If you read the same history books I did you know that when people came over here to *set up shop* they did it for religious reasons. Did they really? Here are some facts and quotes.

In the little book "Bible in Pocket, Gun in Hand," (The story of Frontier Religion) Ross Phares contradicts that reason. "Of the hundred and one immigrants aboard the Mayflower, only twelve belonged to the first New England church. Not more than one out of five of the Massachusetts Bay colonists during the early years were members of a church. In 1760 only one New Englander out of eight was a church member. The ratio in the MIddle colonies was one to fifteen, and in the South about one in twenty. The church historian William Warren Sweet said of the early days of this country that 'there came to be more unchurched people in American, in proportion to the population, than was to be found in any country in Christendom.'

In 1800 only an estimated 7 percent of the population were church members. A peak was reached in 1860, when close to one fourth of the people were church affiliated."

These are some responses to the traveling preachers:

1) One approached a man, busy on his small farm, and by way of attempting to lead him to an interest in a religious life, asked him if he did not "want to be a laborer for the Lord?" "No, thank you," the man replied, "I have a job."

2) In a discussion with a woman, a preacher asked if she had any religious convictions. "Naw, she replied bluntly, nor my ole man neither. He war tried for hog-stealin' once, but he warn't convicted."

3) A Presbyterian missionary arrived at a lonely cabin in a clearing, and hoping to find some fellow member of his denomination, asked the woman of the cabin, "Are there any Presbyterians in this country?" She replied, "Wal, I just couldn't say for sure about that. These woods is full of most every kind of varmet, but I ain't paid much attention to em. You might take a look around there on the back side of the cabin where my husband keeps his varmet hides, and see if he's got any Presbyterian hides nailed up. If there's any Presbyterians in this country, he's bound to have caught one by now."

4) One was asked to *say the blessing* in a home. The next day a 10 year old that had been at the table asked the preacher, "Are you the preacher that talks to the plate?"

5) A boy was asked if he knew Jesus. He replied, "No, but we are new, he may live around here somewhere.

What a *field white unto the harvest*. What a wonderful opportunity for people to been taught about Jesus, brought to Him and then following the examples of the scriptures not taught there was something else they had to join, a Church.

Nelta

-- nib Nelta Brock http://members.xoom.com/atlen/ Bible Discussion list: 1stCen-Christianity-subscribe@egroups.com

-- Anonymous, October 21, 2000

Answers

And it starts John.....

....when you let them erode.....the Second Amendment.

-- Anonymous, October 22, 2000

While understanding that America WAS founded on Christianity, I never understood just how much that was true until reading the book "Original Intent: The Courts, The Constitution, & Religion" by David Barton. I am absolutley amazed at how America was founded not only with the idea of religious freedom, but with the intent that this was to be a CHRISTIAN nation! There are literally THOUSANDS of quotes from the founding fathers re: the intent of the Constitution, and other papers, in the founding of our nation.

I won't even begin to quote from the book ... I honestly wouldn't know where to start. I highly reccomend this book for anyone who is interested in honestly looking to see the original intent of the founding fathers re: this country. One would have to be "dumber than dirt" to miss the point.

Wallbuilder Press PO Box 397 Aledo, TX 76008 817-441-6044

ISBN 0-925279-57-9

It's amazing what we read in the name of revisionist history sometimes. Again, I highly recomend this book to EVERYONE!

Darrell H Combs
-- Anonymous, October 21, 2000

I remember reading about a recent decision by a state judge in (correct me if I'm wrong) Kentucky ... which said that certain documents could not be displayed on public property because they strongly advocated religious ideas and that breached the "constitutional" separation of church and state. Those documents, besides the Ten Commandments, included:

The Mayflower Compact
The Declaration of Independence
The Constitution of the United States of America
Washington's Farewell Address
The Gettysburg Address

Its gotten pretty bad when we start censoring our own historical documents to keep up this artificial wall that the constitution doesn't even mention. When we turn a blind eye on our past and like 1984, start to rewrite our history to exclude the role men of God had in it. When our highest court in the land, which has the Ten Commandments posted above their heads, say we can't post those Ten Commandments in public.

I saw a TV commercial once put on by a church, where George Washington was able to come to our time, and seeing how far we had left the vision of the Founding Fathers, humbly knelt with bowed head at the steps of the Capital building to pray ... and was promptly arrested and lead away in handcuffs. It's coming to that, folks!

-- Anonymous, October 22, 2000

Brethren:

I find it very interesting that it is the exact same amendment of the constitution that guarantees freedom of the press that also guarantees the freedom of religion! That amendment is the first amendment to the constitution, which I now quote verbatim from our constitution that many have hazarded and thousands have given their lives to defend. It reads as follows:

Congress shall make no law respecting the 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 to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances.

Now this is all that the constitution has to say about religion. I do mean ALL! There is not a single word in the entire constitution that speaks of separating the church from the state. It only prohibits the government from establishing a state religion. What has happened is that those who hate Christianity have decided that they would forget that our constitution says that congress shall make no law prohibiting the free exercise of religion. And have pretended that our constitution has raised a wall of separation between Church and State when no such words can be found in the constitution anywhere. That this constitution absolutely prevents the establishment of a state religion, even if that religion is Christianity no reasonable person, including Christians would deny. Only one who has no respect for what the constitution says would allow that congress has the power to make any law that prohibits the free exercise of religion. This includes the Christian religion, in any place whether it be in a government office or and the place where people work or where they go to school. And we allow the hypocritical press to push this lie upon an unsuspecting and illiterate public.

The only religion that our government is seeking to prohibit today is the Christian religion. For this reason I am proud of Judge Moore from Alabama who took a stand defending his right to have the Ten Commandments hanging in his courtroom in Alabama. I want you to know that he won his case and the press did not tell everyone about his great victory. For there is nothing in the constitution that prohibits even a judge in the court from freely exercising his religion. Neither does it prevent your children from freely exercising their religion in School. It is time to go to court when anyone refuses to allow you to freely exercise your religion. This applies to anyones religion including those who are not Christians.

Now, we need to be greatly concerned when we see that our first amendment rights are slowing being taken away without serious challenges. If anyone tries ever to limit the freedom of the press guaranteed in this same amendment you will see an outrage unparalleled in this country because there is a lot of money and power that is concerned with keeping that freedom. But freedom of religion, which is also guaranteed by this amendment, is opposed to the agenda of the fourth estate, as the press likes to call themselves in their own circles. Therefore that money and power is now being turned to deny this precious freedom which is a freedom guaranteed to all citizens but the powerful are opposed to these rights.

I highly recommend that we hold to our second amendment rights to bear arms until we are able to trust that we will not lose or first amendment rights by default to a powerful press and perpetually thereafter to prevent this danger. For we are now suffering from an ignorant public moved by a powerful press that is animated by the spirit of power, money, and leftist ideals filled with hypocritical appeals out of concern for the poor and disenfranchised. If we give up these freedoms without a vigilant fight to hold them then all Americans will be disenfranchised and the press and whomever they are able to usher into power by stifling our freedoms to speak will be dictators in this land of the free.

You can call me an alarmist for all that I have said above but before you do so check to see how many Christians have suffered losses because they wanted to exercise their religion at work or at school or even near a government building. Notice that the majority of the press continue to repeat the mantra that the constitution maintains a wall of separation between the church and state when the constitution says nothing like that at all. And the constitution actually prohibits congress from making the present laws that prohibit the free exercise of our religion.

Think about these things the next time you hear the false mantra that is ever being repeated over and over again until the entire public can hear nothing any longer but a completely unintelligible hum. It is ringing in their ears and they like robots speak without thought and react as if you are opposed to the constitution if you seek to freely bow down in any place to pray to God. Or to stand up in public and proclaim that we have hope in Christ our Lord.

Think about it brethren. I call upon us to pray and exercise our religion in every place whether it is considered illegal or not. For we must obey God rather than man. (Acts 5:29).

Your Brother in Christ,

E. Lee Saffold

-- Anonymous, October 22, 2000

It seems to me that in attempting to avoid promoting religion, the state has inadvertantly created a state religion: the religion of athiesm.

-- Anonymous, October 24, 2000

That's strange. The only "right to bear arms" that I've ever been able to find in the 2nd amendment is the right to do so as part of a "well regulated Militia."

-- Anonymous, October 27, 2000

From another RM//CC/CoC forum:

Subj: [1stCen-Christianity] Our "Fusses" Date: 11/1/00 1:18:34 PM Eastern Standard Time

From: jpdubo@juno.com Reply-to: 1stCen-Christianity@egroups.com To: 1stCen-Christianity@egroups.com

In the Churches of Christ [over the years] we have argued and sometimes divided over such things as . . .

1. Short hair on women 2 Long hair on men. 3. Preacher joining "The Ministerial Alliance." 4. Spiritual Gifts. 5. Defining the "Providence of God." 6. Prayer for healing. 7. The RSV and other modern speech trnslations of the Bible. 8. Use of "Thee" and "Thou" in public prayers. 9. How God answers prayer. 10. The authority of Elders. 11. The selection and appointment of Elders. 12. Tenure of Elders and Deacons. 13. Church incorporation 14. Fasting 15. Academic and/or military titles among brethren. 16. Deaconesses. 17. Contribution to the church treasury by mail [not on Sunday] 18. Singing While the Lord's Supper is being passed. 19. Kitchen and/or Fellowship Hall in the Church Building. 20. Church-sponsored Boy Scout troops. 21. Christian encampments. 22. Use of symbols, pictures [a cross, a steeple, etc.] 23. Stained glass windows in the church building 24. The church building itself. 25. A preacher's residence 26. Terminology: Sunday School vs Bible Classes. 27. Divorce and Remarriage 28. Preacher performing a wedding for a divorced person. 29. Church members marrying non-church members. 30. Use of an organ or piano for a wedding ceremony. 31. Singing gospel songs with an instrument in a private home. 32. Five "items of worship." 33. The "order" of worship. 34. One pray for the loaf and fruit of the vine, instead of two. 35. Prayer before the Contribution. 36. Dress code for men serving the Lord's Supper. 37. Lord's Supper on Sunday evening. 38. Choirs, choruses, quartets, duets, solos, etc. 39. Re-baptism 40. Singing pledge cards 41. Racial integration in the church 42. Total abstinence from Alcoholic beverages. 42. Membership in Fraternities [Masonic Lodge, etc.] 43. Use of Bible class literature and teaching aids. 44. Sale of old church building to "a denomination." 45. Youth Directors, Educational Directors, etc. 46. Vacation Bible Schools. 47. Paying for VBS refreshments from church treasury. 48. Awards and prizes for church activities. 49. Attendance contests between Bible classes. 50. Use of Euphemisms ["Heck," "Darn," etc.]

Are you sick yet? I have more than 50 more if you want to see them. i think i got them from Cecil Hook.

jpdubo@juno.com J. Paul Du Bois, 3901 Montecito Dr., #209, Denton,Texas 76205 "We can't get ahead by trying to get even."

-- Anonymous, November 01, 2000

Connie,

J.Paul was rebuked for putting all this stuff on my list when it is simply divisive. At least those in the Church of Christ are IN Christ.

Nelta

-- Anonymous, November 01, 2000

I think if the truth is devisive, it may upset our stomachs, but it is important to be said, in a spirit of humility.

But I'm sorry if I injected divisiveness into this very loving, unity- exhibiting forum.

-- Anonymous, November 01, 2000

Connie,

I guess I look at this a little differently. For someone to simply make a list of all the failings of a group of people without taking scripture and discussing the points, I find this to be gossiping. J.Paul is *in it*, you are not. I find it in bad taste for either of you to simply post the list. I would like to see you take one of the points in J.Paul's post and apply the scriptures to show what is wrong with either side of the issues listed. This would be real Biblical discussion. I'm sorry if I offended you, Connie, but I find this to be a serious matter.

Nelta

-- Anonymous, November 01, 2000

You haven't offended me, Nelta.

But I figured that Christianity is inclusive and that we don't have to be RM/CC/CoC to be able to see the inconsistencies in different positions.

For this group (I won't say 'denomination') to be so involved in ennui and to be discussing things which are so elementary as to be at the baby level is disappointing, to say the least.

Splitting hairs has become an olympic effort to some here.

It is sad. There is a place of quietness, near to the heart of God where Christians care for each other and love each other ,and submit to one another and where the fruit of the Spirit and the the first two commandments are observed.

Here there is seemingly just controversey.

The Holy Spirit must be grieved. Or else He's not even paying attention to what goes on here because it's not really a Christian fellowship.

-- Anonymous, November 01, 2000

Connie,

What did your last post (one dealing with divided issues) have to with America being founded on Christianity?... it seems to me that you are the one trying to divide (you from us) by showing how "wrong" we are.

All of these things listed are matters of opinion and I know none who have divided over them... do you never disagree about anything in your church? It sure seems obvious that you disagree with the CoC stance and are going to make it know any chance you get.

Sorry for my digresion... back to the point...

I am taking an American History course and need a good comprihensive college level text book... any suggestions?

-- Anonymous, November 02, 2000

You are right, Marc.

It was not speaking to the question of the thread.

I'm sorry.

Connie

-- Anonymous, November 03, 2000

Marc,

My daughter teaches high school History, specializing in the Civil War (the 'War between the States' south of the Mason-Dixon) and I will ask her.

-- Anonymous, November 03, 2000

Brother Ben:

You have said:

BThat's strange. The only "right to bear arms" that I've ever been able to find in the 2nd amendment is the right to do so as part of a "well regulated Militia."B

What is strange? Do you think we are talking about some other right to bear arms than the one found in the second amendment? And where do you read in the second amendment that the peopleBs right to bear arms is conditioned upon their being a Bpart of a well-regulated militia? The second amendment places no such condition or limitation upon our right to keep and bear arms. The well necessity of a well-regulated militia to the security of the state is mentioned only as a justification of the second amendments prohibiting any infringement upon the right of the people to keep and bear arms. That right is not in the least conditioned upon any person being a part of a well- regulated militia. You should read that second amendment again and see if you can find any place it that says that they the people can only bear arms if they are a part of a well-regulated militia. Brother Ben, it just is not there, now is it?

Brethren:

If we are going to be members of a free society and are intending to follow the constitution of a free state then let us at least know what that constitution says.

Let us read the exact words of the second amendment to our constitution. It reads as follows:

A well regulated militia, being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed.

Now words could not be clearer yet they have been deliberately ignored and twisted by those who fear this right of the people to keep and bear arms.

Many have, as brother Benjamin has expressed, thought that this second amendment conditions and limits the right of the people to bear arms only if they are members of a well- regulated militia. Nothing could be further from the truth. Anyone reading the exact wording of the second amendment to our constitution can see that the necessity of a well- regulated militia to the security of a free state was the justification or reason for the peopleBs right to keep and bear arms rather than a condition of it.

Therefore do not let any one take away the force of these significant words in our constitution. For if we negate their force by changing their meaning we will lose this right without the enemies of this amendment being required to follow the arduous process outlined by the constitution to amend it. If we do not want the citizens of this free state to continue to have this right to keep and bear arms we must amend the constitution. For no one will be allowed to take this right from us by simply redefining the meanings of the words of the second amendment. For this reason we need wise judges in our Supreme Court who will interpret the law as it is written rather than redefining and rewriting the laws according to the political whims of those in power.

Brother Ben, the right of the people of this free state to keep and bear arms is justified because of the necessity of a well regulated militia but it is not conditioned upon the state regulating any militia nor the people being members of such. The right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed for any reason without an amendment to the constitution.

The people of this country not only have the right to keep and bear arms they also have the right to form themselves into a well- regulated militia. This amendment says nothing whatsoever about the state regulating a militia. It only says that a well-regulated militia is necessary to the security of a free state and gives this as a justification for granting to the people the right to keep and bear arms. But being a part of a well-regulated militia is not by any means a condition of any citizen exercising his or her right to keep and bear arms according to the second amendment to our constitution.

Your Brother in Christ,

E. Lee Saffold

-- Anonymous, November 05, 2000

Brethren:

I notice in my last post in this thread that somehow the complete quotation of the second amendment that I had intended to place in that post was not complete as I had intended. I therefore now quote the entire second amendment for your benefit as follows:

BA well regulated militia, being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed. No soldier shall, in time of peace be quartered in any house, without the consent of the owner, nor in time of war, but in a manner to be proscribed by law.B

Now that is the entire second amendment to our constitution given for your reading and thoughtful contemplation. You do not see a single word in it that conditions your right to keep and bear arms upon your being in the very least a part of a well- regulated militia.

And if any soldier ever comes to your house in time of peace demanding to be quartered there without your consent. You may then understand why this amendment was written and the reason that you are allowed to keep and bear arms to protect yourself against such abuse of power and aggression against your freedoms.

Your Brother in Christ,

E. Lee Saffold

-- Anonymous, November 05, 2000

Thanks for that clarification E. Lee.

That sure explains why we should reject the licensing & registration of our weapons, because guess which homes the State Militia is going to want to come into?

-- Anonymous, November 06, 2000

I re-post:

Marc, My daughter teaches high school History, specializing in the Civil War (the 'War between the States' south of the Mason-Dixon) and I will ask her.

-- Connie (hive827@cs.com), November 03, 2000.

<><....<><....<><....<><

My daughter is rushed all of the time, but one which came off the top of her head from her masters days is one you could begin on by Thomas Bailey titled 'The American Nation', she thinks.

She is an editor for a State Historical Society and has requested a list of titles and authors for me.

Connie

-- Anonymous, November 06, 2000

GOD and GOVERNMENT-Was the United States founded as a Christian Nation? I apologize for the scattered print format. I sent this out as an e-mail today after I wrote it in a different format.

Any discussion of government from a Christian perspective must begin with the absolute Lordship of Jesus Christ. HE IS, KING of Kings, and LORD of Lords, and He shall reign forever and ever. The extant war between good and evil for control of planet earth notwithstanding, God has not and will not abdicate His throne. He will return in His time to anihilate evil and rule from earth with a rod of iron.

The sphere of His authority remains all encompassing, and is delegated to mankind in three basic areas: -The Church under grace -Civil authority and justice -The family, which includes education In each of these categories, God delegates *limited* authority to man, and clearly states that each man will one day stand before the high court of the universe, the judgment bar of God, and give account for his use of that authority.

Authority then, is limited. When a ruler leaves the sphere of his God- given authority, that authority becomes null and void and he loses the right to bind the consciences of men. For example; your governor or your pastor do not belong in your house giving orders to your wife and children, and you do not belong in their respective offices telling their subordinates what to do. - You must not command your wife or children to sin (or lead them into it), your pastor must not encourage disobedience to the Word of God, Your governor msut not violate or encourage others to violate the Constitution, and so on. Authority is *limited*!

To understand Authority, we must own that the Bible is the Word of God. The Word is alive, and powerful, and sharper than any two edged sword. The Word is applicable to our day, in the here and now- the temporal realm, and therein God Himself declares that this Book contains all things pertaining to life and godliness.

YOU WILL bow to the Word of God, or to man, on a daily basis. You may contend that you yourself do not bow to either, but this will serve only to define your state of mind and spirit as rebellion against God versus obedience to Him, and will place you squarely under the will of man in the form of self. You cannot escape the choice by arrogance. All men are accountable to God, and it is HIS WORD that is the absolute measure of all things good, holy, just, and moral. It is the Creator's Handbook for Humankind, and is non-negotiable. The 100% accuracy of the Bible's fulfilled prophecies alone is proof enough for any honest, thinking man (for anyone who is not fabricating delusional excuses for disobedience).

Government is, in and of its nature, and theological issue. You may "separate Church and State", and indeed, under Grace, it is critical that the State be excluded or prohibited from any regulation or control of the Church, but you cannot separate Government and the Christian Religion, same said as government's duty to Almighty God, because law states moral principle instituted and proclaimed by God Himself.

As I have illustrated in brief above with individuals, government must be subject to the Laws of God or become antichrist rebellion and hence tyranny. While this is true of all forms of government, whether monarchy, aristocracy, democracy, oligarchy or republic, it is uniquely true of our Constitutional Republic, because our representative government is bound by the Constitution to be the servant of the sovereign Citizen, who is answerable to God for his vote, his jury right to judge the law, his right and duty to speak out against and to resist unrighteousness, to stand against antichrist abuses of Law and government, and his right to worship as his conscience dictates.

It is no mistake that the Citizen was granted such authority by the Founders, who designed a Nation to be ruled by God, through the will of a righteous people (see: Israel under the Judges). The present form without substance is the direct result of antichrist corruption unchecked by those charged with governance by the LORD, the Citizenry, with our having forsaken the LORD.

Now, couple the Scriptural examples and mandate to disobey man's laws when they violate the Laws of God and conscience, with the authority and responsibility of a free sovereign Citizen, and you will find Christians facing moral dilemna in a number of areas relating to our U.S. civil government. For starters, these include obeying or supporting corrupt, godless officals, feticide programs; "laws" protecting perversion and evil; fraudulent, bankrupt and dishonest "social insurance" schemes; socialist wealth re-distribution programs that violate Scriptural work ethics, reduce humans to slave status, and perpetuate sloth; fraudulent confiscatory taxation based upon fear; public funded obscene "art"; the law enforcement/insurance growth industry scam with it's victimless crimes, a Babylonian prison growth industry, ad nauseum.

The Church in America has some choices to make. We can speak out against and refuse to obey evil laws and officials, or we can compromise our principles, refuse our God-given responsibility of self-governance, and be assured of participating in God's certain and forthcoming judgment of our Nation. Do you understand the the Scriptural principle of of corporate responsibility for public sin and the sin of our leaders? Read matthew 27:22, II Samuel 21:1, I Kings 18, Jeremiah 16:4, I Samuel 12:24-25, I Timothy 2:1, and KNOW that we are responsible to pray, to speak out, to disobey, and to separate ourselves as necessary or be partakers of their sin.

If you wish to have any integrity with God, any usefulness in His kingdom, the time is at hand when you need to be certain of your convictions and how to apply them.

You should be aware that we have a Covenantel relationship with representative government, that our officials/servants bind themselves by a sacred constitutional oath of office, and that, in God's pattern for covenants, when the convenant is violated the other party is released.

You need to understand the Biblical purpose of Governent: -The punishment of evil doers, or Justice -The praise of good deeds,or our protection

I do not find any directive for government as provider in the New Covenant. The Church is to provide for its own and show charity, and those who will not work are not supposed to eat. The man who does not provide for his own is, according to God, worse than the heathen.

Government socialist welfare programs are therefore, unbiblical. Unemployment insurance, social insecurity, farm subsidies, wage and price controls, and other government meddling in private enterprise is designed to create dependence upon government, to disrupt dependence upon God as provider, to weaken Church and familiy ties, and to undermine individual freedom by diminishing personal responsibility. This is the crux of why America has been under judgment since the 1930's. Embracing FDR's "Raw Deal" was a choice to trust government rather than God, in lieu of repentance, when judgment came.

Temporally and spiritually, personal responsibility is an essential key to liberty.

Now responsibility, as applied to our government, is, again, a Covenental relationship. Our servants, from the president to the cop on the beat, are bound by sacred oath to uphold the Law, and we are bound by birthright before the Lord to hold them accountable. To the extent that they violate their compact, their authority is null and void, and their activity criminal.

When we harmonize Romans 13 with the whole of Scripture, we find that civil rulers are bound first by the moral law, the Law of God, and then by their individual relational covenant with the governed.

Our Consitution is an Expressed Powers Document, which means that it LIMITS the power delgated to goverment, and that authority not specifically included, although claimed or even exercised by government, is invalid. (See Article 9 and 10)

This is applicable to to states rights over central government, individual liberties versus oppressive agencies, a corrupted judiciary, insubordinate lawmen, or executive order.

When our government usurps its contract; when it violates the Biblical, Constitutional mandates of of meting out justice and protecting the life, liberty , and property of the People, either by omission or by comission, we are to obey God rather than man. Our compact, the Will and Testament of the Founders, was written by the People to the Shysters, not the other way around, with real words with real meanings.

DO NOT TOLERATE INSUBORDINATION FROM YOUR SERVANTS! IT BREEDS REBELLION!

To better understand the basis of righteous Law, it is important to separate negative as compared to positive law, or thou shalt not versus thou shalt. Now negative law limits men, limits government, and although oft misused, is not nearly as dangerous in the hands of mortals as positive law, which, outside that positive Law commanded and administered by God Himself, most often leads to tyranny. When Romans 13 tells us that rulers are not to be a terror to good works, and that he is a minister, or diakonos, or servant for and with respect to good, it should be clear that the Lord is limiting civil power, as our constitutional model does.

It should also be clear from this passage that civil government is to be an avenger of evil, and that the sword has always been the symbol of enforcement, punishment, and judgment.

While time would fail to explore the history of our common and constitutional Law, it is critical to realize that this foundational Law is known (see:Cooley's and Blackstone's)as "The Laws of nature and of nature's God", and that the origin and character of our highest Law is Biblical, and was designed to be Biblical. (Crime epidemic- big mystery!)

With our foundation in Law, then, let's explore: Hosea 5:10 is a good place to start, where the people faced judgment with corrupt princes for following them. This Scriptural concept of individual and corporate responsiblity to disobey evil commandments cannot be made clearer than in the design of our system of Law and government.

We, the People, the Nation, under God, answerable to Him, have made a covenant, a Constitution, which strictly limits and regulates our government servants.

I trust I have made clear in each instance, whenever and wherever government violates its authority, that authority simply ceases to exist in the eyes of God. We are speaking of abuse of authority, usurpation, and high treason. As our government becomes increasingly arrogant, violent, lawless, oppressive and antichrist, we need to have decided our course of action.

We need to know the example of men like Nehemiah who built with a sword in one hand; men like Gideon who, when the Angel of the Lord found him hiding the harvest from unlawful seizure and oppressive taxation of the Midianites, addressed Gideon as a "mighty man of valor"; the midwives of Exodus who lied to an evil government to spare the lives of the male infants, and found favor with the Lord; Rahab of Jericho, who lied to protect the Lord's spies. We need to understand that it is not sin to lie to a robber about where our family's food and money is.

Use this principle with Godly wisdom. It is rare in Scripture for a reason.

Yes, God has given us precious promises, spiritual weapons, and has advised us to flee persecution where possible. Do you know of anywhere to hide form a worldwide computer/sattellite surveilance system that has a numbered grid square for every ten square meters, with your SS# number transposed into an 18 digit identifier which includes your last known grid square/FEMA locator, that can tell with with infared if you have been digging on your land, and even detect your body signature? Yes, in the Rock of Ages.

Now go to Luke 22:36, where Christ gives His disciples a new set of travel instructions to be used during His physical abscence, including the purchase of a sword as a deterent to evil. For those who will insist that this was strictly for that occasion, the rest of the chapter will make clear that our Lord had no use for swordplay at His arrest, not was there time at that late hour for any of them to sell his garment to buy a sword. It also should be noted that they already had a couple on hand. The only reasonable interpretation of this passage is that Christ in His infinite wisdom knew their need of protection and deterrent to unlawful attack, and sanctioned their right of self defense.

The key concept under Grace is DEFENSE, Lawful defense. I know someone is already running for Matthew 5 and shouting "resist not evil" here, and I am simply going to say that a man with the love of Christ in his heart will not be easily provoked, will not avenge himself, will not repay outrage with outrage, and will do justly, love mercy, and walk humbly before God, for "Vengance is Mine, I will repay, saith the Lord". The warning is against hatred and strife, not shouldering our God-given reponsibilities without malice! The use of deadly force is a solemn matter. We must never take lightly the dispatch of an immortal soul. Wisdom also dictates that we recognize the potential trap in the present scenario.

At I Peter 2:13 we are told to submit to every ordinance of man for the Lord's sake. That word "ordinance" in the Greek is "ktisis" or "creation" and means in the context of our discussion type or form of government, which for us is a Consitutional Republic, with the supreme power of enforcement on our shoulders.

NOW, if YOU BELIEVE the WORD at Romans 13:1 that the "powers that be are ordained of God", you are beginning to get the idea that this government is our individual, collective responsibility.

Several fellow veterans have pointed out today that an oath is for life, and that the "domestic enemy" side may kick in. Many, as myself, regard our Consitutional Oath as sacred and binding. The oath is not required, however, to be obligated to your God-given birthtright. It well may be that you should Lawfully, and in Godly wisdom, bear the sword. That is my position.

If we have forsaken our Covenant and refused our duty before the LORD, is it any wonder our nation and culture are crumbling under divine judgment?

Is it some awful mistake that God has given us the right to keep and bear arms? Are we AWAKE yet?

Are our rights, when submitted to God, responsibilites, "talents", and duties?!

I know it can be hard to get through the mental programming of the public brain laundries, and a luke-warm "church" that has abandoned its post as moral sentry and conscience of civil government, marched straight into the 501(c)(3) trap, and bought into an antichrist individual numbering and social engineering scheme, but we had had best awaken, re-educate, and prepare NOW, or go back to sleep until we hear the sound of the trap closing. The hour is late.

AMERICA IS UNDER DIVINE JUDGMENT. REPENT.

And all of the above is why evil tyrants everywhere, including the Clintonistas and GORE Inc., hate our Constitutional Christian Republic ( or what is left of it undigested in the belly of the Beast).

DEATH TO THE NEW WORLD ORDER!

LONG LIVE THE REPUBLIC!!

-- Anonymous, November 12, 2000

Amen, Trasael.

You said it, and well!!

Which of our founding fathers said they were handing us a republic, and we'd be fortunate to keep it? Now Hillary wants to eliminate the electoral college this year, and the constitution next year, I'm sure.

Her very good friend Elizabeth Holzman of New York said during the impeachment hearings that the constitution was for 'horse and buggy days' and needed to be overturned.

Because of the structure of the laws maintaining it in the states (almost impossible to overturn) they will have difficulty doing that.

But it's like free-love, homosexuality and abortion; they will start brainwashing the young starting this week and it will come to fruition eventually.

Watch and pray.

-- Anonymous, November 12, 2000

To Trasael...

Isn't it amazing how Jesus has become the savior of the Republican Party and the rest of us who voted differently are just a bunch sinful, whoring, b*st*rds!

(:raig

-- Anonymous, November 30, 2000

Craig,

Out of the mouth of Babes !!!!!!

But, realize no one called you such names. They were speaking of Gore - and biblically so.

Any man who wilfully promotes the killing of innocent children is not of God, but of his father Satan (Jesus' words, not mine). When Jesus said, "suffer the little children to come unto Me", He didn't mean to make them suffer by scrambling their brains with a pair of scissors. Those who follow and support such a person have either been duped by the evil one or else they are just as evil themselves. You'll have to decide for yourself which category you fall in.

If you are not a Christian, you can disregard what I & others have spoken; for we can expect no better of one who is already drowning in sin.

But if you are a Christian, my advice is: Repent and be prepared to answer this question that will be asked you on Judgment Day, "Why did you support people who killed My children?"

-- Anonymous, November 30, 2000

Interesting sentiment, Mark...

...but it's neither Gore's nor Bush's call. You can't legislate morality. How about the woman whose decision it was to have the abortion in the first place? Make it illegal and she and others like her will head for Canada or Mexico. Have you saved a life? No. Change a law. No one is saved. Change a heart, then maybe you've got a chance. WWJD? He changed hearts.

(:raig

-- Anonymous, December 01, 2000

Craig,

You're correct in the fact that you cannot legislate morality.

But you can and YOU MUST legislate Murder. Stance against Murder is the oldest law that God established - even preceeding the Law of Moses. Go back to Genesis 9:6, "Whoever sheds man's blood, by man shall his blood be shed, for in the image of God He made man". This commandment was made in the "Rainbow Covenant" right after Noah departed the Ark - and it has never been revoked or replaced in Scripture.

Yes, if a woman has it in her mind to kill her baby she will go to Canada or wherever in order to do it. But does that make what they want to do right in the sight of God? NO!

If we, as a society, continue to decide to make it easier for them to kill their babies right here, does that make the abortion or our actions right in the site of God? NO!

Yes we must reach the hearts of people in order to get them to change their minds & turn to God - but do we just turn our backs to the voices of untold millions of murdered babies while we wait for that to happen (especially since we know from Jesus that few will find the straight & narrow road)? GOD FORBID!!!!! Babies are innocent victims of a horrendous crime and as such they must be protected.

Think about this - there are State & Federal agencies whose sole purpose is to protect a child's rights & health from the second they are born; but these same gov't agencies turn their back if that same child is brutally killed 10 minutes earlier in the name of "Choice". If that is true and is the law of the land, then logically the converse of that situation must also be true, i.e. Susan Smith who drove her 2 small children off of a boat ramp a few years ago IS NOT guilty of murder - she just conducted an extremely late term abortion. That may sound perverted, that's because it is! And that is EXACTLY what the argument for abortion on demand leads to.

Yes Jesus did and still can change hearts (praise God for that), but he also called a spade a "spade", ie "you hypocrites" and "you are of your father, Satan. He was a liar and a MURDERER from the beginning".

If you really love the person who is still in their sin, you do not try to make it easier for them to continue in that sin. You confront them, teach them better, and tell them to "sin no more". Making abortion more convienent in order to save a trip to Canada only compounds sin, it does NOTHING to help the situation.

-- Anonymous, December 01, 2000

Is not murder a moral issue? Is not stealing a moral issue? Is not perjury (lying) a moral issue? What about incest? Polygamy? Child sacrifice? (Which is what abortion amounts to ... sacrificing your unborn child to the gods of self-indulgence and convenience.)

All these things are not legal ... but they are also not moral! And just because something is legal does not make it moral!

Who says you can't legislate morality? Liberals who desire to have no moral restraints on them, that's who!

-- Anonymous, December 01, 2000

MrMr. Miller:

You have said concerning abortion: "...but it's neither Gore's nor Bush's call."

In this you are right. It is God's call and He has called it murder and condemed it. Now it is all of our call as to whether we will serve God and obey Him. That is a call to be made by each individual person. And in a free society it is each individual's call if he or she will support evil and disobedience to God or not. And it is our call as Christians whether we will support muder of innocent children in their mother's womb. No Christian can support such a thing without becoming a servant of Satan instead of a servant of God. If, as a Christian, you choose to exersize your right to vote by voting to support one like Gore who is in full support of cold blooded murder of innocent children in their mother's womb then you have cast your vote for evil and have become a servant of Satan.

Then you tell us the old worn out cliche:

"You can't legislate morality."

Yes you can and we do it all of the time. God has legislated morality and He has the right to do it. However, it seems that you are probably trying to say that you cannot, simply by the force of law, persuade anyone to live by any standard of morality. If this is what you mean then Christians would without doubt agree with you. Until one is truly converted to Christ and his heart has been changed by the blessed gospel he will not have much concern for morality. But here we have been talking about the actions of those whose hearts have been changed and who should they vote for in this election. If your heart has been changed and you have been converted to the Prince of peace and the source of all life who condemns murder. How can you vote for anyone to rule over us whose heart is black as the night in the absence of the moon and have no sympathy for the defenseless children who are being murdered ruthlessly at their own mother's bidding? Yes we can and must make laws that tell everyone in our society that we will not give our willing consent to these willful and deliberate murders.

Then you ask:

"How about the woman whose decision it was to have the abortion in the first place? Make it illegal and she and others like her will head for Canada or Mexico. Have you saved a life? No."

How about this woman? This woman whose decision it was to murder her own child in the first place? What if this same woman had made this decision to murder this same child a year after it was born? How about her? Would we conclude that because she would run to Canada or Mexico, if it were legal to do such in those countries, that we should therefore simply allow her to murder her own child in this country so that she would not be inconvienced by our laws forbidding such evil? It is illegal to murder this child after it is born but it is legal not only in Canada and Mexico but also in this country to murder this child so long as we do it before the child makes the transition from it's mothers womb into the world. After it is born it is a crime to be severely punished to murder this child. It will never be moral or right to kill this child either in it's mothers womb or out and making it legal to do so does nothing more than make society an accomplice to murder. It is indeed the mother's choice, whether she will be the muderer of her own child. This is her choice whether the child has been born or not and whether it is legal or not. Making such a crime by law does not nullify her choice in the matter in the least. It only prevents society from being an accomplice to such evil. It is society's choice whether they will, through their laws, be complicant with her in this murder. In America presently we have chosen to be the accomplices of these murdering women so long as they kill their child while it is still inside of their womb. But the moment it is born we will "legislislate morality" and no longer grant her the right to kill this child. That is the sheer nonsense and wickedness that you are supporting. If you think that you can support such foolishness and at the same time go about changing hearts for Christ you are woefully mistaken. Your inconsistency in this matter is obvious to any thinking person.

Then you tell us:

" Change a law. No one is saved. Change a heart, then maybe you've got a chance. WWJD? He changed hearts."

It is interesting that you ask what would Jesus do? Now that is a good question. It is God who sends children to be born in this world. Those who deliberately stop a child from being born are fighting against God. Would Jesus support the willful and cold blooded murder of innocent children in their mother's womb? If you think he would why not show us from the scriptures that He would do such a thing? I can assure you that you cannot show that Christ would in any way condone or support such evil. It is true that changing laws or even making laws does not always save. But your claim is that changing the law would not save anyone. I do not think you can prove that statement to be true. Are you actually contending that if it were illegal to murder innocent children in their mother's womb that everyone without exception who wanted to commit this evil would just go to Canada or Mexico to do it? You cannot prove that at all. Is it not possible that some would stop to consider that what they are wanting to do is actually wrong because society is so opposed to it? Is it not possible the change in society's tolerance of this behavior as reflected by it's laws might at least save one life? I believe that it could save many lives and you cannot prove otherwise.

I do, however, agree with you that our business as Christians is to go about with the gospel of Christ and change hearts. And I ask you, if you are a Christian, to join with us in this endeavor by teaching the gospel and teaching all women that it is sinful and evil to kill their own children whether those children are in or out of the mother's womb! If we convert people to Christ but at the same time speak in support of those who kill their children then we will not save anyone even if we claim to be Christians. Your attitude of lending CHRISTIAN support to men like Gore who is in full support of this awful wholesale slaughter of innocent children in this country is an evil far worse than murder itself! If you support such things you cannot be a Christian and your pretence that one can support murder of innocent children in their mother's womb and be a Christian is a sure signal that you are a "wolf in sheep's clothing". Brethren, beware of such men.

Yes, we do need to change hearts begining with changing the hearts of those among us who claim to be Christians while they give "moral and tatical, and voter support" to this evil in this country. If the Brethren in the church know that you willingly support this evil they should seek to change your heart and if they fail they should discipline you for such evil has nothing to do with the precious body of Christ. You cannot serve both God and Satan. You must choose between them. Chose you this day whom ye will serve. Satan,the father of murderers, or God.

Now, I do not advocate that we become all obsorbed in politics. I do contend that we should preach the truth and that we teach all who come to Christ that they cannot support murder in any form including what is euphemistically called "abortion". And when we have the opportunity to vote for our leaders let us make sure that we do not vote for one who supports evil, especially one who supports the murder of innocent children in their mother's womb. Then let us convert as many to Christ as possible so that even if the evil wins and it remains legal to murder children in their mother's womb at least those who are Christians will not do such things. If we convert the entire country to Christ one would certianly expect that conversion to bring about a rapid change in those laws that allow murder. But if the Christians all have the same attitude as Mr. Miller, who seems to think that Christians can conscienciously support murder, a conversion of the entire country to Christianity would not make the slighest difference, now would it?

For Christ and the innocent little ones currently being lead by their own mothers to the slaughter,

E. Lee Saffold

-- Anonymous, December 02, 2000

Was America REALLY founded on Christianity?

Here's a little history lesson that sure leans in that direction:

The Dollar Bill.....

Take out a one dollar bill and look at it.

The one dollar bill you're looking at first came off the presses in 1957 in its present design. This so-called paper money is in fact a cotton and linen blend, with red and blue minute silk fibers running through it. It is actually material. We've all washed it without it falling apart. A special blend of ink is used, the contents we will never know.

It is overprinted with symbols and then it is starched to make it water resistant and pressed to give it that nice crisp look.

If you look on the front of the bill, you will see the United States Treasury Seal. On the top you will see the scales for the balance--a balanced budget. In the center you have a carpenter's T-square, a tool used for an even cut.

Underneath is the Key to the United States Treasury. That's all pretty easy to figure out, but what is on the back of that dollar bill is something we should all know.

If you turn the bill over, you will see two circles. Both circles, together, comprise the Great Seal of the United States. The First Continental Congress requested that Benjamin Franklin and a group of men come up with a Seal.    It took them four years to accomplish this task and another two years to get it approved.

If you look at the left hand circle, you will see a Pyramid.   Notice the face is lighted and the western side is dark. This country was just beginning. We had not begun to explore the West or decided what we could do for Western Civilization. The Pyramid is un-capped, again signifying that we were not even close to being finished. Inside the capstone you have the all-seeing eye, and ancient symbol for divinity. It was Franklin's belief that one man couldn't do it alone, but a group of men, with the help of God, could do anything. "IN GOD WE TRUST" is on this currency.

The Latin above the pyramid, ANNUIT COEPTIS, means "God has favored our undertaking." The Latin below the pyramid, NOVUS ORDO SECLORUM, means "a new order has begun." At the base of the pyramid is the Roman Numeral for 1776.

If you look at the right-hand circle, and check it carefully, you will learn that it is on every National Cemetery in the United States. It is also on the Parade of Flags Walkway at the Bushnell, Florida National Cemetery and is the centerpiece of most hero's monuments. Slightly modified, it is the seal of the President of the United States and it is always visible whenever he speaks, yet no one knows what the symbols mean.

The Bald Eagle was selected as a symbol for victory for two reasons: first, he is not afraid of a storm; he is strong and he is smart enough to soar above it. Secondly, he wears no material crown. We had just broken from the King of England.   Also, notice the shield is unsupported. This country can now stand on its own. At the top of that shield you have a white bar signifying congress, a unifying factor. We were coming together as one nation. In the Eagle's beak you will read, "E PLURIBUS UNUM", meaning "one nation from many people."  

Above the Eagle you have  thirteen stars representing the thirteen original colonies, and any clouds of his understanding rolling away. Again, we were coming together as one. Notice what the Eagle holds in his talons. He holds an olive branch and arrows.  This country wants peace, but we will never be afraid to fight to preserve peace. The Eagle always wants to face the olive branch, but in time of war, his gaze turns toward the arrows.

They say that the number 13 is an unlucky number. This is almost a worldwide belief. You will usually never see a room numbered 13, or any  hotels or motels with a 13th floor.

But think about this: 13 original colonies, 13 signers of the Declaration of Independence, 13 stripes on our flag, 13 steps on the Pyramid, 13 letters in the Latin above, 13 letters in "E Pluribus Unum", 13 stars above the Eagle, 13 plumes of feathers on each span of the Eagle's wing, 13 bars on that shield, 13 leaves on the olive branch, 13 fruits, and if you look closely, 13 arrows. And for minorities: the 13th Amendment.

I always ask people, "Why don't you know this?"  Your children don't know this and their history teachers don't know this.  

Too may veterans have given up too much to ever let the meaning fade. Many veterans remember coming home to an America that didn't care. Too many veterans never came home at all.

-- Anonymous, January 05, 2001

I'm afraid I'm not quite sure what Mark's message about the symbolism on the dollar bill has to do with the original question of whether or not the U.S. was founded on Christianity.

1) Many of the symbols you mentioned (e.g. the bald eagle and the motto, "e pluribus unum") would be just as meaningful to atheists as to people who profess any religion.

2) Even when a specific "Christian" meaning is given to some of these symbols, I don't know how much that proves in the absence of, for example, the name of Christ or specific Bible references. Probably most of you have heard the story of the soldier who used a deck of cards as his "Bible" since every number or picture on a deck of cards CAN be assigned some Biblical significance. Now if someone (perhaps Danny? -- he gave a lot of quotations from the "founding fathers" about weapons) can come up with an account by the original designers of these symbols as to what meaning they had behind choosing them, that would be one thing, but without that all we can do is guess, and a secular person might guess a different meaning.

3) Unfortunately, I haven't kept any of these in my files, so can't give the sources, but I have read a number of places that a number of the people who drafted the Constitution and designed these symbols, etc., were Masons, and that some of these symbols -- e.g., I think, the pyramid and the "all-seeing eye", were actually common Masonic symbols. Now, how do you feel about the idea that the country may have been founded as much on Masonic principles as on Christianity?

Sometimes things are not as simple as we would like them to be.

-- Anonymous, January 05, 2001

I got this off a tract put out by Saints Alive, an ex-Mormon group in Issaquah, WA, that I was a member of for a few years:

"A curious piece of the Masonic puzzle is the actual street layout for our Capital city, Washington, D.C. You see, the city was laid out in the form of the central Masonic Symbols, the Square, the Compass, the Rule and the Pentagram.

"Take any good street map of downtown Washington, D.C. and find the Capitol Building. Facing the Capitol from the Mall and using the Capitol building as the head or top of the Compass, the left leg is represented by Pennsylvania Ave. and the right leg, Maryland Ave. The Square is found in the usual Masonic position with the intersection of Canal St. and Louisiana Ave. The left leg of the Compass stands on the White House and the right leg stands on the Jefferson Memorial. The circle drive and short streets behind the building form the head and ears of what Satanists call the Goat Of Mendes or Goat's head!

"Sitting on top of the White House is an inverted 5 pointed star, or Pentagram. It faces North, with the point down in true occult fashion. It sits within the intersections of Connecticut and Vermont Avenues north to Dupont and Logan Circles, with Rhode Island and Massachusetts going to Washington Circle to the West and Mt. Vernon Square on the East.

"The Pentagram or five-pointed star is, of course, both a Masonic symbol and the ancient symbol of witchcraft. With its point facing down (or south, when placed on the ground) it is especially associated with Satanism. Satanists can be found wearing the inverted pentagram frequently; and it appears on the cover of many black magic books, including THE SATANIC BIBLE. In this form, it is also the emblem of the Eastern Star, the women's Masonic organization.

"The center of the pentagram is 16th St. where, thirteen blocks due north of the very center of the White House, the Masonic House of The Temple sits at the top of this occult iceberg.

"The Washington Monument stands in perfect line to the intersecting point of the form of the Masonic square, stretching from the House of the Temple to the Capitol building. Within the hypotenuse of that right triangle sits many of the headquarters buildings for the most powerful departments of government, such as the Justice Dept., U.S. Senate and the Internal Revenue Service.

"It would be great to know that your national Capital is bathed in continual prayer and to believe that its buildings and monuments have been dedicated in prayer, but do you realize that every key Federal building from the White House to the Capitol Building has had a cornerstone laid in a Masonic ritual and had specific Masonic paraphernalia placed in each one. Wonderful if we are talking about our one true God in all this, but such is not the case."

I believe our nation was indeed founded on Christian principles. Unfortunately it was also heavily influenced by Masonry, the trojan horse of the church.

-- Anonymous, January 06, 2001