The Religion of Founding Father Stephen Hopkins

Hopkins was a great founding father--established the committee of correspondence in Rhode Island, post office, etc. and was highly respected in the Second Continental Congress, because he was the second oldest member.

Governor Hopkins himself, later in life, identified himself very completely with that body of Christians, even to the extent, to quote from Moses Brown, his constant co-laborer, (and himself a Friend), of his having the Friends' meetings sometimes held in the winter at his dwelling-house.

U.S. to use foreign aid to promote gay rights

Here is another reason Obama will lose re-election. And he calls himself a Christian.

(AP) WASHINGTON - The Obama administration is announcing a wide-ranging effort to use U.S. foreign aid to promote rights for gays and lesbians abroad, including combating attempts by foreign governments to criminalize homosexuality.


In a memorandum issued Tuesday, President Barack Obama directed U.S. agencies working abroad, including the State Department and the U.S. Agency for International Development, to use foreign aid to assist gays and lesbians who are facing human rights violations. And he ordered U.S. agencies to protect vulnerable gay and lesbian refugees and asylum seekers.

Another Tebow Victory

Jonathan Mayhew's Weird Philosophy

 On page 389, of Mayhew's memoir, he writes this footnote:

The scriptures make use of no such language as Christ's satisfying divine justice. But I am not disposed to dispute about words. If they who use the phrase, mean no more by the satisfaction of Christ, than is implied in his sacrifice or atonement, I make no objection to it: but I have asserted the doctrine in my sermons, which have been so outrageously attacked.

When I first read it, I thought "can this guy be a divine?" What does the New and Old Testament say takes away sin? Did he not read Mat 24, 25, and 26? Why would Jesus affirm eternal punishment if not for perfect justice?

Matthew 25:41,46
Then shall he say also unto them on the left hand, Depart from me, ye cursed, into everlasting fire, prepared for the devil and his angels..And these shall go away into everlasting punishment: but the righteous into life eternal. [bold face mine]

A human being can only be righteous unto God by having his sins atoned for by blood. Incidently, verse 14 claims the Holy Spirit is eternal, which Mayhew ignored--his own blood is upon him:

Hebrews 9:12,14
Neither by the blood of goats and calves, but by his own blood he entered in once into the holy place, having obtained eternal redemption for us..How much more shall the blood of Christ, who through the eternal Spirit offered himself without spot to God, purge your conscience from dead works to serve the living God? [bold face mine]

Pelagians have the problem of ignoring God's Word, and instead, quote other people, which is what Mayhew does trying to defend himself against an orthodox divine who has him by the...In seminary, when you study the Book of Romans, it becomes evident Paul is explaining reconciliation, satisfaction, justification, etc. Yes, satisfaction satisfies God's wrath, but the entire Bible explains God is Holy, and perfect--so He has to be perfect justice. No way to get around it:

Romans 5:9-11
Much more then, being now justified by his blood, we shall be saved from wrath through him. For if, when we were enemies, we were reconciled to God by the death of his Son, much more, being reconciled, we shall be saved by his life. And not only so, but we also joy in God through our Lord Jesus Christ, by whom we have now received the atonement. [bold face mine]

18th century unitarians ignored parts of scripture they didn't believe, under the guise of adhering to biblical inerrancy--how could you not see it? They would have had empty churches by rejecting biblical inerrancy, and Mayhew's cohorts couldn't yet change the meaning of biblical terms--this didn't happen until Channing established unitarianism on a more broad footing in a broader area. Satisfying God's justice because He is Holy, is in almost every book of the New Testament. If God doesn't eternally punish sin, He approves the sin and takes part in it. A thousand years of punishment isn't enough! God is eternal, and man's spirit is immortal, therefore, the punishment is eternal. Morever, God wouldn't be Holy or perfect justice.

All of these problems start when people depart from the CLEAR teaching of God's Word.

The President of Congress Affirming The DOI Was Ratified

John Jay believed in the principles of the Declaration:

On the 4th of July, 1776, your representatives in Congress, perceiving that nothing less than unconditional submission would satisfy our enemies, did, in the name of the people of the Thirteen United Colonies, declare them to be free and independent States; and “for the support of that declaration, with a firm reliance on the protection of Divine Providence, did mutually pledge to each other their lives, their fortunes, and their sacred honour.” Was ever confederation more formal, more solemn, or explicit? It has been expressly assented to, and ratified by every State in the Union. Accordingly, for the direct support of this declaration, that is, for the support of the independence of these States, armies have been raised, and bills of credit emitted, and loans made to pay and supply them. The redemption, therefore, of these bills, the payment of these debts, and the settlement of the accounts of the several States, for expenditures or services for the common benefit, and in this common cause, are among the objects of this Confederation; and, consequently, while all or any of its objects remain unattained, it cannot, so far as it may respect such objects, be dissolved consistently with the laws of God or man.

--John Jay, Sept. 13, 1779

Another Secularist Argument

I wanted to post Secularist Jon Rowe's argument on World Net Daily from the other day, which shows some of the errors secularists are known for--if he is representative of them:

JG [me] has no evidence for his assertion. He (wrongly) assumes if you can't prove with smoking guns like there are with Jefferson, J. Adams, and Franklin (all three of whom btw had nominal connections to orthodox churches) the Founders were fundamentalists like him. He also uses his own abitrary standards to exclude folks as not Founders. Yes, in addition to the unitarian "key Founder" (Jefferson, J. Adams, and Franklin) there were DEISTS Founders -- Thomas Paine, Ethan Allen and Elihu Palmer. Likewise, there may not be "smoking guns" with Washington and Madison, but on balance, they seem closer to Jefferson, J. Adams, and Franklin than the "orthodox."

This blog is filled with evidence supporting my assertions. Moreover, I never called all the framers fundamentalists like me. Arbitrary standards? Is someone who helped draft, ratify, or exert significant influence in the founding of our country arbitrary standards? A pastor must exert significant influence, such as Samuel Cooper to be considered a founder. Was Elihu Palmer a Founding Father?

This blog has been quite cordial in showing the blatant mis-representations Jon Rowe has made pigeon-holing our founding fathers. For years, he claimed William Livingston was a unitarian--this blog refuted that. He claimed Samuel West was a unitarian--wrong again. He claimed Samuel Cooper was not orthodox--same story. Add to the others, claiming John Lathrop was likely a unitarian, refuted earlier on this blog. There are many other gaffes, including his claim there is no fundamental difference in The Laws of Nature and The Laws of Nature's God in the Declaration, when James Wilson, et al. specifically differentiated God and Nature, posted on this blog. Most of these incorrect assumptions happened because he didn't check the sources well enough.

But Elihu Palmer takes the cake. Palmer was born in 1764, graduated Dartmouth in 1787--the same year the Constitution was written! He never even pastored a church. Yet this guy was a "founder?" Did he help found the nation, some govt. dept. in some way I don't know about? He did nothing of significance to influence the founding. If influencing the founding was the criteria, then every senior pastor of every church was a founder, since they influenced entire churches that shaped religion, where Palmer, was blind by 30, dead at 42 years old.

James Madison is closer to Thomas Jefferson or Ben Franklin than to GW? These statements are mind-boggling. James Madison affirmed the Deity of Jesus Christ:

"Christ's divinity appears by St. John, ch. XX. v. 28."

"Resurrection testified and witnessed by the Apostles. Acts, ch. IV. v. 33."

--Madison's "Notes on Commentary on the Bible" found in The Papers of James Madison, p. 51-59. Vol. I. 16 Mar 1751 - 16 Dec. 1779.

In light of the above quotes, how is JM closer to TJ?

The King's Death Sentence to Samuel Adams and John Hancock

I do hereby, in his majesty's name, offer and promise his most gracious pardon to all persons, who shall forthwith lay down their arms, and return to the duties of peaceable subjects: excepting only from the benefits of such pardon, SAMUEL ADAMS and JOHN HANCOCK, whose offenses are of too flagitious a nature to admit of any other consideration but that of condign punishment. 

--General Gage
 

Another Orthodox Patriot Preacher

Rev. John Lathrop

John Lathrop was born in 1740, graduated from Princeton in 1763, and was Pastor of the Second Church of Boston. This preacher was a prolific writer throughout his life. Unitarians wish to claim him as their own, but his words portray a different result. He was an early Calvinist. Here is some evidence supporting Lathrop's Calvinism:

To mention that you hear that the Convention of Ministers in the Province have actually voted to lay aside all creeds and confessions. I wish there was not too much occasion for such a report. They did not actually vote to lay aside creeds and confessions. They have been pretty generally laid aside; and the motion was to revive them, and that candidates should be examined and introduced in the manner they are in Connecticut. This was urged by Dr. Sewall and Mr. Pemberton; it was also opposed by others; but, the forenoon being spent, a vote was desired whether the matter should be considered again after dinner, and passed quite full that it should not..You mention my being fixed in the midst of a crooked, fkc. generation. I assure you, it is a matter of wonder with me that the clergy are not farther from the character of Gospel ministers; and I apprehend, if some reform is not come into a few genrations, if salaries being small should not prevent it, the pulpits will frequently be filled not only with Arminians, but professed Arians, Socinians, and even Deists themselves.

--January 20th, 1769

Only God can be perfect, unless he became what he denounced--an arian, or idolator, believing Christ divine, yet having a different nature than the father. Unitarians did not believe Christ was perfect:

Jesus Christ also, with the perfect feelings of a perfect man, loved his country..

--A Discourse Delivered Appointed by the President.. April 13, 1815

No hint of arminianism in the below quote:

I can but think good Van Mastrich is right in his sentiments about Regeneration — it is a subject of great importance: I wish to understand it well, and constantly to feel that Divine power which alone is sufficient to produce the change, operating on my heart.

--Boston, 1 August, 1771.

Lathrop used orthodox Christian terms and quoted biblical verses clearly promoting Original Sin and Christ's Deity. Since when did unitarians believe God indwelt Christ?

While discoursing on the blessings of peace, our thoughts, as it is highly proper, will be first turned to the gospel, where we have a view of the foundation, which the mercy of God prepared for peace between heaven and earth ; peace between the Sovereign of the universe and his revolted subjects...Christ is our peace :—He came and preached peace to those who were afar off."—Thus wrote the Apostle Paul: "All things are of God, who hath reconciled us to himself by Jesus Christ, and hath given to us the ministry of reconciliation; to wit, that God was in Christ, reconciling the world unto himself, not imputing their trespasses unto them; and hath committed unto us the word of reconciliation. Now then, we are ambassadors for Christ, as though God did beseech you by us, we pray you in Christ's stead be reconciled to God [2 Cor 5:19]...Let us endeavour, therefore, to do good unto all. And finally, may we unite with the general assembly and church of the Most High, in offering praise and thanksgiving to God, our heavenly Father, and to his son Jesus Christ, our Lord and Redeemer. [bold face mine]

--A Discourse Delivered in Boston on the Day of Public Thanksgiving in the State of Massachusetts Nov 21, 1811.

Below is a first hand account of orthodoxy:

I never saw him after this, but when I became associated in the ministry with his relative, the Rev. Dr. Lathrop, [Calvinist] of West Springfield, I often heard him speak of him in terms of affectionate regard, and he was never willing to admit that he had departed much, if at all, from the accredited standard of orthodoxy.

--FROM THE REV. CHARLES LOWELL, D. D.
Cambridge, February 28, 1853

Warren Throckmorton's Post on David Barton's New Book

I have yet to get an answer to my latest post on his blog. Here it is:

Article 3 Kaskaskia Treaty

the United States will give annually for seven years one hundred dollars towards the support of a priest of that religion, who will engage to perform for the said tribe the duties of his office and also to instruct as many of their children as possible in the rudiments of literature. And the United States will further give the sum of three hundred dollars to assist the said tribe in the erection of a church.

Above is a clear violation of modern separation doctrine, and along with my previous quote, TJ contadicts it, and he believed a State could form whatever religion they wanted:

I consider the government of the United States as interdicted by the Constitution from intermeddling 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. Certainly, no power to prescribe any religious exercise, or to assume authority in religious discipline, has been delegated to the General Government. It must then rest with the States, as far as it can be in any human authority..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; and this right can never be safer than in their own hands..But I have ever believed, that..what might be a right in a State government, was a violation of that right when assumed by another.
–to Rev. Samuel Miller, January 23, 1808

Ultimately, TJ is violating the Indian’s rights even if the tribe was all catholic, which they weren’t. Your rebuttal that the tribes are a sovereign nation does not refute the plain language in the Article, given TJ founded his justification on Natural Rights–that applied to everyone.

Putnam and the "Great Spirit" Part Deux

I don't want to spend too much time on this, but Jon Rowe wrote this in response to my previous post about Rufus Putnam and the Great Spirit:

Goswick seems to suggest that unconverted Natives really DIDN'T worship the God of the Bible with men like Washington and Putnam in knowledge of this. What would that make them then? Manipulative hypocrites when dealing with Natives. Suggesting unconverted Natives worship the same God Christians do, while not believing it, reeks of the same charge of hypocrisy that some secular nationalist scholars make when they claim the early Presidents were cold deists (or atheists) who may have publicly spoken as though they believed in Providence or something closer to Christianity to placate the masses over whom they ruled.

I don't see any hypocrisy at all considering Putnam started and was the President of the original Ohio Bible Society, and perhaps a member of the Society For Propagating the Gospel To The Indians. They weren't missionaries preaching the Gospel--this was diplomacy. If Rowe is correct, Putnam--and all of the Bible societies and missionary organizations--had his people go to the Indians and say, "The Great Spirit so loved the World that he gave his only begotten Great Spirit that whosoever believes in Him has everlasting life...he that believes on the Great Spirit has life, he that has not the Great Spirit has not life?" Don't think so. None of the framers, minus Thomas Jefferson, were ecumenists.

I am confident I can find other evangelicals using that term--most likely members of the societies to promote the Gospel, as Putnam did. I'm fairly certain Congress supported The society for propogating the Gospel to the Indians. That means it was everyone.

In 1798, he was the prime mover in establishing in Marietta the first academy of learning; in 1807, he planned and superintended the building of the church still used by the Congregational Society there; in 1812, he organized there the first Bible Society west of the mountains; in 1817, the first Sunday school and he was the largest subscriber to the funds of each.

--Putnam's Journal

"The Great Spirit" of the Indians

Gen. Rufus Putnam

I thank Jon Rowe, blogging at American Creation, for posting some interesting words by orthodox Christian Founding Father, Rufus Putnam. By reading Putnam's will, he was most likely an Evangelical in the mold of myself or Roger Sherman. You see there is a difference in the terms: orthodox and evangelical. Yes, the word Evangelical was in use in the 18th Century. An orthodox Christian is someone that generally adheres to all the Creeds of the Historic Christian Church without labeling that person part of a particular sect, such as Greek Orthodox. An Evangelical is someone that believes in Biblical Inerrancy over any man-made creed. A Creed is not Inspired as the Bible is.

Rowe quotes Gen. Putnam:

I thank the great Spirit who has inclined our Hearts to do good; and to establish a Peace between You and the United States — Brothers...I propose to send one Speech more requesting them to open a Road to some place or other, where we may meet and Speak to one another; And I trust with Your assistance, that the great Spirit will cause this good Work to succeed--

His point is most likely to link Putnam with the other infidel framers: George Washington, and James Madison, who used the same term referring to the Indian "Great Spirit." I call them infidels because that is what they would be if they considered the Indian god--or any god--the same as the Biblical God. The Bible says at least one thousand times, He is the Only God, the God of the Israel.

Not only is Rowe's implication far-fetched, it would make George Washington a very ignorant man, given a Christian high schooler understands the difference. That Putnam and Washington are placating diplomatically to the Indians by referring to God in their terms is obvious--however Putnam was an Evangelical. The only reason an Evangelical would link the Indian Great Spirit with the God of the Bible is to be diplomatic and accomodating. Here is Putnam:

[F]irst, I give my soul to a holy, sovereign God Who gave it in humble hope of a blessed immortality through the atonement and righteousness of Jesus Christ and the sanctifying grace of the Holy Spirit. My body I commit to the earth to be buried in a decent Christian manner. I fully believe that this body shall, by the mighty power of God, be raised to life at the last day; ‘for this corruptable (sic) must put on incorruption and this mortal must put on immortality.’ [I Corinthians 15:53]

--Will of Rufus Putnam

 My point is supported by GW changing the word "God", to "Great Spirit" while writing to the Indians. He wanted to make sure he was as diplomatic as possible. Moreover, Joseph Story--deceived about the person of Christ--affirmed Biblical Inerrancy, used "The Great Spirit" when referring to the Indians.

My Life Before I met Jesus Christ

Not to give my life story away before its time, but growing up, perhaps my biggest musical influence was Kiss--particularly Ace Frehley. I was in the Kiss Army, my room was smeared with Kiss Posters--the one on top of Empire State Bldg, the 1776 Revolution poster, and the Love Gun album cover poster. I had each member's picture in my wallet. But as a ten year old, I was too busy to pick up a guitar, but had I...


Ace with an Ibanez copy of a Gibson Explorer

  Ace has his book coming out Nov. 1. It's already making waves in the rock n roll community. Ace and Bassist Gene Simmons have a strained relationship. Read the book to find out all the details. I found chapter 1 before the release date. You can click the link to read the entire chapter:

A BRONX TALE

When I was a kid I used to carry around this awful image in my head—a picture of three men tangled awkwardly in high-tension wires, fifty feet in the air, their lifeless bodies crisping in the midday sun.

The horror they endured was shared with me by my father, an electrical engineer who worked, among other places, at the U.S. Military Academy at West Point, New York, helping with the installation of a new power plant in the 1950s. Carl Frehley was a man of his times. He worked long hours, multiple jobs, did the best he could to provide a home for his wife and kids. Sometimes, on Sunday afternoons after church, he'd pile the whole family into a car and we'd drive north through the Bronx, into Westchester County, and eventually find ourselves on the banks of the Hudson River. Dad would take us on a tour of the West Point campus and grounds, introduce us to people, even take us into the control room of the electrical plant. I'm still not sure how he pulled that one off—getting security clearance for his whole family—but he did.

Dad would walk around, pointing out various sights, explaining the rhythm of his day and the work that he did, sometimes talking in the language of an engineer, a language that might as well have been Latin to me. Work was important, and I guess in some way he just wanted his kids to understand that; he wanted us to see this other part of his life..
The Carl Frehley I knew (and it's important to note that I didn't know him all that well) was quiet and reserved, a model of middle-class decorum, maybe because he was so f.....g tired all the time. My father was forty-seven years old by the time I came into this world, and I sometimes think he was actually deep into a second life at that point. The son of German and Dutch immigrants, he'd grown up in Bethlehem, Pennsylvania, finished three years of college, and had to leave school and go to work. Later on he moved to New York and married Esther Hecht, a pretty young girl seventeen years his junior. My mom had been raised on a farm in Norlina, North Carolina. My grandfather was from northern Germany—the island RÜgen, to be precise. My grandmother was also German, but I'd always heard whispers of there being some American Indian blood in our family. It was boredom, more than anything else, that brought my mom to New York. Tired of life on the farm, she followed her older sister Ida north and lived with her for a while in Brooklyn.

Dad, meanwhile, came for the work.

There was always a little bit of mystery surrounding my dad, things he never shared; nooks and crannies of his past were always a taboo subject. He married late, started a family late, and settled into a comfortable domestic and professional routine. Every so often, though, there were glimpses of a different man, a different life.

My dad was an awesome bowler, for example. He never talked about being part of a bowling league or even how he learned the game. God knows he only bowled occasionally while I was growing up, but when he did, he nailed it. He had his own ball, his own shoes, and textbook form that helped him throw a couple of perfect games. He was also an amazing pool player, a fact I discovered while still in elementary school, when he taught me how to shoot. Dad could do things with a pool cue that only the pros could do, and when I look back on it now I realize he may have spent some time in a few shady places. He once told me that he had beaten the champion of West Virginia in a game of pool. I guess you have to be pretty good to beat the state champion of any sport.

"Hey, Dad. What's your high run?" I once asked him while we were shooting pool.

"One forty-nine," he said, without even looking up..
I grew up just off Mosholu Parkway in the Bronx, not far from the New York Botanical Garden and Bronx Zoo. It was a middle-class neighborhood of mixed ethnic backgrounds, consisting of mostly German, Irish, Jewish, and Italian families. Ours was pretty normal and loving, a fact I came to appreciate even more after I began hanging out with some serious badasses who were always trying to escape their violent and abusive home lives. Conversely, my dad never hit or abused me as a child, but I often wondered how much he really cared about me since we never did anything together one-on-one. Now as I think back, I realize more and more that he loved me, and that he did the best he could under the circumstances.

It's pretty hard to look at the Frehleys and suggest that my upbringing contributed in any way to my wild and crazy lifestyle and the insanity that was to ensue. Sure, my dad was a workaholic and never home, but there was always food on the table, and we all felt secure. My parents enjoyed a happy and affectionate marriage—I can still see them holding hands as they walked down the street, or kissing when Dad came home from work. They always seemed happy together, and there was very little fighting at home. We had relatives in Brooklyn and North Carolina, all on my mother's side, but I knew very little about my dad's side of the family. There were no photo albums or letters, no interesting stories or visits from aunts and uncles. Nothing. I knew he had a brother who had tragically drowned at age eight, but the rest was sketchy at best. When I tried to ask him for more details, my mom would intervene.

"Don't push your father," she'd say. "It's too painful for him."

So I'd let it go.

People who know me only as the Spaceman probably find this hard to believe, but I was raised in a family that stressed education and religion. My parents also understood the value of the arts and sciences. The way I'm fascinated with computers and guitars, my dad was fascinated with motors and electrical circuits, and he used to build his own batteries in the basement as a child. I know he was very good at what he did because in addition to his work at West Point, he also serviced the elevator motors in the Empire State Building, and was involved in designing the backup ignition system for the Apollo spacecraft for NASA. He had notebooks filled with formulas and sketches, projects he worked on until the wee hours of the morning.

So my parents emphasized learning, and two of their three children got the message. My sister, Nancy, who is eight years my senior, was a straight-A student who went on to get a master's degree in chemistry; she taught high school chemistry for a while before getting married to start a family. My brother, Charles, was an honors student as well. He studied classical guitar at New York University, where he finished tenth in his class.

Then there was me, Paul Frehley, the youngest of three kids and the black sheep to boot.

In the beginning I enjoyed school and team sports, but as I got older, my social life and music began taking precedence over my studies. I remember coming home with B's, C's, and D's on my report card and hearing my parents complain.

"Why can't you be more like Charlie and Nancy?"

I'd just throw up my hands. Between bands and girlfriends, who had time to study?

"You're wasting your life, Paul," my dad would say, shaking his head.

Once, just to prove a point, I told my parents that I'd study hard for a semester and prove I was just as bright as my brother and sister. And you know what? I got all A's and B's on the next report card. (Much later, it was the same sort of "I told you so" attitude that would compel me to challenge the other guys in KISS to an IQ test. Just for the record, I scored highest: 163, which is considered "genius.") Now, I know I drove my parents crazy, but God had other plans for me. It all stemmed from something I sensed at an early age: the desire to become a rock star and follow my dreams. Crazy as that sounds, I really believed it would happen.

You can partially credit my blind ambition to Mom and Dad! You see, if there was a common thread within our family, it was music. Thanks to the influence of our parents, all the Frehley kids played instruments. My father was an accomplished concert pianist: he could perform Chopin and Mozart effortlessly. My mom played the piano, too, and she enjoyed banging out a few tunes at family gatherings. Charlie and Nancy took piano lessons and performed at recitals as well. They eventually started fooling around with the guitar and formed a folk group, but that was never my cup of tea. From the beginning, I was drawn to rock 'n' roll and started figuring out songs by the Beatles and the Stones on my brother's acoustic guitar. One day, by chance, I picked up my friend's new electric guitar and checked it out. I plugged it in, turned the amp up to ten, and strummed a power chord.

I immediately fell in love. It was a life-changing event! I was only twelve, but I was totally hooked. Within a couple of years I had a Fender Tele and a Marshall amp in my bedroom, and I'd sold my soul to rock 'n' roll. There was no turning back.

My parents were not entirely unsupportive of my obsession (Dad even bought me my first electric guitar as a Christmas present), probably because it beat the alternative. There were worse vices, worse behavior, as I'd already demonstrated. See, at the same time that I was teaching myself guitar and forming my first band, I was also running with a pretty tough crowd. So while it may be true that the rock 'n' roll lifestyle nearly killed me as an adult, it's also true that without music, I might never have made it to adulthood in the first place.

© 2011 Ace Frehley

In light of Mitt Romney, here is the low-down on Mormonism

The founder of Mormonism was Joseph Smith, called "Joe" by the residents of Palmyra, New York, was convicted on March 26, 1826, for his involvement in the Occult, called "glass looking" to find buried treasure, in court case, New York v Joseph Smith. Joe Smith paid the $2.68 cent fine. The court bill can be found in the New York Public Library. Not surprisingly, his conviction happened six years after he claimed the angel Gabriel appeared to him--some conversion right? Smith would put stones in a hat to somehow find buried treasure. I'm clueless how glass could have shown him where treasure was, unless by demonic guidance. There are craters all over Northern New York and Vermont from his digging expeditions.

Joe Smith's mom and dad both write, their son was in the Occult. Mr. "Stoal came for Joseph on account of having heard that he possessed certain means by which he could discern things invisible to the natural eye." Lucy Smith, History of Joseph Smith by his Mother. Likewise, his father claimed Joe was a peep-stone addict in the Historical Magazine May, 1870. Joe Smith could not get his revelations straight either. In the Book of Mormon, 1830 edition, he claimed his angelic messenger was Moroni, but in the Pearl of Great Price, 1851 edition, which Smith compiled himself, he wrote the messenger was Nephi. To Mormons, this contradiction--among many others--is their perverbial thorn in the side.

As to the theology of Mormonism, here is proof of their twisted belief that God the Father was once Adam, and Michael the Archangel:

When our father Adam came into the garden of Eden, he came into it with a celestial body, and brought Eve, one of his wives, with him. He helped to make and organized this world. He is MICHAEL, the Archangel, the ANCIENT OF DAYS! about whom holy men have written and spoken—HE is our FATHER and our GOD, and the only God with whom we have to do.

--Brigham Young, Journal of Discourses, 1:50.

Along with their view Jesus was a Polygamist, who was married to Mary, Martha and Mary of Cana, Mormon theology says God the Father was Adam, who had sex with Mary, to form Jesus, the Blood brother of Lucifer! As if that wasn't enough, Joe Smith claimed Mormons were gods:

God himself was once as we are now, and is an exalted man..In the beginning, the head of the Gods called a council of the Gods; and they came together and concocted a plan to create the world and people it.

--Teachings of the Prophet Joseph Smith, 345, 349.

The evidence suggests Joe Smith started as a unitarian, and was influenced by Greek Mythology, thus, you have Polygamy instituted to make vast families for "Celestial Marriage" as with Greek gods impregnating human women in order to populate different planets in the universe. Mormon theology teaches polytheism--even though they deny it now--that the universe is inhabited by human gods "who proceate spirit children, which are in turn clothed with bodies on different planets." Brigham Young actually believed suicide atoned for one's sins:

There are sins that men commit for which they cannot receive forgiveness in this world, or in that which is to come; and if they had their eyes open to their true condition, they would be perfectly willing to have their blood spilt upon the ground, that the smoke thereof might ascend to heaven as an offering for their sins, and the smoking incense would atone for their sins; whereas, if such is not the case, they will stick to them and remain upon them in the spirit-world.

I know, when you hear my brethren telling about cutting people off from the earth, that you consider it is strong doctrine; but it is to save them, not to destroy them. . . . yet men can commit sins which it can never remit. As it was in ancient days, so it is in our day; and though the principles are taught publicly from this stand, still the people do not understand them; yet the law is precisely the same. There are sins that can be atoned for by an offering upon an altar as in ancient days; and there are sins that the blood of a lamb, of a calf, or of turtle doves cannot remit,but they must be atoned for by the blood of the man.

--Brigham Young, Tabernacle, September 21, 1856

Walter Martin, the expert on Mormonism, gives this synopsis of this cult:
Pastor Jeffries should proclaim these truths to the country to back up his assertion Mormonism is a Christian Cult. What then of Mitt Romney's Presidential candidacy?

After carefully perusing hundreds of volumes on Mormon theology and scores of pamphlets dealing with this subject, the author can quite candidly state that never has he seen such misappropriation of terminology, disregard of context, and utter abandon of scholastic principles demonstrated on the part of non-Christian cultists than is evidenced in the attempts of Mormon theologians to appear orthodox and at the same time undermine the foundations of historic Christianity. The intricacies of their complex system of polytheism causes the careful researcher to ponder again and again the ethical standard that these Mormon writers practice and the blatant attempts to rewrite history, biblical theology, and the laws of scriptural interpretation that they might support the theologies of Joseph Smith and Brigham Young. Without fear of contradiction, I am certain that Mormonism cannot stand investigation and wants no part of it unless the results can be controlled under the guise of “broad-mindedness” and “tolerance."

Was Rev. Samuel West Orthodox? Part Deux

Continuing from my previous post on Rev. West, he left no smoking gun about his faith--his friends were not certain either, but he did comment on free will. This is puzzling given the unitarians were a tight group who communicated with each other, no doubt feeling the heat from the Orthodox majority. Although my earlier post clearly shows West affirmed Calvin's total depravity, this early primary source, claims the opposite:

That is, he [West] asserted free will for man in opposition to Calvin's doctrine of fore-ordination and irreparable election, and man's ability of moral choice in opposition to the doctrine of "total depravity."

Should we not take a person's own words over another's testimony? Where are the smoking guns affirming unitarianism from his contemporaries? Reading his Ordination he was an Orthodox Christian:

This..Christ..as our high priest who offered himself up to God a sacrifice of atonement for the sins of the world.. he is to be preached up as the only Mediator between God and man..that he came to redeem us both from the penal consequences of Adam's first transgression..to increase our knowledge of the doctrines of, the gospel..that through his atoning blood and perfect righteousness..Can anyone imagine faithfully that he preaches Christ, who very seldom in his discourses mentions his name; and who never insists on the doctrine of atonement, with which the new testament so much abounds? Shall gospel ministers leave out the principle end of Christ's coming..?

Where is West's words to refute this? I have read Christians who claim West was a unitarian, however, affirming Arminianism is not synonymous with heterodoxy--at least in the 18th century. Moreover, Timothy Dwight was a sort of Arminian. The fact is, none of these unitarian preachers: Jonathan Mayhew, or Ebenezer Gay, et al., were rationalists in the mold of Thomas Jefferson. Any attempt to label a system of rationalism to any "group" of founding fathers, or founding preachers contradicts the evidence. If Thomas Jefferson truly denied the supernatural, West had a stiff rebuke for him:

[C]an anyone think, that he has faithfully discharge the trust reposed in him, who insists altogether in what is called natural religion, without ever mentioning the pecularly doctrines of revelation? Why should we separate what God has joined together?..Where the doctrines of meer natural religion are insisted on to the neglect of the pecular doctrines of revelation; we can at most expect to find a few fashionable, civil, gentlemen, but destitute of real piety.  

However, there is evidence as to West's heterodoxy:

With reference to Dr. West's position on the doctrine of the Trinity, his granddaughter, Mary C. West, of Tiverton, (recently deceased,) wrote in a communication printed in the Evening Standard of this city in March, 1883, as follows: "If his children were competent witnesses (my father and aunt) I can say that they have often told me that their father was an Arminian Unitarian. * * * I have heard my aunt many times tell this story. When she was a little girl her teacher set her to learning a catechism, — I think it was the Westminster, but at any rate it had the Trinitarian formula in it: 'The Father, the Son, and the Holy Ghost, and these three are one.' She was at home studying her lesson in a loud voice, and her father heard her repeating the above formula and called her to him and held up three of his fingers (as she always did when she told the story), and asked her how three could be one, took the book from her and put it in his pocket, and told her to tell her teacher that he would get her another catechism, which he did. I think the one he got her was called 'The Franklin Catechism,' or 'The Franklin Primer."

Who do we believe? Do we believe West's own words, or this statement years after the fact?

Tax Breaks to Corporations Do Not Create Jobs

Tax breaks to large corporations do not create jobs! It is a lie promoted by conservatives like Sean Hannity, who think with their pocket-books and not with the mind of Christ:

Ten major U.S. corporations, including big banks Citigroup and Bank of America, laid off workers after enjoying a tax holiday in 2004-2005 that had been billed as a form of economic stimulus, said a report released on Tuesday..Fifty-eight corporations that accounted for 70 percent of overseas profits repatriated under the 2004-2005 tax break collectively saved $64 billion in taxes, then cut 600,000 jobs through layoffs, the report said..Legislation in the Republican-controlled U.S. House of Representatives would let them repatriate those profits at 5.25 percent, the same tax rate given to them under a similar tax holiday during the Bush administration.


Just as they are doing now, companies six years ago said that the repatriation tax break would boost jobs and the economy. But the institute said this did not happen, as earlier academic studies have also found.


"History shows that many 'tax holiday' companies use repatriated profits to reward executives and other shareholders, then lay off workers," said Chuck Collins, co-author of the report from the left-leaning institute. "Corporate tax holidays have resulted in precious few U.S. jobs."

At a time of soaring government deficits, the Joint Committee on Taxation, a nonpartisan congressional research arm, has estimated that a tax holiday, like the one proposed in the House and favored by WIN America, would eventually cost taxpayers about $78.7 billion over the next decade.

I would assume the 600,000 layoffs were the net result in the study.

The Most Educated Founding Father Was Orthodox Christian Hugh Williamson

Williamson was a genius. I would call him an evangelical, but I can't find any of his writings. All I found was a quote from his good friend Dr. Hosack:

As might be expected because of his trade and education his manners, though in some respects eccentric, were generally those of a polite gentleman. Occasionally, however, when he met with persons who either displayed great ignorance, want of moral character, or a disregard to religious truth, he expressed his feelings in such a manner, as distinctly to show that they had no claim to his respect. To such, both his language and manners might be considered abrupt, if not possessing a degree of what might be denominated Johnsonian rudeness.

Williamson was born in Pennsylvania 1735, living a long allustrious life ending at the age of 83. His parents were Scoth-Irish Calvinists, who wanted their eldest son to be a Divine. During his voyage to America from Ireland, their ship was captured by Blackbeard. What an adventure that would have been for a young lad. Dr. Hosack relates early in life, Williamson was very zealous as to morality and religion, attending Dr. Alison's seminary. He was an expert in mathematics, attending the first class at the college of Philadelphia, where he received his Bachelor of Arts in 1757. The school then hired him in their Latin and English schools. His goal was to become a minister, as he studied divinity for two years, and was licensed to preach. Williamson was then admitted as a member to the Presbytery of Philadelphia, although he was never ordained.

He apparently had bad lungs, could not speak publicly very well, abrubtly left the ministry because of the division within the Presbyterian Church. He received his Master's Degree in 1760, becoming Professor of Mathematics at the College of Philadelphia, resigned three years later, and left for Europe to become a Doctor. Williamson's quest for knowledge did not stop, having then studied medicine at the University of Edinburgh, and traveled to Utrecht, Holland, to receive his Doctor of Medicine.

Doctor Williamson's life of service is impeccable--a hero to the citizens of North Carolina in the Revolutionary War. He was anti-slavery, a major contributor to Rufus King's Northwest Ordinance. Moreover, Williamson received a Doctor of Laws at the University of Leyden, in Germany. His observations on climate affirm Biblical Inerrancy, the flood, the Exodus, etc.

Was not this most learned man a Divine? Did he not sign the Constitution? Although Witherspoon may be the only Founding Father ordained, was not Williamson licensed to Preach? We should add the name Williamson to that list.

John Adams Believed Religion Only Meant Christianity, Says His First Cousin

Unless specifically enumerated, as I have been saying, religion meant only Christianity. I found Adams' first cousin Zabdiel, quoting the exact quote John wrote to him. How classic! He used another man's quote from a letter to himself. Here is John Adams in 1776.

Statesmen, my dear Sir, may plan and speculate for Liberty, but it is Religion and Morality alone, which can establish the Principles upon which Freedom can securely stand. The only foundation of a free Constitution is pure Virtue, and if this cannot be inspired into our People in a greater Measure than they have it now, They may change their Rulers and the forms of Government, but they will not obtain a lasting Liberty. They will only exchange Tyrants and Tyrannies.

--Letter to Zabdiel Adams (1776-06-21)

Now, here is Zabdiel Adams in 1782 in front of Governor Hancock:

Statesmen may plan and Speculate for liberty, but it is religion' and morality alone which can establish the principles upon which freedom can surely stand.

A SERMON PREACHED BEFORE THE EXCELLENCY JOHN HANCOCK, Esq; GOVERNOUR
HIS HONOR THOMAS CUSHING, Esq, LIEUTENANT-GOVERNOR; THE HONORABLE THE COUNCIL, AND THE HONORABLE THE SENATE, HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES Of THE
COMMONWEALTH OF MASSACHUSETTS, MAY 29, 1782, p. 43. Being the Day of General Elect:ion By ZABDIEL ADAMS, A. M. PASTOR OF THE CHURCH IN LUNENBURG.

Was Rev. Samuel West Orthodox?

The greatest Patriot Preachers were in this order: Whitefield, Witherspoon, Muhlenberg, and Cooper. All four were staunch Calvinists. While Muhlenberg attained one of the highest ranks in the Army--Major General, Cooper was so effective, the English issued a warrant for his arrest. As to Samuel West, he was an eccentric fellow who had to resign his pastorate due to his mental instability, however, he was influential to Boston Patriots. His Sermon to the Boston House of Representatives is quite famous--but as I found out, secularists may have mis-read his entire sermon. The fact is West elevates right reason in the context of man's relations with man, not with anything supernatural or implying a miracle is not above reason:

Had men persevered in a state of moral rectitude, every one would have been disposed to follow the law of nature..There could be no occasion for the exertion of such a power; for every man, being under the government of right reason, would immediately feel himself constrained to comply with everything that appeared reasonable or fit to be done, or that would any way tend to promote the general good. This would have been the happy state of mankind had they closely adhered to the law of nature, and persevered in their primitive state.

Thus we see that a state of nature, though it be a state of perfect freedom, yet is very far from a state of licentiousness.  The law of nature gives men no right to do anything that is immoral, or contrary to the will of God, and injurious to their fellow-creatures; for a state of nature is properly a state of law and government, even a government founded upon the unchangeable nature of the Deity, and a law resulting from the eternal fitness of things.  Sooner shall heaven and earth pass away, and the whole frame of nature be dissolved, than any part, even the smallest iota, of this law shall ever be abrogated; it is unchangeable as the Deity himself, being a transcript of his moral perfections.  A revelation, pretending to be from God, that contradicts any part of natural law, ought immediately to be rejected as an imposture; for the Deity cannot make a law contrary to the law of nature without acting contrary to himself,--a thing in the strictest sense impossible, for that which implies contradiction is not an object of the divine power.  Had this subject been properly attended to and understood, the world had remained free from a multitude of absurd and pernicious principles, which have been industriously propagated by artful and designing men, both in politics and divinity.  The doctrine of non-resistance and unlimited passive obedience to the worst of tyrants would never have found credit among mankind had the voice of reason been hearkened to for a guide, because such a doctrine would immediately have been discerned to be contrary to natural law..These are some of the laws of nature which every man in the world is bound to observe, and which whoever violates exposes himself to the resentment of mankind, the lashes of his own conscience, and the judgment of Heaven.  This plainly shows that the highest state of liberty subjects us to the law of nature and the government of God.  The most perfect freedom consists in obeying the dictates of right reason, and submitting to natural law.  When a man goes beyond or contrary to the law of nature and reason, he becomes the slave of base passions and vile lusts; he introduces confusion and disorder into society, and brings misery and destruction upon himself.  This, therefore, cannot be called a state of freedom, but a state of the vilest slavery and the most dreadful bondage.  The servants of sin and corruption are subjected to the worst kind of tyranny in the universe.  Hence we conclude that where licentiousness begins, liberty ends.
 
The law of nature is a perfect standard and measure of action for beings that persevere in a state of moral rectitude; but the case is far different with us, who are in a fallen and degenerate estate..Now, whatever right reason requires as necessary to be done is as much the will and law of God as though it were enjoined us by an immediate revelation from heaven, or commanded in the sacred Scriptures. [bold face mine]

As anyone can plainly read, his sermon has absolutely nothing to do with man's flawed reason superior to the Bible. Was Samuel West Orthodox? He believed in Total Depravity. That West was a universalist is refuted as West quoted Rev. 14:9-10.

Hence that terrible denunciation of divine wrath against the worshippers of the beast and his image: "If any man worship the beast and his image, and receive his mark in his forehead, or in his hand, the same shall drink of the wine of the wrath of God which is poured out without mixture into the cup of his indignation, and he shall be tormented with fire and brimstone in the presence of the holy angels, and in the presence of the Lamb; and the smoke of their torment ascendeth for ever and ever: and they have no rest day nor night, who worship the beast and his image, and who receive the mark of his name." We have here set forth in the clearest manner, by the inspired apostle, God's abhorrence of tyranny and tyrants, together with the idolatrous reverence that their wretched subjects are wont to pay them, and the awful denunciation of divine wrath against those who are guilty of this undue obedience to tyrants.[bold face mine]

At this point, I will not proclaim West was an Orthodox Christian, but I ask anyone to furnish any of his writings that specifically reject Christian Orthodoxy. More or less, West used Trinitarian verbage because he knew his audience.

Another Error by Justice Antonin Scalia

Speaking at the Duquesne Law School, Antonin Scalia has it all wrong. Scalia claims abortion is not in the Constitution--he is correct. However, abortion violates the Laws of Nature in the Declaration of Independence which is still in effect. Signer of the Declaration and Constitution, James Wilson, wrote that abortion under the Common Law is a felony and framers penalized it as such. With Wilson being the expert of the framers on the laws of nature, how could Scalia not read Wilson? Violations of fundamentals are not left to the States. Here, is Scalia:

What does it mean to be a Catholic law school? There is no such thing as Catholic law. The law is no different for a Catholic than it is for a Jew any more than it is different for a woman or a man or a white man or a black.

Thus it is that I am sometimes embarrassed when sincere opponents of abortion sometimes thank me for championing their cause. ... I do not champion their cause. The Constitution addresses the subject not at all, which means that it is left up to the states.

The Inside of Aitken's Bible

If this isn't a violation of modern separation of church and state, what is?

Evangelical Christian Fundamentalist Rev. Samuel Cooper

Samuel Cooper's Dad, William Cooper, was a zealous Calvinist who died young of apoplexy. Samuel took over Brattle Street Church once his dad passed away in 1743. A Secularist website, American Creation, has fellow former blogger Jon Rowe commenting about Samuel Cooper:

John Adams' list of those most responsible for American Independence: Samuel Cooper, Jonathan Mayhew, Charles Chauncy, and George Whitefield. He calls them all ministers of the gospel and all Christians. In reality ONLY WHITEFIELD was a "Christian" as evangelicals define and understand the term. The others, including J. Adams were Trinity deniers..But America's key Founders and the notable patriotic preachers they followed (Revs. Mayhew, Chauncy, Cooper and others) disbelieved in central Christian tenets like original sin, trinity, incarnation, and atonement, such that they are disqualified as "Christians" in the eyes of large sectors of believers in historic traditional Christianity.

However, as I have discovered, Cooper was an evangelical, who believed in Original Sin, the Vicarious Blood Atonement, eternal judgment, and justification by grace:

[A]nd at last redeemed the Church by his own Blood..Love, by the Example of the compassionate Redeemer, who takes “the Lambs in his Arms; ”and who when He dwelt among us in Flesh..The knowledge we are to dispense to others is chiefly to be drawn from the Holy Spriptures; and by conversing with them, we become acquainted with the pecular doctrines of Christianity: such as the apostacy of human nature; the guilt and condemnation into which all men have fallen; the person and offices of the Redeemer; our pardon and justification through his obedience and sacrifice; the conditions of the covenant of grace; the nature and extent of that holiness without which no man shall see the Lord; and the necessity of the influences of the Holy Spirit to form us to it...Your Discourses will be evangelical and instructive, warm and persuasive.

--A Sermon preach'd April 9, 1760 at the ordination of the Reverened Mr. Joseph Jackson, to the pastoral care of the church in Brooklin. p. 24, 33, 38

Perry is for Dream Act, Romney is for Amnesty

Romney is blasting Perry for his Dream Act, and rightfully so, however Romney is for Amnesty for illegal immigrants. Both men are unqualified to be President.

EVERYONE SHOULD LISTEN TO THIS SWEDISH MP!

Nice speech. If only the rest of Europe would make a stand.

Brilliant. This is a powerful, thoughtful, and important speech by a Swiss Member of Parliament  who lays out precisely how Islamists intend to dominate Europe and the western world.   Not every day that you see a pony-tailed MP denouncing “power lusting holy warriors with social benefits.”  He not only explains the threat,  but makes clear that we will not give up without a fight.

The Orthodox William Livingston

William Livingston was a Calvinist, from a Calvinist family, who graduated Yale in 1741. Not only did he have to pledge loyalty to the Westminster Confession, and Biblical inerrancy, he was buying sermons from Whitefield and his compatriots:

On the 19th of April, the Rev. Ebenezer Pemberton (Harv. 1721), pastor of the Presbyterian Church in New York City, and a zealous partisan of Whitefield, preached a sermon (from 1 Cor. ii, 2) in the College Hall, which was published at New London the same year (160, pp. 30). Appended to this sermon is an interesting list of 100 subscribers, most of them students, who take from 3 to 12 copies each; in this list appear the names of all the members of the Senior and Sophomore Classes, and all but three (William P. Smith, Leverett and John Hubbard) of the other classes in College; it is probable that some or all of the three just named were not then in residence.

--Biographical Sketches of the Graduates of Yale College with Annals of the ...
 By Franklin Bowditch Dexter

Fellow Calvinist Timothy Dwight had a high regard for him--that he was attentive to the things of God:

The talents of Governor Livingston were very various. His imagination was brilliant, his wit sprightly and pungent, his understanding powerful, his taste refined, and his conceptions bold and masterly. His views of political subjects were expansive, clear, and just, Of freedom, both civil and religious, he was a distinguished champion. To his other excellencies, Governor Livingston added that of piety.

One of Livingston's critics called the Calvinist Livingston, a bigot--not a liberal:

[I]n Judge Thomas Jones's History of New York during the Revolutionary War (i, 3) :

Of this young triumvirate [Livingston, Wm. Smith, Jr., and John Morin Scott], then first verging upon the stage of life, William Livingston bore the character of a sensible, cunning, shrewd fellow; well versed in the law, though a very indifferent speaker; of an ill-natured, morose, sullen disposition; satirical and abusive in his writings; violent in his conversation; a bigot in religion; wanton, cruel, and unfeeling in his temper; ungenerous in his sentiments; uncouth in his manners; impatient of contradiction; and of a savage, persecuting spirit.

Online biographies list Livingston as a Calvinist:

Associated with the Calvinists in religion, he opposed the dominant Anglican leaders in the colony and wielded a sharply satirical pen in verses and broadsides.

Not to mention, he called his daughter a Presbyterian, and had is oldest son personally educated by a Calvinist--John Witherspoon.

Here, Livingston affirms His God, as the Laws of God in the DOI. The following piece written by him is completely Calvinist--supporting Calvinist Dartmouth, etc:

After having forsaken houses and lands, and the most tender connections, with everything dear and estimable amongst human kind, tor the undisturbed fruition of the rights of private judgment, sacred by the laws of God and of nature, they had to encounter, without the protection of the government.

--A Letter to the Right Reverend Father in God, John, Lord Bishop of Landaff; occasioned by some passages in His Lordship's sermon, on the 20th of February, 1767, in which the American colonies are loaded with great and undeserved reproach. / By William Livingston. New-York: Printed for the author; and to be sold by Garrat Noel, near the coffee-house, MDCCLXVIII. 1768

Here's the kicker--Livingston calling Arminianism heresy:

BUT in what sense my lord, did those adventurers abandon their native religion? If your lordship means by their native religion, the doctrines of christianity as contained in the thirty-nine articles of your church;. they were so far from abandoning it, that it were to be wished it to be inviolably preserved by those they left behind. These were the very doctrines which they, in their time, universally believed, constantly taught, and warmly inculcated. These are the doctrines which their posterity, to this day, believe, teach, and inculcate. Nay, they believe, teach and inculcate them, in the same scriptural and unadulterated sense, in which they were believed, taught, and inculcated at the time of the reformation. They believe, teach, and inculcate them, without those sophisticating glories, by which they have since, in the mother-country, been wrested to favor the heresy of Arminius.

This is great! Later, Livingston destroys the basis of Arminianism--"garments of salvation out of filthy rags [works]."

The Apparent Ecumenist David Barton Commenting About Glenn Beck

Mr. Barton has taken some heat from Christians; for instance, dropping him from radio programs, as he believes Glenn Beck is a Christian, although Beck says he's a Mormon. Mormons deny all the fundamentals of Christianity taught in the New Testament. As this blog as previously shown, Mormonism is the most blashemous of all the Cults, claiming The Father had sexual relations--as if that could happen--with Mary, to form the Spirit being Jesus. They believe that because they say the Father was a man who became God. Only a demonic mind could inspire that because it isn't in the Bible.

David Barton is treading on dangerous ground. People claim they have a relationship with Jesus every day, however, it is a special relationship by Grace through faith and repentence, where God makes alive our spirit, by his Spirit--which was dead from sin--making us a New Creation in Christ Jesus for good works, to make us born again Christians. God will convert those by the way He has ordained in His Word. The Book of Mormon and "Pearl of Great Price" contradicts the Bible. Thus, The Holy Spirit will not make alive that which rejects what He has inspired.

How can David Barton not understand it is the religion of Ecumenism that anti-christ will bring to the world?  Beck specifically said the God of the DOI is not the Christian God, which contradicts all our history. Barton should sit Beck down and ask him if he is born again. If he is clueless what that is, he is not a recipient of it.

Key Founding Father and Father of American Jurisprudence: Chancellor James Kent

Chancellor Kent is historically associated with the unitarians, however, later in life, Kent links Christ's Merits with the Atonement:

Shortly before my father's death," records Judge William Kent, "the conversation having turned upon the foreign custom of attending places of amusement on Sunday, my father said, 'I am by no means an ascetic in religion as you know, yet I was brought up strictly to regard the Sabbath, and I should like my children always to regard it.

His manner became serious, and after a few minutes he went on:

My children, I wish to talk to you. During my early and middle life I was, perhaps, rather sceptical with regard to some of the truths of Christianity. Not that I did not have the utmost respect for religion, and always read my Bible, but the doctrine of the atonement was one I never could understand, and I felt inclined to consider as impossible to be received in the way divines taught it. I believe I was rather inclined to Unitarianism; but of late years my views have altered. I believe in the doctrines of the prayer- books, as I understand them, and hope to be saved through the merits of Jesus Christ.

--Memoirs of James Kent

Another Evangelical Key Founder: John Hancock

John Hancock was perhaps the most ardent Statesman to promote governmental support of Christianity. He was the first man to sign the Declaration of Independence, the President of Congress while it was framed, long standing Governor of Massachusetts, and a devout Christian.

To the Honourable the Senate and the Honourable House of Representatives of the Commonwealth of Massachusetts.

The Society for propogating the Gospel  among the Indians and others, in North America, beg leave to show, That one design of our venerable Fathers in emigrating to this land, was professedly to extend the knowledge of our Glorious Redeemer among the savage natives, that this design was expressed and adjoined under both the charters, granted by the patent state to this colony, and is, in the opinion of the Society, necessary and fastable (sp?) at all times to be persued, by a people who profess Christianity..The want of funds alone prohibits them from exerting themselves in propagating the Gospel among the Indians, and extending the means of Christian knowledge among those of the inhabitants of this land, who are now destitute of them. They humbly request your Honours, to recommend to his Excellency the Governour, to issue a Brief to be read in all the Churches of this Commonwealth, requesting the aid of all piously disposed persons, in carrying out this truely benevolent design, and taking their contributions, in Specie, Public Securities, or any other property, to enable the Society to send the knowledge of our Glorious Redeemer, among those who are now perishing for lack of vision, and to extend the means of instruction to our fellow citizens in the western and other parts of the State, who are now destitute of them. [bold face mine]

--A Brief, Signed and promoted to the various Churches by Gov. John Hancock, June 20, 1788. Written by Francis Dana, Wigglesworth, and Thacher.

The following Thanksgiving Proclamation is very orthodox. 18th Century unitarians never understood Jesus Christ as Mediator, or a High Priest, but a man whom God showed His mercy through. Whenever you read the words: Mediator, Merits, Redeemer, that person is orthodox. In signifying Christ's Godhead, Hancock capitalizes Lord. LORD in the Bible is for Father:

Hereby calling upon Ministers and people of every Denomination to assemble on the said day--and in the name of the GREAT MEDIATOR, devoutly and sincerely offer to ALMIGHTY GOD..And above all, not only to continue to us the enjoyment of our civil rights and liberties; but the great and most important Blessing, the Gospel of JESUS CHRIST..I do earnestly commend, that we may join the penitent confession of our Sins..that all my bow to the Scepter of our LORD JESUS CHRIST, and the whole earth be filled with HIS Glory. 

--John Hancock, A Proclamation for a Day of Public Thanksgiving, October 5, 1791.

Here is another Orthodox Fast Day Proclamation Calvinist in its obligatory duty to God:

It being the incumbent duty of a people believing in the over-ruling Providence of God..Calling upon Ministers and Christians of every denomination, to assemble on that Day, and devoutly to offer to ALMIGHTY GOD, a sacrifice acceptable to HIM, through the Merits of JESUS CHRIST..And that we enjoy, not only our civil rights and liberties--but that great and important blessing, the Gospel of JESUS CHRIST..affording HIS influence in the ensuing elections..and above all, that HE would revive the Spirit of Christianity in all nations professing the same; and that the Spiritual KINGDOM OF OUR LORD AND SAVIOUR JESUS CHRIST may be continually increasing until the whole earth shall be filled with HIS GLORY. 

--John Hancock, October 29, 1788

Debunking the Palestine Lie

Publius' Forum is saying what I have been saying for years.

There has NEVER been such a people as the Palestinians. And those that wanted their own nation have been little else but murderers, racists, and hatemongers since the 1920s and before!

This video does a great job explaining the REAL history of these murderous, monstrous, haters.

                                             

Is Obama Taxing The Wrong Income?

Eisenhower had the capital gains rate at 91%, Kennedy at 70%, Carter at 70%, and Reagan had it at 50% until 1986 when he dropped it to 28% and caused a recesssion. Furthermore, Mitt Romney claims "Corporations are people too" trying to support the claim of rights. Are corporations made in the image of God?

Those making $100,000 to $125,000 paid on average 9.9 percent in federal income taxes. Those making $50,000 to $60,000 paid an average of 6.3 percent.


Obama's claim hinges on the fact that, for high-income families and individuals, investment income is often taxed at a lower rate than wages. The top tax rate for dividends and capital gains is 15 percent. The top marginal tax rate for wages is 35 percent, though that is reserved for taxable income above $379,150.

Evangelical Christian Fundamentalist Richard Henry Lee

As the Lord is the Disposer of human events, it is ironic the fate that prohibited Richard Henry Lee from writing the Declaration of Independence. Lee had given the formal declaration to break free from Britain, therefore would have been given the task of primary draughtsman, however his wife was sick, forcing Lee to leave for Virginia. Lee's misfortune was Thomas Jefferson's gain. Lee may have been President, and Jefferson perhaps forgotten among the A-list founding fathers. I look forward to asking Mr. Lee about the day he left for Virginia.

Lee, who ratified the Constitution, and helped draft the Bill of Rights, was an Orthodox Christian:

For six months before his death, Mr. Lee was almost entirely confined to his house. He saw his end approaching, and through faith in the merits of the Redeemer, viewed it with tranquil firmness. He had well fulfilled all the duties of life. As a patriot, as a friend to the liberty of mankind, as a parent, friend, and neighbour, he, like the younger Cato, whose character he much resembled, could say, "let guilt or fear disturb man's conscience, Cato knows neither of them;" and that "nature, worn out with care, sunk down to rest." It was the rest, prepared for those, whose virtues the great Parent of good, has approved; and which will be enjoyed by all, who devote their lives to the happiness of their fellow men, and to the duties they owe to their saving God.

Mr. Lee had early studied the evidences of the Christian religion, and had, through life, avowed his belief in its divine origin. He admired the perfection of its morality, and the sublimity of its peculiar theology. He was a member of the Episcopal Church; and although a hearty friend to all who professed the Gospel, he was strongly attached to the Church to which he belonged. The author found amongst his manuscripts, two votes passed by the two first meetings of the general convention of that Church, in the United States, in which their thanks are returned to Mr. Lee, for the interest he had taken in its prosperity.

Let not the infidel say, that Mr. Lee's assent to the truths of Christianity, was given in the twilight of his reason, and proclaimed at the approach of death. In the vigour of his mind, amid the honours of the world and its enjoyment, he had declared his belief, in Jesus Christ, as the saviour of men! For many years of his life, he had partaken, in public, of the emblems of that propitiatory atonement, which he made upon the cross, "for the sin of the world."

The eloquent Erskine has truly said, after reviewing a glorious list of believers in Christianity, "Thus we find all that is great, or wise, or splendid, or illustrious, amongst created beings, all the minds gifted beyond ordinary nature, if not inspired by their Universal Author, for the advancement and dignity of the world, though divided by distant ages, and by the clashing opinions distinguishing them from one another, yet joining, as it were, in one sublime chorus, to celebrate the truths of Christianity, and laying upon its holy altars, the neverfading fruits of their immortal wisdom." To that list may be added the name of Richard Henry Lee.

--Memoir of the life of Richard Henry Lee, and his correspondence ..., Volume 1
  By Richard Henry Lee

John Adams and Ben Franklin Write The Law of Nature is The God of the Bible

First, Adams writes his cousin Samuel Adams first presented the principles in the Declaration of Independence:

As you justly observe, there is not an idea in it [the Declaration of Independence] but what had been hackneyed in Congress two years before. The substance of it is contained in the Declaration of Rights, and the Violations of those Rights, in the journals of Congress in 1774. Indeed, the essence of it is contained in a pamphlet voted and printed by the town of Boston before the first Congress met, composed by James Otis, as I suppose, in one of his lucid intervals, and pruned and polished by Samuel Adams." (John Adams's Works, II. 514).

Franklin approved Samuel Adams' Rights of the Colonists:

To the sentiments expressed in the report of the committee, and adopted by the inhabitants of the town, he fully assented. This is proved by his sending a copy of the proceedings to the press, as soon as he received it in London, with a prefatory notice written by himself. The pamphlet was entitled "The Votes and Proceedings of the Freeholders and other Inhabitants of the Town of Boston, in Town Meeting assembled, according to Law. Published by Order of the Town." -- Sparks.

Here, John Adams writes Christianity is The Law of Nature. Likewise, Yahweh is the Law of Nations in Article 1, section 8 of the Constitution:

One great advantage of the Christian religion is that it brings the great principle of the law of nature and nations...

--Adams Diary, August 24, 1796.

James Oglethorpe, Founding Vision for Georgia (1733).

At the founding of Georgia, Christianity was its religion and morality:

CHRISTIANITY will be extended by the execution of this design; since, the good discipline established by the Society, will reform the manners of those miserable objects, who shall be by them subsisted; and the example of a whole Colony, who shall behave in a just, moral, and religious manner, will contribute greatly towards the conversion of the Indians, and taking off the prejudices received from the profligate lives of such who have scarce any thing of Christianity but the name.

Statutes of the College of William and Mary (1727)

There are three things which the Founders of this College proposed to themselves, to which all its Statutes shall be directed. The First is, That the Youth of Virginia should be well educated to Learning and good Morals. The Second is, That the Churches of America, especially Virginia, should be supplied with good Ministers after the Doctrine and Government of the Church of England; and that the College should be a constant Seminary for this Purpose. The Third is, That the Indians of America should be instructed in the Christian Religion, and that some of the Indian Youth that are well-behaved and well-inclined, being first well prepared in the Divinity School, may be sent out to preach the Gospel to their Countrymen in their own Tongue, after they have duly been put in Orders of Deacons and Priests....

George Washington's Masonry

Contrary to popular secular belief, 18th Century American Masonry, contradistinguished from the English Lodges, was Trinitarian Christian. 18th century Masonry is a tell-tale into George Washington's faith. Washington took Communion and was Baptized outside of the Anglican Church, not to be identified with the King's religion. What then of Rev. Abercrombie affirming GW never took communion from a U.S. Senator? The context appears to be that of his church. Thus, the secret of GW getting baptized and taking communion outside of his church.

If GW was not a Christian, why would he be a member of a Christian society that promoted the Trinity? Yet, GW wrote, "I shall always be happy to advance the interests of the society." Here is what 18th century Masonry believed:

The British troops evacuated Philadelphia and the campaign of 1778 closed with the contending armies in nearly the same position as they were in the summer of 1776. In the latter part of Decernber, Washington visited Philadelphia, where Congress was in session; and while there the Grand Lodge of Pennsylvania celebrated the festival of St. John the Evangelist. Washington was present on the occasion, and was honored with the chief place in the procession, being supported on his right by the Grand Master, and on his left by the Deputy Grand Master. More than three hundred brethren joined in the procession. They met at nine o'clock, at the college, and being properly clothed, the officers in the jewels of their office and other badges of their dignity, the procession moved at eleven o'clock and proceeded to Christ Church where a Masonic sermon for the benefit of the poor was preached by the Rev. Brother William Smith, D.D., Grand Secretary of the Grand Lodge of Pennsylvania.But I will detain you no longer, Brethren !—You all pant to have a Foretaste of the Joy of Angels, by calling forth into immediate Exercise this heavenly Virtue of Charity; whereby you will give Glory to the THRICE BLESSED THREE, Father, Son, and Holy Ghost, one God over all! At the Word 'Glory,' the Brethren rose together; and, in reverential Posture, on pronouncing the Names of the TRI-UNE GOD, accompanied the same by a correspondent Repitition of the Ancient Sign or Symbol of Divine Homage and Obeisance; concluding with the following Response— 'Amen I So let it ever be !

Most, if not all the Masons were Orthodox Christians. Why would a unitarian be a member of a Trinitarian society?  Soon after this event, the Masons wanted to make GW head of Masonry. Here is another poem of apparent Orthodox Christian Masonry:

An ode commemorative of Washington's participation in the ceremonies, and the position he occupied, was written a few months afterwards by Colonel John Park, a distinguished member of American Union Lodge, addressed to Colonel Proctor, of Pennsylvania, bearing date, February 7, 1779, in which he says:

See Washington, he leads the train,
'Tis he commands the grateful strain;
Sec, every crafted son obeys,
And to the godlike brother homage pays.

Let fame resound him through the land,
And echo, Tis Out Master Grand!
'Tis he our ancient craft shall sway, Whilst we, with three times three, obey.

The early leaders of North Carolina were Masons. Gov. Samuel Johnston, Signer of the DOI, William Hooper, and Richard Caswell, were all Christians. Hooper's Dad was Reverend of Trinity Church.

Our Covenant Political Theology

The basis for Revolution is part and parcel of the political and social theology of the United States. All the ideas of republican government, including Revolution were clearly enumerated and brought to light for the American colonists and western civilization through the Protestant Reformation.Those at American Creation would have you believe this idea of revolution was espoused to the colonists through a heretic philosopher named John Locke. In fact, Locke was only repeating the Reformers, no different than quoting them today, except I'm not aware Locke quoted Rutherford or Calvin, although he could have. This is precisely the reason the speaker for the revolutionaries; Samuel Adams quoted Locke and the social compact. Adams and Locke took their ideas from the same source; the Reformers. Since Samuel Adams was a Calvinist, when he quoted the social compact, he was not thinking of Locke or Rousseau, rather, the colonists understood Adams was referring to the Solemn League and Covenant. This agreement was written by Adams and Warren after the 17th century covenant between the Scottish Presbyterians and the English Parliamentarians.

The Declaration of Independence was founded on a Puritan Solemn League and Covenant. Yes, rights were part of the idea, but not the main reason for revolution. Adams and Dr. Joseph Warren wrote the Solemn League document that was far from the secular compact of John Locke. In fact, Locke was only repeating Rutherford, who was repeating Calvin, including the Natural Law tradition, taken from Romans 2:14-15, and enumerated in a more excellent light, whereby Hooker, Pufendorf et al., built upon, guiding the patriot preachers to exposite the Natural rights of the colonists, preceding the American Revolution. Unitarian preachers (Samuel West) are the minority and do not represent the biblical view of Romans 13 nor the views in the declaration of independence.

Here is Professor and British historian Jack Richon Pole:

It isn't surprising to claim the idea of popular sovereignty and representative government by the Colonists of the 1760's was not influenced, as is generally believed, by the political theology of John Locke..Very little evidence exists to suggest that Locke exerted any effective influence on the political thought of the Colonists until Thomas Jefferson came to draft the Declaration of Independence.

-Political representation in England and the origins of the American Republic (Macmillan 1966). H. Trevor Colborum, Thomas Jefferson's Use of the Past, "William and Mary Quarterly" Jan. 1958, 56-70. 

Modern philosophers see Locke to be the inspiration behind the DOI in spite of its Calvinist foundation. Furthermore, there is a connection between Locke and Rutherford. Locke met him, most likely many times and knew him intimately because Locke's dad was Rutherford's friend. This post written last year by David Kopel is another example of Locke's connection to Rutherford. Locke read Lex Rex, then secularized his views, removing the covenantal structure the founding fathers put into the declaration of independence. Rutherford's influence is seen through Witherspoon and Adams, just as Francis Schaeffer writes.

As to empiricism, Schaeffer destroyed Locke's argument just as Berkeley did in the 18th century. Locke contradicted himself by removing the biblical basis for government in exchange for empiricism, yet if experience doesn't come from inside man, it must come from where everyone else found it; and Locke rejected that source, killing his own argument. Locke's empiricism ignored the very foundation of natural rights. Schaeffer was just repeating what Berkeley found in Locke's flawed reasoning.

Moreover, by 1681, Locke himself owned a copy of Vindiciae Contra Tyrannos and most other Calvinistic resistance tracts. (Hall. A Heart Promptly Offered, p. 297).

It was Covenantal Puritanism that was the basis of the DOI, given the document itself claims the King abdicated because he broke the covenant between himself and the people, as well as violated their natural rights. Here, is the noted former Emeritus Professor at Columbia:

From the Bay Colony came the great intellectual leaders, the theologians who became the leaders … in the establishment of New England colonies… Nor was its influence restricted to New England, for its ideals and aspirations… became the dominant influence in the development of the United States.

--Joseph Dorfman, The Economic Mind in American Civilization, vol. 1, ch.3

Even Robert N. Bellah notes, Puritanism was the foundation for our constitutionalism; what he coined, our "civil religion."

Prominent 19th Century historian Alex d'Tocqueville did not give Enlightenment Rationalism, or John Locke the foundation, but understood Puritan Covenant Theology that spread throughout the new nation:

In was in the English colonies… better known as the states of New England, that the two or three main principles now forming the basic social theory of the United States were combined. New England principles spread first to the neighboring states and then…to those more distant, finally penetrating everywhere… Their influence now extends beyond its limits over the whole American world…”

--Alex d’Tocqueville, Democracy in America, Book I, ch. 2.

Is it no less a surprise that the political leader of the Revolution was a Calvinist Puritan, speaking for the new nation?

The people of this country, alone, have formally and deliberately chosen a government for themselves, and with open and uninfluenced consent bound themselves into a social compact. Here no man proclaims his birth or wealth as a title to honorable distinction, or to sanctify ignorance and vice with the name of hereditary authority. He who has most zeal and ability to promote public felicity, let him be the servant of the public. This is the only line of distinction drawn by nature.

--Samuel Adams, An ORATION Delivered at the State-House, In PHILADELPHIA, To A Very Numerous AUDIENCE; On THURSDAY the 1st of AUGUST 1776.