The Oneness exists already as the Whole that exists now. Any proposal to create another Oneness is deception.
There is no such thing as consciousness reverting back to a state of oneness, as this would go against the natural order of the flow of Creation. It is nonetheless possible that we achieve higher orders of oneness (unity consciousness) through greater awareness of the Whole (i.e., the self-existent totality of Creation). Unity consciousness is, therefore, true wholeness. First number 10, then 100, then 1000, etc -- more zeros are added as our consciousness expands. And why number 10? Because in numerology the idea of wholeness corresponds to number 10. Therefore, it is for more wholeness that people should be striving, because wholeness is a higher order of oneness.
The problem is that for a model of wholeness to work, all individuals have to raise their consciousness to a certain optimal state. For example, recognition of a planetary wholeness on an individual level requires that individuals achieve a planetary consciousness, which is roughly the "we are all on the same boat" feeling. In other words, individuals have to expand their awareness beyond differences, which in turn are not going to simply disappear; they just become irrelevant when compared to the big picture. Only then is that individuals are able to connect on a deeper, spiritual level, though they may still be aware of their superficial differences. In short, only when everyone can see each other as equal and as Creator is that we can say that there is oneness.
Many religious, political and elitist groups push for their own version of "one world." That is, they wish for everyone to conform to their model of oneness. Well, this is only because they have great difficulty accepting the world as it is with plenty of diversity. Freedom of choice is also ignored, since any oneness scheme can only work if everyone is following the same principles and standards. Also, since it may be nearly impossible to raise the lowest of the people to conform to a one world standard, then this standard has to be lowered as much as possible. Therefore, every one-world scheme is by necessity a least-common-denominator scheme.
Interestingly enough, every group pushing for oneness has a different idea of how the world should be, and this is something which totally contradicts the nature of what they are trying to achieve. Can you smell the bullshit yet? Because this can only mean more wars and conflicts in our future: the oneness mentality is forceful because everyone has a different idea of what oneness is. Again, the Oneness exists already to the extent that we are able to acknowledge the many aspects of One. Therefore, we should seek atonement instead of oneness; we should accept All That Is right now, not later.
There is nothing wrong with us accepting Oneness. The problem begins when Oneness is turned into a doctrine that is advertised so that we accept the doctrine instead. There is Oneness and we are all One, so what? There is no need to worship the obvious. More important is that we look forward to see what we will create within this Oneness.
Anyway, let us see some examples of how the gospel of Oneness is being preached to the world."Coexist"
Rock band U2 really seems to have embraced the Oneness doctrine. We have, for example, their hit single "One" in which Bono sings "One love / One life." But what caught my attention the most was the infamous CoeXisT headband that Bono wore in some concerts.bonobaltimore @ Flickr
In one concert Bono spoke on how the Abrahamic religions (Islamism, Judaism, and Christianity) should not fight each other because all followers of these religions are "sons of Abraham." In my understanding, Bono implied that the major religions in the world should learn to coexist as if they were one, because all of them have something in common after all: they worship the same god. Anyway, since then the CoeXisT sign has been borrowed by New Age and Love&Peace movements that believe that world religions can somehow coexist in peace.Vertigo Tour @ Wikipedia
What Bono says is fair enough in my opinion, but under the veil it might be just another attempt to further the cause of a one world religion. The fact is that you cannot have world religions coexisting when their very existence depends on their inability to coexist. As I have said before, people first have to go through a major spiritual revolution that will result in their religions being relegated to second plane. Unfortunately, no spiritual revolution will happen as long as people rely on their religious beliefs to be able to function normally in society.
Truth, which is spiritual, cannot coexist with lies, as in religious beliefs. Once people get to learn about some deep spiritual truths, then all systems dependent on religion will begin to crumble. So, do the CoeXisT sympathizers want a more spiritual existence or do they want one world religion? Because you cannot have peace as long as the majority bases their lives on lies. Also, the nature of this new world religion will probably involve people "loving" (worshiping) a new savior-type figure that will conform to all major faiths and prophecies. Each religious group will be fed a version of this new figure that conforms to their respective teachings. It could very well be the prophetic "return of the Antichrist."
NOTE (11/16/2009): Although I alluded to "religious lies" in the paragraph above, I am not against all religions. It is just that mainstream religions have agendas that do not equal Oneness though they are sold as if they did. If you are part of a local church community where you are simply enjoying a space of oneness along with the other members, then probably you are not buying into the propaganda spewed by religious leaders and the mainstream media. A space of oneness can exist on religious grounds as long as people are practicing it and not blindly following and preaching an agenda of unification masked as desire for Oneness."Unity in Diversity"
In July 10, 2009, Russian President Dmitry Medvedev presented to the media a sample coin representing a "united future world currency." The motto behind this proposal was "Unity in Diversity," as we can read on the coin itself. Many conspiracy theorists pointed out that the creation of a world / global currency is a fundamental step toward the establishment of a totalitarian world government. This means that establishing a one world order (one government, one currency) is the dark elite's hidden agenda. This is what mainly motivated me to expose the psyops behind "Unity in Diversity."
NOTE: According to Wikipedia, the "Unity in Diversity" motto describes a sense of oneness. Right on the spot, huh?
See, unity in diversity is contradictory on a subtle but fundamental level because diversity is diversity and differences are differences. In reality, differences are left aside when people unite for a common goal that takes precedence over their personal goals. But we can also have diversity in unity when a goal takes many forms for many people, and so everyone can work for this goal as their personal goal and at the same time preserve their individual differences.
Diversity depends on unity to exist, because many can only come from one, but unity does not depend on diversity: remember that the Oneness, the unity of everything, is self-existent. Therefore, "unity in diversity" can very well mean just "unity," while the "diversity" part is optional. Actually, diversity may be an obstacle for the successful implementation of an agenda of oneness. The controllers need to make sure that all diversity gets rounded up to conform to their unified control system, and that is when you have unity forced into diversity. After all, unity in diversity is not something that exists naturally if the unity in question is not the Oneness that already pervades all diversity.
Of course, the average Joe understands "Unity in Diversity" in the romantic sense and so he fails to uncover the underlying linguistic programming. Metaphorically speaking, the ideal to preserve freedom is a circle with its circumference nowhere and center everywhere, while slavery requires a circumference everywhere and center nowhere. Therefore, diversity in unity is when everyone shares a common goal (center is everywhere) and yet they maintain their differences (circumference is nowhere). On the other hand, unity in diversity is when everyone lacks a common goal but still they get rounded up (circumference is everywhere) for a hidden goal (center is nowhere).