT VIEW:

Good: Yang and Yin in harmony (Progress) 

Evil: Yang and Yin in disharmony (Sickness)

 

The Great One produces the two poles (Heaven and Earth), which in turn give rise to the energies of the dark (yin) and the light (yang). These two energies then transform themselves, one rising upwards, and the other descending downwards; they merge again and give rise to form. (Lu-sih ch'un-ch'iu - Spring and Autumn Annals)

The created universe carries the yin at its back and the yang in front; Through the union of the pervading principles it reaches harmony. (Lao tzu, Tao-te ching)

These two quotes tell the creation of the universe. And it's purpose: Harmony.

The Great One ( however you call him ) let the two energy ( yin yang ) create the heavenly world and the earthly world. Then in order to reach harmony, they must unite.

	Bahá'ís: A New Vision for Humanity
	GRATITUDE: Turn a Negative into a Positive
	Vanga: NEW RELIGION WILL TAKE THE EARTH BY STORM
	Prophecies 2012: The Golden Age

So what does that mean? We humans are bodies and spirits each representing the physical world and spiritual world. We can unite them. We can unite religion and science, which also represent the two worlds, though they seem contradictory. How can we unite those two? You just have to know: religion is about why and science is about how!

Another quote

The relationship between yang and yin is similar to that which exists between internal nature and external form. Yang and yin thus have the following mutual relationships internal and external, cause and result, subject partner and object partner, vertical and horizontal. ( Wolli Kangron - Divine Principle )

Give and Take Action
The Dual Characteristics of God
The Relationship between God and the Universe

Yang and Yin: Unification Thought, Science, and the Book of Changes

David Burton / Journal of Unification Studies Vol. 9, 2008
In the West our religious consciousness has been firmly shaped by the ontology contained in the traditional Christian doctrines on God and Creation. Even the language we use has been shaped by that consciousness and frames the science and religion debate as an unstated assumption by both the religious and non religious alike. These traditional doctrines are in turn derived in large part from the form and matter ontology of Plato and Aristotle. For example, the thought of Augustine and Aquinas, two pillars of traditional doctrine, can be considered to be Platonic and Aristotelian respectively.
Beginning from John Dalton’s atomic theory in the early years of the nineteenth century, modern science has shown that this Greek ontology is not physically correct. Consequently throughout the nineteenth century and continuing until today there has developed a gap between the scientific worldview and those parts of traditional Christian doctrine dealing with God and Creation. It is my contention that in his writing on Unification Thought, Dr. Sang Hun Lee also adopted the unstated ontological assumptions of this traditional doctrine, and that this differentiates Unification Thought from Divine Principle. Unification Thought as it exists is thus shaped by Platonic and Aristotelian philosophy and contains the same discontinuity with the scientific worldview that has developed with traditional doctrine in the last two hundred years.

Previously,[1] [2] I showed how the Platonic dualism of form and matter is present in the Theory of the Original Image where Logos functions as a kind of Platonic form and hyungsang as an unstructured formless matter. Logical analysis of the fundamental concepts without the Greek philosophy leads to an ontological model where sungsang in general can be seen to exist as an inner four position base of a functional aspect and an informational aspect. The inner base does not exist independently of hyungsang and gives a structure more compatible with scientific explanation. This model rejects mind-body dualism and sungsang-hyungsang dualism that also find their root in Platonic thought. In addition it leads to a novel explanation of spirit realm and spiritual existence that potentially falls within the scope of scientific investigation.

In this paper we turn to a consideration of the other pair of dual characteristics, yang and yin, in the context of the proposed ontological model. Yang and yin are found in oriental thought, particularly Chinese philosophy, and the Divine Principle regards the Book of Changes as an authoritative source of these concepts.[3] Consequently we will here examine the philosophy of the Book of Changes and compare it to Unification Thought.

However, in order to understand Lee’s treatment of yang and yin we again need to come back to traditional Christian ontology. Its concept of substances begins with Aristotle and is embodied in what Philip Clayton calls Classical Philosophical Theism (CPT). Clayton says of CPT:

Recall that for CPT everything is either a substance or the attribute of a substance, and wherever one substance is no other substance can be at the same time. Thus God had only two choices in creating the world. He could create it as a set of attributes (or “accidents”) with God as their substance -- but then the world would exist only as a manifestation of God, which would not leave room for personal substances to exist other than God (as in the pantheistic view of God’s relation to the world). Or God could create a world of really existing substances -- but then they must exist outside the divine substance. Hence there must be a “space” outside God “in” which this realm of finite substances has its being. Since in earlier centuries space (and time) was understood as an objective framework -- something like a big box “into” which events or objects might be placed -- there seemed to be no problem with God creating this box somewhere and then creating a bunch of substances ex nihilo to place into it. With this you have the creation narrative of CPT, and one still widely assumed by theologians today.[4]

and

Our common-sense way of thinking of the world has long since lost all touch with the substantivalist manner of speaking, and philosophers no longer appeal to it as a significant resource for resolving debates. Yet its influence on theology continues to be immense, since CPT was institutionalized into credal statements that silently presupposed it.[5]

Clayton goes on to point out that classical philosophical theism is facing a major crisis today. He gives a number of reasons for this, but of particular importance for this work is that he clearly sees it as physically incorrect. That is, natural science does not agree with the philosophical view of existence based on substances.

Lee’s treatment of yang and yin can be seen to derive from an application of this traditional concept of substances to sungsang and hyungsang. This in turn leads him to make a distinction between Unification Thought and the Book of Changes (section 3). Unification Thought is consistent in its discussion here, but in using a substantive ontology it suffers the same problems Clayton ascribes to classical philosophical theism. Extending the previously proposed model for sungsang and hyungsang to the discussion of yang and yin leads to an explanation of these concepts that is continuous with the explanation in the Book of Changes. The understanding of yang and yin can then be shown to be complementary to science rather than inherently conflict with it.

1. Yang and Yin in Divine Principle

To set the scene, let us first examine the concepts of yang and yin in Divine Principle. Exposition of the Divine Principle devotes little more than a page to its explanation of the concepts of yang and yin. The most important points are reproduced here.

Every entity possesses dual characteristics of yang (masculinity) and yin (femininity) and comes into existence only when these characteristics have formed reciprocal relationships, both within the entity and between it and other entities.[6]

Divine Principle therefore primarily regards yang and yin as masculinity and femininity, and traces this through living species multiplying and maintaining their existence though male and female beings. When applied to inanimate matter, yang and yin are seen to be reflected in positive and negative electrically charged particles.[7] In addition to these interactions between beings, yang and yin is also seen in correlative aspects of every existing being.

Every creation exists with correlative aspects: inside and outside, internal and external, front and rear, right and left, up and down, high and low, strong and weak, rising and falling, long and short, wide and narrow, east and west, north and south, etc, The reason for this is that everything is created to exist through the reciprocal relationships of dual characteristics. Thus we can understand that everything requires for its existence a reciprocal relationship between the dual characteristics of yang and yin.[8]

Divine Principle appears to identify two types of yang and yin relationships: those between separate masculine (yang) and feminine (yin) beings, and those in the correlative aspects of each existing being. As can be seen in the above quote, the correlative aspects seem to arise just from the tangible physical manifestation of an existing being rather than from any property of what the being is made of. Thus these correlative yang and yin aspects can operate within a single being, do not necessarily imply masculinity and femininity, and do not necessarily have any physical force acting between them.

In the relationship between sungsang and hyungsang and yang and yin, sungsang and hyungsang are considered more fundamental. Yang and yin are thus seen to be present within each of the more fundamental sungsang and hyungsang. Finally, the relationship between yang and yin is described in the following terms:

The relationship between yang and yin is similar to that which exists between internal nature and external form. Yang and yin thus have the following mutual relationships internal and external, cause and result, subject partner and object partner, vertical and horizontal.[9]

Yang and Yin: Unification Thought, Science, and the Book of Changes (David Burton)

yin and yang, yin & yang, harmony, Lao tzu, Tao-te ching, Lu-sih ch'un-ch'iu

Kant's Moral Philosophy: Principles of Morality

The fundamental principle of morality

Kant's Moral Philosophy

First published Mon Feb 23, 2004; substantive revision Sun Apr 6, 2008

Immanuel Kant (1724–1804) argued that moral requirements are based on a standard of rationality he dubbed the “Categorical Imperative” (CI). Immorality thus involves a violation of the CI and is thereby irrational. Other philosophers, such as Locke and Hobbes, had also argued that moral requirements are based on standards of rationality. However, these standards were either desire-based instrumental principles of rationality or based on sui generis rational intuitions. Kant agreed with many of his predecessors that an analysis of practical reason will reveal only the requirement that rational agents must conform to instrumental principles. Yet he argued that conformity to the CI (a non-instrumental principle) and hence to moral requirements themselves, can nevertheless be shown to be essential to rational agency.

	Blessing that Overcomes Historic Boundaries
	Sun Myung Moon: Revolution of Heart
	Five Curious Facts about the Unification Church
	Prophecy: "Christ will Return, Religions will Unite"

This argument was based on his striking doctrine that a rational will must be regarded as autonomous, or free in the sense of being the author of the law that binds it. The fundamental principle of morality — the CI — is none other than the law of an autonomous will. Thus, at the heart of Kant's moral philosophy is a conception of reason whose reach in practical affairs goes well beyond that of a Humean ‘slave’ to the passions. Moreover, it is the presence of this self-governing reason in each person that Kant thought offered decisive grounds for viewing each as possessed of equal worth and deserving of equal respect.

Source: http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/kant-moral

After his decades-long struggle against the godless empire of evil, Reverend Moon emerged victorious and was then quick to perceive that the rapid decline of moral values, social decay, and the breakdown of the family and religious values were threatening civilization as we know it. Reverend Moon also traveled the world, including all fifty U.S. states, to proselytize indefatigably about what unites the world’s prin cipal religions. It is a war that Reverend Moon still wages daily to re store basic moral and family values in the context of one God for all religions.

Source:www.reverendsunmyungmoon.org/testimony_Arnaud_Borchgrave.html

An Appraisal of Traditional Theories of Education from the Standpoint of Unification Thought Ethics

I. The Divine Principle Foundation for Ethics

II. Ethics and Morality

Kant's and Marx's Epistemologies from the Perspective of Unification Thought

A. Critique of Kant's Epistemology

1. Critique of the Transcendent Method

Kant asserted that the subject is endowed with a priori form is of thought (categories). This statement, needless to say, represents Kant's position of not acknowledging forms of existence in the external world. However, when we examine them well, we realize that there are forms of existence that correspond to the forms of thought. For example, all things in the objective world exist and perform their motion in the form of time and space. Also, scientists can deliberately give rise to a certain phenomenon oil the basis of' time and space in the objective world. Therefore, the form of time and space is not only a subjective form, but an objective form as well.

The same can be said about the form of causality. Scientists have discovered numerous relations of cause and effect from the phenomena of the natural world and have come to be able to reproduce similar phenomena on the basis of the relations of cause and effect. This indicates that indeed there are relations of cause and effect in the objective world.

Also, Kant said that an object of cognition is established through the combination of the form of the subject and the content coming from the object. From the perspective of Unification Thought, the subject (person) as well as the object (all things) have both content and form. What the subject possesses is not what Kant called "a priori forms" alone; rather, it is previously existing prototypes, which have both content and form and, therefore, include the forms mentioned by Kant. Also, what comes from the object is not a chaotic manifold of sensations, but rather sensory content organized by the forms of existence.

Furthermore, the subject (person) and object (all things) are in a correlative relationship and bear resemblance to each other. Therefore, cognition is not carried out through synthesis of the object; rather, cognition is carried out as the "content and form" (the prototype) of the subject, and the "content and form" of the object are collated through give-and-receive action between them, and a judgment is made.

2. Critique of Kantian Agnosticism

Kant thought that only natural, scientific knowledge in the phenomenal world is true, and he considered the world of things-in-themselves (the noumenal reality) uncognizable. Consequently, lie entirely separated the phenomenal reality from the noumenal reality. This led to the separation between pure reason and practical reason, and the separation between science and religion.

From the perspective of Unification Thought, the thing-in-itself is the Sungsang of a thing, while the sensory content is its Hyungsang. Sungsang and Hyungsang are unified in all things, and since Sungsang is expressed through Hyungsang, we can know the Sungsang of a thing through its Hyungsang.

In addition, according to Unification Thought, the human being is the lord of dominion over all things, or the lord of creation, and all things were created in resemblance to the human being, as objects of joy to human beings. This means that the human being and all things resemble each other in structure and in elements; accordingly, they resemble each other in content and in form as well. Therefore, in cognition, the content and form possessed by the subject (human being) are similar to the content and form possessed by all things, and they can be collated. In addition, since through its content the thing-in-itself, namely, the Sungsang of the object, is expressed, the subject can cognize not only the Hyungsang (sensory content and form) of the object, but also its Sungsang (the thing-in-itself). Since Kant was ignorant of the principled relationship between mankind and all things, lie fell into agnosticism.

B. Critique of Marxist Epistemology

1. Critique of the Theory of Reflection

As explained in the section on Unification Epistemology, if there is no prototype within the subject of cognition that corresponds to the things in the external world as criteria for judgment, cognition cannot be made, even if the external world is reflected on the consciousness. Moreover, since cognition is carried out through the give-and-receive action between subject and object, it is necessary for the subject to have interest in the object. Even though an object in the external world is reflected on the consciousness of the subject, if the subject has no interest in the object, cognition will riot take place. This means that cognition is not carried out through a passive material process like reflection, but becomes possible only through the participation of an active mental process (i.e., interest in the object and the function of collation).

2. Critique of Sensory Cognition, Rational Cognition, and Practice

In Marxist epistemology, the process of cognition consists of three states, namely, sensory cognition, rational cognition, and practice.

The important question here is how consciousness, which is field to be a product or a function of the brain and to reflect the objective world, can make rational (logical) cognition (i.e., abstraction, judgment, inference), and moreover, how it can direct practice (revolutionary practice). Even though there is a wide gap between the passive process of reflecting the external world on one hand, and rational cognition and the active process of practice on the other, no reasonable explanation is given. This means that there is a logical gap here in the Marxist view.

From the perspective of Unification Thought, cognition and practice can never be made based solely on the physiological processes of the brain. This is because cognitive action takes place through the give-and-receive action between the mind and the brain. In other words, cognition and practice are carried out through a relationship of give-and-receive action between the mind, which possesses the function of understanding and reason, and the brain.

The next question concerns the role of practice in cognition. Lenin said that cognition proceeds to practice, and Mao Tse-tung asserted that cognition and practice are inseparable. In this respect, Unification Thought has no objection. All things were created as objects of joy for human beings, and we are to exercise dominion (practice) over all things. Accordingly, we cognize all things in order to exercise dominion (practice). Cognition and practice form a correlative circuit of give-and-receive action between human beings and all things (Fig. 9-12). Thus, there is no cognition apart from practice (dominion), and no practice (dominion) apart from cognition.

Fig. 9-12: Correlativity of Cognition and Practice

Practice, as advocated by Marxism, is ultimately directed toward revolution. Contrary to that, Unification Thought asserts that neither cognition nor practice is ever carried out with revolution as its objective, but rather, they are carried out for the actualization of the purpose of creation. The purpose of creation is actualized when (1) God exercises dominion over human beings with love, and human beings return beauty to God; and (2) human beings exercise dominion over all things with love, and all things return beauty to human beings-whereby joy is realized in God and human beings. Therefore, both cognition and practice are carried out for the purpose of obtaining joy through love.

3. Critique of the Communist Concepts of Absolute Truth and Relative Truth

Lenin and Mao Tse-tung acknowledged the existence of absolute truth, saying that human being infinitely approaches absolute truth by repeating cognition and practice. Yet, their concept of "absolute" is ambiguous. Lenin said that the sum-total of relative truths is the absolute truth. No matter how we may sum up relative truths, however, the result is simply relative truths summed up, and cannot become absolute truth.

Absolute truth refers to the universal, eternal truth. Therefore, without having the Absolute Being as the standard, the concept of absolute cannot be established. Absolute truth is one with, and inseparable from, the absolute love of God, as explained in "Axiology." This is the same as the way in which the warmth and brightness of sunlight are one and inseparable. Therefore, there can be no absolute truth apart from God's absolute love. Consequently, only when centered on God's love, will the human being understand the purpose of creation of all things and obtain true knowledge of them. Therefore, if God is denied, there is no way to obtain absolute truth, no matter how strenuously one may engage in practice.