About these ads

Attempting to obey God and follow Jesus Christ our Lord

freedom

The Power of Generosity

Yesterday, my pastor continued the series, Into the Wild, with a message titled, The Power of Generosity. The text for the message was taken from Genesis 13:1-18, and continued with the story of Abram on his adventure Into the Wild, as he walked in obedience to the Lord’s calling. In Abram’s obedience, the Lord had greatly blessed him, so much in fact, that his herdsmen, and Lot’s herdsmen, had begun to argue about having enough pastureland to graze all of their livestock. Rather than focus on He who had blessed them, the herdsmen had begun to fixate on the blessing.

Instead of allowing disputes to ensue, Abram moved in faith, and acted in abundant generosity. Though he was the patriarch of the family, and had every right to claim all that had been given unto him, he treated Lot as his equal, and gave him first choice of the land before them as they were to part company so that the land could better support all of their livestock. Lot chose what appeared to be the better of the two directions, yet Abram seemed unfazed by his decision. He recognized that the God who had so abundantly blessed he and his family, was not limited in how He might bring forth the promised blessings.

Abram’s generosity models how we ought to live. Generosity is one of the ways that we are most able to live freely before God. When we are generous, we are choosing to live our life unrestrained, for Him. As we release things to God, we make room for the miraculous.

The power to change,The Power of Generosity

a heart full of pride;

sincere humbling,

grace giving resides.

A generous heart,

gathers and unites;

selfishness scatters,

makes people take flight.

Such hearts are humble,

they give God control;

releasing the reigns,

make serving their goal.

Perspective through Him,

hearts that understand;

all His ways are best,

so trust in His plan.

Dear Heavenly Father, thank You that You have given us numerous examples of how to live generously, so that we may fully understand and know the freedom that comes when we give all unto You. Thank You that generosity is not just about our finances, but it is about who we are, being all in for You – our time, our trust, our encouragement, our willingness to do whatever You ask. Forgive us for withholding any part of ourselves or our resources from You, and help us to understand how to release all unto You. May we make room for the miraculous in our lives. Let us live our lives in love, as You love us, and may many come to know the generous and loving God You are, as a result. May hearts be turned and lives be changed. Be glorified, O God. Amen.

© Shannon Elizabeth Moreno and Revelations in Writing, May 2011 – present.

He who refreshes others will himself be refreshed. – Proverbs 11:25

About these ads

Has Mr. Obama had an Epiphany?

February 6, 2014|11:09 am

President Barack Obama:

“Today we profess the principles we know to be true,” he said. “We know that each of us is wonderfully made in the image of God. We therefore believe in the inherent dignity of every human being – dignity that no earthly power can take away. And central to that dignity is freedom of religion – the right of every person to practice their faith how they choose, to change their faith if they choose, or to practice no faith at all, and to do this free from persecution and fear.”

I am so thankful to hear President Obama make this statement on religious freedom! It seems that he has had an epiphany and I wonder when he will instruct his justice department to withdraw their persecution and prosecution of people of faith here who think that being forced to pay for abortions or provide services for those who promote homosexuality is a violation of their beliefs!

Obama declared:

“Promoting religious freedom is a key objective of U.S. foreign policy, and I’m proud that no nation on Earth does more to stand up for the freedom of religion around the world than the United States of America.”

This should be welcome news to the countries in which his administration has insisted that they must approve abortion in order to receive aid!

Mr.Obama also said:
Some of the reasons to promote religious freedom is when they protect the religious freedom of their citizens, this, in turn, helps U.S. national security.

“History shows,” he said, “that nations that uphold the rights of their people, including freedom of religion, are ultimately more just, more peaceful and more successful. Nations that do not uphold these rights, sow the bitters seeds of instability and violence and extremism. So freedom of religion matters to our national security.”

Indeed, it does seem that Mr. Obama sees clearly here! Perhaps we will see him speaking forcefully against the persecution of Christians that is happening in the Middle East and Africa right now and we will see him meeting with members of the group’s being killed and using his meetings with the Muslim Brotherhood to call them to account for the violence that the are taking part in and promoting!

After all Mr. Obama makes that point:

“Nations that do not protect religious freedom”, he added, will not be successful: “No society can truly succeed unless it guarantees the rights of all of its peoples, including religious minorities.”

Mr. Obama also said:
“We will keep standing for religious freedom around the world. That includes, by the way, opposing blasphemy and defamation of religion measures, which are promoted sometimes as an expression of religion, but in fact, can all too often be used to suppress religious minorities.”

To this I say amen and amen!!!! Hopefully, he will inform the U.N that any rule that is aimed at preventing the blasphemy of any religion will not be approved by this country!

God works in amazing ways, and perhaps He truly has worked through Mr. Obama to make us realize what a wonderful privilege and opportunity we have in this country!!! As for the words spoken by Mr. Obama at the prayer breakfast, we will have to wait and see if they are truly an epiphany on his part and he believes them himself, or if they are just words intended to placate his detractors! After all words without action are nothing more than empty air!!


JAN. 16 – Religious Freedom Day ‘- Almighty God hath created the mind free’ Thomas Jefferson

 

American Minute by Bill Federer
“Each year on JANUARY 16, we celebrate Religious Freedom Day in commemoration of the passage of the Virginia Statute for Religious Freedom,”-wrote President George W. Bush in his 2003 Proclamation.

Passed in 1786, the Virginia Statute for Religious Freedom was drafted by Thomas Jefferson and commemorated on his tombstone.

Did Jefferson intend to limit the public religious expression of students, teachers, coaches, chaplains, schools, organizations and communities?


In his original 1777 draft of the Virginia Statute of Religious Freedom, Jefferson wrote:

“Almighty God hath created the mind free, and…all attempts to influence it by temporal punishments…tend only to begat habits of hypocrisy and meanness,

and are a departure from the plan of the Holy Author of religion, who being Lord both of body and mind, yet chose not to propagate it by coercions on either, as was in his Almighty power to do, but to extend it by its influence on reason alone….”

President Thomas Jefferson explained in his Second Inaugural Address, March 4, 1805:

“In matters of religion I have considered that its free exercise is placed by the Constitution independent of the powers of the General Government.

I have therefore undertaken, on no occasion, to prescribe the religious exercise suited to it; but have left them, as the Constitution found them, under the direction and discipline of state and church authorities by the several religious societies.”

Jefferson explained to Samuel Miller, January 23, 1808:

“I consider the government of the United States as interdicted [prohibited] by the Constitution from inter-meddling with religious institutions, their doctrines, discipline, or exercises…

This results not only from the provision that no law shall be made respecting the establishment or free exercise of religion, but from that also which reserves to the states the powers not delegated to the United States [10th Amendment]…”

Jefferson continued:

“Certainly no power to prescribe any religious exercise, or to assume authority in religious discipline, has been delegated to the General government…

I do not believe it is for the interest of religion to invite the civil magistrate to direct its exercises, its discipline, or its doctrines…

Every religious society has a right to determine for itself the times for these exercises, and the objects proper for them, according to their own particular tenets.”

In 1776, a year before Jefferson drafted his Statute, another Virginian, George Mason, drafted the Virginia Declaration of Rights, which was later revised by James Madison and referred to in his Memorial and Remonstrance, 1785:

“Religion, or the duty we owe to our CREATOR, and manner of discharging it, can be directed only by reason and conviction, not by force or violence;

and, therefore, that all men are equally entitled to the free exercise of religion, according to the dictates of conscience,

and that it is the mutual duty of all to practice Christian forbearance, love and charity toward each other.”

James Madison made a journal entry, June 12, 1788:

“There is not a shadow of right in the general government to inter-meddle with religion…The subject is, for the honor of America, perfectly free and unshackled. The government has no jurisdiction over it.”

On June 7, 1789, James Madison introduced the First Amendment in the first session of Congress with the wording:

“The civil rights of none shall be abridged on account of religious belief or worship.”

James Madison appointed to the Supreme Court Justice Joseph Story.


Justice Joseph Story wrote in hisCommentaries on the Constitution of the United States, 1833, Chapter XLIV, “Amendments to the Constitution,” Section 991:

“The real object of the First Amendment was, not to countenance, much less advance Mohammedanism, or Judaism, or infidelity, by prostrating Christianity; but to exclude all rivalry among Christian sects.”

Samuel Chase, who had been appointed to the Supreme Court by George Washington, wrote in the Maryland case of Runkel v. Winemiller, 1799:

“By our form of government, the Christian religion is the established religion; and all sects and denominations of Christians are placed upon the same equal footing, and are equally entitled to protection in their religious liberty.”

FOR A SHORT HISTORY OF THE EVOLUTION OF THE FIRST AMENDMENT, READ BELOW:

Supreme Court Justice John Paul Stevens admitted in Wallace v. Jaffree, 1985:

“At one time it was thought that this right merely proscribed the preference of one Christian sect over another, but would not require equal respect for the conscience of the infidel, the atheist, or the adherent of a non-Christian faith.”

When the country began, religious liberty was under each individual Colony’s jurisdiction.

In the decision Engel v. Vitale, 1962, Supreme Court Justice Hugo Black wrote:

“Groups which had most strenuously opposed the established Church of England…passed laws making their own religion the official religion of their respective colonies.”

Like dropping a pebble in a pond and the ripples go out, States began to expand religious liberty from the particular Christian denomination that founded each colony to all Protestants, then to Catholics, then to liberal Christian denominations, then to Jews, then to monotheists, then to polytheists.

This process was then continued by the Federal Government to expand “religious” liberty to atheists, pagans, occultic, and eventually to religions which historically have been violently ANTI-Judeo-Christian.

After the Constitution, the States ratified the First Amendment, as well as all Ten Amendments, specifically to limit the new Federal government’s power:

“CONGRESS shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion OR PROHIBITING THE FREE EXERCISE THEREOF…”

The word “Congress” meant the Federal Congress.

“Shall make no law” meant the Federal Congress could not introduce, debate, vote on or send to the President any bill respecting an establishment of religion.

The word “respecting” meant “concerning” or “pertaining to.”

It was simply telling the Federal government “HANDS OFF” all religious issues.

When anything regarding religion came before the Federal government, the response was to be that it had no jurisdiction to decide anything on that issue, neither for nor against.

“Establishment” did not mean “acknowledgment.”

“Establishment” did not mean believing in Christianity or believing in God.

Establishment was a clearly understood term.

It meant setting up one particular Christian denomination as the official denomination.

With varying levels of official state endorsement and favoritism, countries typically had some kind of established Church:

England had established the Anglican Church;
Sweden had established the Lutheran Church;
Scotland had established the Church of Scotland;
Holland had established the Dutch Reformed Church;
Russia had established the Russian Orthodox Church;
Serbia had established the Serbian Orthodox Church;
Romania had established the Romanian Orthodox Church;
Greece had established the Greek Orthodox Church;
Bulgaria had established the Bulgarian Orthodox Church;
Finland had established the Finnish Orthodox Church;
Ethiopia had established the Ethiopian Orthodox Tewahedo Church;
Italy, Spain, France, Poland, Austria, Mexico, Costa Rica, Liechtenstein, Malta, Monaco, Vatican City had established the Roman Catholic Church; and
Switzerland had established Calvin’s Ecclesiastical Ordinances.

The attitude of the original 13 States was that they did not want the new Federal Government to follow the pattern of most Western nations and pick one denomination with its headquarters in the Capitol.

Allegorically, they did not want a Federal Walmart Church to come into town and put out of business their individual State “mom & pop department store” denominations.

To make the purpose of the First Amendment unquestionably clear, they went on to state that the Federal Congress could not make a law which prohibited “THE FREE EXERCISE” of religion.

Ronald Reagan stated in a Radio Address, 1982:

“Founding Fathers…enshrined the principle of freedom of religion in the First Amendment…

The purpose of that Amendment was to protect religion from the interference of government and to guarantee, in its own words, ‘the free exercise of religion.’”

Like dealing a deck of cards in a card game, the States dealt to the Federal Government jurisdiction over a few things, like providing for the common defense and regulating interstate commerce, but the rest of the cards were held by the States.

Justice Joseph Story wrote in hisCommentaries on the Constitution, 1833:

“The whole power over the subject of religion is left exclusively to the State Governments, to be acted upon according to their own sense of justice and the State Constitutions.”

Just as today some States allow minors to consume alcohol and other States do not;
some States allow the selling of marijuana and others do not;
some States have smoking bans and others do not;
some States allow gambling and others do not, and
some States allow prostitution (Nevada and formerly Rhode Island) and the rest do not;
at the time the Constitution and Bill of Rights were ratified some States allowed more religious freedom, such as Pennsylvania and Rhode Island, and other States, such as Connecticut and Massachusetts, did not.

But it was up to the people in each State to decide.

Congressman James Meacham of Vermont gave a House Judiciary Committee report, March 27, 1854:

“At the adoption of the Constitution, we believe every State – certainly ten of the thirteen – provided as regularly for the support of the Church as for the support of the Government.”

When did things change?

Charles Darwin theorized that species could evolve.

This inspired a political theorist named Herbert Spencer to suggest that laws could evolve.

This influenced Harvard Law Dean Christopher Columbus Langdell to develop the case precedent method of practicing law, which influenced his student, Supreme Court Justice Oliver Wendell Holmes, Jr.

The 14th Amendment was passed in 1868 with the original intent to guarantee rights to freed slaves in the Democrat South.

Activist Justices quickly began to use the 14th Amendment very creatively to take jurisdiction away from the States over issues such as unions, strikes, railroads, polygamy, freedom of speech, freedom of the press, and freedom of assembly.

The freedom of religion was still under each individual State’s jurisdiction until Franklin D. Roosevelt.

FDR was elected President four times, which led to the 22nd Amendment being passed to limit all future Presidents to only two terms.

During his 12 years in office, FDR concentrated power in the Federal Government to an unprecedented degree.

Franklin D. Roosevelt nominated Justice Hugo Black to the Supreme Court in 1937.

Justice Hugo Black concentrated power in the Federal government by taking jurisdiction over religion away from each State.

He did this by simply inserting the phrase “Neither a State” in his 1947 Everson v Board of Education decision:

“The ‘establishment of religion’ clause of the First Amendment means at least this: Neither a State nor the Federal Government can set up a church. Neither can pass laws which aid one religion, aid all religions or prefer one religion over another.”

He conveniently ignored innumerable references to and requirements in the various State Constitutions regarding religion.

In a word, he took the handcuffs off the Federal government and placed them on the States.

After this, Federal Courts began evolving the definition of “religion” away from that originally used by George Mason and James Madison in the Virginia Declaration of Rights, 1776:

“Religion…the duty we owe our Creator and the manner of discharging it.”

This progression can be seen in several cases.

“ETHICAL” = RELIGION

In 1957, the IRS denied tax-exempt status to an “ethical society” stating it did not qualify as a 501(c)3 tax-exempt “church” or “religious society.”

The case went to the Supreme Court, where Justice Warren Burger wrote in Washington Ethical Society v. District of Columbia (1957):

“We hold on this record and under the controlling statutory language petitioner [The Washington Ethical Society] qualifies as ‘a religious corporation or society’…

It is incumbent upon Congress to utilize this broad definition of religion in all its legislative actions bearing on the support or non-support of religion, within the context of the ‘no-establishment’ clause of the First Amendment.”

“SECULAR HUMANISM” = RELIGION

In 1961, Roy Torcaso wanted to be a notary public in Maryland, but did not want to make “a declaration of belief in the existence of God,” as required by Maryland’s State Constitution, Article 37.

In the Supreme Court case Torcaso v Watkins (1961), Justice Hugo Black included a footnote which has been cited authoritatively in subsequent cases:

“Among religions in this country which do not teach what would generally be considered a belief in the existence of God are Buddhism, Taoism, Ethical Culture, Secular Humanism and others.”

Justice Scalia wrote in Edwards v. Aguillard(1987):

“In Torcaso v. Watkins, 367 U.S. 488, 495, n. 11 (1961), we did indeed refer to ‘SECULAR HUMANISM’ as a ‘religio[n].’”

“A SINCERE AND MEANINGFUL BELIEF” = RELIGION

During the Vietnam War, Mr. Seeger said he could not affirm or deny the existence of a Supreme Being and wanted to be a draft-dodger, claiming to be a conscientious objector under the Universal Military Training and Service Act, Section 6(j) that allowed exemptions for “religious training and belief.”

In United States v Seeger, (1965), U.S. Supreme Court Justice Tom Clark stated:

“The test of religious belief within the meaning in Section 6(j) is whether it is a sincere and meaningful belief occupying in the life of its possessor a place parallel to that filled by the God of those admittedly qualified for the exemption.”

“BELIEFS ABOUT RIGHT AND WRONG” = RELIGION

Another draft-dodger case involved Elliot Welsh. The U.S. Supreme Court, in Welsh v. United States (1970), decided that belief in a “deity” is not necessary to be “religious”:

“Having decided that all religious conscientious objectors were entitled to the exemption, we faced the more serious problem of determining which beliefs were ‘religious’ within the meaning of the statute…

Determining whether the registrant’s beliefs are religious is whether these beliefs play the role of religion and function as a religion in the registrant’s life…

Because his beliefs function as a religion in his life, such an individual is as much entitled to a ‘religious’ conscientious objector exemption under Section 6(j) as is someone who derives his conscientious opposition to the war from traditional religious convictions…

We think it clear that the beliefs which prompted his objection occupy the same place in his life as the belief in a traditional deity holds in the lives of his friends, the Quakers…

A registrant’s conscientious objection to all war is ‘religious’ within the meaning Section 6(j) if this opposition stems from the registrant’s moral, ethical, or religious beliefs about what is right and wrong and these beliefs are held with the strength of traditional religious convictions.”

“ATHEISM” = RELIGION

The 7th Circuit Court of Appeals, (W.D. WI) decision inKaufman v. McCaughtry, August 19, 2005, stated:

“A religion need not be based on a belief in the existence of a supreme being…Atheism may be considered…religion… ‘Atheism is indeed a form of religion…’

The Supreme Court has recognized atheism as equivalent to a ‘religion’ for purposes of the First Amendment…

The Court has adopted a broad definition of ‘religion’ that includes non-theistic and atheistic beliefs, as well as theistic ones…

Atheism is Kaufman’s religion, and the group that he wanted to start was religious in nature even though it expressly rejects a belief in a supreme being.”

Overlooking that the Constitution is only to be changed by Amendments voted in by the majority of the people, the Supreme Court admitted in Wallace v Jaffree (472 U.S. 38, 1985) that the original meaning of the First Amendment was modified “in the crucible of litigation,” a term not mentioned in the Constitution:

“At one time it was thought that this right merely proscribed the preference of one Christian sect over another, but would not require equal respect for the consciences of the infidel, the atheist, or the adherent of a non-Christian faith such as Islam or Judaism.

But when the underlying principle has been examined in the crucible of litigation, the Court has unambiguously concluded that the individual freedom of conscience protected by the First Amendment embraces the right to select any religious faith or none at all.”

The Federal Courts gradually gave the word “religion” a new definition which included “ethical,” “secular humanism,” “a sincere and meaningful belief,”  “beliefs about right and wrong,” and “atheism.”

Under this new definition, so as not to prefer one “religion” over another, Federal Courts have prohibited God, which, ironically, has effectively established the religion of atheism in the exact the way the First Amendment was intended to prohibit.

This was warned against by U.S. Supreme Court Justice Potter Stewart in his dissent in Abington Township v. Schempp, 1963:

“The state may not establish a ‘religion of secularism’ in the sense of affirmatively opposing or showing hostility to religion, thus ‘preferring those who believe in no religion over those who do believe’…

Refusal to permit religious exercises thus is seen, not as the realization of state neutrality, but rather as the establishment of a religion of secularism.”

Ronald Reagan referred to this decision in a radio address, February 25, 1984:

“Former Supreme Court Justice Potter Stewart noted if religious exercises are held to be impermissible activity in schools, religion is placed at an artificial and state-created disadvantage.

Permission for such exercises for those who want them is necessary if the schools are truly to be neutral in the matter of religion. And a refusal to permit them is seen not as the realization of state neutrality, but rather as the establishment of a religion of secularism.”

U.S. District Court, Crockett v. Sorenson, W.D. Va,. 1983:

“The First Amendment was never intended to insulate our public institutions from any mention of God, the Bible or religion. When such insulation occurs, another religion, such as secular humanism, is effectively established.”

Ronald Reagan stated in a Q & A Session, October 13, 1983:

“The First Amendment has been twisted to the point that freedom of religion is in danger of becoming freedom from religion.”

Ronald Reagan stated in a Ceremony for Prayer in Schools, September 25, 1982:

“In the last two decades we’ve experienced an onslaught of such twisted logic that if Alice were visiting America, she might think she’d never left Wonderland.

We’re told that it somehow violates the rights of others to permit students in school who desire to pray to do so. Clearly, this infringes on the freedom of those who choose to pray…

To prevent those who believe in God from expressing their faith is an outrage.”

Is it just a coincidence that the ACLU’s agenda is similar to the Communist agenda read into the Congressional Record, January 10, 1963 by Congressman Albert S. Herlong, Jr., of Florida (Vol 109, 88th Congress, 1st Session, Appendix, pp. A34-A35):

“Eliminate prayer or any phase of religious expression in the schools on the ground that it violates the principle of ‘separation of church and state.’”

Ronald Reagan stated in a Radio Address, 1982:

“The Constitution was never meant to prevent people from praying; its declared purpose was to protect their freedom to pray.”

Judge Richard Suhrheinrich stated inACLU v Mercer County, 6th Circuit Court of Appeals, December 20, 2005:

“The ACLU makes repeated reference to ‘the separation of church and state.’ This extra-constitutional construct has grown tiresome.

The First Amendment does not demand a wall of separation between church and state. Our nation’s history is replete with governmental acknowledgment and in some case, accommodation of religion.”

The Supreme Court stated in Lynch v Donnelly, 1984:

“The Constitution does not ‘require complete separation of church and state.’”

Associate Justice William Rehnquist wrote in the U.S. Supreme Court caseWallace v. Jafree, 1985, dissent, 472 U. S., 38, 99:

“The ‘wall of separation between church and state’ is a metaphor based on bad history, a metaphor which has proved useless as a guide to judging. It should be frankly and explicitly abandoned.

It is impossible to build sound constitutional doctrine upon a mistaken understanding of Constitutional history…The establishment clause had been expressly freighted with Jefferson’s misleading metaphor for nearly forty years…

There is simply no historical foundation for the proposition that the framers intended to build a wall of separation…Recent court decisions are in no way based on either the language or intent of the framers…

But the greatest injury of the ‘wall’ notion is its mischievous diversion of judges from the actual intentions of the drafters of the Bill of Rights.”

U.S. Supreme Court Justice Potter Stewart wrote in Engle v Vitale, 1962, dissent:

“The Court…is not aided…by the…invocation of metaphors like the ‘wall of separation,’ a phrase nowhere to be found in the Constitution.”

In the U.S. Supreme Court decision, McCullum v Board of Education, it stated:

“Rule of law should not be drawn from a figure of speech.”

Justice William O’Douglas wrote inZorach v Clausen, 1952:

“The First Amendment, however, does not say that in every and all respects there shall be a separation of Church and State…

We find no constitutional requirement which makes it necessary for government to be hostile to religion and to throw its weight against efforts to widen the effective scope of religious influence…

We cannot read into the Bill of Rights such a philosophy of hostility to religion.”

Ronald Reagan told the Annual Convention of the National Religious Broadcasters, January 30, 1984:

“I was pleased last year to proclaim 1983 the Year of the Bible. But, you know, a group called the ACLU severely criticized me for doing that. Well, I wear their indictment like a badge of honor.”

Are anti-faith groups using the evolved interpretation of the First Amendment to take away the liberties which the original First Amendment was intended to guarantee?

Dwight Eisenhower is quoted in the TIME Magazine article, “Eisenhower on Communism,” October 13, 1952:

“The Bill of Rights contains no grant of privilege for a group of people to destroy the Bill of Rights.

A group – like the Communist conspiracy – dedicated to the ultimate destruction of all civil liberties, cannot be allowed to claim civil liberties as its privileged sanctuary from which to carry on subversion of the Government.”

Ronald Reagan worded it differently on the National Day of Prayer, May 6, 1982:

“Well-meaning Americans in the name of freedom have taken freedom away. For the sake of religious tolerance, they’ve forbidden religious practice.”

Ronald Reagan stated at an Ecumenical Prayer Breakfast, August 23, 1984:

“The frustrating thing is that those who are attacking religion claim they are doing it in the name of tolerance and freedom and open-mindedness. Question: Isn’t the real truth that they are intolerant of religion?”

Did Jefferson intend to outlaw the acknowledgment of God and limit students, teachers, coaches, chaplains, schools, organizations, and communities from public religious expression?

In light of mandates in President’s Healthcare law which forces individuals to violate their religious beliefs or be subject to “temporal punishments” for non-compliance, it is incumbent upon Americans to read again the words of Thomas Jefferson’s Virginia Statute of Religious Freedom:

“Almighty God hath created the mind free, and…all attempts to influence it by temporal punishments…are a departure from the plan of the Holy Author of religion…

That to compel a man to furnish contributions of money for the propagation of opinions which he disbelieves is sinful and tyrannical…

That therefore the proscribing any citizen as unworthy the public confidence, by laying upon him an incapacity…unless he profess or renounce this or that religious opinion, is depriving him injuriously of those privileges and advantages, to which…he has a natural right…

That to suffer the civil magistrate to intrude his powers into the field of opinion…is a dangerous fallacy which at once destroys all religious liberty because he being of course judge of that tendency will make his opinions the rule of judgment and approve or condemn the sentiments of others only as they shall square with or differ from his own…

Be it enacted by General Assembly that no man…shall be enforced, restrained, molested, or burdened in his body or goods, nor shall otherwise suffer on account of his religious opinions or belief,

but that all men shall be free to profess, and by argument to maintain, their opinions in matters of Religion, and that the same shall in no wise diminish, enlarge or affect their civil capacities.”

Ronald Reagan addressed the Alabama State Legislature, March 15, 1982:

“The First Amendment of the Constitution was not written to protect the people of this country from religious values; it was written to protect religious values from government tyranny.”

American Minute is a registered trademark. Permission is granted to forward. reprint or duplicate with acknowledgement tovwww.AmericanMinute.com
Enhanced by Zemanta

‘To destroy us…our enemies must first seduce us from the house of God’ -Yale President Timothy Dwight

 

American Minute with Bill Federer
A grandson of Princeton president Jonathan Edwards, he could read at age 4 and entered Yale at 13.He was a chaplain in the Continental Army until his father died.

Then, as the eldest of 13 children, he worked the family farm to pay off debts.

He served in Massachusetts’ first State Legislature.

His name was Timothy Dwight IV, and he died JANUARY 11, 1817.


He was Yale’s 8th president, 1795 to 1817.

In his 22 years at Yale, he created Departments of Chemistry, Geology, Law, and Medicine.

He also founded Andover Theological Seminary.

Timothy Dwight pioneered women’s education, and was critical of slavery and encroachment on Indian lands.

He befriended Henry Opukahaia, the first Hawaiian convert to Christianity, which led to missionaries sailing to the Islands.

During his administration, Yale grew from 110 to 313 students, with one of his students, Samuel Morse, inventing the telegraph.

Originally a Puritan college, Yale students had become enamored with “French infidelity” and the deistic “cult of reason.”

Dwight met with students and answered their questions on faith.

By the time of his death, JANUARY 11, 1817, a third of the graduates were professing Christians, and 30 entered the ministry.

On July 4, 1798, Timothy Dwight gave an address in New Haven titled “The Duty of Americans at the Present Crisis.”

In this address, he explained how Voltaire’s atheism inspired the French Revolution and it’s Reign of Terror, 1793-1794, where 40,000 people were beheaded and 300,000 were butchered in the Vendee:

“About the year 1728, Voltaire, so celebrated for his wit and brilliancy and not less distinguished for his hatred of Christianity and his abandonment of principle, formed a systematical design to destroy Christianity and to introduce in its stead a general diffusion of irreligion and atheism.

For this purpose he associated with himself Frederick the II, king of Prussia, and Mess. D’Alembert and Diderot, the principal compilers of the Encyclopedie, all men of talents, atheists and in the like manner abandoned.

The principle parts of this system were:

1. The compilation of the Encyclopedie: in which with great art and insidiousness the doctrines of … Christian theology were rendered absurd and ridiculous; and the mind of the reader was insensibly steeled against conviction and duty.

2. The overthrow of the religious orders in Catholic countries, a step essentially necessary to the destruction of the religion professed in those countries.

3. The establishment of a sect of philosophists to serve, it is presumed as a conclave, a rallying point, for all their followers.

4. The appropriation to themselves, and their disciples, of the places and honors of members of the French Academy, the most respectable literary society in France, and always considered as containing none but men of prime learning and talents.

In this way they designed to hold out themselves and their friends as the only persons of great literary and intellectual distinction in that country, and to dictate all literary opinions to the nation.

5. The fabrication of books of all kinds against Christianity, especially such as excite doubt and generate contempt and derision.

Of these they issued by themselves and their friends who early became numerous, an immense number; so printed as to be purchased for little or nothing, and so written as to catch the feelings, and steal upon the approbation, of every class of men.


6. The formation of a secret Academy, of which Voltaire was the standing president, and in which books were formed, altered, forged, imputed as posthumous to deceased writers of reputation, and sent abroad with the weight of their names.

These were printed and circulated at the lowest price through all classes of men in an uninterrupted succession, and through every part of the kingdom.”


Timothy Dwight continued:

“In societies of Illuminati…the being of God was denied and ridiculed….

The possession of property was pronounced robbery.

Chastity and natural affection were declared to be nothing more than groundless prejudices.

Adultery, assassination, poisoning, and other crimes of the like infernal nature, were taught as lawful…provided the end was good….

The good ends proposed by the Illuminati…are the overthrow of religion, government, and human society, civil and domestic.

These they pronounce to be so good that murder, butchery, and war, however extended and dreadful, are declared by them to be completely justifiable…

The means…were…the education of youth…every unprincipled civil officer…every abandoned clergyman…books replete with infidelity, irreligion, immorality, and obscenity…

Where religion prevails, Illumination cannot make disciples, a French directory cannot govern, a nation cannot be made slaves, nor villains, nor atheists, nor beasts.

To destroy us therefore, in this dreadful sense, our enemies must first destroy our Sabbath and seduce us from the house of God…”

Timothy Dwight concluded:

“Religion and liberty are the meat and the drink of the body politic.

Withdraw one of them and in languishes, consumes, and dies.

If indifference…becomes the prevailing character of a people…their motives to vigorous defense is lost, and the hopes of their enemies are proportionally increased…

Without religion we may possibly retain the freedom of savages, bears, and wolves, but not the freedom of New England.

If our religion were gone, our state of society would perish with it and nothing would be left which would be worth defending.”

American Minute is a registered trademark. Permission is granted to forward. reprint or duplicate with acknowledgement tovwww.AmericanMinute.com
Enhanced by Zemanta

But for a Word

This is a repost of a post that I put up a year ago, but it is still relevant and I decided that it was worth reposting!

In the post I put up previously about the founding Father’s  there was something that struck me! Roger Sherman stated:

 There is one amendment proposed by the convention of South Carolina respecting religious tests, by inserting the word other, between the words no and religious in that article, which is an ingenious thought, and had that word been inserted, it would probably have prevented any objection on that head. But it may be considered as a clerical omission and be inserted without calling a convention; as it now stands the effect will be the same”

This was written in his second letter to the New Haven Gazette on the 25th of December 1788. It made me wonder how much history would have changed if that word, other, had been inserted in between the words no and religious? 

Article. VI.

The Senators and Representatives before mentioned, and the Members of the several State Legislatures, and all executive and judicial Officers, both of the United States and of the several States, shall be bound by Oath or Affirmation, to support this Constitution; but no religious Test shall ever be required as a Qualification to any Office or public Trust under the United States.

From the Congressional Debates of 1789, we have this discussion on Religious Amendments:

August 15, 1789 First Federal Congress (Amendments-religious reference)

[House of Representatives]

The House again went into a Committee of the Whole on the proposed amendments to the Constitution. Mr. Boudinot in the chair.

The fourth proposition being under consideration, as follows:

(Religious Reference)

Article 1. Section 9. Between paragraphs two and three insert ‘no religion shall be established by law, nor shall the equal rights of conscience be infringed.

Mr. SYLVESTER had some doubts of the propriety of the mode of expression used in this paragraph. He apprehended that it was liable to a construction different from what had been made by the committee. He feared it might be thought to abolish religion altogether.

Mr. VINING suggested the propriety of transposing the two members of the sentence.

Mr. GERRY said it would read better if it was no religious doctrine shall be established by law.

Mr. SHERMAN thought the amendment altogether unnecessary, inasmuch as Congress had ‘no authority whatever delegated to them by the Constitution to make religious establishments; he would, therefore, move to have it struck out.’

Mr. CARROLL As the rights of conscience are, in their nature, a peculiar delicacy, and will little bear the gentlest touch of governmental hand; and as many sects have concurred in opinion that they are not well secured under the present constitution, he said he was much in favor of adopting the words. He thought it would tend more towards conciliating the minds of the people to the government than almost any other opinion he heard proposed. He would not contend with gentlemen about the phraseology, his object was to secure the substance in such a manner as to satisfy the wishes of the honest part of the community.

Mr. MADISON said he apprehended the meaning of the words to be, that Congress should not establish a religion, and enforce the legal observation of it by law, nor compel men to worship God in any manner contrary to their conscience. Whether the words are necessary or not, he did not mean to say, but they had been required by some of the state conventions, who seemed to entertain an opinion, that under the clause of the Constitution, which gave power to Congress to make all laws necessary and proper to carry into execution the constitution, and the laws made under it, enabled them to make laws of such a nature as might infringe the rights of conscience, and establish a national religion; to prevent these effects he presumed the amendment was intended, and he thought it as well expressed as the nature of the language would admit.

Mr. HUNTINGTON said that he feared, with the gentleman first up on this subject, that the words might be taken in such latitude as to be extremely hurtful to the cause of religion. He understood the amendment to mean what had been expressed by the gentleman from Virginia; but others might find it convenient to put another construction on it. The ministers of their congregations to the eastward were maintained by contributions of those who belong to their society; the expense of building meeting houses was contributed in the same manner. These things were regulated by bylaws. If an action was brought before a federal court on any of these cases, the person who had neglected to perform his engagements could not be compelled to do it; for a support of ministers or buildings of places of worship might be construed into a religious establishment.

By the charter of Rhode Island, no religion could be established by law; he could give a history of the effects of such a regulation; indeed the people were now enjoying the blessed fruits of it. He hoped, therefore, the amendment would be made in such a way as to secure the rights of conscience, and the free exercise of religion, but not to patronize those who professed no religion at all.

Mr. MADISON thought, if the word ‘National’ was inserted before religion, it would satisfy the minds of honorable gentlemen. He believed that the people feared one sect might obtain a pre-eminence, or two combined together, and establish a religion, to which they would compel others to conform. He thought if the word ‘National’ was introduced, it would point the amendment directly to the object it was intended to prevent.

Mr. LIVERMORE was not satisfied with the amendment; but he did not wish them to dwell long on the subject. He thought it would be better if it were altered, and made to read in this manner, that Congress shall make no laws touching religion, or infringing the rights of conscience.

Mr. GERRY did not like the term National, proposed by the gentleman from Virginia, and he hoped it would not be adopted by the House. It brought to his mind some observations that had taken place in the Conventions at the time they were considering the present constitution. It had been insisted upon by those who were called anti-federalists, that this form of government consolidated the union; the honorable gentleman’s motion shows that he considers it in the same light. Those who were called anti-federalists at that time, complained that they were in favor of a federal government, and the others were in favor of a National one; the federalists were for ratifying the constitution as it stood, and the others did not until amendments were made. Their names then ought not to have been distinguished by federalists and anti-federalists, but rats and anti-rats.

Mr. MADISON withdrew his motion but observed that the words single ‘no National religion shall be established by law’, did not apply that the government was a national one; the question was then taken on MR. LIVERMORE’s motion, and passed in the affirmative 31 for it, and 20 against it.(5)

(End of Religious Reference)

I find it odd that people can read the amendment and clearly understand that the government is not allowed to infringe on the rights of the press, and yet as the same time ignore the statement that this same government is forbidden from infringing upon the rights of the people to practice their religion and to assemble peaceably as they will.

ARTICLE THE THIRD.

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press, or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition to the government for a redress of grievances.

I also find it odd that those we elect to serve us and defend and protect the Constitution of the United States of American, assume that their role is instead to change that very document into something that suits their ideas of what should be. We have a responsibility to those who come after us to teach them the true meaning of what the oath of affirmation says.

“I do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will faithfully execute the Office of President of the United States, and will to the best of my Ability, preserve, protect and defend the Constitution of the United States.”

We have strayed very far from our beginnings, so far that children today seem to believe that our President serves as a Monarch, instead as part of a trinity of three equal branches of government with each having their own established jobs to do. We have let Presidents take power by way of Presidential Signings that has no real basis in law, and yet they use this power to force their will upon the people even when the people who elected them cry out for change. Our current discussion of limiting the rights of the people is another power grab that goes totally against the Constitution and knowing it, our leaders intend to do all they can to steal this right away from the people. This was not unforeseen by those very writers of the Constitution:

“A well regulated militia, composed of the body of the people, being the best security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed; but no person religiously scrupulous shall be compelled to bear arms.”

Mr. GERRY: This declaration of rights, I take it, is intended to secure the people against the mal-administration of the Government; if we could suppose that, in all cases, the rights of the people would be attended to, the occasion for guards of this kind would be removed. Now, I am apprehensive, sir, that this clause would give an opportunity to the people in power to destroy the constitution itself. They can declare who are those religiously scrupulous and prevent them from bearing arms.

What, sir, is the use of a militia? It is to prevent the establishment of a standing army, the bane of liberty. Now, it must be evident, that, under this provision, together with their other powers, Congress could take such measures, with respect to a militia as to make a standing army necessary. Whenever Governments mean to invade the rights and liberties of the people, they always attempt to destroy the militia, in order to raise an army upon their ruins. This was actually done by Great Britain at the commencement of the late revolution. They used every means in their power to prevent the establishment of an effective militia to the eastward. The Assembly of Massachusetts, seeing the rapid progress that administration were making to divest them of their inherent privileges, endeavored to counteract them by the organization of the militia; but they were always defeated by the influence of the Crown.

These gentlemen knew what it was like to be under an oppressive government. They understood the probability that there would come a time when our government no longer served the people but instead used force to impose their will upon them. They wanted to prevent this from happening.

Thomas Jefferson (1743-1826)
The strongest reason for the people to retain the right to keep and bear arms is, as a last resort, to protect themselves against tyranny in government.

Was the government to prescribe to us our medicine and diet, our bodies would be in such keeping as our souls are now.

I would rather be exposed to the inconveniences attending too much liberty than to those attending too small a degree of it.

“Laws that forbid the carrying of arms…disarm only those who are neither inclined nor determined to commit crimes… Such laws make things worse for the assaulted and better for the assailants; they serve rather to encourage than to prevent homicides, for an unarmed man may be attacked with greater confidence than an armed man.” (Quoting Cesare Beccaria)

The beauty of the Second Amendment is that it will not be needed until they try to take it.

The policy of the American government is to leave their citizens free, neither restraining nor aiding them in their pursuits.

No man has a natural right to commit aggression on the equal rights of another, and this is all from which the laws ought to restrain him.

To take from one because it is thought that his own industry and that of his father’s has acquired too much, in order to spare to others, who, or whose fathers, have not exercised equal industry and skill, is to violate arbitrarily the first principle of association—the guarantee to every one of a free exercise of his industry and the fruits acquired by it.

I think myself that we have more machinery of government than is necessary, too many parasites living on the labor of the industrious. (Back then!)

When the people fear their government, there is tyranny; when the government fears the people, there is liberty.

I am not a friend to a very energetic government. It is always oppressive.

Shake off all the fears of servile prejudices, under which weak minds are servilely crouched. Fix reason firmly in her seat, and call on her tribunal for every fact, every opinion. Question with boldness even the existence of a God; because, if there be one, he must more approve of the homage of reason than that of blindfolded fear.

The god who gave us life, gave us liberty at the same time: the hand of force may destroy, but cannot disjoin them.

And the day will come, when the mystical generation of Jesus, by the Supreme Being as His Father, in the womb of a virgin, will be classed with the fable of the generation of Minerva, in the brain of Jupiter.

In matters of style, swim with the current;
In matters of principle, stand like a rock.

What country can preserve its liberties if its rulers are not warned from time to time that their people preserve the spirit of resistance?

The spirit of resistance to government is so valuable on certain occasions that I wish it to be always kept alive. It will often be exercised when wrong, but better so than not to be exercised at all.

The majority, oppressing an individual, is guilty of a crime, abuses its strength, and by acting on the law of the strongest breaks up the foundations of society.

When wrongs are pressed because it is believed they will be borne, resistance becomes morality.

Were we directed from Washington when to sow and when to reap, we should soon want bread.

The legitimate powers of government extend to such acts only as are injurious to others. But it does me no injury for my neighbor to say there are twenty gods, or no God. It neither picks my pocket nor breaks my leg.

The price of freedom is eternal vigilance.

God forbid we should ever be twenty years without such a rebellion. The people cannot be all, and always, well informed. The part which is wrong will be discontented, in proportion to the importance of the facts they misconceive. If they remain quiet under such misconceptions, it is lethargy, the forerunner of death to the public liberty…. And what country can preserve its liberties, if its rulers are not warned from time to time, that this people preserve the spirit of resistance? Let them take arms. The remedy is to set them right as to the facts, pardon and pacify them. What signify a few lives lost in a century or two? The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time, with the blood of patriots and tyrants. It is its natural manure.

Of liberty I would say that, in the whole plenitude of its extent, it is unobstructed action according to our will. But rightful liberty is unobstructed action according to our will within limits drawn around us by the equal rights of others. I do not add “within the limits of the law,” because law is often but the tyrant’s will, and always so when it violates the right of an individual.

It is strangely absurd to suppose that a million of human beings, collected together, are not under the same moral laws which bind each of them separately.

Liberty is the great parent of science and of virtue; and a nation will be great in both in proportion as it is free.

He who knows nothing is closer to the truth than he whose mind is filled with falsehoods and errors.

I predict future happiness for Americans if they can prevent the government from wasting the labors of the people under the pretense of taking care of them.

I have sworn on the altar of God eternal hostility against every form of tyranny over the mind of man.

I have never been able to conceive how any rational being could propose happiness to himself from the exercise of power over others.

To compel a man to furnish funds for the propagation of ideas he disbelieves and abhors is sinful and tyrannical.

In a government bottomed on the will of all, the…liberty of every individual citizen becomes interesting to all.

I’m a great believer in luck, and I find the harder I work the more I have of it.

Say nothing of my religion. It is known to God and myself alone. Its evidence before the world is to be sought in my life: if it has been honest and dutiful to society the religion which has regulated it cannot be a bad one.

The democracy will cease to exist when you take away from those who are willing to work and give to those who would not.

Most bad government has grown out of too much government.

Timid men prefer the calm of despotism to the tempestuous sea of liberty.

The two enemies of the people are criminals and government, so let us tie the second down with the chains of the Constitution so the second will not become the legalized version of the first. Read more at

John Petrie’s Collection of

Thomas Jefferson Quotes

Enhanced by Zemanta

GREED and the GOSPEL – two threads in history – and American Indians

 American Minute by Bill Federer
 GREED and the GOSPEL are two threads that run through the past 2,000 years.Those motivated by GREED took land from Indians; held slaves; were East India Tea Company merchants who imported opium into China; or hung signs “Help Wanted-No Irish Need Apply”; or voted for candidates promising financial security even though they spread immorality and disregard for human life.


Those motivated by the GOSPEL donated money, food and clothes, opened orphanages andmedical clinics, dug wells in native villages, fought to abolish slavery, founded hospitals, took in homeless, dispensed emergency aid, inoculated children, taught farming techniques, visited those in prison, provided literacy programs and disaster relief.

Such were:

Scottish Missionary to Nigeria Mary Slessor who promoted women’s rights and ending twin killing;

Baptist Missionary Lottie Moon, who helped famine victims in China;


Scottish Missionary to the Congo David Livingstone who worked to end the Muslim slave trade;

Adoniram Judson, missionary to Burma, who created a Burmese-English Dictionary;

Missionary to India William Carey, who helped end the practice of ‘sati’ – the burning widows on their husband’s ashes;


George Muller, who founded orphanages in the slums of England;

Missionary to China Gladys Aylward, who helped end the binding of little girls’ feet;

Hudson Taylor, who was a missionary and physician in China;

Irish missionary Amy Carmichael, who worked with orphans in India;


Olympic athlete Eric Liddell, who was a missionary and teacher in North China;

Jake DeShazer, who was a prisoner-of-war turned missionary to Japan;

Nate Saint and Jim Elliot, who were missionary martyrs to Ecuador’s Auca Indians;


and Mother Teresa of Calcutta, who said:

“I see Jesus in every human being. I say to myself, this is hungry Jesus, I must feed him. This is sick Jesus. This one has leprosy or gangrene; I must wash him and tend to him. I serve because I love Jesus.”


These spread Judeo-Christian ideals like ‘women and children first,’ philanthropy, charity, volunteerism, civil rights, and tolerance.

Though conquistadors unfortunately lusted for gold, they were followed by sincere missionaries like Bartolome’ de Las Casas, who ministered to native peoples.

American Indians were caught in the struggle between GREED and the GOSPEL.


Many Indians sided with the French against the British during the French and Indian War. When the French lost, the Indians lost land.

Many Indians sided with the British during the Revolutionary War as Britain limited colonial westward expansion in 1763. When the British lost, Indians lost more land. (Treaty of Greenville, 1795)


Many Indians sided with the British during the War of 1812. When the British lost, Indians lost more land. (Treaty of Fort Jackson, 1814)

Gold was discovered in Georgia and settlers rushed in. A Democrat controlled Congress hurriedly passed the Indian Removal Act of 1830, signed by a Democrat President. Four thousand Cherokee died in their forced march to Oklahoma. (Treaty of Fort Armstrong, 1832; Treaty of Echota, 1835)

Some Indians sided with the Confederacy during the Civil War. When the South lost, Indians lost more land.


During America’s history, there were well-intentioned missionaries motivated by the GOSPEL: John Elliott, Pierre Marquette, David Brainerd, Francis Makemie, John Stewart, Marcus Whitman, and Hiram Bingham.

On April 26, 1802, President Jefferson extended a 1787 act of Congress in which special lands were designated:

“For the sole use of Christian Indians and the Moravian Brethren missionaries for civilizing the Indians and promoting Christianity.”


After the Louisiana Purchase, Jefferson asked Congress to ratify a treaty with the Kaskaskia Tribe, negotiated by William Henry Harrison-the future 9th President. The Kaskaskia Treaty, DECEMBER 3, 1803, stated:

“And whereas the greater part of the said tribe have been baptized and received into the Catholic Church, to which they are much attached,

the United States will give annually, for seven years, one hundred dollars toward the support of a priest of that religion, who will engage to perform for said tribe the duties of his office, and also to instruct as many of their children as possible, in the rudiments of literature,

and the United States will further give the sum of three hundred dollars, to assist the said tribe in the erection of a church.”


In 1806 and 1807, two similar treaties were made with the Wyandotte and Cherokee tribes.

President Jackson stated in a Message to Congress, January 20, 1830:

“According to the terms of an agreement between the United States and the United Society of Christian Indians the latter have a claim to an annuity of $400…”


President Jackson commented in his 2nd Annual Message, December 6, 1830:

“The Indians…gradually, under the protection of the Government and through the influence of good counsels, to cast off their savage habits and become an interesting, civilized, and Christian community.”


In the 1850′s, the territory of the Five Civilized Tribes in the eastern Oklahoma had missions, schools and academies:Presbyterians’ Dwight Mission (Cherokee, 1820, 1828);
Chuala Female Academy (Choctaw, 1842);
Tullahassee Manual Labor Boarding School (Cherokee, 1848);
Congregational-American Board of Commissioners for Foreign Missions’s Wheelock Academy (Choctaw, 1832);
Methodist Episcopal Church’s Quapaw Mission (1843); and
Bloomfield Academy for Chickasaw Females (1852).

President Lincoln stated in his 3rd Annual Message, December 3, 1863:

“It is hoped that the treaties will result in…permanent friendly relations with such of these tribes…

Duty to these wards of the Government demand our anxious and constant attention to their material well-being, to their progress in the arts of civilization, and, above all, to that moral training which under the blessing of Divine Providence will confer upon them the elevated and sanctifying influences, hopes and consolations, of the Christian faith.”

In 1869, the Board of Indian Commissioners noted in its annual report: “the religion of our blessed Savior is…the most effective agent for the civilization of any people.”

President Grant stated in his First Annual Message, December 6, 1869:

“I have attempted a new policy toward these wards of the nation…

The Society of Friends is well known as having succeeded in living in peace with the Indians in the early settlement of Pennsylvania…

They are known for their opposition to all strife, violence, and war, and are generally noted for their strict integrity and fair dealings.

These considerations induced me to give the management of a few reservations of Indians to them…The result has proven most satisfactory.”


President Grant stated in his 2nd Annual Message, December 5, 1870:

“Reform in…Indian affairs has received the special attention…

The experiment of making it a missionary work was tried with a few agencies given to the denomination of Friends (Quaker), and has been found to work most advantageously…

Indian agencies being civil offices, I determined to give all the agencies to such religious denominations as had heretofore established missionaries among the Indians, and perhaps to some other denominations…to Christianize and civilize the Indians, and to train him in the arts of peace.”


President Grant stated to Congress, January 1, 1871:

“Civilized Indians of the country should be encouraged in establishing for themselves forms of Territorial government compatible with the Constitution…

This is the first indication of the aborigines desiring to adopt our form of government, and it is highly desirable that they become self-sustaining, self-relying, Christianized, and civilized.”


President Grant stated in his 3rd Annual Message, December 4, 1871:

“The policy pursued toward the Indians has resulted favorably…

Through the exertions of the various societies of Christians…many tribes of Indians have been induced to settle upon reservations, to cultivate the soil, to perform productive labor of various kinds, and to partially accept civilization…

I recommend liberal appropriations to carry out the Indian peace policy, not only because it is humane, Christianlike, and economical, but because it is right.”

Oklahoma had missions run by Baptists, Methodists, Episcopalians, Presbyterians, Mennonites, Quakers, Moravians and Mennonites, who had a mission among the Comanches at Post Oak Mission and at Colony.

Catholics had missions in the Potawatomi Nation at Sacred Heart Abbey, at Anadarko on the Kiowa-Comanche-Apache Reservation, and in north central Oklahoma among the Osage, Ponca, and Otoe.


In 1884, one of the first missionaries to the Yupik Indians in Alaska was John Henry Killbuck, great-grandson of Lenape Chief Gelelemend, who in 1778 made the first Indian Treaty with the United States and later was converted to Christianity by German Moravian missionaries.


President Cleveland issued the Proclamation respecting Church property in Alaska, November 14, 1896:

“Whereas…the Russian Empire ceded to the US the Territory of Alaska…the churches which have been built in the ceded territory…shall remain the property of such members of the Greek Oriental Church…

The Cathedral Church of St. Michael…The Church of the Resurrection…called the Kalochian Church, situated near the battery number at the palisade separating the city from the Indian village….Three timber houses…for lodging of priests. Four lots of ground belonging to the parsonages.”


Growing up in a Quaker family, Herbert Hoover spent several months as a boy living on the Osage Indian Reservation in Oklahoma Territory.

After becoming a multi-millionaire in the mining industry and organizing the feeding of Europe after World War I, Hoover became the 31st U.S. President.


He chose as his Vice-President Charles Curtis, the nation’s first Native American Vice-President, from the Kaw tribe in Kansas.

Hoover reorganized and provided increased funding to the Bureau of Indian Affairs.

The next President, Franklin D. Roosevelt, had John Collier serve as Commissioner of Indian Affairs, 1933-45.


The son of a successful Atlanta businessman, John Collier pressured Congress to pass the Indian Reorganization Act of 1934 which preserved Indian identity by restoring native lands, improving reservation medical services, and promoting development of business opportunities for Indians.

American Minute is a registered trademark. Permission is granted to forward. reprint or duplicate with acknowledgement tovwww.AmericanMinute.com
Enhanced by Zemanta

Was America once a Christian nation?

By Bill Federer via American Minute
Was America once a Christian nation?

Exclusive: Bill Federer looks at Obama’s 2006 statement in light of state constitutions

“Whatever we once were, we are no longer a Christian nation.”  – President Barack Obama, June 28, 2006

Wouldn’t it be interesting to find out “whatever we once were”?

Originally, laws that governed personal behavior were under states’ jurisdiction, not federal.

People today are aware that some states allow minors to consume alcohol, and others do not; some states have smoking bans, and others do not; some states allow gambling, and others do not; some states attempt to limit the Second Amendment, and others do not; some states allow gay marriage, and others do not; and one state allows prostitution, while the rest do not.

At the time the Constitution was written, religion was under each individual state’s jurisdiction, and each state expanded religious tolerance at its own speed.

The U.S. Constitution went into effect June 21, 1788, when two-thirds of the states ratified it.

What was in those original 13 state Constitutions concerning religion at the time those states ratified the U.S. Constitution? [Caps added throughout for emphasis.]

DELAWARE – first to ratify the U.S. Constitution, stated in its 1776 state constitution:

“Every person … appointed to any office … shall … subscribe … ‘I … profess faith in GOD THE FATHER, and in JESUS CHRIST His only Son, and in the HOLY GHOST, one God, blessed for evermore; and I do acknowledge the Holy Scriptures of the Old and New Testament to be given by Divine inspiration.’”

PENNSYLVANIA – second to ratify the U.S. Constitution, stated in its 1776 state constitution, signed by Ben Franklin:

“Each member, before he takes his seat, shall … subscribe … ‘I do believe in one GOD, the Creator and Governor of the Universe, the Rewarder of the good and the Punisher of the wicked. And I do acknowledge the Scriptures of the Old and New Testament to be given by Divine Inspiration.’”

NEW JERSEY – third to ratify the U.S. Constitution, stated in its 1776 state constitution:

“All persons, professing a belief in the faith of any PROTESTANT sect, who shall demean themselves peaceably under the government … shall be capable of being elected.”

GEORGIA – fourth to ratify the U.S. Constitution, stated in its 1777 state constitution:

“Representatives shall be chosen out of the residents in each county … and they shall be of the PROTESTANT religion.”

CONNECTICUT – fifth to ratify the U.S. Constitution, retained its 1662 Colonial Constitution, which was established PROTESTANT CONGREGATIONAL, till 1818:

“By the Providence of GOD … having from their ancestors derived a free and excellent Constitution … whereby the legislature depends on the free and annual election. … The free fruition of such liberties and privileges as humanity, civility and CHRISTIANITY call for.”

MASSACHUSETTS – sixth to ratify the U.S. Constitution, stated in its 1780 state constitution, written by John Adams:

“Any person … before he … execute the duties of his … office … [shall] subscribe … ‘I … declare, that I believe the CHRISTIAN religion, and have a firm persuasion of its truth.’ … The legislature shall … authorize the support and maintenance of public PROTESTANT teachers of piety, religion and morality.”

MARYLAND – seventh to ratify the U.S. Constitution, stated in its 1776 state constitution:

“No other test … ought to be required, on admission to any office … than such oath of support and fidelity to this State … and a declaration of a belief in the CHRISTIAN religion.”

SOUTH CAROLINA – eighth to ratify the U.S. Constitution, stated in its 1778 state constitution:

“No person shall be eligible to a seat … unless he be of the PROTESTANT religion. … The CHRISTIAN PROTESTANT religion shall be deemed … the established religion of this State.”

NEW HAMPSHIRE – ninth to ratify the U.S. Constitution, stated in its 1784 state constitution:  “No person shall be capable of being elected … who is not of the PROTESTANT religion.”

VIRGINIA – 10th to ratify the U.S. Constitution, stated in its 1776 state constitution, bill of rights, written by James Madison and George Mason:

“It is the mutual duty of all to practice CHRISTIAN forbearance, love, and charity towards each other.”

NEW YORK – 11th to ratify the U.S. Constitution, stated in its 1777 state constitution:

“The United American States … declare … ‘Laws of nature and of NATURE’S GOD … All men are created equal; that they are endowed by their CREATOR with certain unalienable rights … Appealing to the SUPREME JUDGE of the world … A firm reliance on the protection of DIVINE PROVIDENCE’ …”

NORTH CAROLINA – 12th to ratify the U.S. Constitution, stated in its 1776 state constitution:

“No person, who shall deny the being of GOD or the truth of the PROTESTANT religion, or the Divine authority either of the Old or New Testaments, or who shall hold religious principles incompatible with the freedom and safety of the State, shall be capable of holding … office.”

RHODE ISLAND – 13th to ratify the U.S. Constitution, retained its 1663 Colonial Constitution till 1843, which stated:

“By the blessing of God … a full liberty in religious concernements … rightly grounded upon GOSPEL principles, will give the best and greatest security … in the true CHRISTIAN faith and worship of God. … They may … defend themselves, in their just rights and liberties against all the enemies of the CHRISTIAN faith.”

U.S. Supreme Court Justice Hugo Lafayette Black wrote inEngel v. Vitale, 1962:

“As late as the time of the Revolutionary War, there were established Churches in at least eight of the 13 former colonies and established religions in at least four of the other five.”

John K. Wilson wrote in “Religion Under the State Constitutions 1776-1800″ (Journal of Church and State, Volume 32, Autumn 1990, Number 4, pp. 754):

“An establishment of religion, in terms of direct tax aid to Churches, was the situation in nine of the 13 colonies on the eve of the American revolution.”

The Journal of the U.S. House recorded that on March 27, 1854, the 33rd Congress voted unanimously to print Rep. James Meacham’s report, which stated:

“At the adoption of the Constitution, we believe every State – certainly 10 of the 13 – provided as regularly for the support of the Church as for the support of the Government. …

“Down to the Revolution, every colony did sustain religion in some form. It was deemed peculiarly proper that the religion of liberty should be upheld by a free people. …

“Had the people, during the Revolution, had a suspicion of any attempt to war against Christianity, that Revolution would have been strangled in its cradle.”

Over the years, the Christians in these states extended tolerance to other denominations, to Jews, to monotheistic religions, to any religion and eventually to atheists.

Activists judges creatively used the 14th Amendment to remove authority over many issues from state jurisdiction.

Though our government has seemingly abandoned ties to the past, for the student of history, it is still fascinating to find out “whatever we once were.”  —

American Minute is a registered trademark. Permission is granted to forward. reprint or duplicate with acknowledgement tovwww.AmericanMinute.com

Enhanced by Zemanta

C.S. Lewis, ‘Mere Christianity’

American Minute By Bill Federer
His death went unnoticed, as he died the same day John F. Kennedy was shot.His books are some of the most widely read in English literature, with over 200 million sold worldwide and, nearly 50 years after his death, continue to sell a million copies a year.

His name was Clive Staples Lewis, born NOVEMBER 29, 1898.


At age 19, he fought in the trenches in World War I.

An agnostic, he became a professor at Oxford and Cambridge.


He credits his Catholic friend and fellow writer, J.R.R. Tolkien, author of Lord of the Rings, as being instrumental in bringing him to faith in Christ.


Among his most notable books are: The Screwtape Letters; Miracles; The Problem of Pain; Abolition of Man; and The Chronicles of Narnia, which include The Lion, Witch and Wardrobe.

C.S. Lewis stated (The Oxford Socratic Club, 1944. pp. 154-165):


“If…I swallow the scientific cosmology as a whole, then not only can I not fit in Christianity, but I cannot even fit science.

If minds are wholly dependent on brains, and brains on bio-chemistry, and bio-chemistry (in the long run) on the meaningless flux of atoms,

I cannot understand how the thought of those minds should have any more significance than the sound of the wind in the trees.”

In Mere Christianity, 1952, C.S. Lewis wrote:

“All that we call human history – money, poverty, ambition, war, prostitution, classes, empires, slavery – is the long terrible story of man trying to find something other than God which will make him happy.”


C.S. Lewis expressed in Mere Christianity, 1952:

“I am trying here to prevent anyone saying the really foolish thing that people often say about Him: ‘I’m ready to accept Jesus as a great moral teacher, but I don’t accept his claim to be God.’

That is the one thing we must not say. A man who was merely a man and said the sort of things Jesus said would not be a great moral teacher.


He would either be a lunatic – on the level with the man who says he is a poached egg – or else he would be the Devil of Hell.

You must make your choice. Either this man was, and is, the Son of God, or else a madman or something worse.

You can shut him up for a fool, you can spit at him and kill him as a demon or you can fall at his feet and call him Lord and God, but let us not come with any patronizing nonsense about his being a great human teacher. He has not left that open to us. He did not intend to.”


In The Screwtape Letters, 1942, C.S. Lewis wrote:

“The safest road to Hell is the gradual one – the gentle slope, soft underfoot, without sudden turnings, without milestones, without signposts.”

C.S. Lewis wrote:

“God cannot give us happiness and peace apart from Himself, because it is not there. There is no such thing.”

“There are two kinds of people: those who say to God, ‘Thy will be done,’ and those to whom God says, ‘All right, then, have it your way.’”

“Everyone says forgiveness is a lovely idea, until they have something to forgive.”


C.S. Lewis wrote:

“Christianity…is a religion you could not have guessed…It is not the sort of thing anyone would have made up. It has just that queer twist about it that real things have.”

In Mere Christianity, 1952, C.S. Lewis wrote:

“The Eternal Being, who knows everything and who created the whole universe, became not only a man but (before that) a baby, and before that a fetus in a woman’s body.”

American Minute is a registered trademark. Permission is granted to forward. reprint or duplicate with acknowledgement tovwww.AmericanMinute.com
Enhanced by Zemanta

Sojourner Truth heard ‘a voice from Heaven’ and began spreading ‘God’s plan for salvation’

By Bill Federer
Born a slave in New York in 1797, she spoke only Dutch until sold around the age of 9, together with a flock of sheep, for $100.Suffering hardships, her third master made her marry an older slave with whom she had five children.


In 1827, she escaped to Canada.

After New York abolished slavery, she returned as a domestic servant and helped with Elijah Pierson’s street-corner preaching.

Her name was Sojourner Truth.


In 1843, Sojourner Truth heard “a voice from Heaven” and began spreading “God’s truth and plan for salvation.”

In Massachusetts, she worked with abolitionists William Lloyd Garrison and Frederick Douglass.

After the Emancipation Proclamation, Sojourner Truth moved to Washington, D.C., met Lincoln and helped former slaves.

In 1850, she dictated her biography, The Narrative of Sojourner Truth: A Northern Slave, stating:

“When I left the house of bondage I left everything behind. I wanted to keep nothing of Egypt on me, and so I went to the Lord and asked him to give me a new name.”


Sojourner Truth continued:

“I set up my banner, and then I sing, and then folks always comes up ’round me, and then…I tells them about Jesus.”

Her last full day on earth was NOVEMBER 25, 1883. Sojourner Truth would begin her messages:

“Children, I talk to God and God talks to me.”

American Minute is a registered trademark. Permission is granted to forward. reprint or duplicate with acknowledgement tovwww.AmericanMinute.com
Enhanced by Zemanta

PEOPLE OF THE BOOK – what does the quran say about Christians and Jews?

            You may think it is an honor to be called ‘people of the book’. This is the islamic term referring to Christians and Jews in the Islamic scriptures, but what you are not told is that it is of the lowest infidel ranks worthy of death. These words are written and confirmed in the quran and haddith. They do not want you do know the truth. It’s the perfect term so we don’t start ripping our ‘coexist’ bumper stickers off. It’s a term that pretty much shuts us all up. It’s clear that Islam has taken over many countries and they do so because of the ignorance of the people. You may have heard the term taqiyya or kitman, these are ways of deceiving people for allah, which is allowed as long as it spreads their cause.

               It is written very clearly throughout the quran that muslims are each called to fight. In fact, fighting is mandatory. You need to know this and the children in public schools need to be taught the truth. Students are taught that Jews and Christians are honored as people of the book, they share the same god, allah, they are similar to Muslims, but they have different rights but still enjoy religious freedom in many Muslim countries. This couldn’t be further from the truth, yet our schools continue to teach the lies in ignorance of the truth and people continue to believe every word they hear without searching for the truth.

TRUE DEFINITION of ‘PEOPLE OF THE BOOK’ aka ‘JEWS AND CHRISTIANS’ FROM THE WORDS OF THE QURAN:

  • ignorant pagans cursed by allah
  • unbelievers
  • perverted transgressors with no faith
  • rebellious deceivers with falsehood that try to cover the truth of allah
  • try to trick muslims to believing them
  • allah sends terror in their hearts because they have no understanding
  • they are the worst of creatures
  • they are the worst of beasts
  • have been deceived intentionally by allah
  • have a disease in their heart that allah increases
  • disobedient of no understanding
  • will be transformed to swine and apes
  • will be burned over and over again in the fires of hell
  • blasphemy by saying God has a Son
  • cursed
  • wicked
  • full of selfish envy
  • liars
  • they think they are going to heaven but those are vain desires
  • shame pitched over their faces
  • will be mutilated to the point of unrecognition if they don’t turn to allah
  • they believe any lie
  • are to be treated with enmity and hatred
  • cursed by allah
  • are always plotting schemes
  • they are hypocrites steeped in self glory (verses listed below, please see)

You see, it’s not politically correct to say such things, that might offend the muslim. Do you see how twisted the play on words gets? It actually should offend the Christians, but to manipulate and downplay the words of the Quran they stand up and fight back when we quote the true words of Mohammed. This silences the people and opens a door for sharia to come in.

I have met many muslims people and they have been very kind people, but their teachings say another thing. Allah tells them they must fight all unbelievers even if they don’t want to( Surah2:216). I’m not here to argue, but to inform Christians and Jews of the real definition they have of you, that you know they are not to be friends with any unbeliever and each one is called out to fight for allah and his cause. Some will counter the scripture with another and others will say it cannot be translated from Arabic, but if it cannot be translated it cannot be and therefore is not- which it is, so that’s not an excuse either.

If you are a Muslim reading this, this message for you: 
For God so loved you, that he gave his one and only Son,
that whoever believes in him shall not perish but have eternal life.
For God did not send his Son into the world to condemn the world,
but to save the world through him. Whoever believes in him is not condemned,
but whoever does not believe stands condemned already because they have not believed in the name of God’s one and only Son. John 3:16-18
Isaiah foretold of this: A child will be given unto us He will be Wonderful Counselor, Mighty God, Everlasting Father, Prince of Peace. Of the greatness of his government and peace there will be no end. He will reign forever Isaiah 9:6-7 Behold the virgin shall conceive and bear a Son, and shall call His name Immanuel which means God with us Isaiah 7:14 “I will declare the decree: The Lord has said to Me, ‘You are My Son, Today I have begotten You. 8 Ask of Me, and I will give You The nations for Your inheritance, And the ends of the earth for Your possession. 9 You shall break[a] them with a rod of iron; You shall dash them to pieces like a potter’s vessel.’”Kiss the Son, lest He be angry and you perish Psalm 2:4-12 God has a Son Proverbs 30:4 Matthew 27:54, These things I have written to you who believe in the name of the Son of God, that you may know that you have eternal life,[a] and that you may continue to believe in the name of the Son of  God 1 JOhn 5:13, Revelation 2:8, John 3:19,
Jesus is the Son of God: Then when daylight came, the assembly of the elders of the people, which included both chief priests and scribes, met and marched him off to their own council. There they asked him, “If you really are Christ, tell us!” “If I tell you, you will never believe me, and if I ask you a question, you will not answer me. But from now on the Son of Man will take his seat at the right hand of almighty God.” Then they all said, “So you are the Son of God then?””You are right; I am,” Jesus told them luke 22:66-70 Isaiah 53 1 Corinthians 1:18, 1 peter 2:24, mark 15:24, Hebrews 6:6, Eph 2:16, Gal 3:13, Rev 1:7, John 19:33-37

According to the public school world history books, the definition of people of the book : Jews and Christians who are spiritually superior to polytheistic idol worshippers
.worldhistorybook 012worldhistorybook 011

ARE MUSLIMS PEACE LOVING? Verses from the Quran: “Unbelievers are your enemies” Surah 4:101 “Rouse them to fight for they are without understanding. 8:65 You cannot have a prisoner of war until you have subdued the land 8:67. You must fight all who fight allah 2S196And slay them wherever ye catch 2S191 Fight them and allah will punish them by your hands 9:14 Fighting is prescribed for you, and ye dislike it. But it is possible that ye dislike a thing that is good for you, and that you love a think that is bad for you. 2S216 Fight the cause of Allah to him who fighteth in the cause of allah soon shall we give him a reward of great value 474Fight allahs cause 484Seize them and slay them wherever you get them, we have provided you with a clear argument against them. 491fight those who believe not in allah nor the law even if they are people of the book, until they pay the jizyah with willing submission and feel subdued 929 when you meet unbelievers in fight, smite at their necks, at length when ye have thoroughly subdued them, bind a bond firmly on them. Those who are slain in the way of a. he will never let their deeds be lost Surah 473-4. allah loves those who fight his cause Surah 61:4 and the people of the book , (allah) did a cast terror in their hearts, so some you slew, and some you made prisoners. Suah 31

DOES THIS LINE UP WITH THE WORDS OF JESUS? ” I say to you, love your enemies, bless those who curse you, do good to those who hate you, and pray for those who spitefully use you and persecute you, that you may be sons of your Father in heaven; for He makes His sun rise on the evil and on the good, and sends rain on the just and on the unjust. For if you love those who love you, what reward have you? Do not even the tax collectors do the same? And if you greet your brethren only, what do you do more than others? Do not even the tax collectors do so? Therefore you shall be perfect, just as your Father in heaven is perfect.

According to the Quran, the muslims believe the following about the PEOPLE OF THE BOOK:

  • Jews and Christians are people of the book
  • The people of the book reject the truth and will not depart until they see clear evidence. Those who reject the truth ( the people of the book) will be in hell fire to dwell in , for they are the worst of creatures. But those who have faith and do good deeds are the best of creatures, and their reward is gardens of eternity. 98:1
  • say people of the book, do you disapprove of us, for no other reason than that we believe in allah, and the revelation , and perhaps that most of you are rebellious and disobedient 5.59
  • but you are stronger than they are because of the terror in their hearts sent from allah they are men of no understanding. 59:13
  • say, To them, he transformed them into apes and swine, those who worshipped evil, these are many worse in rank 5.60
  • It is the wish of the people of the book to lead you astray. But they lead themselves astray and do not perceive! 3.69
  • Ye people of the book! Why do you reject allah? 3.70
  • Ye people of the book! Why do you cover truth with falsehood? 3.71
  • People of the book- there is no call on us to keep faith with these ignorant pagans, they lie against allah and they know it. 3.75
  • The jews say, a hand is tied up, be their hands tied up and be they accursed for the blasphemy the utter, nay, they are obstinate rebellious 5.64
  • say, o people of the book, you have no ground to stand on unless you stand fast by the law, they are obstinate and rebellious but don’t fret over these people without faith. 5.68
  • they do blasphemy who say allah is one of three in a trinity, for a grievous penalty will befall them 5.73
  • if any believe not in allah and his messenger, we have prepared for those who reject allah a blazing fire. 48.13
  • They have a disease in their heart and allah increases it 2:10
  • People of the book wish they could turn muslims back to infidelity only because o of their selfish envy 13:109
  • People of the book say only they enter paradise, but they say it with vain desires, say ‘prove it’ 13:111
  • Even if you were to bring to the people of the book all the signs, they would not follow. They follow their own desires and are indeed clearly wrong S 2:5 .
  • Say, O people of the book, come to common terms as between us and you, that we worship non but allah that we associate no partners with him. 3:64
  • Abraham was not a Jew nor a Christian, but he was true in faith and bowed to a. .3.67
  • People of the book obstruct those who believe in allah and make it crooked 3.99
  • People of the book have no faith, they are perverted transgressors 3.110.
  • Shame is pitched over the people of the book like a tent. 3.112
  • Soon we will cast terror into the hearts of unbelievers 3.151
  • Allah has cursed the Jews for their unbelief 4.46
  • O ye people of the book, believe us before we change your face of fame to beyond recognition or curse them 4.47
  • Unbelievers believe in sorcery and evil 4.51
  • Those who reject us will be cast into the fire as often as their skins are roasted through, we shall change them for fresh skins, they may taste the penalty People of the book broke their covenant 4.155
  • They said (People of the book) , in boast , We killed Christ Jesus the son of Mary, – but they killed him not, nor crucified him, it was only made to appear to them and those who differ therin are full of doubts, with no knowledge, for they killed him not 4.157
  • O People of the book! Commit no excesses in your religion, Christ Jesus the son of mary, was no more than a Messenger of Allah Do not say trinity, for it will not be good for you. Allah is above having a son 4.171
  • we had a covenant with the Christians, but they forgot a good part of the message so we estranged them(Christians) with enmity and hatred 5.14
  • O people of the book! There is a new light and a new book 5.15
  • It is blasphemy to say that allah is Christ 5.17
  • The Jews and Christians say: We are sons of Allah and his beloved, but say to them, Why does then he punish you for your sins? 5.18
  • Jews will listen to any lie, they are fond of listening to falsehood 5.41
  • we sent Jesus to confirm the law and we sent him the gospel 5.46
  • If people of the book fail to judge by the light of allah, they are as those who rebel 5.47 5.52
  • These people have a heart of disease 5.72
  • They do blasphemy those who say God is Christ , son of mary, but said Christ O children of Israel, worship alllah Curses were put on the children of Israel, by the tongue of David and Jesus 5.77
  • strongest among men in enmity to the believers with thou find in Jews and pagans and who say we are Christians, but they are arrogant 8.82
  • Oh you who believe, Do not question what has been made known to you. 5.101
  • I inspired the disciples 5.111
  • The deaf and dumb (unbelievers- people of the book) are the worst of beasts, if allah had found in them any good, the would have made them listen 8.22-23 9.30
  • the Jews call uzayr a son of god, and the Christians call Christ the son of God, but is only a saying from their mouth and allah curse is upon them because they hide the truth. Those who oppose allah will go to hell 9.61
  • The hypocrites join in evil and forbid what is just. They are perverse and rebellious. 9.64
  • you cannot guide the blind unbelievers or prevent them from straying, only those who listen will bow down to islam 27.81
  • and when the word was fulfilled against the unbelievers, we will produce from the earth a beast to face them, he will speak to them because mankind did not believe surah 27
  • and the unbelievers say to those who believe follow our path and we will bear the consequence of your faults. Never in the least will they bear their faults, in fact they are liars. 29:12
  • unbelievers are steeped in self glory and separatism 38:2
  • say, is it ye that deny him, who created the earth in 2 days? And do ye join equals with him? 41.9
  • The unbelievers say, listen not to this quran, but talk at random in the midst of its reading. That ye may gain the upper hand, but we will certainly give the unbelievers a taste of sever penalty and we ill require them for the worst of their deeds- fire will be their eternal home, a fit requital. 41.26
  • we gave Moses the book 41.45
  • When the son of mary is held up as an example, behold, they people raise a clamor thereat in ridicule and the say, what god is best? 43. 57
  • Muhammad is the messenger of allah and those who are with him are strong against unbelievers, but compassionate to each other. 48.29
  • have you seen the hypocrites say to their misbelieving brethren among the people of the book? If you are expelled, we will go with you, but a. is witness that they are liars 59:11: unbelievers are plotting a scheme, but allah is plotting a scheme also. 86:15-17 87:8
  • and we will make it easy for thee to follow the simple path (Jesus said the way is narrow and difficult and few men enter)
  • Indeed, the penalty for those who wage war against Allah and His Messenger and strive upon earth [to cause] corruption is none but that they be killed or crucified or that their hands and feet be cut off from opposite sides or that they be exiled from the land. That is for them a disgrace in this world; and for them in the Hereafter is a great punishment. Surah 5:33 (Surah means chapter- all verses above are from quran, their haddith has more)

pc from huffingtonpost 

Wake up! Read the Word of God and pray for discernment. The Lord has said to Israel – and His word stands forever- He has loved them with an everlasting love. Jesus said “For assuredly, I say to you, till heaven and earth pass away, one jot or one tittle will by no means pass from the law till all is fulfilled”

At the same time,” says the Lord,
“I will be the God of all the families of Israel, and they shall be My people.”
2 Thus says the Lord:
“The people who survived the sword Found grace in the wilderness— Israel, when I went to give him rest.”
3 The Lord has appeared of old to me, saying: “Yes, I have loved you with an everlasting love;
Therefore with lovingkindness I have drawn you.
4 Again I will build you, and you shall be rebuilt, O virgin of Israel!

For God so loved you, that he gave his one and only Son,
that whoever believes in him shall not perish but have eternal life.
For God did not send his Son into the world to condemn the world,
but to save the world through him. Whoever believes in him is not condemned,
but whoever does not believe stands condemned already because they have not believed in the name of God’s one and only Son. John 3:16-18

I marvel that you are turning away so soon from Him who called you in the grace of Christ, to a different gospel, which is not another; but there are some who trouble you and want to pervert the gospel of Christ. But even if we, or an angel from heaven, preach any other gospel to you than what we have preached to you, let him be accursed. As we have said before, so now I say again, if anyone preaches any other gospel to you than what you have received, let him be accursed. Galations 1:8

           But I fear, lest somehow, as the serpent deceived Eve by his craftiness, so your minds may be corrupted from the simplicity that is in Christ. For if he who comes preaches another Jesus whom we have not preached, or if you receive a different spirit which you have not received, or a different gospel which you have not accepted—you may well put up with it! 1 Cor 11:3-5


Importance of Godly Character via American Minute

By Bill Federer
On NOVEMBER 18, 1807, Thomas Jefferson replied to Captain John Thomas of the Newhope Baptist Church:”Among the most inestimable of our blessings is that…of liberty to worship our Creator in the way we think most agreeable in His will;

a liberty deemed in other countries incompatible with good government and yet proved by our experience to be its best support.”


On NOVEMBER 18, 1869, after the Civil War, the most popular preacher in America, Henry Ward Beecher, stated:

“In the unity of the nation…we hope much from religion; very little from sectarian churches;

much from the Spirit of God blessing the Truth of his Word to the hearts of individual men;

much from the individual men that are nobler than their sect;

much from free men whose adhesion to forms and ceremonies is the least part of their existence;

much from religion as it exists in its higher forms in individual nature and in public sentiment;

very little from dogmas; very little from theology as such…

Let us implore the God of our fathers, by his own wise providence, to save us from our wanton passions, from impertinent egotism, from pride, arrogance, cruelty, and sensual lusts, that as a nation we may show forth his praise in all the earth.”


On NOVEMBER 18, 1886, President Chester Arthur died. The son of a Baptist minister from Ireland, he was an abolitionist lawyer who defended the rights of African Americans, and the Union’s Inspector General during the Civil War.

President Chester Arthur stated October 25, 1882:

“The blessings demanding our gratitude are numerous and varied…for…moral education of our youth;

for the influence upon the conscience of a restraining and transforming religion…for these and for many other blessings we should give thanks…

I do recommend…that the people, ceasing from their daily labors…draw near to the throne of Almighty God, offering to Him praise and gratitude for the manifold goodness which He has vouchsafed to us.”


On NOVEMBER 18, 1933, President Franklin D. Roosevelt stated in Savannah, Georgia, :

“We are celebrating the planting of the Colony of Georgia… which had its roots in religious teachings and religious liberty, a State in which the first Sunday School was established…

Let me…read to you a very short passage from…a great son of a great Georgia mother, Theodore Roosevelt. He said:

‘Spiritually and ethically we must strive to bring about clean living and right thinking. We appreciate that the things of the body are important; but we appreciate also that the things of the soul are immeasurably more important.’”


On NOVEMBER 18, 1992, The New York Times printed Mississippi Governor Kirk Fordice’s statement:

“The less we emphasize the Christian religion the further we fall into the abyss of poor character and chaos in the United States of America.”

On NOVEMBER 18, 1957, Julius Caesar Watts, Jr., better know as J.C. Watts, was born.

A college and pro football player, he was a youth minister and, in 1994, was elected to the U.S. Congress, where he was chosen House Conference Chairman.


In response to the President’s 1997 State of the Union Address, Congressman J.C. Watts stated:

“I was taught to respect everyone for the simple reason that we’re all God’s children.

I was taught, in the words of Martin Luther King, to judge a man not by the color of his skin, but by the content of his character.

And I was taught that character is simply doing what’s right when nobody’s looking.”

American Minute is a registered trademark. Permission is granted to forward. reprint or duplicate with acknowledgement tovwww.AmericanMinute.com
Enhanced by Zemanta

Could We Stand?

THE TWELVE APOSTLES:

1. Andrew – crucified
2. Bartholomew – beaten then crucified
3. James, son of Alphaeus – stoned to death
4. James, son of Zebedee – beheaded
5. John – exiled for his faith; died of old age
6. Judas (not Iscariot) – stoned to death
7. Matthew – speared to death
8. Peter – crucifed upside down
9. Philip – crucified
10. Simon – crucified
11. Thomas – speared to death
12. Matthias – stoned to death
(source: Fox’s Book of Martyrs)

Chart courtesy of Every Student.com

Do you want to follow Jesus Christ? How much? What are you willing to give up? Your life? Will you stand in civil disobedience when you are told to obey the laws of whichever government in power over you?

We are quickly coming to a point where here in America, although we are supposed to have freedom to practice our faith, we are being restricted on how and where we can do so. The current administration argues that if you are a business, even though you have always used Christian principles for your business, that you should not be exempt from laws that violate your belief. This includes providing abortion services, along with honoring marriages between same sexes,  to just name a few. Whether this will stand we don’t yet know. There are currently arguments before several judges with some of the cases either at the Supreme Court or on there way.

Then there is the school system. Our children are taught at church and at home that certain things are unacceptable in the eyes of God, yet when they are as school, these things are often promoted. Our children are taught that both their parents and their churches are wrong, bigoted, racist and evil. Schools are becoming less a place to teach our children what they need for the future and more a place for those who have differing values to indoctrinate our children. They are also being taught that the government comes before God.

Even as individuals we are not safe, we are being forced to pay for abortion in the insurance that we have, even though this practice is abhorrent to us. Recently Pastors that speak out in public or hand out tracts have been arrested. Even praying in public has been a cause for arrest and harassment.

Our men and women in the military have lost the ability to even talk about their faith to their fellow men and women. They are told to shut up and be quiet or they will face a court martial. We have in the last six years seen Veterans families told that they cannot say Jesus name in prayers at funerals, in hospitals, or anywhere on federal land.

We are told that instead of the Constitution saying we have freedom of religion, that instead it is a document that protects all others from having to either hear, or even know that we are a people of faith and follow Jesus. At the very same time we are told that Muslim’s should not be insulted, their prayers’s need to be respected and special places allowed within schools, and that laws that apply to everyone else, such as head covering when you are photographed at the DMV.

You read the history of the apostles and how they were treated, we know that they were tortured and killed because they followed Jesus, but how often do you consider what they were doing when this happened and who did it? It wasn’t always at the hands of the Jews. Often it was because they angered the government of the time.  Consider the Apostle Andrew:

Concerning the cause and manner of his death, the following is contained in Apophthegm. Christian. Baudart., page 3: AtPatras, a city in Achaia, he converted besides many others, Maximillia, the wife of Aegaeas, the governor, to the Christian faith. This so enraged the governor against Andrew, that he threatened him with death of the cross. But the apostle said to the governor, “Had I feared the death of the cross, I should not have preached the majesty and gloriousness of the cross of Christ.”

The enemies of the truth having apprehended and sentenced to death the apostle Andrew, he went joyfully to the place where he was to be crucified, and, having come near the cross, he said,”O beloved cross! I have greatly longed for thee. I rejoice to see thee erected here. I come to thee with a peaceful conscience and with cheerfulness, desiring that I, who am a disciple of Him who hung on the cross, may also be crucified.” The apostle said further,”The nearer I come to the cross, the nearer I come to God; and the farther I am from the cross, the farther I remain from God.”

The holy apostle hung three days on the cross; he was riot silent, however; but as long as he could move his tongue, he instructed the people that stood by the cross, in the way of the truth, saying, among other things, “I thank my Lord Jesus Christ, that He, having used me for a time as an ambassador, now permits me to have this body, that I, through a good confession, may obtain everlasting grace and mercy. Remain steadfast in the word and doctrine which you have received, instructing one another, that you may dwell with God in eternity, and receive the fruit of His promises.”

The Christians and other pious people besought the governor to give Andrew unto them, and take him down from the cross., (For it appears that he was not nailed to the cross, like Christ, but tied to it). When the apostle learned of this, he cried to God, Saying,”O Lord Jesus Christ! suffer not that Thy servant, who hangs here on the tree for Thy name’s sake, be released, to dwell again among men; but receive me. O my Lord, my God! whom I have known, whom I have loved, to whom I cling, whom I desire to see, and in whom I am what I am.” Having spoken these words, the holy apostle committed his spirit into the hands of his heavenly Father. M. W. Baudart. in Apophthegm Christian. lib. 1, super Andream, ex August. de Vera et Falsa Poenitentia., cap 8, Bernhard. in Sermon. de Andrea. Lanfrancus contra Berengar. Niceph., lib. 2, cap. 39, and lib. 15, cap. 39. Remigius in Psal. 21 and 40. Johan. Strac. in Festo Andreae, p. 23, haec et alia. Also, Konst-tooneel van veertig, by N. D. C., Concerning the Life of Andrew. MARTYRS MIRROR

But it wasn’t just the Apostle’s who faced the wrath of the rulers or Synagogues. It was almost any Christian that came to the attention of the leaders of that time. Paul himself was one of those who participated in imprisoning and killing followers of Christ. Consider the case of

FELICITAS WITH HER SEVEN SONS, JANUARIUS, FELIX, PHILIPPUS, SYLVANUS, ALEXANDER, VITALIS, AND MARTIALIS, PUT TO DEATH FOR THE FAITH, AT ROME, A. D. 164

Felicitas was a Christian widow at Rome, and had seven sons, whose names were Januarius, Fe-


Page 110

lix, Philippus, Sylvanus, Alexander, Vitalis, and Martialis. These lived together with their mother in one house, as an entire Christian church. Of the mother it is stated, that by her Christian communion, (conversation) which she had with the Roman women, she converted many to Christ. The sons, on their part, also acquitted themselves well by winning many men to Christ.

Now, when the heathen priests complained of this to Antonius, the Emperor-who had resumed the persecution which had begun with Trajan, but had subsided-saying, that there were not only men, but also women, who blasphemed the gods, despised their images, trampled under foot the Emperor’s worship of the gods, yea, turned away many from the old religion of the Romans; that this was principally done by a certain widow, named Felicitas, and her seven sons, and that, therefore, in order to prevent this, they must be compelled to give up Christ, and sacrifice to the gods, or, in case they should refuse to do so, be put to death, the Emperor, prompted or instigated hereby, gave . to Publius, the provost, or chief magistrate of Rome, full authority over them.

Publius, willing to spare Felicitas, as being a highly respectable woman, first secretly summoned her and her sons into his own house, where he entreated them with fair words and promises, but afterwards threatened to punish them with severe tortures, unless they would forsake the Christian religion, and readopt the old Roman worship of the gods. Felicitas, remembering the words of Christ,”Whosoever shall confess me before men, him will I confess also before my Father which is in heaven,” did not seek to evade the issue by using dissimulating or indirect words, but answered briefly thus, “I am neither moved by thy flatteries and entreaties, nor am I intimidated by thy threats; for I experience in my heart the working of the Holy Ghost, which gives me a living power, and prepares me for the conflict of suffering, to endure all that thou mayest lay upon me, for the confession of my faith.”

When Publius could not move the mother from her steadfast purpose, he said to her, “Very well; if it seems pleasant to thee , to die, die alone, but have pity and a mother’s compassion for thy sons, and command them, to ransom their own lives at least, by sacrificing to the gods.”

Thereupon Felicitas said to the judge, “Thy compassion is pure wickedness, and thy admonition is nothing but cruelty, for, if my sons should sacrifice to the gods, they would not ransom ‘their lives, but sell them to the hellish fiend, whose slaves, yea, whose serfs in soul and body, they would become, and be reserved by him, in chains of darkness, for everlasting fire.”

Then, turning away from the judge, to her sons, she said, “Remain steadfast in the faith, and in the confession of Christ; for Christ and His saints are waiting for you. Behold, heaven is open before you; therefore fight valiantly for your souls, and show, that you are faithful in the love of Christ, wherewith He loves you, and you Him.”

This filled the judge with rage against her, and he commanded them to smite her on the cheek, while he at the same time upbraided her vehemently, saying, “How darest thou thus impudently exhort thy sons in my presence, and make them obstinate to disobey the commands of the Emperor; whereas it would be far more proper for thee to incite them to obedience toward him?”

Felicitas, notwithstanding that death had been threatened her, answered with more than manly courage, saying, “If thou, O judge, didst know our Saviour Jesus Christ, and the power of His Godhead and majesty, thou wouldst undoubtedly desist from persecuting the Christians, and wouldst not seek to draw us away from the Christian religion by blaspheming His holy name; for whoever curses (or blasphemes) Christ and His faithful ones, curses (or blasphemes) God Himself, who, by faith, dwells in their hearts.”

Thereupon, though they struck her in the face with their fists, in order to silence her, she did not cease to admonish her sons to remain steadfast, and to fear neither tortures nor rack, nor even death itself, but to die willingly for the name of Christ.

Therefore, Publius the judge took each of her sons separately, and talked first to one and then to the other, hoping by this last resort to draw away from the faith, by promises as well as by threats, some of them at least, if not all. But as he could not prevail upon them, he sent a message to the Emperor, stating that they all remained obstinate, and that he could in no wise induce them to sacrifice to the gods. Thereupon the Emperor sentenced the mother together with her seven sons, that they should be delivered into the hands of different executioners, and be tortured and put to death in various ways; yet, that the mother was first to see all her sons die, before she herself should be put to death.

In accordance with this sentence, they first scourged Januarius, the first-born, to death, in the presence of his mother. The scourges were made of cords or ropes, to the ends of which balls of lead were attached. Those who had to undergo this mode of torture were scourged with them on their necks, backs, sides, and other tender parts of their bodies, either to torture them, or in order to martyr them to death as was the case in this instance. Felix and Philippus, the two brothers next (in age), were beaten to death with rods. Sylvanus, also called Syllanus, was cast down from a height. Alexander, Vitalis, and Martialis were beheaded. Last of all, the mother was beheaded or put to death with the sword. This took place under Emperor Antonius Pius. A. Mell. 1st book of the Hist., fol. 33, col. 4 and fol. 34, col. 1-3, ex Prudent. in hincentio. Also, Acto. Adon. Mart., 23 Novemb. Greg. P. in Natali. S. Felic. Homil. 3, in Eu. Bet. Chrysol. Serm. 134. Arta apud Mombrit. MARTYRS MIRROR

Could we stand the same type of persecution? Many in the Middle East are doing so now. We have heard and read of people even in the last few weeks being crucified or dismembered. And yet there are those in this country who think that we should just go along with the government because the Bible tells us to obey them. They ignore the part of the Bible that tells us in all things God comes first.

Many of the ways in which we have to make decisions everyday are not even known by many people. Take a recent case where nurses were  required to take part in abortions even though it is against their faith to murder. Or Pharmacists who are forced to give drugs that cause abortions. Or Doctors who are forced to provide abortions. The same with hospitals, especially under the new laws, if they don’t they are forced to close their doors in many instances because the government will not pay for patient care at them and they cannot get by without it.

Or consider teachers who are not allowed to wear a cross and are made to participate in practices at school that promote homosexuality. They are often fired if they pray with their students. Instead of protecting our ability to practice our faith. We are being pushed further and further into secrecy.

And yet if those early Christians had listened to the rulers of the day, they would not have lost their lives. For those who say that we should not practice “civil disobedience”, I must ask, what was the beginning of Christianity if it was not “civil disobedience?” The definition of civil disobedience is “the refusal to comply with certain laws or to pay taxes and fines, as a peaceful form of political protest.”

While these early Christians did not go to battle to change peoples and we should never do that, they did stand when those in power tried to force them to kneel to whomever was in control. They didn’t cease converting people to Christianity. They didn’t sacrifice to the false gods of the time.

Even before Jesus we have examples throughout the Bible of  men and women of faith who disobeyed the rulers of their times. Daniel didn’t bow down. Shadrach, Meshach, and Abednego, did not either. We have only to look to these to see examples of civil disobedience.

Enhanced by Zemanta

A Wake-Up Call for Christians

1461678_430057127093948_203512618_n

‘Complete Anarchy’: Famed Pastor Issues Major Wake-Up Call for Christians About the Dire State of American Culture

TheBlaze’s Carly Hoilman contributed to this report.

Pastor Mark Driscoll of Mars Hill Church in Seattle, Wa., is on a mission to wake Christians up from the illusion that faith is alive and well in America.

The centerpiece of Driscoll’s new book titled, ”A Call to Resurgence: Will Christianity Have a Funeral or a Future?,” is that we’re living in a “post-Christian culture — a culture fundamentally at odds with faith in Jesus.”

Culture Is Quickly Shifting

The pastor recently told TheBlaze that he believes cultural norms are rapidly shifting in American society and that these changes come at the same time that Christianity is losing its place of prominence.

Mark Driscoll Issues Major Wake Up Call for Christians About the Dire State of American Culture | A Call to Resurgence

Pastor Mark Driscoll (Image source: @PastorMark onTwitter)

“A commitment to secularism to pluralism has really come very, very rapidly, and certain issues like gay marriage have accelerated and highlighted that,” Driscoll said. “More biblical, conservative traditions…values have gone from being respected to really despised in very short order.”

Driscoll explained that 40 years ago, homosexuality was still listed in psychological manuals and textbooks as a mental disorder, and now it is considered a civil right. He added, “That’s a quick flip.”

“We are living in a post-Christian culture — a culture fundamentally at odds with faith in Jesus.”

Share:

He believes that there’s been a paradigm shift in society from “morality to personality.”

Rather than moral absolutes governing what’s right or wrong, Driscoll said that there’s a general view that people should be true to themselves — that they should essentially stand by their feelings and desires.

“We’ve shifted from a worldview where there is a God who makes laws, and they apply to you, to whether or not there is a God it does not matter — ‘I don’t recognize any laws external to me. The only thing that guides me is my own internal convictions,’” he said. “Authority has shifted from external to internal, from God to me. And what you end up with is not a discussion of morality but a defense of personality. And that’s the world we live in.”

Driscoll believes that there is “a culture of complete anarchy in the name of tolerance and diversity.”

“One in four women sexual assaulted, one in six men, people that are sexually addicted, sexually assaulted, sexually abused, rampant debt, broken families, suicidal,” he told TheBlaze. “The number one category of prescription medication is antidepressants. Somebody’s gotta stand up and say, ‘This ain’t working — we gotta try something else.’”

One of the Big Questions Facing Christians

One of the big questions facing Christians, the pastor said, is how to peacefully exist in this context of change without compromising values and theology.

“Christians need to understand that Christians and non-Christians just disagree about a lot of things,” he said. “We disagree about where we come from, we disagree about why we’re here, we disagree about what we’re supposed to do, we disagree with what we’re supposed to do with our pots and our pans and our genitals and our wallets — we just disagree on all kinds of things.”

Mark Driscoll Issues Major Wake Up Call for Christians About the Dire State of American Culture | A Call to Resurgence

Credit: Tyndale House Publishers

Driscoll went on to say that one of the biggest threats to Christians is the assumption that compromising on what they believe will help them or serve a positive purpose for the non-believers they interact with. Doing this, he said, simply doesn’t work for anyone

With the changing cultural dynamics, Driscoll warned that Christians need to start getting better at understanding suffering and dealing with pushback, as they’re poised to receive more of it.

“In the West we’re not really familiar with suffering [and] Christendom and Christians have tended to be in a position of power, a respected position, and so all the issues surrounding suffering and criticism and such — we’re not very good at that,” he said. “And it’s something we’d better get better at pretty quickly because it’s just going to get harder to stay true to what we believe.”

Driscoll said that it’s becoming increasingly difficult for people to be Bible-believing — and practicing — Christians and that there are “no social perks to being a Christian” in today’s society.

Issues Facing Churches

The decreasing role and reverence for churches is also noticeable, Driscoll said. While houses or worship were once much-respected, today he believes that this dynamic has profoundly changed.

“The churches, for the most part, held a very respected place in society — and if you’re going to be a good business leader, a good citizen, a moral person, well obviously you believe in God and you’re involved in some religious community,” he said. “So what that led to was really a lot of people who weren’t committed to their religious beliefs — they didn’t really live them out — but they would sort of wave the flag because of the social benefits that came with it.”

Driscoll believes the social benefits and connotations the church once offered are decreasing. Being ostracized or marginalized for being in the pews makes it somewhat less appealing to participate in church. While he doesn’t necessarily believe that there are fewer Christians, he said “the teams have gotten very clear.”

“Somebody’s gotta stand up and say, ‘This ain’t working — we gotta try something else.’”

Share:

Fewer of those who went or go to church mainly to bask in these benefits are now doing so and for obvious reasons; the purported benefits are diminishing.

With the changing dynamics, Christians have to find a balance, Driscoll argued. What battles will they choose to fight? Which will they choose to ignore? Of these concerns, Driscoll said, ”You can’t fight over everything, and you’re not very courageous if you won’t fight for anything.”

The pastor said it’s important to decide what’s worth fighting for and then to be prepared to deal with the consequences of speaking out.

Driscoll expounds upon these themes in “A Call to Resurgence: Will Christianity Have a Funeral or a Future?

http://www.theblaze.com/stories/2013/11/12/a-culture-of-complete-anarchy-famed-pastor-issues-major-wake-up-call-for-christians-about-the-dire-state-of-american-culture/

jesus-with-crown-of-thorns2


11th hour of the 11TH DAY OF THE 11TH MONTH of 1918, World War I ended

By Bill Federer
The 11th hour of the 11TH DAY OF THE 11TH MONTH of 1918, World War I ended.Though the Armistice was signed at 5:00 AM, fighting continued till11:00 AM, killing nearly 11,000 more men.
In 1921, President Warren Harding had the remains of an unknown soldier killed in France buried in the Tomb of the Unknown Soldier at Arlington Cemetery.


Inscribed on the Tomb are the words:

“Here rests in honored glory an American soldier know but to God.”

Armistice Day was changed to Veterans Day in 1954 to honor all U.S. Veterans.


In 1958, President Eisenhower placed soldiers in the tomb from WWII and the Korean War.

In 1984, President Ronald Reagan placed a soldier from the Vietnam War in the tomb.


DNA test later identified him as pilot Michael Blassie, a graduate of St. Louis University Highschool, 1966 and the U.S. Air Force Academy, 1970, whose A-37B Dragonfly was shot down near An Loc, South Vietnam.

In 1998, Michael Blassie was reburied at Jefferson Memorial Cemetery, St. Louis, Missouri.


On NOVEMBER 11, 1921, President Harding stated:

“On the threshold of eternity, many a soldier, I can well believe, wondered how his ebbing blood would color the stream of human life, flowing on after his sacrifice…

I can sense the prayers of our people…

Let me join in that prayer.

Our Father who art in heaven, hallowed be Thy name. Thy kingdom come…”


Charles Michael Province, U.S. Army, wrote the poem:

It is the Soldier, not the minister
Who has given us freedom of religion.

It is the Soldier, not the reporter
Who has given us freedom of the press.

It is the Soldier, not the poet
Who has given us freedom of speech.

It is the Soldier, not the campus organizer
Who has given us freedom to protest.

It is the Soldier, not the lawyer
Who has given us the right to a fair trial.

It is the Soldier, not the politician
Who has given us the right to vote.

It is the Soldier who salutes the flag,
Who serves beneath the flag,
And whose coffin is draped by the flag,
Who allows the protester to burn the flag.

American Minute is a registered trademark. Permission is granted to forward. reprint or duplicate with acknowledgement tovwww.AmericanMinute.com
Enhanced by Zemanta

For Our Freedom

Today, many of us are blessed with an extra day off. The intent of this day is that we might honor veterans, both those whom have served, and those who are still serving. An automatic response of mine, anytime there is such a day, is to make some sort of personal connection so that the day is more meaningful. My mind instantly drifts to images of my late grandfather. Though he is no longer with us, he was an incredible example of one who was willing to lay down his life for the good of his country, family, and friends. He retired as a Lieutenant Colonel from the U.S. Army, and then went on to serve as a prison guard at one of the toughest penitentiaries on the West Coast. Despite his ability to command the respect of men, he was tender, gentle and kind with his grandkids and loved ones.

Several of my former students have also gone on to serve in our armed forces. I am so grateful for the sacrifices that so many men and women are willing to make, in order to preserve the freedoms we know and love. As I read in I Corinthians this morning, the following verse is lived out daily, by those who serve: “Nobody should seek his own good, but the good of others.” – (I Corinthians 10:24) May we listen for His voice, so that we too, may know how He would have us seek the good of others.

For freedom they fight,

so we may enjoy;

all that we now know,

our rights to employ.

This freedom’s not free,

cost much sacrifice;

time, blood, sweat and tears,

oft ultimate price.

Take not for granted,

these freedoms we know;

remember the cost,

and gratitude show.

Thank you all soldiers,

and those who support;

today we honor,

come close and consort.

Dear Heavenly Father, thank You for the men and women who have answered the call to protect our country, near and far. Please protect every service member, and help them to know how very near You are. May each veteran and serving soldier feel honored today, and may we as a nation, be more supportive of our troops. Forgive us for taking our freedoms for granted, and help us to do whatever You call us to, to honor and support those who are serving our country, and their families that are left behind. Teach us how to trust You more, so that we may love like You in all things and at all times. May the love that we show lead many to a lasting relationship with You. Above all, be glorified through our every action. Amen.

© Shannon Elizabeth Moreno and Revelations in Writing, May 2011 – present.


Honoring Our Warriors

Sometimes war is something that can and should not be avoided. God has told us to stand for what we believe and in order to do that sometimes it is necessary to fight. To the men and women who are willing to lay down their lives for their God, their country, their family, their friends, and even for those whom they do not know, we give our thanks.

In 2 Samuel 23 Davids last words were for the men that fought and men that he considered the real hero’s. Men like Eleazer, Adino, and Shammah, who stood and fought for God and country. David said “The God of Israel said, the Rock of Israel spake to me, He that ruleth over men must be just, ruling in the fear of God.” 2 Samuel 23:3

Many times the wars of today are not just, but that does not negate the honor of those who obey and give their lives in order for the people of this country to remain free. In times past we have treated them with dishonor, and I see a return of that in the way that our current government is beginning to treat them as well. While our government is limiting their freedoms and disrespecting them, it falls upon us as citizens of this country to step up and show them that irregardless of what the government that has placed them in danger, believes, we honor them and wish to show our respect in every way possible. So remember that these are our own and that we do honor them!

Enhanced by Zemanta

Who is the King in America?

By Bill Federer
Who is the King in America?”THE PEOPLE ARE THE SOVEREIGN OF THIS COUNTRY” – John Jay, First Chief Justice, Chisholm v. Georgia, 1793.

President James K. Polk stated December 7, 1847:


“THE PEOPLE ARE THE ONLY SOVEREIGNS RECOGNIZED BY OUR CONSTITUTION…

The success of our admirable system is a conclusive refutation of the
theories of those in other countries who maintain that a ‘favored few’ are born to rule and that the mass of mankind must be governed by force.”


President Grover Cleveland, July 13, 1887:

“THE SOVEREIGNTY OF 60 MILLIONS OF FREE PEOPLE, is…the working out…of the divine right of man to govern himself and a manifestation of God’s plan concerning the human race.”

President Gerald Ford stated September 13, 1975:

“Never forget that in America OUR SOVEREIGN IS THE CITIZEN…

The State is a servant of the individual. It must never become an anonymous monstrosity that masters everyone.”

How do THE PEOPLE exercise their sovereignty?

Through voting in elections.


On of the first elections recorded in America was in Woburn, Massachusetts, which was founded in 1642 by Captain Edward Johnson, a contemporary of Governor John Winthrop.


Captain Edward Johnson described the town’s first election in Wonder-Working Providences of Sion’s Saviour in New England, 1654:

“The number of faithful people of Christ…gather into a church…


Having fasted and prayed…they joined together in a holy Covenant with the Lord and with one another…

Those who are chosen to a place in government, must be men truly fearing God, wise and learned in the truths of Christ…

Neither will any Christian of a sound judgment vote for any, but those who earnestly contend for the faith.”


Alexis de Tocqueville wrote of elections in Democracy in America, 1835:

“If a political character attacks a (religious) sect, this may not prevent even the partisans of that very sect from supporting him;

but if he attacks all the sects together, every one abandons him and he remains alone…

Moreover, all the sects of the United States are comprised within the great unity of Christianity.”


On elections, President Calvin Coolidge stated in a Radio Address, NOVEMBER 3, 1924:

“I therefore urge upon all the voters of our country, without reference to party, that they assemble…at their respective voting places in the exercise of the high office of American citizenship,

that they approach the ballot box in the spirit that they would approach a sacrament, and there, disregarding all appeals to passion and prejudice, dedicate themselves truly and wholly to the welfare of their country.”

Calvin Coolidge continued:

“When an election is so held, it…sustains the belief that the voice of the people is the voice of God.”

On September 20, 2001, President George W. Bush addressed Congress after the 911 Islamic terrorist attack:

“Our enemy is a radical network of terrorists…They hate our freedoms – our freedom of religion, our freedom of speech, our freedom to vote.”

American Minute is a registered trademark. Permission is granted to forward. reprint or duplicate with acknowledgement tovwww.AmericanMinute.com
Enhanced by Zemanta

PEACE THROUGH STRENGTH – ‘We can ensure peace only so long as we remain strong.’-Harry Truman via American Minute

By Bill Federer
On OCTOBER 23, 1945, President Harry Truman addressed a Joint Session of Congress:”The United States now has a fighting strength greater than at any other time in our history…greater than that of any other nation in the world…

We are strong because of the courage…of a liberty loving people who are determined that this nation shall remain forever free…

We intend to use all our moral influence and all our physical strength to work for that kind of peace.

We can ensure such a peace only so long as we remain strong. We must face the fact that peace must be built upon power, as well as upon good will and good deeds…”


Truman continued:

It is only by strength that we can impress the fact upon possible future aggressors that we will tolerate no threat to peace or liberty…

In any future war, the heart of the United States would be the enemy’s first target.

Our geographical security is now gone–gone with the advent of the robot bomb, the rocket, aircraft carriers and modern airborne armies.

The surest guaranty that no nation will dare again to attack us is to remain strong in the only kind of strength an aggressor understands–military power…

The moral and spiritual welfare of our young people should be a consideration of prime importance, and, of course, facilities for worship in every faith should be available.”

On OCTOBER 23, 1960, John F. Kennedy stated at a Commemorative Concert:

“Americans will never…recognize Soviet domination of Hungary.

Hungary’s claim to independence and liberty is not based on sentiment or politics. It is deeply rooted in history, in culture and in law.

No matter what sort of puppet government they may maintain, we do not mean to see that claim abandoned.

Americans intend to hasten…the day when the men and women of Hungary will stand again in freedom and justice.”


Twenty-nine years later, on OCTOBER 23, 1989, the communist Hungarian People’s Republic officially ended, being replaced by the Hungarian Republic.


On OCTOBER 23, 1985, President Ronald Reagan stated:

“OCTOBER 23 is the second anniversary of the date on which the largest number of Americans was killed in a single act of terrorism –

the bombing of the United States compound in Beirut, Lebanon…in which 241 United States servicemen lost their lives.

These brave soldiers died defending our cherished ideals of freedom and peace. It is appropriate that we honor these men and all other victims of terrorism.”


On March 20, 1981, at the Conservative Political Action Conference Dinner, Mayflower Hotel, Washington, DC, Ronald Reagan stated:

“Evil is powerless if the good are unafraid.”


On October 27, 1964, Ronald Reagan stated:

“Khrushchev has told his people…we are retreating under the pressure of the Cold War, and someday when the time comes…our surrender will be voluntary because by that time we will have been weakened from within spiritually, morally, and economically….”

Reagan continued:

“You and I…do not believe that life is so dear and peace so sweet as to be purchased at the price of chains and slavery…

Should Moses have told the children of Israel to live in slavery under the pharaohs? Should Christ have refused the cross?

Should the patriots at Concord Bridge have thrown down their guns and refused to fire the shot heard ’round the world?

The martyrs of history were not fools, and our honored deadwho gave their lives to stop the advance of the Nazis didn’t die in vain.”

Reagan concluded:

“Where, then, is the road to peace? Well, it’s a simple answer after all.

You and I have the courage to say to our enemies,

“There is a price we will not pay.” There is a point beyond which they must not advance.”

American Minute is a registered trademark. Permission is granted to forward. reprint or duplicate with acknowledgement tovhttp://www.AmericanMinute.com
Enhanced by Zemanta

‘Free speech does not live many hours after free industry and free commerce die.’-Herbert Hoover via American Minute

By Bill Federer
“Free speech does not live many hours after free industry and free commerce die.”-Herbert Hoover, October 31, 1932, in his campaign for President.He continued:

“No man who has not occupied my position in Washington can fully realize the constant battle which must be carried on against…tyranny of government expanded into business activities.”


Following World War I, Hebert Hoover organized feeding 300 million in 21 countries of Europe and Russia.

During the 1927 Mississippi flood, Herbert Hoover coordinated relief to millions when the levees broke.

His entire life he refused payment for public service.


In 1928, Herbert Hoover was elected the 31st U.S. President in a landslide victory.

His Vice-President, Charles Curtis, was the first Native American to hold that office.


In his Inaugural Address, March 4, 1929, he stated:

“I assume this trust in the humility of knowledge that only through the guidance of Almighty Providence can I hope to discharge its ever-increasing burdens.”


In The Challenge of Liberty, 1934, Herbert Clark Hoover declared:

“While I can make no claim for having introduced the term, ‘rugged individualism,’ I should be proud to have invented it.

It has been used…in eulogy of those God-fearing men and women of honesty whose stamina and character and fearless assertion of rights led them to make their own way in life.”


Hoover stated:

“Freedom is an open window through which pours the sunlight of the human spirit and of human dignity.

With the preservation of these moral and spiritual qualities and with God’s grace will come further greatness for our country.”

Born in 1874, his Quaker mother taught Sunday School and spoke at Friend’s meetings before dying when he was ten.


Hoover lived on an Indian Reservation in Oklahoma before moving to Oregon.

He worked his way through Stanford University doing laundry, delivering papers and working for the U.S. Geological Survey.

Herbert Hoover served under Presidents Wilson, Harding, Coolidge, Truman and Eisenhower.


At the onset of the Depression, in an address at Valley Forge, May 30, 1931, President Hoover stated:

“If those few thousand men endured that long winter of privation and suffering…held their countrymen to the faith, and by that holding held fast the freedom of America, what right have we to be of little faith?”


On October 18, 1931, in an address which began a nation-wide drive to aid the private relief agencies, President Herbert Hoover stated:

“This civilization…which we call American life, is builded and can alone survive upon the translation into individual action of that fundamental philosophy announced by the Savior nineteen centuries ago.”


On September 15, 1932, to leaders of the “national drive” committee for voluntary relief agencies, President Herbert Hoover stated:

“We maintain the spiritual impulses in our people for generous giving and generous service – in the spirit that each is his brother’s keeper.”


On April 5, 1945, President Franklin Roosevelt wrote a letter to the Saudi King promising not to recognize a Jewish State. A week later, Roosevelt was dead and the next President, Harry S Truman, recognized Israel.

Herbert Hoover proposed a solution to the Middle East crisis which was reported in a Scripps-Howard Press interview, November 19, 1945:


“In ancient times the irrigation of the Tigris and Euphrates Valleys supported probably 10 million people in the kingdoms of Babylon and Nineveh.

The deterioration and destruction of their irrigation works by the Mongol invasion centuries ago, and their neglect for ages, are responsible for the shrinkage of the population to about 3,500,000 people in modern Iraq.


Some 30 years ago, Sir William Willcocks, an eminent British engineer, completed a study of the restoration of the old irrigation system. He estimated that about 2,800,000 acres of the most fertile land I the world could be recovered at a cost of under $150,000,000.

Some progress has been made under the Iraq government but their lack of financial resources and the delay of war have retarded the work greatly…


My own suggestion is that Iraq might be financed to complete this great land development on the consideration that it be made the scene of resettlement of the Arabs from Palestine.

This would clear Palestine completely for a large Jewish emigration and colonization.

A suggestion of transfer of the Arab people of Palestine was made by the British Labor Party in December, 1944, but no adequate plan was proposed as to where or how they were to go.


There is room for many more Arabs in such a development in Iraq than the total Arabs in Palestine. The soil is more fertile. They would be among their own race which is Arab-speaking and Mohammedan.

The Arab population of Palestine would be the gainer from better lands in exchange for their present holdings. Iraq would be the gainer for it badly needs agricultural population…

Today millions of people are being moved from one land to another. If the lands were organized and homes provided, this particular movement could be made the model migration of history. It would be a solution by engineering instead of by conflict.

I realize that the plan offers a challenge both to the statesmanship of the Great Powers as well as to the goodwill of all parties concerned. However, I submit it and it does offer a method of settlement with both honor and wisdom.”


After his term in office, Herbert Clark Hoover proposed reorganizing the United Nations to exclude Communist countries, as he told the American Newspaper Publishers Association, April 27, 1950:

“What the world needs today is a definite, spiritual mobilization of the nations who believe in God against this tide of Red agnosticism. It needs a moral mobilization against the hideous ideas of the police state and human slavery…

I suggest that the United Nations should be reorganized without the Communist nations in it. If that is impractical, then a definite New United Front should be organized of those peoples who disavow communism, who stand for morals and religion, and who love freedom…

It is a proposal based solely upon moral, spiritual and defense foundations. It is a proposal to redeem the concept of the United Nations to the high purpose for which it was created. It is a proposal for moral and spiritual cooperation of God-fearing free nations.

And in rejecting an atheistic other world, I am confident that the Almighty God will be with us.”

Herbert Hoover spoke at a reception on his 80th birthday in West Branch, Iowa, August 10, 1954, warning:

“I have witnessed on the ground in 20 nations the workings of the philosophy of that anti-Christ, Karl Marx.
There rises constantly in my mind the forces which make for progress and those which may corrode away the safeguards of freedom in America…

Today the Socialist virus and poison gas generated by Karl Marx and Friedreich Engels have spread into every nation on the earth.
Their dogma is absolute materialism which defies truth and religious faith…
To this whole gamut of Socialist infections, I say to you…God has blessed us with another wonderful word – “heritage.” The great documents of that heritage are not from Karl Marx. They are from the Bible, the Declaration of Independence and the Constitution of the United States.
Within them alone can the safeguards of freedom survive.”
Herbert Clark Hoover, who was a member of the Society of Friends, or Quakers, stated:
“The whole inspiration of our civilization springs from the teachings of Christ and the lessons of the prophets. To read the Bible for these fundamentals is a necessity of American life.”

Herbert Hoover, who died OCTOBER 20, 1964, signed a joint-statement during World War II with the widows of Presidents Theodore Roosevelt, Coolidge, Taft, Harrison and Cleveland, which stated:
“Menaced by collectivist trends, we must seek revival of our strength in the spiritual foundations which are the bedrock of our republic.
Democracy is the outgrowth of the religious conviction of the sacredness of every human life.
On the religious side, its highest embodiment is the Bible; on the political side, the Constitution.”
American Minute is a registered trademark. Permission is granted to forward. reprint or duplicate with acknowledgement tovwww.AmericanMinute.com
Enhanced by Zemanta

Victory at the Battle of Yorktown

By Bill Federer
British Colonel Tarleton was known as ‘the bloody butcher’ for letting his dragoons bayonet and hack hundreds of surrendering American soldiers atBuford’s Massacre, May 29, 1780.In January of 1781, Colonel Tarletonwith 1,200 dragoons were pursuing American troops, but General Daniel Morgan led them into a trap at theBattle of Cowpens, killing 100 British and capturing 800.


When British General Cornwallisheard the news, he was leaning on his sword, and leaned so forcibly that it snapped in two.


Cornwallis gave chase, even abandoning his slow supply wagons along the way, but was unable to catch the Americans, now led by General Nathaniel Greene.

Providential flash floods and rising rivers allowed the Americans to escape.


Without supplies,Cornwallis was ordered to move his 8,000 troops to a defensive position where the York River entered Chesapeake Bay.

By this time, Ben Franklin and Marquis de Lafayette had succeeded in their efforts to persuade French King Louis XVI to send ships and troops the help the Americans.


French Admiral de Grasse left off fighting the British in the West Indies and sailed 24 ships to the mouth of Chesapeake Bay, where, in the Battle of the Capes, he drove off 19 British ships which were sent to evacuate Cornwallis‘ men.


De Grasse’s 3,000 French troops andGeneral Rochambeau’s 6,000 French troops hurriedly joinedGeneral Lafayette’s division as they marched to help General Washington trap Cornwallis against the sea.


They joined the troops ofGenerals Benjamin LincolnBaron von SteubenModrecai Gist,Henry Knox and John Peter Muhlenberg.

Altogether, 17,000 French and American troops surrounded Cornwallisand, on OCTOBER 19, 1781, he surrendered.

Yale President Ezra Stiles wrote, May 8, 1783:

“Who but God could have ordained the critical arrival of the Gallic (French) fleet, so as to… assist… in the siege… of Yorktown?…
Should we not… ascribe to a Supreme energy… the wise… generalship displayed by General Greene… leaving the… roving Cornwallis to pursue his helter-skelter ill fated march into Virginia…
It is God who had raised up for us a…powerful ally… a chosen army and a naval force: who sent us a Rochambeau… to fight side by side with aWashington… in the… Battle of Yorktown.”

General Washingtonwrote:
“To diffuse the general Joy through every breast the General orders…Divine Service to be performed tomorrow in the several Brigades…
The Commander-in-Chief earnestly recommends troops not on duty should universally attend with that gratitude of heart which the recognition of such astonishing Interposition of Providence demands.”
American Minute is a registered trademark. Permission is granted to forward. reprint or duplicate with acknowledgement tovwww.AmericanMinute.com
Enhanced by Zemanta

About the cost of Obama-care via Cry and Howl

Our friend and fellow blogger Steve (Cry and Howl) has had a interesting experience that I thought it would be helpful to share. Here is his latest post, reposted with his permission!

 …

A couple days ago Sara at The Independent Sentinel posted  Healthcare Dot Gov Is As Secure As Chicken Wire Holding Back T-Rex.

You know how the Food Stamp cards recently went out without a limit in Louisiana due to a computer glitch? Wait until the same people who gave you food stamp cards are in charge of your healthcare needs. Wait until your healthcare is dependent on this healthcare dot gov site.

The Alaska Dispatch found significant cybersecurity problems that no one is talking about! It’s architecture is outrageous as in outrageously bad, according to their cybersecurity experts.

The problems are many and they should have been obvious. For one thing, healthcare.gov can be ‘spoofed,’ in other words, criminals can design a matching site that will grab your information as you input. Another problem is the login which allows frequent errors upon login. A bank, for instance will allow no more than three tries. Allowing endless tries gives hackers the opportunity to keep trying until they get the password.

The serious cybersecurity issues noted by the Dispatch:

RIGHT HERE

I made a comment on the post relaying my own personal experience at enrolling into Obama-care. Mainly I was curious what the cost would be … The following is what I found out …

I pay a little over $1,000 a month for health-care insurance. 70% paid after I meet a $5,000 deductable. (my company reimburses $2,500 of that) $15,000 o.o.p. (family)
~~~
I went to Healthcare.gov to see what I could get …
Bronze: about $1,550 a month … $11,700 deductable … $12,700 out-of-pocket. (pays 60% after meeting deductable)
Silver: about $2,015 a month … $7,540 deductable …$12,457 o.o.p.
Gold: $2,278 a month …$4,050 deductable … $9,314 o.o.p.
~~~
I make a decent living and I can barely afford health insurance. I hate to see what people of lesser means are facing. And to think they are forced to buy that crap!

I didn’t go any farther. There were other variations of plans … too exhaustive to check out and it took me about 45 minutes just to get to the point of getting any prices. The above gives us just a taste of what we’re in for and how team Obama has broken it off in the American people once again.

Enhanced by Zemanta

Her beautiful hair was scalped off her head… – The Battle of Saratoga via American Minute

By Bill Federer
Her beautiful, long hair was scalped off her head by Indians after she was shot.
This was the fate of Jane McCrea, whose loyalist fiancé David Jones had only weeks earlier joined British General “Gentleman Johnny” Burgoyne, who in June of 1777, was marching with 7,000 troops from Canada to Albany, New York.

Recapturing Fort Ticonderoga, Burgoyne headed down the Hudson River Valley, making a treaty with the Mohawk Tribe to terrorize American settlements.
When Indians returned to camp with a scalp of beautiful long hair, David Jones instantly recognized it as his fiancée’s.
This resulted in an outrage that forced Burgoyne to tell the Indians to show restraint.
Insulted, the Indians left Burgoyne stranded deep in the forest.

Jane McCrea’s death, later immortalized in James Fenimore Cooper’s novel, The Last of the Mohicans, rallied Americans, causing ranks to increase to 15,000.
The British tried to send reinforcements, but were prevented, as Yale President Ezra Stiles explained, May 8, 1783:
“To whom but the Ruler of the Winds shall we ascribe it, that the British reinforcement, in the summer of 1777, was delayed on the ocean three months by contrary winds, until it was too late for the conflagrating General Clinton to raise the siege of Saratoga.”

At the Battle of Saratoga, October 7, 1777, General Benedict Arnold led a valiant charge on the British flank, resulting in him being considered the hero of the battle.

Shortly thereafter, OCTOBER 17, 1777, British General Johnny Burgoyne surrendered to American General Horatio Gates, and over 6,000 British troops were captured.
When news of Burgoyne’s surrender reached King Louis XVI in France, he decided to support the American cause and enter the war.
The victory at Saratoga turned the Revolution into a global war, stretching Britain’s resources in other areas of the world, including the West Indies and Europe.
The surrender of Burgoyne at Saratoga is not only considered a major turning point in the Revolutionary War, but one of the most important battles in world history.

Artist John Trumbull’s painting of the Surrender of General Burgoyne is in the U.S. Capitol Rotunda.

 

General George Washington wrote to his brother John Augustine the day after the victory:
“I most devoutly congratulate my country, and every well-wisher to the cause, on this signal stroke of Providence.”

When Roger Sherman of Connecticut, who signed the Declaration of Independence, heard of the victory of Saratoga, he exclaimed:
“This is the Lord’s doing, and marvelous in our eyes!”
On November 1, 1777, the Continental Congress proclaimed a Day of Thanksgiving:

“That with one heart and one voice the good people may express the grateful feeling of their hearts…
join the penitent confession of their manifold sins…that it may please God, through the merits of Jesus Christ, mercifully to forgive and blot them out of rememberance…
and… under the providence of Almighty God…secure for these United States the greatest of all human blessings, independence and peace.”
American Minute is a registered trademark. Permission is granted to forward. reprint or duplicate with acknowledgement tovwww.AmericanMinute.com
Enhanced by Zemanta

Does Absolute Power Corrupt Absolutely? via American Minute

By Bill FedererOn OCTOBER 15, 1788, James Madison warned:

“As the courts are generally the last in making the decision, it results to them, by refusing or not refusing to execute a law, to stamp it with its final character.This makes the Judiciary department paramount in fact to the Legislature, which was never intended and can never be proper.”
On OCTOBER 15, 1991, the U.S. Senate confirmed Clarence Thomas as a Supreme Court Justice. During the hearings, in reply to Senator Thurmond, Clarence Thomas replied:”The role of a judge is a limited one. It is to…interpret the Constitution, where called upon, but at no point to impose his or her will or…opinion in that process.” 

Thomas Jefferson wrote to Abigail Adams, September 11, 1804:

“Nothing in the Constitution has given them (judges) a right to decide for the Executive, more than to the Executive to decide for them…

The opinion which gives to the judges the right to decide what laws are constitutional… not only for themselves in their own sphere of action, but for the legislature and executive…would make the judiciary a despotic branch.”

Webster’s Dictionary defined “despot” as:

“Absolute and arbitrary authority power… independent of the control of men.”


Thomas Jefferson wrote to William Jarvis, September 28, 1820:

“You seem…to consider the judges as the ultimate arbiters of all constitutional questions;a very dangerous doctrine indeed, and one which would place us under the despotism of an oligarchy...”

Jefferson continued:

“Our judges are as honest as other men, and not more so….and their power (is) the more dangerous, as they are in office for life and not responsible  , as the other functionaries are, to the elective control.

The Constitution has erected no such single tribunal,knowing that to whatever hands confided, with corruptions of time and party, its members would become despots.”

In his 1841 Inaugural Address, PresidentWilliam Henry Harrison warned:

“The great danger to our institutions does…appear to me to be…theaccumulation in one of the departments of that which was assigned to others.

Limited as are the powers which have been granted, still enough have been granted to constitute a despotism if concentrated in one of the departments.”

In 1857, Democrat appointed JusticeRoger Taney gave the Supreme Court’s infamous Dred Scott decision that slaves were not citizens, but property.

Lincoln alluded to this decision in his First Inaugural Address, March 4, 1861:”I do not forget the position assumed by some that constitutional questions are to be decided by the Supreme Court…


The candid citizen must confess that if the policy of the Government upon vital questions affecting the whole people is to be irrevocably fixed by decisions of the Supreme Court, the instant they are made…the people will have ceased to be their own rulers,

having to that extent practically resigned their Government into the hands of the eminent tribunal.

Thomas Jefferson warned Mr. Hammond in 1821:

“The germ of dissolution of our federal government is in…the federal judiciary;

an irresponsible body…working like gravity by night and by day, gaining a little today and a little tomorrow, and advancing its noiseless step like a thief, over the field of jurisdiction, until all shall be usurped from the States.”

Jefferson wrote September 6, 1819:

“The Constitution is a mere thing of wax in the hands of the judiciary, which they may twist and shape into any form they please.”

Thomas Jefferson explained to Supreme Court Justice William Johnson, June 12, 1823:”On every question of construction, carry ourselves back to the time when the Constitution was adopted, recollect the spirit manifested in the debates,and instead of trying what meaning may be squeezed out of the text, or invented against it, conform to the probable one in which it was passed.”

 

Baron Montesquieu, the most frequently quoted writer by the Framers of the Constitution, warned of the dangers of uncontrolled judicial power in his Spirit of the Laws, 1748:”Nor is there liberty if the power of judging is not separated from legislative power and from executive power.If it were joined to legislative power, the power over life and liberty of the citizens would be arbitrary, for the judge would be the legislator.

If it were joined to executive power, the judge could have the force of an oppressor.

All would be lost if the same…body of principal men… exercised these three powers.”

 Alexis de Tocqueville, author of Democracy in America, 1835, warned:

“The President, who exercises a limited power, may err without causing great mischief in the State.

Congress may decide amiss without destroying the Union, because the electoral body in which Congress originates may cause it to retract its decision

by changing its members.But if the Supreme Court is ever composed of imprudent men or bad citizens, the Union may be plunged into anarchy or civil war.” 

Colonial leader John Cotton stated:

“For whatever transcendent power is given, will certainly over-run those that give it…It is necessary therefore, that all power that is on earth be limited.”

   


James Madison
stated at the Constitutional Convention, 1787:

“All men having power ought to be distrusted.”


George Washington stated in his Farewell Address, September 17, 1796:

“And of fatal tendency…to put, in the place of the delegated will of the Nation, the will of a party – often a small but artful and enterprising minority…

They are likely, in the course of time and things, to become potent engines, by which cunning, ambitious, and unprincipled men will be enabled to subvert the Power of the People and to usurp for themselves the reins of Government;

destroying afterwards the very engines which have lifted them to unjust dominion.”


President Andrew Jackson,
 July 10, 1832, Bank Renewal Bill Veto:

“It is easy to conceive that great evils to our country and its institutions might flow from such a concentration of power in the hands of a few men irresponsible to the people.

Mere precedent is a dangerous source of authority, and should not be regarded as deciding questions of constitutional power.”


James Madison sums up the current dilemma in Federalist Paper #51:

“In framing a government which is to be administered by men over men, the great difficulty lies in this:

you must first enable the government to control the governed; and in the next place oblige it to control itself.”


Andrew Jackson
 stated in his Seventh Annual Message, December 7, 1835:

“All history tells us that a free people should be watchful of delegated power,

and should never acquiesce in a practice which will diminish their control over it.”

Lord Acton wrote to Bishop Mandell Creighton. April 5, 1881:“All power tends to corrupt and absolute power corrupts absolutely.”
American Minute is a registered trademark. Permission is granted to forward. reprint or duplicate with acknowledgement tovwww.AmericanMinute.com
Enhanced by Zemanta

US Army defines Christian ministry as ‘domestic hate group’

US Army defines Christian ministry as ‘domestic hate group’

by JohnMcTernan

 US Army defines Christian ministry as ‘domestic hate group’ 10/14/13

“Several dozen U.S. Army active duty and reserve troops were told last week that the American Family Association, a well-respected Christian ministry, should be classified as a domestic hate group because the group advocates for traditional family values.The briefing was held at Camp Shelby in Mississippi and listed the AFA alongside domestic hate groups like the Ku Klux Klan, Neo-Nazis, the Black Panthers and the Nation of Islam.”

The Dream of Obama and the Reprobates.The Dream of Obama and the Reprobates.

Once again, I told you this was coming. The Hard Left that now runs the military wants to marginalize real Christians exactly like the Nazis did to the Jews. This is not a game, but they are very serious about destroying Christianity. I cannot emphasize this enough: THEY HATE GOD AND ANYONE WHO STANDS FOR HIM.
Do not sit back and let them do it. I am not sure of a plan of action, but, we the people, can’t let the reprobates in government do this to our army. We vastly outnumber them, and somehow these numbers have to be harnessed. This is not live and let live, but for them it is to destroy.
They are training the military to be used against the people, like the SS was used against the Germans.
These are vicious dangerous people now over the military. It starts from Obama and flows directly into the leadership of the military.

We need to stand against them as a witness to the truth and the Lord Jesus Christ. When we make a stand in the name of Jesus Christ, God honors this.

Homosexuality is a life choice and a person is not born this way.
Homosexuals can be freed from the bondage of this sin, by repentance and the power of the gospel of Jesus Christ.

Revelation 22:20 He which testifieth these things saith, Surely I come quickly. Amen. Even so, come, Lord Jesus.

Reprinted with permission of the author John McTernan

Enhanced by Zemanta

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 2,998 other followers