Wednesday, September 28, 2011

America IS A Christian Nation, Part IV, Despotism and the Theory of America

In the last installment of America IS A Christian Nation, I purposely doubled back to speak to one consideration that automatically arises when the subject of God and country comes up, the idea that anything that has to do with God is religion.  No, that is not necessarily the case.  In America's case, God is an assumed TRUTH on which America's sovereign authority depends.  God is in the mix of assumptions that lead to America's right to sovereignty.  Because according to the Declaration of Independence, that right is one of God's Natural Laws, then without God, that law would not exists, and therefore America's right to sovereignty would not exist, and therefore of course, in the theoretical sense, America itself would not exist.  So in that same sense, America's very right of existence depends upon the TRUTH of God.

And as we have seen in previous installments, God on which America's sovereignty exists is no deist god, and certainly no god created in the minds of the Founders.  No, each colonial representative who signed the Declaration of Independence was more than just a professed Christian at the time.  According to the laws of each of the 13 colonies, he was also legally a Christian.   Therefore any reference to God in the DoI is legally God of the Bible and New Testament.  The colonial laws in place at the time required that to be.  So as the Treaty of Paris of 1783 proclaims and certifies, that God of the New Testament is a necessary assumed truth for America's existence, was no secret to anyone, any American, or any citizen of the world at the time.

So let's talk about that assumption, that God is 'truth' and that God has imparted certain natural laws that govern the universe and mankind.  Because these assumptions are necessary for America's sovereignty to exist, one result should be apparent.  And that result is very simply that

Because American governmental authority is assumed from God, America's government 
has no authority, the use of which effectively denies that assumption.  

I hope you understand what I just wrote.  This is very important.  Because all American government authority comes from God, no tool of American government, using that authority, can effectively deny the truth of God.  This is a vital concept  for anyone to truly understand what America is all about.  Any tool of American government which attempts to even question the truth of God, God of the Bible and New Testament, can only use rogue authority, someone's personal authority to do so.  Using 'personal authority,' I can say whatever I like and so can you.  But if I purport to carry the authority of the United States Government, because that authority comes from God, I have no authority within that capacity to even question whether God exists.  To do so would be to question the authority by which I might try.  Therefore, any tool of American government that questions God's existence, is effectively NOT a tool of American government.  For any purported tool of American government to take steps to enforce its will in defiance of the possibility of the truth of God, using the power of American government in the process, that act would provide an example of what the Founders' termed, 'despotism.'  In the Founders' lexicon, the term, 'despotism,' is the 'unauthoritative use of the power of government.' 

The practice of that kind of despotism is precisely the reason the Founders justified the use of the terms, 'despot,' or 'tyrant,' to describe King George.  They used those terms applying the standard of God's Natural Laws, assumed as truth and self-evident for their purposes.  According to the Founders, because he used the power of British government to enforce his personal will to suppress the colonists, King George broke God's Laws, thereby losing any authority he may have had to do so.  Because even the king's authority comes from God, when a king steps beyond God's authority, he becomes a despot using powers, but with no requisite authority to do so.

People commonly use the terms, power and authority almost interchangeably.  And as long as power is used along with the necessary authority to do so, then these terms are at least very similar.  But when a tool of government uses power WITHOUT the requisite authority, then that tool becomes despotic.

None of what I have written here changes the unavoidable fact that in anyone's mind, the truth of God is encumbered by a certain amount of doubt.  Even the most devout Christian has doubts regarding the existence of an unseen, supernatural realm in which the Creator of the Universe might reside.  To many, that prospect sounds perfectly absurd!  But to the Founders, these men believed it to the extent that they acted on that belief and brought forth their new nation dependent upon that belief.  In that respect, the Founders created America as an act of faith in their belief of the Bible and New Testament scriptures.

Still, all the faith in the world does not prove the Founders' grand assumption of God, as fact, to folks who do not share that faith.  So the Founders knew that they could not, and should not, portray unproven propositions as truth, expecting to get away with it. For this reason, the Founders stated their assumptions in the Declaration of Independence and created their new nation as something more tangible than just assuming that God exists.  Instead, they created their nation as a very real, very tangible, scientific experiment, one which would test their assumptions, those assumptions being that that
  • God exists
  • God has imparted certain natural laws to His creation
  • Men who obey these laws shall receive God's blessings
  • A nation that obeys God's Laws, fulfilling God's will on earth, shall be protected by divine Providence
And that is why the Founders who signed the Declaration of Independence each endorsed that document 'with a firm reliance on the protection of divine Providence.'  That is why each Founder pledged 'his life, his fortune and his sacred honor.'  In essence, each Founder who signed the Declaration of Independence 'bet the farm' that the Theory of America would be proven true over time.

Earlier in these series of articles, I quoted from George Washington's Farewell Address, issued at the close of his two terms as first President of the United States under the Constitution.  In that address, George Washington embalmed the truth of the American founding for all future generations to discover, and to utilize, possibly even as I am in this application.  At the risk of repeating, Washington wrote:
It will be worthy of a free, enlightened, and, at no distant period, a great Nation, to give to mankind the magnanimous and too novel example of a people always guided by an exalted justice and benevolence. Who can doubt, that, in the course of time and things, the fruits of such a plan would richly repay any temporary advantages, which might be lost by a steady adherence to it?  Can it be, that Providence has not connected the permanent felicity of a Nation with its Virtue? The experiment, at least, is recommended by every sentiment which ennobles human nature.
In his farewell address, George Washington makes it clear for us that America is an experiment designed to confirm whether God has connected a nation's permanent felicity with its virtue, whether a nation guided by the exalted justice and benevolence of God's Laws would be protected by divine Providence.  Washington left us this to find, if we as Americans are so inclined to look for it, to use this information to our advantage as secular forces attempt to either legislate God out of existence in America, or utilize the courts to do so from the bench.  Washington knew that, as God is held in the hearts of Americans, freedom will reign.  Washington also knew that as soon as God disappears from American hearts, freedom would as well.  So one practical lesson Washington leaves us should be clear, and that is for all Americans to know that
No tool of American government, a description that includes the congress, the president or the federal judiciary, nor any administrator or officer under their authority, possesses within his or her job description, the authority to even question that God exists, or that God is the source of authority for the Constitution and all  federal law, or to deny the conspicuous notice of those assertions on federal properties.
In our next installment, we will delve further into the Theory of America and see what some of our other early statesmen may have had to say on the matter.

Back before you know it!


Monday, September 26, 2011

America IS A Christian Nation, Part III, All About Authority, Not Religion

In the last installment of America IS A Christian Nation, I offered answers to a few questions that were on the minds of some readers.  I hope that my answers were sufficient.  But if I left any part of a question unanswered, I hope that one of the questioners will pose it.  Never will I purposely evade a question.  But I may not fully understand the sense of a question, just like a reader may not fully understand the sense of what I write.  Comments and questions are open for anyone.  All I ask is that the one who comments or questions has read what I have written.  Questions should be to clarify, not provide bulk information.  The bulk will be right here, in each next installment.

I do want to make one more pit stop before we resume with the next scheduled installment.  I think it might be wise to drop back and clarify one other major point here, a clarification that may help readers to more fully understand what I have written up to this point.  The purpose of this diversion is to drive home the point that

It Is All About Authority

That's right.  Human rights are all about authority.  Consider the answers to these questions:
  • Why is the President of the United States allowed to command the military?  Answer: Authority.  
  • Why are the courts allowed to incarcerate folks whom they determine deserve it?  Answer: Authority.  
  • What allows the IRS to seize one's bank account if it determines that taxes are due?  Answer: Authority.  
  • But what keeps any of these folks, even the government, from entering into our homes and taking what they want at random? Answer: Lack of authority.  And that means that the government may possess authority for some actions, and none for others.  Whereas Americans may have what seems an all-powerful government, that does not mean that every action of that government is authoritative.  One of the principles embodied in the Declaration of Independence is that "Tyranny" is an unauthoritative use of the power, power without requisite authority.
So authority is a powerful commodity, is it not?

Now consider a few of the complaints of the American British Colonies against actions the King.  Among other complaints, according to the Declaration of Independence, the King George
  • obstructed the administration of justice, by refusing his assent to laws for establishing judiciary powers.
  • made judges dependent on his will alone, for the tenure of their offices, and the amount and payment of their salaries.
  • erected a multitude of new offices, and sent hither swarms of officers to harass our people, and eat out their substance.
  • kept among us, in times of peace, standing armies without the consent of our legislature.
  • affected to render the military independent of and superior to civil power. 
Well look,  you guys in Philadelphia back in 1776, your are talking about the King of England here. The King of England rules by divine right, divine authority, authority given to him directly from God.  So how can the king ever be wrong??? The king can do anything he wants.  He's the man, the guy who has authority over all in his domain, certainly over the colonies. So no matter what you might think or say, what the king says goes.  So what makes you few fellows think that the King of England has to listen to anything you say? Answer very simply: Authority.

Regardless what the British divine right system might require, the Declaration of Independence contends that God gives absolutely NO authority directly to an unelected king.  According to America's founding document, authority from God does NOT first flow through a monarchy.  Instead, all authority for men and nations endows directly to individuals, and then flows from individuals, as they elect, to a government of their choosing.  And because the King of England is mere human, even the king has not sufficient authority to deny God's basic rights to other men.  Yet according to the declaration's contentions, that is exactly what King George did.  And therein lies the rub.

So because King George conspicuously, and over a sufficient time frame, denied the colonists their basic rights, personal rights which if they are correct flow to them directly from God, then by default, the colonists possessed the God-given right to abolish the king's rule and institute a new government, authorizing it in any fashion on which they might agree.  According to the Declaration of Independence, the divine right of kings model of human government is a violation of God's Natural Laws and thereby contradictory to God's charge of authority to mankind.

Well that's all fine and good, but until that allegation is adjudicated by some source of common authority that is greater than men making it, one that even has jurisdiction over the King of England, and agreed as a common source of authority, then why should anyone, especially the King of England, respect what the colonists might have to say about the matter?  Great question, one that can only therefore be answered by appealing to the common authority of the New Testament Scriptures, Scriptures to which both the American colonists and the King of England legally submitted.  Because both sides submitted to the authority of the New Testament Scriptures, the final determination of right and wrong is simply a matter of Scriptural interpretation.

But to adjudicate that question sounds very much like going to court, does it not?  And who might possess jurisdiction to settle a dispute over scriptural interpretation?  Another good question!  And the authors of the Declaration of Independence thought of that very question.  According to the Declaration, the Founders were content to leave it to God, the 'Supreme Judge of the World, to judge the rectitude of [their] intentions.'  So the American Founders recognized that their conflict with the king boiled down to a matter of Scriptural interpretation.  That question regarded whether God deals directly with men as the colonists claim, or whether God deals with men, but first through an emissary such as a monarch, as the British divine right government contends.

Regarding that question, certain authoritative references are found in various books of the Bible, one of which is the book of Matthew.  In that book, Matthew relates that Jesus came into the temple and began teaching the people certain lessons He obviously wanted them to know.  As you might imagine, that Jesus would bypass the presumed authority of the chief priest and elders, and take His teachings directly to the people, did not sit well with the priest and elders.  So they interrupted Jesus asking Him,
By what authority doest thou these things? and who gave thee this authority? (Matthew21:23,KJV)
That day in the temple, Jesus Christ demonstrated the Christian principles, held by the colonists, that no man is authorized to stand between another man and God, and that God desires a personal relationship with all men through His Son, Jesus Christ.  According to the American colonists' interpretation, King George played much the part of the chief priest in the scriptures.  And because Jesus, Son of God, God in the flesh, bypassed the established authorities, the priest and his elders, and took His teachings directly to the people, then that established the right of the people to deal directly with God.  That being the case, the people are under no compulsion to respect any presumed authority, the use of which denies or crosses the personal relationship between man and his maker, as they allege King George did.

Now I quote Matthew directly from the King James Version of the Bible, the same version adopted by the Church of England, scriptures of which King George was obviously aware.  By English law, the Church of England was, and is, the established church of England, which church ordained King George, conferring English sovereign authority from God directly to George.  So the standards against which the American British Colonists would cite crimes by King George were the very same standards that authorized the king's rule in the first place, placing the King and his government under a common jurisdiction.  In citing these standards, these upstart American colonists placed the very idea of rule by divine right into question, using the king's source of authority against him.  That move put King George in a precarious position.  If the king assented to the demands of the colonists, then he would admit that the colonists were correctly interpreting the scriptures.  And if that were true, then that fact, once understood by the British people, might even topple the British monarchy. 

So for that reason, and certainly others, King George found himself motivated by his own earthly desire to remain king, to enforce his will against the the colonies.  As a result, the American Revolutionary War broke out.  But that war was much more than simply a war for independence for a nation of folks who desired to be free from the rule of a certain king.  That war was fought over a much larger question.  That war was fought over conflicting interpretations of the very Scriptures that authorized the rule of the British monarchy.  And in the end, according to the Treaty of Paris of 1783, both sides would just agree to disagree, each party to that agreement holding to their respective Scriptural interpretation, each party submitting to the authority of the Scriptures, which as they interpret them authorize each nation's sovereignty, and thereby each side publicly and obviously submitting to the authority of the Holy Trinity, simply under different interpretations of the same Scriptures.

So this discussion is all about authority; and it is not about religion at all.  According to the Declaration of Independence, the foundation of God's Natural Law that underwrites the sovereignty of the United States is not any sort of religious belief.  No, that foundation is TRUTH, self-evident TRUTH.  Remember, religions deal with beliefs, and faith in those beliefs, not truths.  Now the foundation on which America's declared sovereignty rests is an ASSUMED truth, for sure.  But the manner in which America's sovereignty is reasoned to exist depends on that assumed truth actually being true!  The American Experiment, the discussion of which will resume in the next installment, is designed to prove the truth of that assumption, or disprove that assumption altogether.

Something in the comments I recently received made me realize that I needed to backup and retrace these certain points before we went any further.  So thanks again for your comments and questions. They really help me to understand what you are thinking and whether I am making sense.  In the next Installment, we will resume discussing the American Experiment and the Theory of America.


Sunday, September 25, 2011

America IS A Christian Nation, Time Out for Q&A

I want to thank several individuals who have posted questions or comments elsewhere on Facebook.  And I would like to take a little time to comment or answer several of them.  I expect that these questions may be rolling around in the heads of others who have read the series as well.

These questions and comments largely find basis in the poster's preconceptions regarding the relationship between God, country and man.  In the Declaration of Independence, that relationship certainly does exists.  But that relationship has nothing to do with religion. 

Here is the first question:

I am interested in knowing why is it important to you that America be identified as a Christian nation?

Thank you for the question.  Whether I think it is important that America be identified as a Christian nation does not affect the truth America IS a Christian nation, as defined as a nation that draws its sovereign authority from Jesus Christ as portrayed in the Bible and New Testament scriptures.

Your question might better be asked, why I believe it is important to tell people about America being a Christian nation.  The answer to that question is that I have a heartfelt interest in the truth of the matter.  That interest has come upon me as fire comes to a match.  First, I expect that this interest has always been there waiting for a spark, but when the spark lit, and the match of truth began to burn, understanding the forces at work in America and the world that are trying to extinguish that truth, it just seems my personality to keep the fire lit.

So the importance I ascribe to broadcasting this message  has nothing to do with my advocacy of any particular point of view on the truth.  The importance I ascribe to this message is the importance I ascribe to being truthful.

Regarding the truth of the matter, I have constructed the arguments in this series such that anyone who disagrees with any succeeding conclusion, can trace their disagreement back to a point at which his or her thinking diverged away from mine.  So if someone disagrees with my conclusion, but agrees with all of the facts that build the conclusion, then their disagreement in the end can only find basis in something other than the facts, most likely a preconception brought through to them end despite the facts, or a personal preference of the truth that persists despite the facts, or a misunderstanding of the facts or the way that I portray them.  Truth transcends anyone's beliefs or preconceptions.

Next Comment:

I was wondering about the Native Americans who were there long before, the Christians, as far as I remember. It saddens me to think what they and my ancestors suffered at the hands of the 'Christians' who took over our lands. What indignities people have suffered in the name of such self-righteousness is there for anyone who remembers history to see.

I understand, and agree.  Yet the manner in which certain individuals or groups adopt religion in their lives, and practice that religion, imperfectly, does not change the facts of America's founding or source of authority.  That source of authority is Jesus Christ of the Bible and New Testament.  That individuals and groups, who refer to themselves as members of a Christian denomination or religion, do not live by the scriptures does not change the scriptures.  That the American government may not act according to the scriptures does not change the scriptures.  And nothing about the manner in which any religion, Christian or otherwise, finds roots within the American borders changes the fact that American sovereignty comes from Jesus Christ.  Demonstrating the truth of that fact was the subject of the first series of articles, Is American A Christian Nation.

I encourage you to remain reading the series.  The basis of your comment will find a home in the discussion.  What I am telling you, in these small bites, is what I learned only after lengthy and heartfelt analysis of the facts.  But after considering the remarks of our Founders, and some of our enlightened early statesmen, such as Lincoln, the light bulb came on.  This discussion centers only around America's authority as a nation.  It does not center around religion practices within that nation.  I hope that helps to further your understanding.  Hang in there.  If you do,and if you truly consider what I am telling you, I expect you to have a 'light bulb' moment as well.

Next Comment:

Organised religion is just that, an organisation that strives to be supreme and claims to be supreme and run strategically. It will do what it takes to stake it's claim on the world. It was overt expression of power and might at one time and now it is quiet and insiduous. No religion can stake it's exclusive claim on being humanitarian. Christians have Christs, Muslims the prophet Mohammed, Buddhists have Buddha and so on. So every religion in America is going to quote the teachings of their Prophet/God and claim America to be REALLY a Muslim, Buddhist etc..nation?

I find no fault with anything that you have written...surprise!  Organized religion is largely of man.  There is no official organized religion of America.  In fact, to establish one would violate the Constitution's first amendment.  No, to establish any particular religion in America was not the concern of the Founders who signed the declaration of Independence.  Their concern was to establish a basis of personal authority for each of us to own ourselves and the product of our own hands, which government would have no unrestricted authority to affect.  That authority over our lives is given to us personally by Jesus Christ. And that personal authority over our lives, our freedom to pursue happiness is our right only by virtue of endowment from Jesus Christ.  That personal authority is our human right.

All unalienable human rights come to us by this same means.  We in turn have the right to use some of that authority to authorize and institute a government of our choosing.  So because human rights come from God, to the people, on the way to the government, the government never owns sufficient authority to deny its people their basic rights. 

Prior to America's establishment, governmental deprivation of human rights was the rule, not the exception.  And that rule once manifested as in one particularly egregious act against one man Who had done absolutely nothing to deserve it.  That man was Jesus Christ.  But because Jesus Christ survived the ultimate act denying Him His very human life, certainly His liberty and any earthly pursuit that He may have otherwise undertaken, as a result, according to the scriptures, Jesus Christ is given all authority over Heaven and earth.  That is how Jesus came to own the authority sufficient to endow every man certain unalienable rights.  That is the only basis for human rights that are truly unalienable.  Any rights conveyed by man can be denied by man.  But rights conveyed by God can only be denied by God.

Next Comment:

I think if our nation was truly centered on Christ, it would look a lot different.

Whoa!  You said a mouthful!  And that comment plays largely into the present discussion regarding America and the divine Providence.  I agree with you 100%.

Next Comment:

Why do we need a nation of organized religion? How would it be any different from Big Brother?

I agree.  America is not a theocracy, one guided and authorized by man's organized religion.  That would be very dangerous, indeed, and would formulate an authoritative basis by which human rights could justifiably be denied the people.  In fact, human rights are denied to people who live within theocracies as a rule, rather than exception.  In a theocracy, authority is given to the government from a deity, and any rights for the people exist at the government's pleasure.  Obviously, that is not the design of America.  The flow of authority comes from God of the Bible and New Testament directly to the people, and any authority for the government exists at the people's pleasure.

Last Comment:

I don't believe in theocracies. My earlier statement was me saying that if the majority of our country (as some claim our majority consists of Christians and thus that's why we are a "Christian nation") actually acted like Christ, than there would be definite changes and our country would look a lot different than it does now.

Again, I agree with you 100%.

OK, I believe that I have answered the questions and comments that have thus far come my way.  So be on the look out for the next installment of America IS a Christian Nation.  It will come your way soon.  And if this subject matter interests you, I encourage you to click on the 'subscribe' button.

I will be back again soon.  And I thank all who have participated, either by reading or by commenting or asking questions.


Saturday, September 24, 2011

America IS A Christian Nation, Part II, The American Experiment

In the initial contribution to this new series, America IS A Christian Nation, I welcomed all who successfully concluded the last series entitled, Is America A Christian Nation.  This new series is a sequel of sorts, and it's foundation is the answer derived in its prequel.  So, because each new article, and indeed series of articles, builds from conclusions arrived in earlier articles and series, in Part I of this series I issued a fair warning that anyone who proceeds in this new series will miss out on much of the meaning that he or she will find, unless he or she has successfully completed the earlier series.  That series demonstrates a proof of sorts, that America is indeed a Christian nation, as defined as a nation that receives its authority from Jesus Christ, who according to those scriptures of the Bible and New Testament is given all authority in Heaven and earth.  That conclusion is derived by examining the paper evidence available from America's founding and early days, and understanding what that evidence accurately means.

Notice that the conclusion, that America is a Christian Nation, depends not upon whether any American actually believes in Jesus Christ.  No, truth does not depend on whether anyone believes it. Truth exists, on its own, mutually exclusive of anyone's opinion, world view, religious beliefs, political persuasions, or outlook toward life.  The truth is what it is, and no man can change the truth.

But men try to change the truth all the time.  That is what 'spin rooms' are all about, shading the truth, shaping it into less bitter pills for some to swallow or portray.  That's what courtrooms are about, discovering who is telling the truth, if anyone, and who is telling otherwise.

The reason men attempt to change the truth into something that it is not, or submit new truth in its place, has its foundation in one major characteristic of the natural world in which we live.  The natural world is an environment of limited resources.  Just think about it; if everyone always had all that they wanted, needed or desired, there would be no reason to lie, cheat, steal, covet, murder, and on and on...But scarcity of desired worldly resources adds a 'stresser' to the system.  Because there is only so much to go around, and because receiving these desired resources requires work, to circumvent scarcity and the requirement to work, the nature of men is to consider committing all of those acts I mention. Some actually follow through on that consideration.

Political rhetoric is one means that men commonly use to mold and shape desired impressions of the truth.  Because the fruits of political victories only accrue to the relative few number of winners of popular elections, political fruits are no less a scarcity than certain more tangible or material ones.  That is why any particular political season yields an abundance of candidates ready and willing to say whatever they need to say in order to receive the prize of being elected. 

But none of this changes the real truth. Real truth does not depend upon whether it is believed, only that it is.  Truth therefore transcends any worldly systems of beliefs.  Moral relativists contend that, regardless whether folks understand and act on the same truth, everyone owns and espouses the truth.  According to the relativist, truth is therefore relative to the observer.  If that is true, then what is true for me can be entirely different than what is true for you, forming a contradiction, yet we can both be right.  Disproving that assertion is no more difficult than shooting fish in a barrel, yet folks do believe it!

An early philosopher and all-around doer-of-a-guy, Avicenna, may have said it best.  He contended that the truth is always consistent from individual to individual.  He disputed that the truth can contradict other truth simply according to one's viewpoint and opinions.  He called it the Law of Non-Contradiction.  He illustrated that law contending
Anyone who denies the law of non-contradiction should be beaten and burned until he admits that to be beaten is not the same as not to be beaten, and to be burned is not the same as not to be burned.
I think Avicenna's contention stands on its own and illustrates well the 'true' nature of truth. 

But truth only relates to human beings.  Animals have no truth, at least as opposed to falsehood.  They only have what is and how they feel.  If an animal depends upon a false assumption, it never knows it and it likely dies.  So there in only one way for animals, and everything is true.  Everything the animal senses is an affirmation of truth.  There being nothing false therefore, all is true, which means that, to the animal, whether something is true is meaningless to consider.  Falsehood is not in the animal's imagination.

Regarding human beings though, truth is real, and falsehood is just as real, and both are absolute.  But because truth is absolutely true and falsehood is absolutely false, then consider the truth of God.  God is either truth, or He is not.  God is not 'true for some' but 'false for others.'  If that were 'true' then not being burned would be the same as being burned, which anyone caught in that situation would know without question that it is not.  And so, if God exists for one man, God exists for all men.  If God exists for one man then God is a universal truth.  Believing the universal truth of God, and that truth itself therefore derives from God, is precisely the point at which the American Founding Fathers stood as they considered the rationale documented in the Declaration of Independence. 

Those enlightened men had all previously considered the evidence of natural creation and none could reconcile that natural creation sprang from natural nothing.  Now these men had not the first inkling of Einstein, or the theory of relativity, or atoms and molecules, or of all of the other building blocks on which natural creation seems to depend.  But they knew, in fact they were born knowing in their hearts, that God is truth, that God created the natural world and therefore all that is true about the natural world derives from God.  The Founders had faith in that belief, so much faith in fact that these men relied upon that belief and termed that truth "self-evident."

The New Testament scriptures support that God is truth and that all truth derives from God.  Jesus Christ states this conclusion directly, "I am the way and the truth and the life." (John 14:6) Christian men, both in fact, and also in law, as the law of each colony required at the time the Declaration of Independence was signed, these men had faith in the truth of the Bible and New Testament scriptures.  One major tenet of Christianity is that God gives all men free will.  Free will derives from love, God's love, infinite love.  Love cannot be forced.  Love can only manifest if man is free to love.  According to Jesus Christ, the greatest commandment is to love God and to love others as we love ourselves.  Yes, that is a commandment.  But men are free to adopt it and live by it, or not.  Men therefore have free will to obey Jesus, or not.

The Founders, all professed Christian men, believed the Christian scriptures and understood that Jesus is indeed 'the truth.'  In fact, they understood that same truth to be self-evident to all men, given to them from God at conception, that all men are created equal and are deserved of love equal to the love of self.  They understood that God gives men full liberty, free will to live according to their own determinations.  And the Founders understood that God desires to bless men who choose to live according to His commands.

The scriptures teach that all good blessings come from God.  God's blessings are therefore the fruit of faith in God.  True happiness can therefore only derive from receiving God's blessings.  The Founders understood that God gives every man the right and free will to pursue true happiness, in any way he might imagine, but knowing that true happiness is only a result of faith.

So the enumerated foundation of self-evident truths the Founders offer in the Declaration of Independence derive directly from the Bible including the Christian Scriptures.  But also from those same scriptures, God promises to provide for men of faith.  Chapter 6 of the Book of Matthew is plain on God's desire to provide for mankind who trusts in Him, Jesus telling His disciples
25Therefore I say unto you, Take no thought for your life, what ye shall eat, or what ye shall drink; nor yet for your body, what ye shall put on. Is not the life more than meat, and the body than raiment?

 26Behold the fowls of the air: for they sow not, neither do they reap, nor gather into barns; yet your heavenly Father feedeth them. Are ye not much better than they?

 27Which of you by taking thought can add one cubit unto his stature?

 28And why take ye thought for raiment? Consider the lilies of the field, how they grow; they toil not, neither do they spin:

 29And yet I say unto you, That even Solomon in all his glory was not arrayed like one of these.

 30Wherefore, if God so clothe the grass of the field, which to day is, and to morrow is cast into the oven, shall he not much more clothe you, O ye of little faith?

 31Therefore take no thought, saying, What shall we eat? or, What shall we drink? or, Wherewithal shall we be clothed?

 32(For after all these things do the Gentiles seek:) for your heavenly Father knoweth that ye have need of all these things.

 33But seek ye first the kingdom of God, and his righteousness; and all these things shall be added unto you.
Verse 33 indicates that men who seek God's righteousness, by performing God's will on earth, those men shall receive the Providence of God, the divine Providence.  As a condition of their authority to represent each American colonist, the American Founders professed their belief in these scriptures.  The scriptures tell us that faith without works is dead, no faith at all.  So if they were truly faithful, these men had no choice.  If they were to live as Christians, their Christian faith had to be reflected in the works they performed.  Therefore, the Christian faith of our Founders is reflected in the Founding of America.  That Christian faith is on display as each Founder signed the document which affirms ,
"With a firm reliance on the divine Providence, we mutually pledge our lives, our fortunes and our sacred honor."  
The Founders' reliance on the divine Providence is nothing but a work of faith in keeping with the Founder's Christian beliefs. 

Still, faith is only faith.  Faith is not based upon proof. It cannot be.  That is the nature of faith and removing that nature destroys faith.  And faith must be demonstrated.  Faith requires action, works.  To demonstrate the Christian faith of the American people, the Founders decided to put that faith to work in their design of the American nation.  In so doing, the new nation created under the expressions of the Declaration would be an experiment of sorts.  If the scriptures are correct, and if an earthly nation would design its use of God-given authority to fulfill God's will on earth, then that nation is promised God's blessing, the divine Providence.  That is the Founders' theory, in any event, the Theory of America. The United States of America is a nation created to test that theory.  America is an experiment, the American Experiment. And that is exactly why in his inaugural address, John F. Kennedy proclaimed,
'here on earth God's work must truly be our own.'
God's work must truly be our own for the American experiment to continue toward its final determination. Unless America works to fulfill God's will on earth, then the experiment is over and the final outcome is never determined.  John Kennedy understood the authoritative nature of the United States of America, and under his watch, this proclamation indicates that he would not allow the experiment to end.

In the next installment of America IS A Christian Nation, using the expressions of several early American statesmen, including some of the Founder's themselves, we will certify that America is indeed a nation designed as an experiment, and a nation solely authorized to fulfill God's will on earth, nothing more, and in so doing, receive the favor and blessings associated with the divine Providence.


Thursday, September 22, 2011

America IS A Christian Nation, Part I, An Angel Rides the Whirlwind

In the previous series, Is America A Christian Nation, that question found its justifiable answer.  That answer affirms that the United States of America is in fact a Christian Nation, as defined most simply as a nation which draws its authority from Jesus Christ of the Bible.  Because the proof of that statement is exhaustively demonstrated in the previous series, I will not tread that ground again here.  So if any new reader just happens to have walked in to this discussion wondering, 'Wha' tha' heck is he talkin' about?' then please, if you are interested in the subject of the founding of America, and if you truly want to understand what America is all about, then do yourself a favor and do not begin reading here.  That would be like everyone's worst nightmare, walking into a class for the first time, on the last day of school, and trying to understand what is going on.  For ease of navigating, the first article in the series, Is America A Christian Nation, can be found

Assuming that anyone who remains has already 'passed the prerequisite,' then to you I extend GREETINGS!  I also extend hearty CONGRATULATIONS! Congratulations because as a result of reading and even somewhat understanding the series, Is America A Christian Nation, you can be counted in an elite number of individuals who understand what you now know about the founding of the United States of America, what America truly stands for, and how that came to be.  

Yes, now you can be counted in the same room with the Founders as they stood in line to sign the Declaration of Independence.  You now think some of the very same thoughts that they thought.  In that room, you stand knowing that the rights of man, endowed from God, have a place to be planted, nurtured, and grow in this world.

And for that matter, you stand right in the front row at Gettysburg, in July of 1863, as Lincoln just finished his hallowed remarks, ushering a 'new birth of freedom for this nation, under God.'  And as Lincoln put his speech away and made his way off the platform, you might even detect that he made eye contact with you  and gave you a 'knowing glance.' 

You are counted in the inauguration crowd in January of 1961, as John F. Kennedy's voice echoed across the world, directing the truth that 'here on earth God's work must truly be our own.'  Because of the work you are undertaking, to read and understand these articles, President Kennedy's concluding remark likely means much more to you now than at anytime you may have heard it before.

And now you more adequately understand President George W. Bush's first inaugural remarks, among which he offered the nation:
After the Declaration of Independence was signed, Virginia statesman John Page wrote to Thomas Jefferson: ``We know the race is not to the swift nor the battle to the strong. Do you not think an angel rides in the whirlwind and directs this storm?''

Much time has passed since Jefferson arrived for his inauguration. The years and changes accumulate. But the themes of this day he would know: our nation's grand story of courage and its simple dream of dignity.

We are not this story's author, who fills time and eternity with his purpose. Yet his purpose is achieved in our duty, and our duty is fulfilled in service to one another.

Never tiring, never yielding, never finishing, we renew that purpose today, to make our country more just and generous, to affirm the dignity of our lives and every life.

This work continues. This story goes on. And an angel still rides in the whirlwind and directs this storm.

God bless you all, and God bless America.
Just the simple and oft expressed prayer, 'God bless America,' ought to now begin to mean something new to you.  And what is George Bush saying here as he repeats a quote from John Page first put to pen in 1776, 'an angel rides in the whirlwind and directs its storm?'

While I doubt it has come fully together in your mind yet, just exactly what these American statesmen are trying to convey,  having gotten this far into the present discussion, I dare say that you now stand at the door of understanding what these men obviously understood, but which is not given to us in obvious fashion, but is instead woven together deftly within America's founding documents, such as exquisite fibers are woven within the fabric of a fine tapestry.

And the Bible scriptures are the same way.  The meaning of those scriptures is meant to be understood, not through speed reading, not by being 'clocked' over the head by what is conspicuously evident, but only through quiet contemplation, communing in spirit with the author who wrote them, and understanding the circumstances prevailing which made them relevant and necessary to deliver to the world.

So here we stand to go forward, knowing that God is America's true Founding Father, knowing that authority flows toward America through one common source, and that source is His Son, Jesus Christ, Who according to the New Testament scriptures, owns all authority in Heaven and earth.  Since authority is His, it is also His to dispense any way He decides.  How Jesus Christ decided to dispense authority to the world, is much the overriding subject matter of the Declaration of Independence. 

Well all that is fine and good, but in a practical sense, what does all this really mean to us as Americans today?  How do we use this new information, that God is the true sovereign over the United States of America, through Jesus Christ His Son, to affect any real  meaning in our lives? And can this knowledge help Americans to understand how to make better national decisions, decisions that might facilitate better lives for American citizens and even world citizens?  The answers to those questions are what our new series, America IS a Christian Nation, is all about.  And what readers will discover in this series is the same information Lincoln uncovered, that Kennedy uncovered, and GW Bush no doubt understood, that many of America's great statesmen have known, and which the Founders knew without question, but which has over time been written over, sought hidden by dark powers in high places, and by those who prefer that the truth be other than the facts tell us.

During the War of 1812, on August 25, 1814, the British army arrived in Washington DC. They were directed to burn the city.  The flames began in such places as the Library of Congress, and worked their way through town.  Earlier, the first lady, Dolly Madison, had the presence of mind to secure America's founding documents, the Declaration of Independence, the Articles of Confederation, the Constitution and the Bill of Rights, and she personally handed them to an army officer with the assignment to protect those documents with his life and to proceed to Maryland and stow them in a safe place.  Shortly after that was done, the British army took charge of America's nation's capital.  Things looked dark for America and any cause that might have been behind the efforts of America's founders.

But when things looked their darkest, after the American army had been decimated, and after all practical hope was lost for the fledgling American republic, something incredible occurred.  The British were driven out of Washington, their forces destroyed, the fires quenched in extraordinary efficiency--but not by anything the Americans did.  No, America had hardly a fighting force remaining.

The force that drove the British out of America's nation's capital was, you may have guessed, a mighty whirlwind, a hurricane, a tornado of sufficient magnitude that it sacked the British army, unleashed their hold on Washington DC, ran them out of town, and set them up for an ultimate defeat by the remaining American forces.  A mighty whirlwind defeated the British, not the Americans, all in keeping with the theory of the American Founders, a theory woven almost as scriptures into the expressions of the Declaration of Independence.  That theory, the Theory of America, will be the first subject of discussion in this, our new series, America IS A Christian Nation.

I will be back soon.


Tuesday, September 20, 2011

Is America A Christian Nation, Part XVII, The End of the Beginning

This series began noting that America entered into the Treaty of Paris of 1783, officially ending the American Revolutionary War, and in the process dutifully submitting to the authority of the Holy Trinity.  That was several installments ago.  And when you first read that, I imagine that you may have taken consummate note of that singular fact, however might not have viewed it as conclusive, in and of itself, to the answer to the question, Is America A Christian Nation.  I understand that.  And that is why I have since surrounded that singular fact with the background and foreground necessary to demonstrate the truth that America is indeed a Christian Nation, as I define that term.

So by now, after understanding the supporting history of God's involvement in the founding of America, as evidenced by each of our founding documents leading up to that treaty, and since, not knowing any better, I would expect that any self-proclaimed open-minded reader, who professes to seek only truth, would rightfully conclude, as I do, that America is in fact a Christian Nation, one defined as a nation which derives its sovereign authority directly from the Bible scriptures, including those scriptures of the entire New Testament, and therefore from Jesus Christ, Who according to those scriptures, owns all authority in Heaven and earth (Matthew 28:18).

But I do know better.

If you have read this far into the series, and still do not agree, even to the very possibility that America is a Christian Nation under the definition I offer, then frankly, I expect that you will never believe it.  And I expect that you will never believe it because you choose not to believe it, and you have chosen against believing that truth from the outset.  I do not mean to insult, only to inform.  Abraham Lincoln once wrote of this phenomenon in men, who effectively decide to believe what they prefer believe, despite overwhelming evidence against what they believe.  Lincoln wrote:
One would start with great confidence that he could convince any sane child that the simpler propositions of Euclid are true; but, nevertheless, he would fail, utterly, with one who should deny the definitions and axioms.
I have started with great confidence that I might convince any sane individual that under the definitions I have offered, America is a Christian Nation.  Yet I have known from the outset that I will fail, utterly, with anyone who chooses to deny the definition of a Christian nation, and the axioms that prove it.  I have given the naysayer all opportunity to arrive at the truth.  I have written this series such that any individual who disagrees and who wishes to challenge the facts as I offer them, either directly with me, or challenge them against his or her own preconceived sense of the truth, might trace any disagreement against my final conclusion back to the moment that we departed thoughts, and analyze that point.  As one commenter put it, I have made this analysis 'bullet proof.'  And I am delighted to address any question or a disagreement with the material and conclusions I have offered, provided of course that the person who questions or disagrees has first actually read what I have written.

The unvarnished truth is that most folks who are interested enough to even disagree with the final conclusion of the series will not understand what I have written, and will likely not even read what I have written. And that will not be because they are incapable of understanding or reading, not because what I present is not the truth, but because, as Lincoln noted, it is their personal preference to deny the definitions and axioms.  It is always easier to steer our beliefs away from certain truths that defy our personal preferences, than to accept them and therefore submit to them.  If we merely close our eyes to truth, then we can better shape truth to fit our liking.

But for those who find interest in this subject, and find interest to understand the truth no matter which way the truth may fall, rejoice! This is not the end!  No, Heavens no.  We stand at the beginning!  Now that we have demonstrated that America is a Christian Nation, as we have defined that animal, next we will embark on a course that will help us to understand what that really means! 

And so the title of the next series will just rearrange a couple of the terms.  Rather than Is America A Christian Nation, the new series will be entitled, America IS A Christian Nation.  And in each successive article we will analyze what it really means for Americans to understand that America is a Christian Nation.  And I well imagine that the answers are not what you presently expect.

And thank you again, any of the good folks who have read, and who continue to read these articles.  Once you begin to fully grasp what I present here, I dare say that you will be in an elite class of Americans who are truly beginning to understand what their nation is all about.  But here is a fair warning:

The truth will change you.

I'll be back soon.


Monday, September 19, 2011

Is America a Christian Nation, Part XVI, Authority Flows to the Constitution

In the last installment of our series, Is America A Christian Nation, within the expressions of the Articles of Confederation and Perpetual Union we discovered in America's first constitution how boldly the representatives of the states comprising the United States of America proclaimed America to be a Christian nation.  In that document, the American people, via their authorized representatives, agreed and proclaimed that
  • God governs the world;
  • God 'inclined the hearts' of the representatives to approve the Articles of Confederation;
  • God authorized the representatives of the people of the United States to approve and ratify the Articles of Confederation;
  • The representatives of the American people proposed this agreement for ratification by the states in the year 1778, that year referenced directly as 'in the year of our Lord,' indicating that Jesus Christ is the Lord over the nation about which this agreement was drawn, approved, and subsequently ratified.
Five undeniable conclusions are certified from these statements.  According to the representatives of the American people:
  1. Because God governs the World, God governs all nations of the World, including the United States of America.  Therefore, the American people submit to the authority of God.  America is one nation under God;
  2. God is no deist god, no other god except God of the Bible including the New Testament, referencing the date of the agreement to the birth of Jesus Christ.
  3. Because in this document, the 'Great Governor of the World' is God of the Bible including the New Testament, the representatives of the people directly imply to be influenced by the Holy Spirit, which 'inclined their hearts' to approve and ratify the agreement.  That conclusion is directly implied because, according to the scriptures, the Holy Spirit is sent to to indwell in the hearts of believers in Jesus Christ.  That Spirit works to 'incline the heart' of the believer to fulfill God's will on earth.   Therefore the American people, via their representatives, are believers in Jesus Christ, endeavoring to fulfill God's will on earth by their actions approving and ratifying this agreement.
  4. America is a Christian nation, one that submits to Jesus Christ, the Great Governor of the World, Who according to the scriptures owns all authority on earth.
  5. And stated as its own conclusion, as a Christian nation, America's primary purpose is to fulfill God's will on earth.
But one last conclusion is also noticeable, and that is the importance the American people, through their representatives, ascribe to pleasing God.  According to the AoC, it 'pleased the Great Governor of the World to incline the hearts of the legislatures.' As we venture still deeper into this discussion, the meaning behind the importance these men attached to pleasing God will become apparent.

But for now we have one final step to take to finish our proof of sorts, that America is truly a Christian Nation, as I have defined that term, and that is to look directly at the Constitution and determine if by its terms, it either follows through, citing itself as a the Supreme Law for a Christian nation, or whether it abandons that truth, or even disputes that truth.

To make that determination, we will start in the Preamble, which begins with the following familiar terms
We the People of the United ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America.
Notice that the Constitution does not define the 'United States of America.'  It makes no declaration establishing a nation.  That is for a good reason.  The nation for which it applies was already established, with an identifiable source of sovereign authority, and therefore that agreement did not have to state any of that again. And at the time that the Constitution was proposed, those who did so acted solely under the authority that flowed to them from the Articles of Confederation, which was the supreme law in force during the proceedings at the Constitutional Convention. The Articles of Confederation defines the nation to which it applies as the 'United States of America,' no coincidence the same name referred in the Constitution.  And previous to the AoC, the Declaration of Independence declared the basis under which that same nation, the United States of America would become authorized. And so because the only basis of authority in existence during the time the Constitution was that reasoned to exist under the Declaration of Independence, which authority also served to underwrite the Articles of Confederation, and because the Constitution's terms do not terminate either previous agreement, which agreements otherwise survive in perpetuity, then unless there are two earthly nations known as the 'United States of America,' the Constitution refers directly to the same nation that existed under the Articles and Declaration of Independence.

The Constitution's Article VII certifies the previous conclusion, and declares it to be the Supreme Law of the Land, stating that the date the Constitution was proposed for ratification, which proposal could only have been authorized under the Articles of Confederation, occurred 'in the 12th year of the independence of the United States of America.'

But Article VII also offers us one more item to consider, and that is that the 12th year of the independence of the United States of America, was also
the Year of our Lord one thousand seven hundred and Eighty seven
That date stamp directly references the birth of Jesus Christ and therefore declares and certifies that Jesus Christ is Lord.  And that statement therefore certifies that Lord over 'We the People of the United States,' is also none other than Jesus Christ.  And for this reason, we can now ultimately conclude, without reservation, that the United States of America is a Christian Nation, as defined as a nation which draws its authority from God of the Bible including the New Testament, which scriptures require that America's authority flows directly from Jesus Christ, Who according to those scriptures owns all authority in Heaven and earth.  What else need we say?  It is finished, the proof.

But now that we have fully established that America is A Christian nation under the terms we have defined, in the next installment we will begin to understand just exactly what that really means. So stand by and come back.  

All that has been written heretofore is prologue... 

Saturday, September 17, 2011

Is America A Christian Nation, Part XV, How the Articles of Confederation Transfer God's Authority to the Constitution

In the last installment of Is America A Christian Nation, using the expressions of the Declaration of Independence we learned how authority flows from the principles of that agreement to each successive agreement.  For authority to convey from those principles, the actions of the people of the United States of America must follow those principles without exception.  For example, because principle #4 cited previously offers the universal truth that government derives it powers from the consent of the people, then by consent of those same people, an American government receives authority.  That is how American authority conveys.  

Consent to unified government first presented in 1781 as the original 13 states ratified the Articles of Confederation, offered for ratification in 1777. That agreement conveyed certain basic authority to a unified government.  One argued power of that government was to ensure that the union remain intact in perpetuity.  That fact is certified in the following stanza, proclaiming the agreement to a perpetual union and who agreed to reside in that union:
Articles of Confederation and perpetual Union between the States of New Hampshire, Massachusetts-bay, Rhode Island and Providence Plantations, Connecticut, New York, New Jersey, Pennsylvania, Delaware, Maryland, Virginia, North Carolina, South Carolina and Georgia.
A perpetual union is one that does not contemplate its own end.  An agreement in perpetuity is an agreement that therefore does not end.  Even an agreement to end the agreement must be a part of the agreement in the first place  And this is why the Articles of Confederation is still in force today.  But by certain provisions in that agreement, certain of the principles agreed and ratified in 1781 have simply changed.  But the changes are indeed authorized in the Articles of Confederation, which changes demonstrate that the articles are still in force.  If the Articles are not in force, then any authority that might have been used to authorize the change that came in the form of the Constitution died at the same time the Articles of Confederation died.  Fortunately, that has not happened.

But getting back to the matter at hand, determining without question whether America is a Christian Nation, authorized therefore by the scriptures of the Bible including the New Testament, and therefore indeed Jesus Christ, whereas having to 'back in' to that conclusion in our study of the Declaration of Independence, the Articles of Confederation state the only conclusions available to draw, and that agreement states these conclusions boldly and without equivocation, offering 
Whereas the Delegates of the United States of America in Congress assembled did on the fifteenth day of November in the Year of our Lord One Thousand Seven Hundred and Seventy seven, and in the Second Year of the Independence of America, agree to certain articles of Confederation and perpetual Union between the States of New Hampshire, Massachusetts-bay, Rhode Island and Providence Plantations, Connecticut, New York, New Jersey, Pennsylvania, Delaware, Maryland, Virginia, North Carolina, South Carolina and Georgia, in the words following, viz:
In the passage above, two conclusions are apparent.  The first conclusion is that the Articles of Confederation, offered for ratification in 1777, concern the same nation reasoned into existence under the Declaration of Independence in 1776.  That being the case, as we have seen previously in this series, the nation under the Declaration of Independence did not, and could not have morphed into any other sovereign animal than the one described in that document.  And by Article I of the new agreement, the sovereign nation under the Declaration of Independence retained its same title, the article offering
Article I. The Stile of this Confederacy shall be "The United States of America."
And Article II of the confederation agreement certifies that each party to the agreement delegated certain authority to the new government, which authority could not be rescinded, except as provided in some provision of that same agreement, offering
Article II. Each state retains its sovereignty, freedom, and independence, and every Power, Jurisdiction, and right, which is not by this confederation expressly delegated to the United States, in Congress assembled.
Because perpetuity was expressly delegated to the confederation government, that aspect of the agreement could not be altered unless specifically provided elsewhere in the agreement.  For this reason, and really this reason only, because perpetuity was never removed, eventually Lincoln would find the authority necessary to take steps to save the union under the Constitution.

Next though, toward the end of the agreement we find the bold provision that the Unites States of America is indeed under the authority of God, offering
And Whereas it hath pleased the Great Governor of the World to incline the hearts of the legislatures we respectively represent in Congress, to approve of, and to authorize us to ratify the said articles of confederation and perpetual union. Know Ye that we the undersigned delegates, by virtue of the power and authority to us given for that purpose, do by these presents, in the name and in behalf of our respective constituents, fully and entirely ratify and confirm each and every of the said articles of confederation and perpetual union, and all and singular the matters and things therein contained: And we do further solemnly plight and engage the faith of our respective constituents, that they shall abide by the determinations of the united States in congress assembled, on all questions, which by the said confederation are submitted to them. And that the articles thereof shall be inviolably observed by the States we respectively represent, and that the union shall be perpetual.

Compared to some of the previous discussions in this series, the Founders made this so plain that it is unequivocal, that the World has a Great Governor, God, and that God authorizes the people of the United States, through their representatives, to ratify this agreement known as the Articles of Confederation and Perpetual Union.  And to leave no doubt as to their intentions, the people agreed once again that the union shall be perpetual. So each state, boldly proclaimed its agreement that the union referred under its terms shall not end.  Because each party agreed to that stipulation, then that term of the agreement is enforceable by all other parties.

And notice that God is not a passive god here.  According to the men who authored and endorsed this agreement, God 'inclined their hearts' to approve the Articles of Confederation.  That God would incline one's heart is a Christian concept.  Because Christians offer their hearts to God through Jesus Christ, they are given the gift of the Holy Spirit indwelling with their given spirits.  Among the works of the Holy Spirit, He guides the Christian toward fulfilling the will of God.  So in offering that the Great Governor of the World inclined their hearts, the legislature representing the American people certified that they were Christians under the influence of the Holy Spirit.

And to further solidify that the Great Governor of the World was no deist god, no god of any other thinking than God of the Bible and New Testament, the people of the United States of America, by their authorized representatives, agreed that the date of the agreement in question is relative to the date of the birth of Jesus Christ, "our Lord," offering
In Witness whereof we have hereunto set our hands in Congress. Done at Philadelphia in the State of Pennsylvania the ninth Day of July in the Year of our Lord one thousand seven Hundred and Seventy-eight, and in the Third Year of the independence of America.
Because the America people agreed that the 'Great Governor of the World' influenced and authorized their actions in agreeing to the Articles of Confederation, and because within that same document those people also agreed that their Lord is Jesus Christ, then it is not arguable against the conclusion that according to this document, Jesus Christ is the Great Governor of the World, which conclusion requires that Jesus Christ owns all authority on earth, once again agreeing with the scriptures of the New Testament.  So in this agreement, our Founders made it easy for us to understand that the United States of America is indeed one nation under God, which draws its authority from Jesus Christ, and is therefore a Christian nation under that definition.

In the next installment in this series, Is America A Christian Nation, we will finally take a look at America's Constitution, and determine whether it either ratifies, or denies, the heretofore demonstrated conclusion that America is a Christian Nation authorized by the Scriptures of the New Testament, and therefore Jesus Christ.

So stay on the lookout and check in for the next contribution.  If you would like a reminder of each successive article in this series and beyond, simply click on the 'subscribe' button on the page and you will receive notifications.  Thank you for your readership!


Thursday, September 15, 2011

Is America A Christian Nation, Part XIV, Transferring Ideal Authority

In the last installment in the series, Is America A Christian Nation, standing atop the conclusions realized in earlier installments, we pointed out that the Declaration of Independence does not specifically stipulate that the authority for America comes from God of the Bible, including the New Testament. But because the laws in each colony/state-to-be required any representative of the people to profess faith as a Christian, any reference to God endorsed in the Declaration these men signed as representatives of the people, can only have been God of the Bible and New Testament.  For this reason, the expressions of the Declaration of Independence support that American sovereign authority derives from God, the Holy Trinity, through Jesus Christ, who according to New Testament scriptures is given all authority in Heaven and earth.  Because Jesus Christ owns all authority, any authority for a nation, must pass through Him on the way.

Following that train of reason, according to the Declaration, based upon certain New Testament scriptures, Jesus Christ endows all men with certain authority, certain human rights, and does so equally, all men being equal in the eyes of God.  There are numerous scriptures from which this principle derives, perhaps notably, Matthew 22:37-39, where Jesus is quoted to say
37 Jesus replied: “‘Love the Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your mind.’ 38 This is the first and greatest commandment. 39 And the second is like it: ‘Love your neighbor as yourself.’
That Jesus commands men to love others as they love themselves, that command requires men to respect that all men are created equal in the eyes of God.  If that were not true, then God would understand loving certain individuals, perhaps even one's self, more than others. 

There are many other New Testament scriptures from which the principle that 'all men are created equal' derives.  The Golden Rule is certainly one.  Another is John 15:13 where Jesus is quoted, saying
Greater love has no one than this, that he lay down his life for his friends.
That one might voluntarily lay down life for a friend, necessarily implies that the life of one's friend is of equal value to that of one's self, the equity of the exchange allowing  one to sacrifice for another freely.  But this scripture also specifically implies that a friend's right to life is equal to one's own claim on the same, here again requiring believers in Jesus Christ to respect each man's equal right to life.

These are just of few of New Testament scriptures that help to demonstrate that the Natural Laws of God cited in the expressions of the Declaration of Independence, derive from the New Testament. 

And before we go further, I think it is important to realize that, during the period encompassing 1776 and 1781, the United States of America was a nation governed solely by the principles of the Declaration of Independence, governed solely by ideals.  Wow! Imagine that, a nation governed solely by just a few simple ideals!  But think about it; that is the exactly the way that Jesus Christ describes Christian life, self-government by ideals, government of men, by men, whose laws are few but who each respect the rights of others.  This demonstrates yet another way in which American sovereignty derives from the scriptures.

Now this next point is very important going forward, so I hope you get this if you don't get anything else from this series.  And that point is that those few simple ideal principles, stated clearly in the American Declaration of Independence, are still authoritative.  Every law in the land, every statute, every regulation, each individual act of every tool of government, finds its source of authority in those few principles in the Declaration of Independence.  There is no other source of authority for American national government.  So what does that really mean???

It means that any governmental intention that violates the intentions of those principles, is unauthoritative, null, void before it is enacted into law or before it is acted upon by a tool of government.  Because the entire nation of the United States of America draws its authority from these few principles, these ideals, ordered as they are in the form of a rational reason for that authority to exist, then any American authority to act, in theory, is restricted to those actions, the intentions of which are in support of and consistent with those principles.  And THAT was Jefferson's brilliance.  And THAT is the importance today of the Declaration of Independence. Even the very principle that authorizes men to institute a national government derives from the authority that flows from one of the principles, the Natural Laws of God, in the Declaration of Independence.  Just for example, let's see how that works.

Remember in the previous installment XII, I wrote, 'Principle # 4 is the Natural Law that authorizes government to exist.'  That law states the following:
That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed;
Because that Natural Law of God is 'truth,' self-evident 'truth,' that principle carries authority.  That is because authority derives from truth.  Truth is authoritative because one can always count on truth.  One cannot count on falsehood.  So truth can be used to construct authoritative agreements.  Agreements without truth are agreements based in falsehood, bad faith, bad intentions which are null and void and thereby unenforceable.  Agreements made in good faith, truthful intentions, are enforceable using the authority of the agreement.  So efforts carried forth which are intended to fulfill the principle #4 above, or any of the principles of the Declaration, are authorized.  Those efforts and the fruits of those efforts therefore carry authority, the authority that derives from Truth.  Now truth itself derives from love, but that is a topic for another time.

Carrying this discussion a smidge further, as long as the representatives of the people of the United States design a government, the intentions of which are in keeping with principle #4 above, and do not violate any other of the Declaration's principles, the results of their efforts carry authority.  And that is exactly what the people's representatives did in constructing America's first 'constitution.' And that is why that document, the Articles of Confederation, carry authority.  That is the only reason.  Had principle #4 above been left out of the Declaration, and had the founders enacted some other rationale to justify independence from Great Britain, one that did not authorize an institution of government, then any government that may have sprung from those efforts would not have carried authority. 

So in keeping with the authority that flows from principle #4 of the Declaration, America's first effort to institute a national government was that government described under the agreement ratified in 1781, the Articles of Confederation. Understanding now how that document came to its authority, in our next installment we will return to the matter at hand. We will look at America's 'first constitution' and understand what it might have to say which will aid us to fully and completely answer the question, Is America a Christian Nation.

And I have a suggestion for you.  If these articles have sparked a certain interest in the topic I am covering, click on the box above and subscribe.  Don't be shy! With each new contribution, you will be notified by an email.  I'm not counting heads, but I think the topic is so important that I hate for anyone who is interested to miss anything for the lack of a notification.

Have a great day and I'll be back for more soon.


Wednesday, September 14, 2011

Is America A Christian Nation, Part XIII, the Declaration Continued

In the previous installment of Is America A Christian Nation, within the expressions of the Declaration of Independence, we identified the source of all American sovereign authority.  And that source is God.  That authority flows from God, to men, and from men to a government of their choosing.  That's what the Declaration says.  But knowing that "God" the Creator, is the source of all American authority really does not fully answer the question at hand, which is to determine whether, in all respects, America is a Christian Nation.  After all, the followers of Islam believe in God, or Allah..  Other religions have their gods as well.

Another possibility is that the Declaration refers to a deist god, one who created the world and universe, set it in motion, and then took a long coffee break, allowing men and nations to settle their own issues toward a conclusion, the nature of which God chooses not to affect.  Could it be that Founders were deists?

The point I make here is that, the analysis we pursued in the very previous installment, while it demonstrates conclusively that American sovereign authority comes from God,  that analysis did not necessarily demonstrate or prove that God, the Creator referred in the Declaration of Independence, is God of the New Testament. Hey, as they say, Rome wasn't built in a day!  I have to leave a few things to talk about each next time!  That's what keeps you coming back!

So let's talk about all that. 

To gain a foothold on whether, indeed, the Declaration of Independence is a Christian document, written by Christians, referring only to God of the Bible and New Testament, let's look at that document's last stanza, which proclaims:
We, therefore, the Representatives of the united States of America, in General Congress, Assembled, appealing to the Supreme Judge of the world for the rectitude of our intentions, do, in the Name, and by Authority of the good People of these Colonies, solemnly publish and declare, That these United Colonies are, and of Right ought to be Free and Independent States; that they are Absolved from all Allegiance to the British Crown, and that all political connection between them and the State of Great Britain, is and ought to be totally dissolved; and that as Free and Independent States, they have full Power to levy War, conclude Peace, contract Alliances, establish Commerce, and to do all other Acts and Things which Independent States may of right do. And for the support of this Declaration, with a firm reliance on the protection of divine Providence, we mutually pledge to each other our Lives, our Fortunes and our sacred Honor.
So where is Jesus in all of that??  Good question, friends.  Nothing within these expressions says anything about Jesus, Christ, the Holy Trinity, the New Testament, or gives any indication at all that the 'Supreme Judge of the world' is in fact God of the Bible and New Testament.  So I guess I'm stuck here, right?...WRONG!  We just have to dig a little deeper to discern the truth.

Because the Declaration of Independence does not specifically refer to the Bible, or Christ, or the Trinity, or the New Testament, to draw any conclusion beyond that which is stated plainly, we will have to go back to the authority given the representatives of the 'good People of these Colonies.' We will have to discern just what any of them were authorized to do, given their charge of authority by those they represented, while engaged at the proceedings during which those men ended up signing the Declaration of Independence.

During the time in question, a period which spans July 4, 1776, each of the American British Colonies, which would become declared 'free and independent states' on that date, had codified a legal requirement, either by charter, or by charter and newly constructed state constitution, that individuals who represented the people of those colonies/states, were Christian, men who either swore an oath that they were Christian, or who otherwise professed faith in Jesus Christ.   And indeed, when the various state constitutions were completed, each state constitution either established a specific Christian denomination as its state religion, or specified that those who represented the people professed to be Christian, believing in Jesus Christ and the Gospel of the New Testament.  Here is a good reference for anyone to verify what I write here

So unless the men who convened in Philadelphia were not only Christian, each professing a belief in God of the New Testament as a condition of their appointment in the first place, they would not have been authorized to represent the people of the colonies/states they represented.  And if they were not authorized to represent the 'good People of the Colonies,' then the Declaration of Independence was an unauthorized agreement and the good People never declared independence!  So either the Declaration of Independence is a Christian declaration, or it is NO declaration at all! There are no other viable choices here.  Not only were the men who represented each American-British Colonist PROFESSED Christians, they were also LEGALLY Christians. So those who contend that America is not a Christian nation, in so doing also contend that America does not exist, thereby nullifying their very contention.  I describe this result in the same way I describe division by zero.  One cannot even speak of something that does not exist.  It is a meaningless waste of time.  The men who represented the 'good People of the Colonies,' as a LEGAL REQUIREMENT of that position, professed faith in Jesus Christ.  That was the law.  So as a matter of law, any reference to God in the Declaration is also a reference to God of the Bible including the New Testament.

So if we rightfully conclude that the United States of America of today, did in fact begin on July 4, 1776, as in previous installments in this series we have demonstrated beyond any substantial objection, then the Declaration of Independence must be a Christian declaration, announced and endorsed by Christians, men who represented a Christian nation, as defined as a nation whose sovereignty is authorized by the scriptures of the New Testament, which scriptures contend that all authority in Heaven and earth is given to Jesus Christ.  And because the Declaration of Independence speaks in terms of universal, natural laws, that document professes that any real authority for men and nations, which includes the United States of America, must derive from Jesus Christ as well.  All other semblance of authority is therefore either false, despotic, brought either by force, or by pure agreement among men.

In the next installment in our series Is America A Christian Nation, we will investigate further this notion of Christian God in the American founding documents.  And we will delve into America's first constitution of sorts, the Articles of Confederation, looking for any discrepancy, any reason whatsoever to question the conclusions drawn so far, and discover whether that document either disputes, or ratifies the conclusion that the Declaration of Independence is a Christian document.  So come back soon and find out.

Thanks again for your support and readership!


Monday, September 12, 2011

Is America A Christian Nation, Part XII, Authority From the Declaration of Independence

In our previous installment in the series Is America A Christian Nation, citing evidence already in play we demonstrated that the Supreme Law of the Land in the United States of America actually incorporates the expressions of three documents, not just the Constitution.  That is because the authority that passes to the Constitution originally derives within the expressions of the Declaration of Independence, and then passes through the Articles of Confederation before taking residence in the Constitution.  Because this is true, any conditions placed upon the use of that authority under either the Declaration of Independence, or the Articles of Confederation, must remain satisfied, even today.  That is how these documents are written.

In this installment, using the terms of the first in this series of documents, the Declaration of Independence, we will identify the very source of American sovereign authority. We are going to understand just exactly what that document's author, Thomas Jefferson, had in mind when he constructed the rationale that concluded with the rightful sovereign authority for a new nation, the United States States of America.  And we will also begin to understand how Jefferson's reasoning might affect any rightful use of that authority today, over two and one-quarter centuries later.  So let's get to it!

The Declaration of Independence presents a simple rationale beginning with the following principle:
When in the Course of human events, it becomes necessary for one people to dissolve the political bands which have connected them with another, and to assume among the powers of the earth, the separate and equal station to which the Laws of Nature and of Nature's God entitle them, a decent respect to the opinions of mankind requires that they should declare the causes which impel them to the separation.
That principle indicates that a rationale shall follow declaring the causes impelling one people, the American British colonists, to dissolve the political bands with another, the subjects of the King of England.  According to that principle, it was certain of God's Natural Laws which entitled the colonists to severe ties with the king.  According to the Declaration, the truth of these Natural Laws is self-evident, therefore requiring no particular proof.  The Declaration then asserts the truth of five of those Natural Laws.  Those laws are:
  1. that all men are created equal;
  2. that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights;
  3. that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.
  4. That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed;
  5. That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness.
Using these Natural Laws as the foundation of their justification, the Founders assert that human rights, one of which is the authority for men to act on their own behalf, is a gift that flows from God to each person individually, and equally, all men being equal in the eyes of God.

Having documented the basic flow of divine authority to men, the truth of which is self-evident, the founders cite two more specific Natural Laws.  Because God gives rights to all men equally, and because the tendency of men is to violate the rights of other men, it naturally follows that God authorizes men to institute certain means of protecting their God-given rights. Principle # 4 is the Natural Law that authorizes government to exist in the first place.  That principle of Natural Law defines the basic and universal role of government as “to secure these (human) rights.”

After documenting the basic purpose of institutional government, the founders enumerate one more endowed right.  And that right may be thought of as a trigger mechanism of sorts.   Principle #5 states that when any government destroys the basic rights endowed by the Creator, rather than secure them as required by natural law #4, men have the God-given right to abolish that government and establish a new one more “likely to effect their Safety and Happiness.”

Springing forward on the expressions of principle #5, the Declaration cites evidence that the King of England had violated God's Law, “becoming destructive” of God's endowed rights to the colonists.  After listing evidence of the king's infractions, violating God's law, the document concludes with the signers declaring, therefore…these United Colonies are, and of Right ought to be Free and Independent States.”  The use of the term, “therefore” indicates that a legal conclusion of sorts is being drawn from the previous assertions of law and fact, the law of course being God's Natural Law, and the facts being those the Founders assert as evidence against the king for violating God's Law. 

That conclusion declaring "rightful" independence is the “conclusion of sovereignty” for the United States of America.  America depends on that rightful conclusion even today. Without that conclusion, one justified solely from the preceding foundation of reason in the Declaration of Independence, there would be no rational source of authority by which the United States of America could claim its independence from Great Britain, even today. That is because, as we have proven together in previous installments in this series, the America of today is the very same America it was on July 4, 1776.  Nothing has been established that changes or alters the flow of authority reasoned into existence in the Declaration of Independence.  Today, our Constitution depends completely upon the authority reasoned to exist from applying natural laws #4 and 5 above to the facts as they saw them.  Without those natural laws, and without the rationale offered in the expressions of the Declaration, no authority could be or would be in place for any subsequent congress to eventually convene and authorize the Constitution. 

Question: Why did the Founders go to so much trouble to come up with this extraordinary "rationale" to break ties with the king?

Answer: Otherwise, they had no justification to do what they did.  Without Jefferson's reasoning, the American nation would have had no legitimate “right” to claim its sovereignty from the King.  The genius of Thomas Jefferson understood that the thirteen colonies could not “rightly” walk away from Great Britain simply because they wanted to.  An action of that kind would be an act of vigilantism.  Jefferson understood vigilantism to be nothing less than group despotism. And despotism was the root cause against which the conclusion of sovereignty in the Declaration was drawn in the first place.  In walking away, America would be just as bad as the king.  So Jefferson had to give a legitimate reason for the colonists to reject the king's authority, claiming authority of their own in the process, quite an assignment given young Jefferson at the 2nd Continental Congress.  The bottom line is that, in agreeing with the rationale offered by Jefferson to the 2nd Continental Congress, as each stood in line to endorse the Declaration of Independence, representing each of the "good people of the colonies," the Founders claimed authority given to them from God

Now this is not to say that Jefferson and the rest of the Founding Fathers did not believe that what each endorsed with their signature as the truth.  We have every reason to expect that in fact they did believe it.
But regardless of any facts one might suppose to the contrary, the undeniable fact is that the conclusion of sovereignty for the United States of America depends completely on one fundamental precept at its core.  And that precept is that God exists.  If God does not exist, then human rights do not exist. If human rights do not exist, men have no authority to declare sovereignty and convey that sovereignty to the state.  So it is unavoidable to conclude that, according to America's founding document, if God does not exist, then America itself does not exist. 

And for this reason, for some to argue that God has no place in the fabric of the national and patriotic institutions of America, they must also effectively disavow their own claim to unalienable rights.  Jefferson's logic is circular.  Either Americans have unalienable rights endowed by God or they have only those rights that flow from an agreement among them, namely, the government formed under such an agreement.  To accept a position as authoritative that denies the existence of God in America is therefore to claim no unalienable right to have done so.  To maintain that position, is to argue that the very foundation on which the American society and its primal source of authority are founded was a grave error.  To do so is to argue that men possess no rights that cannot, rightfully, be taken away by a simple act of the majority of force mustered within any particular segment of human society.  And so the lesson to convey in this installment is that

The sovereign authority of the United States of America, as it is designed and defined by the Founders, requires the absolute practical certainty of the existence of God.

In the next installment, we will pick up at this juncture.  And thank you very much for participating!