About these ads

Attempting to obey God and follow Jesus Christ our Lord

liberty

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
About these ads

What if Freedom Meant Exodus?

David Wilkerson said:

“Consider the plight of Israel in Egypt. God’s nation was in incredible ruin, with widespread apostasy. Satan had Israel under his heel, manipulating the political powers of the day to make laws against them and persecute them. The enemy was ridiculing and mocking God’s testimony on earth.

It was a dark hour in Israel’s history and over time the people grew discouraged. They began backsliding, indulging in the pleasures and sensuality of Egypt. Idolatry and fornication became rampant. Israel’s situation seemed hopeless and the faith of the nation was slowly dying.

What was God’s response to this rising power of darkness? Did He stir up surrounding empires to act as His rod against Egypt? Did He incite a civil war among the Egyptians? Did He send avenging angels? No– God did no such thing. He had a totally different plan and laid His hand on a single man, raising up Moses!”

Think about that for a moment! Christians in America are increasingly seeing the same thing here! With our faith being ridiculed and mocked and a government increasingly hostile to our practicing our faith. We see a rampant increase of sexual immorality and perversion along with an assault on a on our children by forcing them to accept this behavior as normal.

We pray for wisdom for our leaders and for God to intercede. But what if God has other plans? What if God were to bring a Moses forth? Would we recognise and welcome him? If he wanted to lead us to a different place, would we go?

“The Lord executeth righteousness and judgment for all that are oppressed. He made known His ways unto Moses, His acts unto the children of Israel. The Lord is merciful and gracious, slow to anger, plentous in mercy.” Psalms 103:6-8


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

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

‘I tremble for my country when I reflect that God is just’-Thomas Jefferson via American Minute

By Bill Federer
The longest serving member of the United States Congress was Senate Majority Leader Robert Byrd, who was born NOVEMBER 20, 1917.Elected as a Democrat to Congress in 1953, and serving in the Senate from 1959-2010, he never lost an election.


On June 27, 1962, just two days after the Supreme Court stopped school prayer, Senator Robert Byrd addressed Congress:

“Inasmuch as our greatest leaders have shown no doubt about God’s proper place in the American birthright, can we, in our day, dare do less?…

In no other place in the United States are there so many, and such varied official evidences of deep and abiding faith in God on the part of Government as there are in Washington….


Every session of the House and the Senate begins with prayer. Each house has its own chaplain…”

Senator Robert Byrd continued:


“The 83rd Congress set aside a small room in the Capitol, just off the rotunda, for the private prayer and meditation of members of Congress. The room is always open when Congress is in session, but it is not open to the public.


The room’s focal point is a stained glass window showing George Washington kneeling in prayer. Behind him is etched these words from Psalm 16:1: ‘Preserve me, O God, for in Thee do I put my trust.’..”

Senator Byrd went on:


“Inside the rotunda is a picture of the Pilgrims about to embark from Holland on the sister ship of the Mayflower, the Speedwell.

The ship’s revered chaplain, Brewster, who later joined the Mayflower, has open on his lap the Bible. Very clear are the words, ‘the New Testament according to our Lord and Savior, Jesus Christ.’

On the sail is the motto of the Pilgrims, ‘In God We Trust, God With Us.’


The phrase, ‘In God We Trust,’ appears opposite the President of the Senate, who is the Vice-President of the United States.

The same phrase, in large words inscribed in the marble, backdrops the Speaker of the House of Representatives…”

Senator Byrd added:


“Above the head of the Chief Justice of the Supreme Court are the Ten Commandments, with the great American eagle protecting them.

Moses is included among the great lawgivers in Herman A MacNeil’s marble sculpture group on the east front.


The crier who opens each session closes with the words, ‘God save the United States and this Honorable Court.’

Engraved on the metal on the top of the Washington Monument are the words: ‘Praise be to God.’


Lining the walls of the stairwell are such biblical phrases as ‘Search the Scriptures,’ ‘Holiness to the Lord,’ ‘Train up a child in the way he should go, and when he is old he will not depart from it.’

Numerous quotations from Scripture can be found within its (the Library of Congress) walls.


One reminds each American of his responsibility to his Maker: ‘What doth the Lord require of thee, but to do justly and love mercy and walk humbly with thy God’(Micah 6:8).


Another in the lawmaker’s library preserves the Psalmist’s acknowledgment that all nature reflects the order and beauty of the Creator, ‘The heavens declare the glory of God, and the firmament showeth His handiwork’ (Psalm 19:1).

And still another reference: ‘The light shineth in darkness, and the darkness comprehendeth it not’ (John 1:5)…”


Senator Byrd stated further:

“Millions have stood in the Lincoln Memorial and gazed up at the statue of the great Abraham Lincoln.

The sculptor who chiseled the features of Lincoln in granite all but seems to make Lincoln speak his own words inscribed into the walls.

‘…That this Nation, under God, shall have a new birth of freedom, and that government of the people, by the people, for the people, shall not perish from the earth.’


At the opposite end, on the north wall, his Second Inaugural Address alludes to ‘God,’ the ‘Bible,’ ‘providence,’ ‘the Almighty,’ and ‘divine attributes.’

It then continues:

‘As was said 3000 years ago, so it still must be said, The judgments of the Lord are true and righteous altogether.’…

Senator Robert Byrd concluded:

“On the south banks of Washington’s Tidal Basin, Thomas Jefferson still speaks:

‘God who gave us life gave us liberty. Can the liberties of a nation be secure when we have removed a conviction that these liberties are the gift of God?

Indeed I tremble for my country when I reflect that God is just, that his justice cannot sleep forever.’

Jefferson’s words are a forceful and explicit warning that to remove God from this country will destroy it.”

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


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

Update from John McTernan

 

by JohnMcTernan

                           Verse of the Day

Matthew 26:64 Jesus saith unto him, Thou hast said: nevertheless I say unto you, Hereafter shall ye see the Son of man sitting on the right hand of power, and coming in the clouds of heaven.

Commentary

This is coming to America. The banks are warning.This is coming to America. The banks are warning.

Chase Bank Limits Cash Withdrawals, Bans International Wire Transfers10/16/13 This is an unusual step and needs to be watched. Chase is a huge bank and is warning everyone about the limits on cash withdrawals. Please seek the Lord about your funds in these banks, because this corrupt banking system cannot continue forever. I do not want a penny of my money lost or tied up in a “bail-in” as the plans are already in place for the US banks. Cyprus was their test case and the “banksters and gangsters” know exactly what to do.

May the Holy God of Israel bless and protect you.

Revelation 1:7 Behold, he cometh with clouds; and every eye shall see him, and they also which pierced him: and all kindreds of the earth shall wail because of him. Even so, Amen.

Hard Left Watch

Pentagon Admits Army’s ‘Hate Group’ Label of Christian Groups is Incorrect 10/16/13 Please pay no attention to this as this is about the fourth time in the last year this happened. Each time the military said the same thing or nothing. The military did nothing to correct this, and it continues at these training sessions. Someone high in the chain of command is authorizing this and no one is being held accountable except if it deals with Islam, then people are fired. This is just a ploy to make us feel good.

New Extremist Foxes Welcomed into U.S. Chicken Coop 10/10/13 This is about the Muslim Brotherhood influence in the Obama administration.

“Say hello again to two of the most over-promoted and sinister figures involved with the current U.S. government: Mohamed Elibiary and Dalia Mogahed. If you were one of those Christian Copts standing in the ruins of your village or church, what message would you take from all this?”

Presbyterian Church USA Teams Up With American Islamists10/06/13 Our brothers and sisters in Christ are being murdered every day by the Muslims and he writes a book like this. I would like to see this pastor try and go to Mecca and find out what is real Islam.

I see this man as “Tokyo Rose” during WW2 or “Hanoi Jane” during the Vietnam War. If you know anyone in the Presbyterian Church USAplease send this to them.

Pro-family attorneys arguing for traditional marriage before lesbian judge 10/09/13 This is what America is coming down to: wicked people in positions of power. God has turned America over to them. A judge like this is judgment on the nation.

Judge punished for refusing to perform same-sex marriage ceremonies10/09/13 This is what happens when the wicked are in power.

America’s Delusion

Gov. Brown: Insurers Must Cover Fertility Treatments–For Same-Sex Partners 10/10/13 What can be added to this other than there is no bottom to free fall of the reprobates in America. They are making total fools of themselves for all to see. This is really embarrassing and yet painful to watch.

Gov. Brown: Insurers Must Cover Fertility Treatments–For Same-Sex Partners – See more at: http://www.cnsnews.com/news/article/barbara-hollingsworth/gov-brown-insurers-must-cover-fertility-treatments-same-sex#sthash.2suO5NOH.dpuf

Homosexual movement has PR campaign for its last enemy: the church10/14/13 Because the vast majority of pastors and Christians failed to stand up for God’s holiness and seek revival in America, God is about to use the homosexuals to test the mettle of the church. They will force the church to take a stand in the name of Jesus or just melt away. This is very close.

Israel and the Middle East War

US and Iran hold bilateral meeting in Geneva 10/16/13 Obama is looking for a way out of confrontation with Iran. Iran will tell him what he wants to hear. Israel is going to be left alone.

Tensions rise as Saudis fear US ‘going soft’ 10/15/13 How about Israel and Saudi Arabia teaming up against Iran? The Saudis are terrified of a nuclear Iran and could it be possible that they would allow Israel to use Saudi Arabian airspace to attack Iran?

“With Saudi Arabia backing the rebels in Syria, and Iran helping to prop up Bashar al-Assad’s dictatorship, the longstanding rivalry between the regional powers has found a violent flashpoint. The Saudi kingdom was therefore dismayed to see the US welcoming – albeit cautiously – the new moderate tone coming from Tehran.”The Saudis’ worst nightmare would be the administration striking a grand bargain with Iran,” former US ambassador to Saudi Arabia Robert Jordan told Reuters. Such a deal could, for example, see Washington willing to tolerate Iran’s influence in Syria in exchange for inspections of Iran’s nuclear facilities.”

Netanyahu to NYT: Herzl, Churchill were more alone 10/12/13

Egypt’s message to Obama – Keep your aid 10/11/13

Israel’s blind watchmen 10/10/13 Obama tried his best to sell out Israel to the Turks! This man is an agent of the Muslim Brotherhood.

” Last week, Turkish President Abdullah Gul told Yediot Aharonot that the apology came too late. And this week, Erdogan hosted Hamas chief Khaled Mashaal for the third time in the past year. Commentators have raised the prospect that Hamas may be hoping to transfer its headquarters from Qatar to Turkey.The Egyptian military is now fighting Hamas in Sinai. The military-backed government blames the Palestinian Muslim Brotherhood branch for fomenting the Islamist insurgency there. Egyptian forces have destroyed much of the tunnel network linking Gaza with Sinai that had enabled the cross-traffic of terrorists and munitions between the areas. This week, Egypt announced plans to demarcate Egypt’s territorial waters along Gaza to prevent the transfer by sea of weapons and terror operatives between them.

Under these circumstances, Erdogan’s embrace of Mashaal was a sign not only of support for Hamas and ill will toward Israel. It was a sign of animosity toward Egypt.

It is notable that the same day Erdogan welcomed Mashaal to Turkey, the Obama administration announced it is scaling back US military assistance to Egypt. The administration claims it is freezing the transfer of major military platforms to Egypt to show its dissatisfaction with the government’s crackdown on the Muslim Brotherhood government, and its impatience with the military’s refusal to date to call elections after deposing the elected Muslim Brotherhood government in July.”

Jihadists flooding into northern Syria put Turkey on edge 10/15/13 This is very interesting as Turkey was behind Hamas and the flotilla that Israel had to attack. Now they have vicious terrorists right on their border! The very same type that they tried to get into Israel!

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

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

‘A people who reject its holy faith will find themselves the slaves of arbitrary power.’- Lewis Cass via American Minute

By Bill FedererThe Democrat Party’s candidate for President in the 1848 election was Lewis Cass, born OCTOBER 9, 1782.

In 1807, Lewis Cass became the US Marshal for Ohio.

He was a Brigadier-General in the War of 1812, fighting in the Battle of the Thames.President James Madison appointed him Governor-General of the Michigan Territory, 1813-1831, where he made Indian treaties, organized townships and built roads.

In 1820, he led an expedition to northern Minnesota to search for the source of the Mississippi River in order to define the border between the U.S. and Canada.

Cass’ expedition geologist Henry Schoolcraft identified the Mississippi’s source as Lake Itasca in 1832.

President Andrew Jackson appointed Lewis Cass as Secretary of War in 1831, then minister to France in 1836.

He was elected a U.S. Senator from Michigan, 1845-48, 1849-57.

Senator Lewis Cass wrote from Washington, D.C. in 1846:

“God, in His providence, has given us a Book of His revealed will to be with us at the commencement of our career in this life and at its termination;

and to accompany us during all chances and changes of this trying and fitful progress, to control the passions, to enlighten the judgment, to guide the conscience, to teach us what we ought to do here, and what we shall be hereafter.”

Lewis Cass delivered a Eulogy for Secretary of State Daniel Webster, December 14, 1852:”‘How are the mighty fallen!’ we may yet exclaim, when reft of our great and wisest; but they fall to rise again from death

to life, when such quickening faith in the mercy of God and in the sacrifice of the Redeemer comes to shed upon them its happy influence this side of the grave and beyond it…”Continuing his Eulogy of Daniel Webster, Lewis Cass stated”

And beyond all this he died in the faith of the Christian – humble, but hopeful – adding another to the long list of eminent men who have searched the Gospel of Jesus Christ, and have found it to be the word and the will of God.”

Lewis Cass was Secretary of State for President James Buchanan, 1857-1860.

The State of Michigan placed his statue in the U.S. Capitol’s Statuary Hall.
In 17 States, Lewis Cass has places named for him, including: 30 townships, 10 cities, 10 streets, 9 counties, 4 schools, 3 parks, 2 lakes, 1 river, 1 fort, and 1 building.
Lewis Cass stated:
“Independent of its connection with human destiny hereafter, the fate of republican government is indissolubly bound up with the fate of the Christian religion,
and a people who reject its holy faith will find themselves the slaves of their own evil passions and of arbitrary power.
American Minute is a registered trademark. Permission is granted to forward. reprint or duplicate with acknowledgement tovwww.AmericanMinute.com
Enhanced by Zemanta

Is History Repeating Itself?

When America decided that it could no longer tolerate the abuse and excess’ of King George, and declared their independence from Great Britain, they set forth in that declaration a list of the reasons for their decision. Compare their reasoning then to the current circumstances that we find ourself in. They are very similar in many instances. Take a look at a portion of the Declaration of Independence:

“The history of the present King of Great Britain is a history of repeated injuries and usurpations, all having in direct object the establishment of an absolute Tyranny over these States. To prove this, let Facts be submitted to a candid world.

He has refused his Assent to Laws, the most wholesome and necessary for the public good.

He has forbidden his Governors to pass Laws of immediate and pressing importance, unless suspended in their operation till his Assent should be obtained; and when so suspended, he has utterly neglected to attend to them.

He has refused to pass other Laws for the accommodation of large districts of people, unless those people would relinquish the right of Representation in the Legislature, a right inestimable to them and formidable to tyrants only.

He has called together legislative bodies at places unusual, uncomfortable, and distant from the depository of their public Records, for the sole purpose of fatiguing them into compliance with his measures.

He has dissolved Representative Houses repeatedly, for opposing with manly firmness his invasions on the rights of the people.

He has refused for a long time, after such dissolutions, to cause others to be elected; whereby the Legislative powers, incapable of Annihilation, have returned to the People at large for their exercise; the State remaining in the mean time exposed to all the dangers of invasion from without, and convulsions within.

He has endeavoured to prevent the population of these States; for that purpose obstructing the Laws for Naturalization of Foreigners; refusing to pass others to encourage their migrations hither, and raising the conditions of new Appropriations of Lands.

He has obstructed the Administration of Justice, by refusing his Assent to Laws for establishing Judiciary powers.

He has made Judges dependent on his Will alone, for the tenure of their offices, and the amount and payment of their salaries.

He has erected a multitude of New Offices, and sent hither swarms of Officers to harrass our people, and eat out their substance.

He has kept among us, in times of peace, Standing Armies without the Consent of our legislatures.

He has affected to render the Military independent of and superior to the Civil power.

He has combined with others to subject us to a jurisdiction foreign to our constitution, and unacknowledged by our laws; giving his Assent to their Acts of pretended Legislation:

For Quartering large bodies of armed troops among us:
For protecting them, by a mock Trial, from punishment for any Murders which they should commit on the                      Inhabitants of these States:
For cutting off our Trade with all parts of the world:
For imposing Taxes on us without our Consent:
For depriving us in many cases, of the benefits of Trial by Jury:
For transporting us beyond Seas to be tried for pretended offences
For abolishing the free System of English Laws in a neighbouring Province, establishing therein an Arbitrary                  government, and enlarging its Boundaries so as to render it at once an example and fit instrument for                          introducing the same absolute rule into these Colonies:
For taking away our Charters, abolishing our most valuable Laws, and altering fundamentally the Forms of                    our Governments:
For suspending our own Legislatures, and declaring themselves invested with power to legislate for us in all                cases whatsoever.

He has abdicated Government here, by declaring us out of his Protection and waging War against us.

He has plundered our seas, ravaged our Coasts, burnt our towns, and destroyed the lives of our people.

He is at this time transporting large Armies of foreign Mercenaries to compleat the works of death, desolation and tyranny, already begun with circumstances of Cruelty & perfidy scarcely paralleled in the most barbarous ages, and totally unworthy the Head of a civilized nation.

He has constrained our fellow Citizens taken Captive on the high Seas to bear Arms against their Country, to become the executioners of their friends and Brethren, or to fall themselves by their Hands.

He has excited domestic insurrections amongst us, and has endeavoured to bring on the inhabitants of our frontiers, the merciless Indian Savages, whose known rule of warfare, is an undistinguished destruction of all ages, sexes and conditions.

In every stage of these Oppressions We have Petitioned for Redress in the most humble terms: Our repeated Petitions have been answered only by repeated injury. A Prince whose character is thus marked by every act which may define a Tyrant, is unfit to be the ruler of a free people.”

It seems in reading this, that we are no longer a free people, with a governing body that is represented by regular Americans, instead we have devolved into the very monarchy of King George that we spent treasure and lives to overcome and establish a Republic called The United States of America!

Our Constitution gave us an out if and when we faced this situation, that was in Article V which says:

“on the Application of the Legislatures of two thirds of the several States, shall call a Convention for proposing Amendments, which, in either Case, shall be valid to all Intents and Purposes, as Part of this Constitution, when ratified by the Legislatures of three fourths of the several States, or by Conventions in three fourths thereof, as the one or the other Mode of Ratification may be proposed by the Congress;”

This is a proposal that is gaining popularity, especially with the promotion of people like Mark Levin. This is a proposal that relies on the States desiring the freedom which has been taken from them. It is also a process that takes time and we truly have no idea what a vindictive and manipulative federal government would do in the meantime, or even if they, who have decided that the laws do not mean anything if they don’t like them, or that they are inviolate and unable to be changed if they do.

We don’t know if the administration which has made it clear that they would like to make life painful to the American people would accept the legality of the states making decisions that benefit them. We also don’t know if our Supreme Court would rule that this is Constitutional. This leaves a lot of questions about what we would do then.

But what do we do now? Do we allow the current situation to continue? If we do, we will no longer be a free people, but rather slaves to a government that thinks that it knows what is best for all, that they have the moral right to redistribute not only the wealth that a private citizen earns, but the property that they have strived for in many cases their whole lives. An administration that thinks that it knows best what food you should eat, what news you should read, what faith you should practice, and even what words are acceptable for you to think!

In other words, we will not be The United States of America because the states will really no longer exist, but instead every directive will come from the Federal Government and they will be our God.

When the founding patriots decided that they had reached their limit and informed King George of their grievances, they knew that they would have to fight for freedom.

“Nor have We been wanting in attentions to our Brittish brethren. We have warned them from time to time of attempts by their legislature to extend an unwarrantable jurisdiction over us. We have reminded them of the circumstances of our emigration and settlement here. We have appealed to their native justice and magnanimity, and we have conjured them by the ties of our common kindred to disavow these usurpations, which, would inevitably interrupt our connections and correspondence. They too have been deaf to the voice of justice and of consanguinity. We must, therefore, acquiesce in the necessity, which denounces our Separation, and hold them, as we hold the rest of mankind, Enemies in War, in Peace Friends.

We, therefore, the Representatives of the united States of America, in General Congress, Assembled, appealing to the Supreme Judge of the world for the rectitude of our intentions, do, in the Name, and by Authority of the good People of these Colonies, solemnly publish and declare, That these United Colonies are, and of Right ought to be Free and Independent States; that they are Absolved from all Allegiance to the British Crown, and that all political connection between them and the State of Great Britain, is and ought to be totally dissolved; and that as Free and Independent States, they have full Power to levy War, conclude Peace, contract Alliances, establish Commerce, and to do all other Acts and Things which Independent States may of right do. And for the support of this Declaration, with a firm reliance on the protection of divine Providence, we mutually pledge to each other our Lives, our Fortunes and our sacred Honor.”

The time is rapidly approaching when we as American Citizens must choose the path of our future. We must choose while we have the opportunity, because if we do not, it will be chosen for us. A Constitutional Convention is one choice and it is one that I think that most people would agree on. However there is the possibility that we will not be able to make that choice. It that is the case there will only be two choices. Thomas Jefferson informed us that there was a possibility that we may have to change our government in The Declaration of Independence:

When in the Course of human events, it becomes necessary for one people to dissolve the political bands which have connected them with another, and to assume among the powers of the earth, the separate and equal station to which the Laws of Nature and of Nature’s God entitle them, a decent respect to the opinions of mankind requires that they should declare the causes which impel them to the separation.

We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain inalienable rights, that among these are Life, Liberty, and the pursuit of Happiness.—That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed. — That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles, and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness. Prudence, indeed, will dictate that Governments long established should not be changed for light and transient causes; and accordingly all experience hath shown, that mankind are more disposed to suffer, while evils are sufferable, than to right themselves by abolishing the forms to which they are accustomed. But when a long train of abuses and usurpations pursuing invariably the same Object, evinces a design to reduce them under absolute Despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such Government, and to provide new Guards for their future security. Such has been the patient sufferance of these Colonies; and such is now the necessity which constrains them to alter their former Systems of Government. The history of the present King of Great Britain is a history of repeated injuries and usurpations, all having in direct object the establishment of an absolute Tyranny over these States. To prove this let Facts be submitted to a candid world.”

When our government no longer have our permission to govern and instead are forcing us into the positions of slaves to it, we have the right under the Constitution to remove our government and take the rights that they lay claim to, away from them. We are told that it should not be done lightly and for transient cause. What is going on in our Federal Government is not a transient cause. Instead, it is rapidly developing into permanent enslavement. We can look at the reasons that we declared our independence in the first place and compare them to today’s conditions and see that they are almost identical.  It is our right, our duty, to throw off such Government, and provide new Guards for our future security. We are in the throes of Tyranny with a leader and governing body that no longer follows the law, abides by the Constitution, nor address’ the complaints of the people. We must choose wisely, but above all we must choose!

Cross posted at MareZilla

Cross posted at Grumpy’s Opinions

This image was selected as a picture of the we...

This image was selected as a picture of the week on the Malay Wikipedia for the 26th week, 2010. (Photo credit: Wikipedia)

Enhanced by Zemanta

Are The Truckers Today’s Patrick Henry?

Patrick Henry, portrait by George Bagby Matthe...

Patrick Henry, portrait by George Bagby Matthews c. 1891 after an original by Thomas Sully (Photo credit: Wikipedia)

This is no time for ceremony. The question before the House is one of awful moment to this country. For my own part, I consider it as nothing less than a question of freedom or slavery; and in proportion to the magnitude of the subject ought to be the freedom of the debate. It is only in this way that we can hope to arrive at truth, and fulfill the great responsibility which we hold to God and our country. Should I keep back my opinions as such a time, through fear of giving offense, I should consider myself as guilty of treason towards my country, and of an act of disloyalty toward the Majesty of Heaven which I revere above all earthly kings.” Patrick Henry

Are we willing to let ourselves be enslaved and subjugated by an elite division of this country that is currently in power and through their arrogance have decided that “We the People” mean nothing more than fodder to feed their desires to empower themselves and delegate those that they consider unworthy to irrelevancy. When the revolt against King George began, part of the protest was a group called “Sons of Liberty”, and while Patrick Henry was not a part of that group, the sentiments that he expressed in his speech, “Give me liberty or give me death,” are very much the same that those young men demonstrated. He also stated emphatically that to not speak out, irregardless of the offense that it might cause, was something that he himself would consider treasonous to his country and above that to God. He goes on to say:

“Mr. President, it is natural to man to indulge in the illusions of hope. We are apt to shut our eyes against a painful truth, and listen to the song of that siren till she transforms us into beasts. Is this the part of wise men, engaged in a great and arduous struggle for liberty? Are we disposed to be of the number of those who, having eyes, see not, and, having ears, hear not, the things which so nearly concern their temporal salvation? For my part, whatever anguish of spirit it may cost, I am willing to know the whole truth; to know the worst, and to provide for it.” Patrick Henry

The “illusion of hope”, that is what we have been sold for the last few years and there have been many that have been willfully blind and deaf to the reality of what is present in our government today. Our eyes are being opened finally by the extreme hatred and negativity that is being spewed out by leaders on the left for the most part, and not answered effectively by those on the right. We are beginning to recoil in horror at the treatment by the President in his enforcement of the so-called shutdown. The very idea that having less than 20% of the government on vacation, as a shutdown is in itself a mockery of the American people. But the actions of the President in making this as painful as possible on Vets, the elderly, the infirm, the military, and any others that he thinks are not worth is very disturbing.

For years Congress has been ceding it’s power in order to relieve themselves of work that they think can be done by someone else, or simply having that power taken by a President that believes he and he alone is fit to make decisions for everyone. It is time that Congress reasserts itself and claims it’s mantle before it is too late, if it is not already to late.

But back to my original question: Are the truckers today’s Patrick Henry? And are they shouting to the rooftops, give me liberty or give me death? They are displaying an enormous amount of courage by their actions and it will be a hopeful sign if they can manage to pull their actions off without any violence on either side.

Bullies tend to back down when they are faced and quite frankly the Obama administration are just that, bullies. It is time that the people of this country take a stand and support actions against the people in charge of this country that are trying to steal it away from the foundations on which it is based and turn it into nothing more that a foundation for enslavement.

I don’t know about you, but I stand with Patrick Henry, and with the truckers. As Glenn Beck is famous for pointing out, there are more of us than there are of them. If we wait until we are enslaved, we have no one to blame but ourselves.

“If we wish to be free– if we mean to preserve inviolate those inestimable privileges for which we have been so long contending– if we mean not basely to abandon the noble struggle in which we have been so long engaged, and which we have pledged ourselves never to abandon until the glorious object of our contest shall be obtained– we must fight! I repeat it, sir, we must fight!” Patrick Henry

Crossposted at GrumpyElder

Crossposted at MareZilla

Enhanced by Zemanta

‘Fighting the Flying Circus’ – Eddie Rickenbacker via American Minute

By Bill FedererHe began his career as an auto racer, gaining international fame by competing in theIndianapolis 500 four times, earning the nickname“Fast Eddie.”


When World War I stared, he was sent to France in 1917, becoming the personal chauffeur driver of General John J. Pershing.

His name wasEdward Vernon “Eddie” Rickenbacker, born OCTOBER 8, 1890.

With Germany’s Red Barondominating the skies, Eddie requested transfer to the air service where he eventually became commanding officer of the 94th Aero Pursuit Squadron, with its now famous “Hat-in-the-Ring” insignia.


This Squadron was responsible fordestroying 69 enemy aircraft, the highest number shot down by any American Squadron.

Flying over 300 combat hours,Eddie Rickenbacker was awarded the Congressional Medal of Honor by President Herbert Hoover in 1931 for personally shooting down 26 enemy aircraft.

He wrote his World War I experiences in the book,Fighting the Flying Circus, 1919, such as one story:

“…three-quarters of an hour of gasoline remained…and no compass.

Then I thought of the north star! Glory be! There she shines! I had been going west instead of south…

Keeping the star behind my rudder I flew south for fifteen minutes, then…found myself above…the River Meuse…picked up our faithful searchlight and ten minutes later I landed…

As I walked across the field to my bed I looked up…and repeated most fervently, ‘Thank God!’”

Rickenbacker wrote of the courage of fellow pilot Lt. Quentin Roosevelt, the son of President Theodore Roosevelt:

“Quentin flew about alone for a while, then discovering, as he supposed, his own formation ahead of him he overtook them, dropped in behind…

To his horror he discovered that he had been following an enemy patrol all the time! Every machine ahead of him wore a huge black maltese cross on its wings and tail!…

Quentin fired one long burst…The aeroplane immediately preceding him dropped at once and within a second or two burst into flames.

Quentin put down his nose and streaked it for home before the astonished Huns had time to notice what had happened.”


Quentin was shot downin a dogfight, July 14, 1918, as Rickenbackerwrote:

“Quentin Roosevelt’s death was a sad blow to the whole group.”


In recounting barely escaping death himself, Eddie Rickenbacker wrote:
“I want to make it clear that this escape and the others were not the result of any super ability or knowledge on my part. I wouldn’t be alive today if I had to depend on that.


I realized then, as I headed for France on one wing, that there had to be something else.

I had seen others die, brighter and more able than I.

I knew there was a power. I believe in calling upon it for aid and for guidance.

I am not such an egotist as to believe that God has spared me because I am I. I believe there is work for me to do and that I am spared to do it, just as you are.”

After World War I,Eddie Rickenbackerbecame owner of theIndianapolis Speedway which holds the annual 500 mile auto race.

In 1925,Rickenbackersupported General Billy Mitchell, who was court-martial for criticizing the military’s failure to upgrade their airplanes.


Rickenbacker worked forEastern Airlines, eventually becoming its president.

He opposed President Franklin Roosevelt’s New Deal policies as socialism, which drew criticism from the liberal media.

Roosevelt’s administration even ordered NBC Radio not to broadcast Rickenbacker’s remarks.

In 1942, Secretary of War Henry L. Stimson askedRickenbacker to go on aspecial mission to the Pacificto inspect the military bases.


Flying from Hawaii to New Guinea to meet with General Douglas MacArthur, the plane’s inadequate navigational equipment resulted in them being hundreds of miles off-course.

Out of fuel, the plane ditched in the ocean, October 21, 1942.

For twenty-four days, in almost hopeless conditions, Eddie Rickenbacker and seven othersdrifted aimlessly on the open sea.

Lt. James Whittakerdescribed in his book, We Thought We Heard The Angels Sing (1943), that they shivered wet all night but baked in the burning sun all day, and fought off sharks:

“…Those giant swells hadn’t looked so bad from high in the air, but down among them they were mountainous…

Rick maintained with a perfectly straight face that he was not in the least upset…

A swift movement beside our raft caught my eye and I turned…The water about the raft fleet was alive with the triangular, dorsal fins of sharks…”

The crew would have given up had not 52-year-old Eddie Rickenbacker, the oldest person on the raft, continued to encourage them.

Lt. James Whittakerwrote:

“Col. James C. Adamson…suddenly raised himself over the side of the raft and slid into the water. Quick as a flash, Rick had him.

We hurriedly pulled the rafts in close and helped push the Colonel back into his boat…Rick took over.

I will not put down all the things he said. They would scorch this paper. But from then on, woe betide the man who appeared about to turn quitter…

That man Rickenbacker has got a rough tongue in his head.”


Lt. James Whittakercontinued:

“At length Private Johnny Bartek got out his Testament and by common consent we pulled the rafts together for a prayer meeting. We said the Lord’s prayer…

I didn’t have the least notion that this open-air hallelujah meeting was going to do any good…I observed that Rick seemed to encourage the suggestion and appeared inclined to take part…

Col. Adamson was reading from the Testament.

Suddenly Cherry stopped him. ‘What was that last, Colonel?’ he demanded. ‘Where is that from?’

‘It is from the Gospel According to Matthew,’ Col. Adamson replied. ‘Do you like it?’

‘It’s the best thing I’ve heard yet. Read it again, Colonel.’

Col. Adamson then read from the 31st through the 34th verses of the sixth chapter of Matthew:

‘Therefore, take ye no thought, saying: What shall we eat? or What shall we drink? or, Wherewithal shall we be clothed? For these are things the heathen seeketh. For your Heavenly Father knoweth that ye have need of all these things.

But seek ye first the kingdom of God, and His righteousness; and all these things shall be added unto you. Take therefore no thought for the morrow; for the morrow shall take thought for the things of itself. Each day has enough trouble of its own.’

Lt. James Whittakercontinued:

“I was somewhat impressed and said so. Then I was a little surprised at myself and added that the evil certainly had been sufficient unto the last two or three days…

I thought of these words during the wet, dreary night that followed. I dismissed them finally with the decision I would believe when I saw the food and drink. I was destined to see something startlingly like proof the following night…”

Flight EngineerPrivate Johnny Bartek of Freehold, N.J., wrote in his book, Life Out There (1943) that on the 8th day, after reading from the Bible, Matthew 6:31-34, a sea gull landed on Rickenbacker’s head:

“…but as we went on we all began to believe in the Bible and God and prayer…We prayed and prayed for the sea gull to land so we could catch him…

After reading the passage, about twenty minutes later, that’s when the sea gull landed on Eddie Rickenbacker’s head…”

Rickenbacker caught it and they used it for food and fish bait, with a fishhook made from a bent key ring.

Succumbing to exposure and dehydration, Lt. James Whittakerwrote further in We Thought We Heard The Angels Sing(1943):

“We said the Lord’s prayer again…

While we rolled and wallowed over the crests and into the troughs I was thinking that this was God’s chance to make a believer of Jim Whittaker…

Eventually I became aware something was tugging insistently at my consciousness. I looked over to the left. A cloud that had been fleecy and white a while ago now was darkening by the second.


While I watched, a bluish curtain unrolled from the cloud to the sea. It was rain – and moving toward us! Now everyone saw the downpour, sweeping across the ocean and speckling the waves with giant drops.

‘Here she is!’ Cherry shouted. ‘Thanks, Old Master!’ Another minute and we were being deluged by sheets of cold water that splashed into our parched mouths and sluiced the caked salt off our burned and stinging bodies. We cupped our hands to guide the life-giving rivulets down our throats…

We soaked and wrung out our shirts until all the salt was washed out of them. Then we saturated them again and wrung the water into our mouths…”

Eddie Rickenbacker described their survival in his book, Seven Came Through (1943).

Regarding America, Eddie Rickenbacker wrote:

“I pray to God every night of my life to be given the strength and power to continue my efforts to inspire in others the interest, the obligation and the responsibilities that we owe to this land for the sake of future generations – for my boys and girls – so that we can always look back when the candle of life burns low and say,

‘Thank God I have contributed my best to the land that contributed so much to me.’”

Eddie Rickenbackerconfided:

“It was clear to me that God had a purpose in keeping me alive…I had been saved to serve.”

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

Enhanced by Zemanta

Three cigars, with Lee’s battle plans wrapped around them, were found by Union soldiers… via American Minute

By Bill Federer

Three cigars, with Lee’s battle plans wrapped around them, had been inadvertently lost by a Confederate officer.

With this information in Union hands, the South’s anticipated victory was cut short.
The Confederate Army had been unstoppable – within weeks of winning the Civil War.

General Robert E. Lee had won the Second Battle ofBull Run and was marching 55,000 Confederate troops into Maryland on September 3, 1862.The Confederate Army was welcomed, as anti-Union protests had filled Baltimore’s streets.

On September 13, 1862, President Lincoln met with Rev. William Patterson, Rev. John Dempster, and Methodist, Baptist, and Congregational leaders who presented him with a petition to emancipate the slaves.

Lincoln told them:

“I am approached with the most opposite opinions and advice…

I hope it will not be irreverent for me to say that if it is probable that God would reveal His will to others, on a point so connected with my duty, it might be supposed He will reveal it directly to me;

for, unless I am more deceived in myself than I often am, it is my earnest desire to know the will of Providence in this matter…

These are not, however, the days of miracles, and I suppose it will be granted that I am not to expect a direct revelation.”

The same day, September 13, 1862, Union PrivateBarton W. Mitchell was drinking coffee and noticed three cigars on the ground wrapped with a piece of paper.

It was Lee’s Special Orders No. 191addressed to Confederate General D.H. Hill revealing his plan to divide the Confederate Army.


Union General George McClellan was now able to intercept and ambush several Confederate brigades just 70 miles from Washington, DC.

This erupted into the Battle of Antietam, September 17, 1862, where 38,000 Confederate troops were attacked by over 75,000 Union troops.

It was the single bloodiest day o

f the Civil War.

Though outnumbered nearly 2 to 1, the South rallied and inflicted more than 12,400 casualties on the North, while sustaining 10,316 of their own.

Since McClellan failed to make better use of his intelligence advantage, President Lincoln removed him not long afterwards.

The Battle of Antietam was tactically inconclusive, but it proved costlier to the South, as they did not have immigrates from which to draft new recruits.

With the urging of religious leaders, Lincoln then seized the moral high ground by announcing that he would issue an Emancipation

Proclamation.On September 22, 1862, as reported by Secretary of the Treasury, Salmon Portland Chase, President Lincoln told his Cabinet after the Battle at Antietam:

  “The time for the annunciation of the emancipation policy can no longer be delayed.

Public sentiment will sustain it, many of my warmest friends and supporters demand it, and I have promised God that I will do it.”


Britain and France were now persuaded not to recognize the Confederacy.

Three weeks after the Battle of Antietam, President Lincoln met on OCTOBER 6, 1862, with Eliza Gurney and three other Quaker leaders, saying:

“We are indeed going through a great trial…

In the very responsible position in which I happen to be placed, being a humble instrument

in the hands of our Heavenly Father…as we all are, to work out His great purposes…”

Lincoln continued:

“But if, after endeavoring to do my best in the light which He affords me, I find my efforts fail, I must believe that for some purpose unknown to me, He wills it…

If I had been allowed my way, this war would have ended…But we find it still continues…

We must believe that He permits it for some wise purpose of His own…”

Lincoln concluded:

“We cannot but believe that He who made the world still governs it.”

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

Great Awakening Revival and Jonathan Edwards via American Minute

By Bill FedererHe entered Yale College at age 13 and graduated with honors.He became a pastor, and his sermon,“Sinners in the Hands of An Angry God,” started The Great Awakening Revival.

His name was Jonathan Edwards, born OCTOBER 5, 1703.

The Great Awakening Revival can be traced back to earlier revivals in Scotland, and to Scottish Rev. William Tennent’s Log College in Pennsylvania.

The fiery Dutch Reformed minister Theodore Frelinghuysen preached divine outpourings of the Holy Spirit and conversion.

The revival spread across America through the preaching of George Whitefield, Gilbert Tennent, Samuel Finley and others, inadvertently uniting the Colonies prior to the Revolutionary War.

Calvinist denominations split between traditionalist “Old Lights” emphasizing ritual, and revivalist “New Lights” emphasizing personal commitment.


The Great Awakening Revival was part of the Pietist movement in Lutheran Churches, it reshaped Presbyterian and Dutch Reformed Churches, and it strengthened evangelical Baptist and Methodist Anglican Churches.

The Revival inspired the founding of universities, such as: Princeton, Brown, Dartmouth, Rutgers and Columbia.

The Revival brought large numbers of African slaves to Christianity, being led by Presbyterian preacher Samuel Davies, who later became Princeton’s fourth president.

Blacks were welcomed into active roles in white congregations, even as preachers.

The first black Baptist churches were founded in Virginia, South Carolina and Georgia.

The Great Awakening Revival had a profound effect, as noted by Sarah Pierrepont Edwards, wife of Jonathan Edwards, who wrote to her brother in New Haven of George Whitefield’s preaching:


“It is wonderful to see what a spell he casts over an audience by proclaiming the simplest truths of the Bible…

Our mechanics shut up their shops, and the day laborers throw down their tools to go and hear him preach, and few return unaffected.”

Ben Franklin wrote of Whitefield:

“Multitudes of all denominations attended his sermons…

 

It was wonderful to see the change soon made in the manners of our inhabitants.

From being thoughtless or indifferent about religion, it seemed as if all the world were growing religious, so that one could not walk thro’ the town in an evening without hearing psalms sung in different families of every street.” 

In his “Narrative of the Surprizing Word of God in the Conversion of Many Hundred Souls,” Jonathan Edwards wrote:

“And then it was, in the latter part of December, that the Spirit of God began extraordinarily to…work amongst us. 

There were, very suddenly, one after another, five or six persons who were, to all appearance, savingly converted, and some of them wrought upon in a very remarkable manner.

Particularly I was surprised with the relation of a young woman, who had been one of the greatest company-keepers in the whole town. 

When she came to me, I had never heard that she was become in any ways serious, but by the conversation I had with her, it appeared to me that what she gave an account of was a glorious work of God’s infinite power and sovereign grace, and that God had given her a new heart, truly broken and sanctified….

God made it, I suppose, the greatest occasion of awakening to others, of anything that ever came to pass in the town…” 

Jonathan Edwards continued:

“I have had abundant opportunity to know the effect it had, by my private conversation with many. 

The news of it seemed to be almost like a flash of lighting upon the hearts of young people all over the town, and upon many others….

Presently upon this, a great and earnest concern about the great things of religion and the eternal world became universal in all parts of the town and among persons of all degrees and all ages. 

The noise of the dry bones waxed louder and louder….

Those that were wont to be the vainest and loosest, and those that had been the most disposed to think and speak slightly of vital and experimental religion, were not generally subject to great awakenings…”

Jonathan Edwards added:

“And the work of conversion was carried on in a most astonishing manner and increased more and more; souls did, as it were, come by flocks to Jesus Christ….

This work of God, as it was carried on and the number of true saints multiplied, soon made a glorious alteration in the town, so that in the spring and summer following, Anno 1735, the town seemed to be full of the presence of God.

It never was so full of love, nor so full of joy…there were remarkable tokens of God’s presence in almost every house. 

It was a time of joy in families on the account of salvation’s being brought unto them, parents rejoicing over their children as new born, and husbands over their wives, and wives over their husbands.

The goings of God were then seen in His sanctuary, God’s day was a delight and His tabernacles were amiable…” 


Jonathan Edwards went on:

“Our public assembles were then beautiful; the congregation was alive in God’s service, everyone earnestly intent on the public worship, every hearer eager to drink the words of the minister as they came from his mouth.

The assembly in general were, from time to time, in tears while the word was preached, some weeping with sorrow and distress, others with joy and love, others with pity and concern for their neighbors.

There were many instances of persons that came from abroad, on visits or on business…that partook of that shower of divine blessing that God rained down here and went home rejoicing. 

Till at length the same work began to appear and prevail in several other towns in the country…”

Jonathan Edwards concluded:

“In the month of March, the people of South Hadley began to be seized with a deep concern about the things of religion, which very soon became universal…

About the same time, it began to break forth in the west part of Suffield… and it soon spread into all parts of the town. It next appeared at Sunderland…

About the same time it began to appear in a part of Deerfield… Hatfield… West Springfield… Long Meadow… Endfield… Westfield… Northfield…

In every place, God brought His saving blessings with Him, and His Word, attended with Spirit…returned not void.” 

Jonathan Edwards stated:

“There is no leveler like Christianity, but it levels by lifting all who receive it to the lofty table-land of a true character and of undying hope both for this world and the next.” 

Jonathan and Sarah Edwards’ emphasis on training their children in godly values had a ripple effect. A.E. Winship’s A Study in Education and Heredity (1900) listed among their descendants:

1 U.S. Vice-President,
3 U.S. Senators,
3 governors,
3 mayors,
13 college presidents,
30 judges,
65 professors,
80 public office holders,
100 lawyers and
100 missionaries.

A.E. Winship’s study also examined a family known as “Jukes.”

In 1877, while visiting New York’s prisons, Richard Dugdale found inmates with 42 different last names all descending from one man, called “Max.”

Born around 1720 of Dutch stock, Max was a hard drinker, idle, irreverent and uneducated.

Max’s descendants included:

7 murderers,
60 thieves,
50 women of debauchery,
130 other convicts.
310 paupers, who, combined spent 2,300 years in poorhouses, and
400 physically wrecked by indulgent living.

The “Jukes” descendants cost the state more than $1,250,000.

Jonathan Edwards stated:

“I have reason to hope that my parents’ prayers for me have been, in many things, very powerful and prevalent, that God has…taken me under His care and guidance, provision and direction, in answer to their prayers.” 

In A History of the Work of Redemption, 1739, Jonathan Edwards wrote:

“Those mighty kingdoms of Antichrist and Mohammed…have trampled the world under foot..(and) swallowed up the Ancient Roman Empire…  

 

Satan’s Mohometan kingdom swallowing up the Eastern Empire.”  
In his work, The Latter-Day Glory Is Probably to Begin in America, Jonathan Edwards proposed that the since the Old World had hosted Christ’s first coming, the New World would be given the honor of preparing the earth for His second coming.

The thought that the “Sun of Righteousness” traveled from East to West contributed to the concept that America had a “Manifest Destiny”:

“When the time comes of the church’s deliverance from her enemies, so often typified by the Assyrians, the light will rise in the west, till it shines through the world like the sun in its meridian brightness…

And if we may suppose that this glorious work of God shall begin in any part of America, I think, if we consider the circumstances of the settlement of New England, it must needs appear the most likely, of all American colonies, to be the place whence this work shall principally take its rise.” 
Jonathan Edwards, who became President of Princeton College, resolved:

“Never to do anything which I should be afraid to do if it were the last hour of my life.”

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

Enhanced by Zemanta

Amendments passed limiting Fed. Gov. – Washington thanked WHO…? via American Minute

By Bill Federer

OCTOBER 3, 1789, from the U.S. Capitol in New York City, President George Washington issued the first Proclamation of a National Day of Thanksgiving and Prayer to Almighty God.

Why?

Just one week earlier the first session of the U.S. Congress successfully approved the Bill of Rights, which put ten limitations on the power of the new Federal Government.

The States were concerned the Federal Government would get too powerful.

ThePreamble to the Bill of Rights explained:

“The Conventions of a number of the States, having at the time of their adopting the Constitution, expressed a desire, in order to prevent misconstruction or abuse of its powers, that further declaratory and restrictive clauses should be added…as amendments to the Constitution of the United States.”

The First of the Ten Amendments restricting the Federal Government’s abuse of its powers began:

“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 the Government for a redress of grievances.”

       President George Washington thanked God for the “Constitutions of government…particularly the national one now lately instituted,” stating in his Proclamation, OCTOBER 3, 1789:

“Whereas it is the DUTY of all nations to acknowledge the Providence of ALMIGHTY GOD, to obey His will, to be grateful for his benefits, and humbly to implore His protection and favor; and 


Whereas 
both Houses of Congress have by their joint Committee requested me

‘to recommend to the People of the United States A DAY OF PUBLIC THANKSGIVING AND PRAYER to be observed by acknowledging with grateful hearts the many signal favors of ALMIGHTY GOD, 

especially by affording them an opportunity peaceably to ESTABLISH A FORM OF GOVERNMEN

T for their safety and happiness;’ 

Now, therefore, I do recommend and assign Thursday, the twenty-sixth day of November next, to be devoted by the People of these United States to the service of that GREAT AND GLORIOUS BEING, who is the BENEFICENT AUTHOR of all the good that was, that is, or that will be;

That we may then all unite in rendering unto Him our sincere and humble thanks,

for His kind care and protection of the People of this country previous to their becoming a Nation;

for the signal and manifold mercies, and the favorable interpositions of HIS PROVIDENCE, which we experienced in the course and conclusion of the late war;

for the great degree of tranquillity, union, and plenty, which we have since enjoyed,

for the peaceable and rational manner in which we have been enabled to ESTABLISH CONSTITUTIONS OF GOVERNMENT for our safety and happiness, and PARTICULARLY THE NATIONAL ONE NOW LATELY INSTITUTED,

for the CIVIL AND RELIGIOUS LIBERTY with which we are blessed, and the means we have of acquiring and diffusing useful knowledge;

and in general for all the great and various favors which He hath been pleased to confer upon us.

And also that we may then unite in most humbly offering our prayers and supplications to THE GREAT LORD AND RULER OF NATIONS, and beseech Him

to pardon our national and other transgressions,

to enable us all, whether in public or private stations, to perform our several and relative duties properly and punctually;

to render OUR NATIONAL GOVERNMENT a blessing to all the People, by constantly being A GOVERNMENT OF WISE, JUST AND CONSTITUTIONAL LAWS, discreetly and faithfully executed and obeyed;

to protect and guide all Sovereigns and Nations (especially such as have shown kindness unto us) and to bless them with good government, peace, and concord;

TO PROMOTE THE KNOWLEDGE AND PRACTICE OF TRUE RELIGION AND VIRTUE, and the increase of science among them and us;

and generally to grant unto all Mankind such a degree of temporal prosperity as He alone knows to be best.

Given under my hand, at the city of New York, the 3rd of October, IN THE YEAR OF OUR LORD one thousand seven hundred and eighty-nine.

-George Washington.”

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

What’s the future for Egypt, Syria minorities? – Historian Arnold Toynbee via American Minute

by Bill FedererHistorian Arnold Joseph Toynbee died OCTOBER 2, 1975.

Providing foreign intelligence for the British during World Wars I and II, Toynbee was a delegate to the Paris Peace Conferences.Educated at Oxford “almost entirely in the Greek and Latin Classics,” Toynbee taught at King’s College of London, the London School of Economics, and the Royal Institute of International Affairs.


Toynbee authored many history books, including Greek Policy Since 1882(1914), and The Murderous Tyranny Of The Turks(London, New York: Hodder & Stoughton, 1917), in which he wrote:

“Turks…from Central Asia, ruled during the first two centuries of their conquests by…unscrupulous Sultans, who subjugated the Christian populations of Asia Minor and South-Eastern Europe, compelling part of these populations to embrace Mohammedanism, 

and supporting their own power by seizing the children of the rest, forcibly converting them to Islam, and making out of them an efficient standing army, the Janizaries, by whose valour and discipline the Turkish wars of conquest were carried on from early in the 15th down into the 19th century.”


Toynbee explained:

“The Greeks were leaders of civilization in the Ancient World and in the Middle Ages, till the Greek Empire of Constantinople was conquered by the Turks in 1453…

The Armenians were the first people to make Christianity their national religion…They produced a fine literature and architecture, which Turkish conquest destroyed…

Turks have repressed all symptoms of Armenian revival by massacres…”


Tracing history, Toynbee continued:

“There are three stages in the history of Ottoman tyranny…

Osman, its founder, from whom the Osmanli Turks take their name, was the hereditary chief of a wandering band of Turkish freebooters from Central Asia…carve(d) out a principality for himself at the expense of the neighboring Christians…” 


This Ottoman dominion, which started thus in the 13th century with a few square miles of territory in North-Western Asia Minor, expanded during the next 300 years till it stretched from within a few miles of Vienna to Mecca and Baghdad. 

It destroyed the Ancient Empire of Constantinople, which had preserved Greek learning during the Middle Ages; the free Christian kingdoms of Bulgaria, Serbia, Bosnia, Wallachia, Moldavia and Hungary…

Such a career of destructive conquest was a disaster to civilization, and it was only made possible by a ruthless militarism…”

Toynbee described:

“The Ottoman method of conscription was to take a tribute of children from the conquered Christians so many children from each family every so many years bring them up in barracks as fanatical Moslems and train them as professional recruits.

These ‘Janissaries,’ militarized from their youth up and divorced from every human relation except loyalty to their war-lord, were the most formidable soldiers in Europe, and each new Christian land they conquered was a new field of recruitment for their corps. 

The Ottoman Empire literally drained its victims’ blood, and its history as a Vampire-State is unparalleled in the history of the world.”


Toynbee wrote further:

“This was the first stage in Ottoman history; the second…was internal and external decay. 

The Empire was cut short by Austria, Russia and other foreign powers; the subject peoples began to win back their freedom by breaking away from under the Turkish yoke…

The Turkish…tradition of violence and cunning…tried to stave off the consequences of its own rottenness by making the subject peoples even weaker and more wretched than itself...”

Toynbee continued:

“This was the policy of Abd-ul-Hamid, who reigned from 1876 to 1908, and his method was to set one race against another. 

Kurds were encouraged to massacre the Armenians; the Turkish soldiers were ordered to join in the massacre when the Armenians put up a resistance…

Turkish troops came up and burned the village for treason against the Ottoman State. “

Toynbee described the brief euphoria when dictator Abd-ul-Hamid was deposed and they were promised democracy.

But high hopes were dashed when this Turkish ‘Spring’ was co-opted by fundamentalist Muslims who began a genocide, as Toynbee described:


“In the FIRST STAGE the subject peoples paid their tribute of children…

In the SECOND STAGE they were hounded on to destroy each other by the Machiavellian policy of Abd-ul-Hamid.


The THIRD STAGE has been introduced by the Young Turks…a government employing its resources in the murder of its own people…

When the Young Turks came into power in 1908 they announced a program of ‘Ottomanisation.’ 

Every language in the Empire but Turkish was to be driven off…Non-Turkish majority was to be assimilated to the Turkish minority by coercion…

The Turks drive forth Greeks and Bulgars destitute from their homes and possessions. The Magyars mobilize troops to terrorize Slovaks and Romanians at the elections; the Turks draft the criminals from their prisons into the Gendarmeri to exterminate the Armenian race… 

The Young Turks have pursued their nationalistic program by butchery.

The Adana massacres of1909…occurred within a year of the proclamation of the Young Turk Constitution, which assured equal rights of citizenship to all inhabitants of the Empire.  

In 1913 the Turkish Army was engaged in exterminating the Albanians because they had an un-Ottoman national spirit of their own.

This work was interrupted by the Balkan War, but the Turks revenged themselves for their defeat…by exterminating all Greeks and Slavs left in the territory they still retained…

Only a third of the two million Armenians in Turkey have survived, and that at the price of apostatizing to Islam or else of leaving all they had and fleeing across the frontier. 

The refugees saw their women and children die by the roadside, and apostasy too, for a woman, involved the living death of marriage to a Turk and inclusion in his harem. 


The other two-thirds…were marched away from their homes…with no food or clothing for the journey, in fierce heat and bitter cold, hundreds of miles over rough mountain roads. 

They were plundered and tormented by their guards, and by subsidized bands of brigands, who descended on them in the wilderness, and with whom their guards fraternized. 


Parched with thirst, they were kept away from the water with bayonets.

They died of hunger and exposure and exhaustion, and in lonely places the guards and robbers fell upon them and murdered them in batches some at the first halting place after the start, others after they had endured weeks of this agonizing journey.


About half the deportees and there was at least 1,200,000…perished thus on their journey, 

and the other half have been dying lingering deaths ever since at their journey’s end; for they have been deported to the most inhospitable regions in the Ottoman Empire:
-the malarial marshes in the Province of Konia;
-the banks of the Euphrates where, between Syria and Mesopotamia, it runs through a stony desert;
-the sultry and utterly desolate track of the Hedjaz Railway… 

The same campaign of extermination has been waged against the Nestorian Christians on the Persian frontier…

In Syria there is a reign of terror…”

 

Islamic 

Toynbee added:
 
“The ‘Deportation Scheme’ was drawn up by the central government…

No State could be more completely responsible for any act within its borders than the Ottoman State is responsible for the appalling crimes it has committed against its subject peoples…”

Toynbee wrote:

“Turkish rule…is now, oppressing or massacring, slaughtering or driving from their homes, the Christian population of Greek or Bulgarian stock…Armenia and Cilicia, and Syria, where within the last two years it has been destroying its Christian subjects…

The Young Turkish gang who gained power when they had deposed Abd-ul-Hamid, have surpassed even that monster of cruelty in their slaughter of the unoffending Armenians. 


The ‘Committee of Union and Progress’ began by promising equal rights to all races and faiths…

It proceeded…to expel the Greek-speaking inhabitants of Western Asia Minor, and to exterminate the Armenians…


The Muslim peasant of Asia Minor is an honest, kindly fellow when not roused by fanaticism…

President Wilson…called upon…Allied Nations…that they…make good their words:

‘The liberation of the peoples who now lie beneath the murderous tyranny of the Turks…’”


Toynbee continued:

“Turkish tyranny…putting the clock in South-Eastern Europe a century back…to reconquer for Militarism the field which the 19th century won here for Democracy…destroying without interference a multitude of smaller and weaker peoples from Alsace to Romania and from Schleswig to Baghdad…”


Arnold Toynbee was a correspondent for the Manchester Guardian during the Greco-Turkish War (1919-1922).


His 12-volume Study Of History (1934-1961), described the rise, flowering, and decline of 26 cultures from Egypt, Greece and Rome to Polynesia and Peru.

After World War II, Toynbee wroteHistorians Approach To Religion (1956), and Change And Habit: The Challenge Of Our Time (1966), in which he predicted that China would become the major global power if the United States and the Soviet Union could not maintain world order.

“Civilizations die from suicide, not by murder,” argued Toynbee, who saw religion as a prime motivation in history.


Toynbee continued:

“When I started, religion was not a prominent feature…

In writing my study, I have been constantly surprised to find religion coming back to fill an even greater place.”


Toynbee concluded:

“So what does the universe look like?..

It looks as if everything were on the move either toward its Creator or away from Him…

The course of human history consists of a series of encounters… in which each man or woman or child…is challenged by God to make the free choice between doing God’s will and refusing to do it. 

When Man refuses, he is free to make his refusal and to take the consequences.”

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

‘There is a time to preach and a time to fight’ – John Peter Muhlenberg via American Minute

by Bill Federer
He preached a message on Ecclesiastes 3:1:”For everything there is a season, and a time for every matter under heaven.”

He closed his message by saying:

“In the language of the Holy Writ, there is a time for all things. There is a time to preach and a time to fight. And now is the time to fight.”

This was John Peter Gabriel Muhlenburg, a 30 year old member of the Virginia House of Burgesses…and a pastor.

At the end of his sermon, January 21, 1776, John Peter Muhlenburg threw off his clerical robes to reveal the uniform of an officer in the Continental Army.

Drum began to roll, men kissed their wives, then walked down the aisle to enlist.

The next day, Pastor Muhlenberg led 300 men of his church to marched off and join General Washington’s Continental Army as the 8th Virginia Regiment.

John Peter Muhlenberg was born OCTOBER 1, 1746, and he died the same day sixty-one years later, OCTOBER 1, 1807.

As a youth, he lived with relatives in Germany from 1763-1767, and returned to America to finish his schooling at the Academy of Philadelphia (University of Pennsylvania).

He served Lutheran congregations, though he was ordained as an Anglican minister, as was the requirement in Colonial Virginia.


In 1774, he was elected to the House of Burgesses and became a delegate to the First Virginia Convention.

John Peter Muhlenberg heard Patrick Henry’s famous speech, “Give me liberty or give me death,” in 1775, and was moved to enlist.

General George Washington personally asked him to raised soldiers and serve as their Colonel.

John Peter’s brother, Fredrick Augustus Mulenberg, was a Lutheran minister in New York who opposed John Peter joining Washington’s army:

“You have become too involved in matters which, as a preacher, you have nothing whatsoever to do…”

Then the British bombarded New York and burned Fredrick’s church right in front of him, resulting in Fredrick joining the patriotic cause.

John Peter Muhlenberg fought until the end of the war, being promoted to the rank of Major-General.

He endured the freezing winter of Valley Forge and saw action at Brandywine, Germantown, Monmouth, and Stonypoint.

He helped force British General Cornwallis to surrender at Yorktown.

After the war, John Peter Muhlenburg was elected to Pennsylvania’s Supreme Executive Council in 1784, and then Vice-President of Pennsylvania in 1787.

In 1789, he was elected a Representative to the first U.S. Congress.

In 1790, he was a member of the Pennsylvania’s State Constitutional Convention and in 1793, was the first founder of the Democratic-Republican Societies.

John’s father, Henry Muhlenberg, was a founder of the Lutheran Church in America.

John’s brother, Fredrick Augustus Mulenberg, was also elected to the U.S. Congress and became the first Speaker of the House of Representatives.

Both ordained pastors, John and Frederick Muhlenberg served in the first session of the U.S. Congress which passed the First Amendment, making sure that the new Federal Government would never “prohibit the free exercise” of their religion, nor take away the freedom of speech, press, the right of the people peaceably to assemble, or petition the Government for a redress of grievances.

John Peter Muhlenberg was elected a U.S. Senator in 1801.

He served as a Trustee of the University of Pennsylvania, which honored him with a statue.

In 1889, the State of Pennsylvania placed a statue of John Peter Muhlenberg in the U.S. Capitol’s Statuary Hall.

His statue is in front of the Shenendoah County Courthouse.

John Peter Gabriel Muhlenburg was memorialized in a poem by Thomas Buchanan Read, titled “The Rising,” published inWilliam Holmes McGuffey Fifth Eclectic Reader(Cincinnati & New York: Van Antwerp, Bragg & Co., revised ed., 1879, Lesson LXV, pp. 200-204):

…Within its shade of elm and oak
The church of Berkley Manor stood:
There Sunday found the rural folk,
And some esteemed of gentle blood.

In vain their feet with loitering tread
Passed ‘mid the graves where rank is naught:
All could not read the lesson taught
In that republic of the dead.

The pastor rose: the prayer was strong;
The psalm was warrior David’s song;
The text, a few short words of might,-
“The Lord of Hosts shall arm the right!”

He spoke of wrongs too long endured,
Of sacred rights to be secured;
Then from his patriot tongue of flame
The startling words for Freedom came.

The stirring sentences he spake
Compelled the heart to glow or quake,

And, rising on his theme’s broad wing,
And grasping in his nervous hand
The imaginary battle-brand,
In face of death he dared to fling
Defiance to a tyrant king.

Even as he spoke, his frame renewed
In eloquence of attitude,

Rose, as it seemed, a shoulder higher;
Then swept his kindling glance of fire
From startled pew to breathless choir;

When suddenly his mantle wide
His hands impatient flung aside,
And, lo! He met their wondering eyes
Complete in all a warrior’s guise.
A moment there was awful pause,-

When Berkley cried, “Cease, traitor! Cease!
God’s temple is the house of peace!”

The other shouted, “Nay, not so,
When God is with our righteous cause:
His holiest places then are ours,
His temples are our forts and towers
That frown upon the tyrant foe:

In this the dawn of Freedom’s day
There is a time to fight and pray!”

And now before the open door-
The warrior priest had ordered so-
The enlisting trumpet’s sudden soar
Rang through the chapel, o’er and o’er,
Its long reverberating blow,

So loud and clear, it seemed the ear
Of dusty death must wake and hear.
And there the startling drum and fife
Fired the living with fiercer life;

While overhead with wild increase,
Forgetting its ancient toll of peace,
The great bell swung as ne’er before:
It seemed as it would never cease;

And every word its ardor flung
From off its jubilant iron tongue
Was, “War! War! War!”

“Who dares”-this was the patriot’s cry,
As striding from the desk he came -
“Come out with me, in Freedom’s name,
For her to live, for her to die?”

A hundred hands flung up reply,
A hundred voices answered “I!”

In Washington, D.C., at the corner of Connecticut Ave. and Ellicott St., there is a bronze memorial to John Peter Gabriel Muhlenberg, with the inscription:

JOHN PETER GABRIEL MUHLENBERG
1746-1807
SERVING
HIS CHURCH
HIS COUNTRY
HIS STATE

…THE “FIGHTING PARSON OF THE AMERICAN REVOLUTION”

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

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 2,961 other followers