Would Jesus Celebrate
|
Of course not.
I don't think Jesus would object to setting off fireworks, having a Bar-B-Que, and whatever else millions of Americans want to do on a nice July day. But . . .
There are many reasons why Jesus would not celebrate "Independence Day."
Here are two reasons Jesus would not celebrate Independence Day:
1. Jesus hates violence. A revolution (such as America's Revolution) is destructive violence. Thousands of British Christians were killed by American Christians, and thousands of American Christians were killed by British Christians. How could Jesus celebrate that?
1a. It's true, Jesus hates tyranny, and the American Revolution was said to be a revolution against tyranny . . .
2. But Jesus hates hypocrisy.
2a. Celebrating a violent revolution against tyranny is pretty hypocritical considering today's Woke Regime in Washington D.C. is incomparably more tyrannical and anti-Christian in 2024 than the British government was in 1776. Taxes in 2024 are 20x higher than in 1776. Americans today are hypocrites to celebrate the violent overthrow of a tyrannical government by those who were willing to risk "our Lives, our Fortunes and our sacred Honor" when we aren't willing to risk anything, and when we tolerate what the Founders would see as unspeakable evil (and therefore intolerable evil).
The willingness of Christians in America to get out their muskets and
kill Christians from Britain in 1776
in order to accomplish "regime change"
(replacing the British government in the colonies with a new government
more favorable to American colonial leaders)
is directly related to
the
willingness of Americans to get out their nuclear weapons and
kill millions of Christians in Russia and Ukraine in 2024
in order to accomplish "regime change"
(replacing the Putin government in Russia with a new government
more favorable to the U.S. "Deep State").
Why would Jesus celebrate the murder of Christians? The British "Red Coats" were Christians.
But this question raises other questions. Would Jesus celebrate "Memorial Day" or "Veterans Day?"
Americans killed some of those Christians.
Joe Biden wants to kill some of those Christians, using Ukrainian soldiers as proxies.
Why do Christians in America vote for "leaders" who kill Christians in other nations?
Why do Christians in America vote for "leaders" who kill non-Christians in other nations?
Why do Christians in America celebrate "Independence Day?"
The answer to these three questions is simple, but requires un-learning a lot of propaganda we have all imbibed.
The religion of Christianity is in conflict with the religion of Washington D.C. And yes, Washington D.C. has a religion. That religion may be your religion. Or, you may be trying to combine that religion with the religion of Jesus Christ.
It can't be done.
The purpose of this website is not just to argue about historical facts. The purpose is to change your entire religion.
Even if you're a church-going Christian.
Our purpose in this essay is to prove that
These are controversial claims, but can be supported by voluminous testimony from Scripture.
In opposition to these claims is patriotic propaganda and a few misused passages of Scripture.
There are 30,000 verses in the Bible, and most Christians have only thought about a handful of them. This essay will require you to look at the rest of the Bible.
Given the choice between reading lots of Bible verses and believing a few patriotic slogans and bumper-stickers, most Americans today will choose the bumper-stickers.
This debate 's simple (obvious) but not easy. It's easy to understand, but will take time to internalize. You are a victim of educational malpractice in 12 years of tyrannical and despotic government indoctrination camps ("public schools"). It will only take 12 months to reverse-brainwash you, if you work for 30 minutes a day.
It will take thought. Most Americans don't want to have to think. They want their leaders to tell them what to think.
Before we dig deeper into the reasons Jesus would not celebrate Independence Day, let's review highlights from the document we celebrate on that holiday. You may not have read it since high school. Or ever. In three words, the goal was "Liberty Under God."
When in the Course of human events, it becomes necessary for one people to dissolve the political bands which have connected them with another, and to assume among the Powers of the earth, the separate and equal station to which the Laws of Nature and of Nature's God entitle them, a decent respect to the opinions of mankind requires that they should declare the causes which impel them to the separation.
We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty, and the pursuit of Happiness.
That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed.That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness. Prudence, indeed, will dictate that Governments long established should not be changed for light and transient causes; and accordingly all experience hath shown, that mankind are more disposed to suffer, while evils are sufferable, than to right themselves by abolishing the forms to which they are accustomed. But when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same Object, evinces a design to reduce them under , it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such Government, and to provide new Guards for their future security.
Such has been the patient sufferance of these Colonies; and such is now the necessity which constrains them to alter their former Systems of Government. The history of the present King of Great Britain is a history of repeated injuries and usurpations, all having in direct object the establishment of an absolute Tyranny over these States. To prove this, let Facts be submitted to a candid world.-----=====******O******=====-----
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.
Was George III really such a bad guy? One historian says no:
- Jefferson wrote these words in the Declaration of Independence:
- The history of the present King of Great Britain is a history of repeated injuries and usurpations, all having in direct object the establishment of an absolute Tyranny over these States.
- I can think of no more misleading political assessment uttered by any leader in the history of the United States. No words having such great impact historically in this nation were less true. No political bogeymen invoked by any political sect as "the liar of the century" ever said anything as verifiably false as these words.
- The colonists had a sweet deal in 1775. Great Britain was the second freest nation on earth. Switzerland was probably the most free nation, but I would be hard-pressed to identify any other nation in 1775 that was ahead of Great Britain. And in Great Britain's Empire, the colonists were by far the freest.
- I will say it, loud and clear: the freest society on earth in 1775 was British North America, with the exception of the slave system. Anyone who was not a slave had incomparable freedom.
Other writers agree: George III would be a conservative Christian libertarian in 2024.
Gary North writes:
There was a slogan: “No taxation without representation.” How did that slogan turn out? In 1776, there was no income tax. So, we got our representation, but taxes today are at 40% of our income. Washington extracts 25% of the nation’s output. In 1776, taxes imposed by the British were in the range of 1% in the North, and possibly 3% in the South. I’m ready to make a deal: I’ll give up being represented in Washington, but I’ll get to keep the 74% of my income that they take. I’ll work out something else with state and local politicians. Just get Washington out of my pocket.
Jefferson put these words into the Declaration of Independence:
He has erected a multitude of New Offices, and sent hither swarms of Officers to harrass our people, and eat out their substance.He had no idea. Not counting troops, who were here to defend the Western territory from the French after 1763, the number of British officials was probably well under a thousand. They resided mainly in port cities, where they collected customs (import taxes): Boston, New York, Philadelphia, and Charleston. The average American had never met a British official in 1776.
By any modern standard, in any nation, what Jefferson wrote in the Declaration to prove the tyranny of King George III would be regarded by voters today as a libertarian revolution beyond the dreams of any elected politician, including Ron Paul. Voters would unquestionably destroy the political career of anyone who would call for the restoration of King George’s tyranny, which voters would see as the destruction of their economic security, which they believe is provided only by politicians and each other’s tax money.
It is now held that any government entity (like a public school) that would "endorse" or "promote" the concepts found in the Declaration of Independence violates the Constitution (specifically, the myth of "separation of church and state." which isn't about "churches" [or as James Madison, the "Father of the Constitution" usually called them, "ecclesiastical bodies"] but is actually about God Himself: a separation of God and government).
The following concepts in the Declaration of Independence cannot be taught to public school students:
Today's rulers censor these ideas from public schools as "unconstitutional."
Talk about hypocrisy: celebrating a document that has been banned in government-run schools. Maybe the schools where you send your children.
When we dig deeper into the reasons Jesus would not celebrate Independence Day, we're going to see that America's Founders were
But they were also infected with a false religion, just as you are.
Samuel Adams orchestrated the Boston Tea Party (1773) and signed the Declaration of Independence. He agitated Americans by sending letters through a network of communication known as "The Committees of Correspondence." In the first letter he sent to America's Town Halls, Adams exhorted the colonists to become
• Extraordinary Americans,
• Extraordinary Christians,
• Extraordinary Human Beings.
Adams coached America toward Independence, and became known as "The Father of the American Revolution."
If Samuel Adams could travel through time from 1776 to 2024 and sit down in your living room and have a conversation with you -- and if I were to be there and share with Adams the contents of this website -- Adams would say you are
Adams -- and every Signer of the Declaration of Independence -- would say you're a victim of educational malpractice. For 13, 17, 20 or more years, you've been taught
More than a decade of atheistic education in public schools can be reversed in just 12 months of study, but it takes tremendous moral courage to make the transition. It takes "fanatic" resolution and willingness to be an "intolerant" "extremist."
Violent revolution is evil. It is based on anti-Christian principles. It does not lead to good.
“Every revolution in history has moved towards the centralization of power,
including the American Revolution.”
-- Gary North
Imagine a young man about 23 years old. As an agent of the British Empire, he wears a red coat. He believes that the American colonies face a situation of "anarchy" and chaos. For generations, the British government has maintained law and order, and he has been told that this stability is threatened by lawless hordes who dress like Indians and
vandalize merchants who are loyal to the government. Based on reports of a large cache of arms in Lexington and threats of armed revolution, he has been sent away from his family in Liverpool to help maintain order in the colonies.
Oh dear.
This nice young man has just had a large part of his face and shoulders blown away by the musket fire of an outraged tax-resister. This colonist (and others like him) apparently believed that this young soldier evinced "a design to reduce them under absolute despotism." As the officer lies dying in a pool of his
own blood, the revolutionary "minute-man" rejoices in his victory over this red-coat's objective of the "establishment of an absolute tyranny over these states."
Is
this a loving (1 Corinthians 13:5-7) or righteous (John 7:24; Exodus 23:2; Proverbs 24:21) judgment
of this young human being? Was this soldier a budding Adolph Hitler, or a "good Christian family man"?
Was this revolutionary killing the beginning -- or the end -- of a Christian nation?
The Bible repeatedly commands us to submit to government -- even tyrannical
or despotic governments -- and pay all taxes demanded.
You say, "We'll all be slaves with that 'pacifist' attitude."
So what?
You
think the men who risked "our Lives, our Fortunes, and our sacred Honor" would say you're free when government takes over
half of everything you earn (and nearly 100% of the purchasing power of everything you save, if any), but you're not brave
enough to face an IRS audit, NSA surveillance, asset forfeiture, or some bureaucratic agency SWAT Team by effectively protesting tyranny in our day?
"Land of the free and home of the brave," huh?
But I guess I should file that under "hypocrisy," below.
Romans
12-13 {1} I beseech you therefore, brethren, by the mercies of God, that ye present your bodies a living sacrifice, holy, acceptable unto God, which is your reasonable service.1 Peter 2:11-24
Dearly beloved, I beseech you as strangers and pilgrims, abstain from fleshly lusts, which war against the soul;Matthew 5:38-48
Ye have heard that it hath been said, An eye for an eye, and a tooth for a tooth:The political implications of Matthew 5:41 (in which invading pagan soldiers conscript citizens to aid the conquerors) are staggering. This was a case involving a duly-sword agent of the civil magistrate's law enforcement body.
That's what this website is about: not just the American Revolution, but all revolutions. All wars. We have to question what we have been taught about "self-defense" and "national defense."
I am a geezer, born in the year of Sputnik -- the Soviet Satellite that kicked off "The Space Race," which was part of "The Cold War," a "war" that should have ended with the end of the Soviet Union in 1991.
On 8 December 1991, the Russian, Ukraine and Belarus presidents signed the Belavezha Accords, declaring the Soviet Union dissolved and replaced by the looser Commonwealth of Independent States (CIS) in its place. This was followed up on 21 December 1991, when the representatives of all 15 Soviet republics (including the Baltic States and the Asian Muslim "stans") except Georgia signed the Alma-Ata Protocol, confirming the accords.
On the western Christmas Day, December 25th, 1999, General Secretary Mikhail Gorbachev, head of the Union of the Soviet Socialist Republics (USSR) and the head of the Communist Party, resigned, officially dissolving the Union of 293+ million people which spanned 9 time zones, and freeing another 100 million+ people in "satellite" countries (such as Poland and Czechoslovakia) formerly behind the "iron curtain" in Eastern Europe. The following day, the Supreme Soviet, the highest governmental body of the Soviet Union, dissolved itself. A brutal story of a failed trans-national totalitarian empire spanning nearly 70 years had come to an end.
How the Soviet Union Committed Suicide | Gary North
Back in 1976, Mao Zedong died, Deng Xiaoping came to power, and the Chinese people embarked on millions of "marginal revolutions," privatizing their farms and businesses and transforming China into a semi-capitalist nation.
Communism was dead. The Union of Soviet Socialist Republics was dead. But soviet socialism was alive in the United States, a government that had adopted most of the planks of The Communist Manifesto. The U.S. government was determined to avoid the fate of Russia and China. The U.S. did not want to lose power and control. But with the Cold War enemy lying in a coffin, how could the State-run Military-Industrial Complex be kept alive?
The answer was a "War on Terror."
A part of this war was an invasion of Iraq. Like Putin, Saddam Hussein, the leader of Iraq, was a thug. But Saddam allowed Christians to meet freely, and even to evangelize Muslims in public. (Doing so in Saudi Arabia -- a U.S. "ally" -- would result in decapitation.) As a result, Iraq had the largest Christian population in the Arab world. But the U.S. murdered, maimed, and made homeless hundreds of thousands of Christians, and replaced the secular government of Iraq with an Islamic Theocracy under Shariah Law.
During my lifetime, the communist/socialist government of the United States has murdered, maimed, and made homeless tens of millions of innocent, non-white non-combatant civilians around the world, making the United States the most evil and dangerous criminal enterprise on planet earth. You might counter, "No, the government of North Korea is more evil than the government of the United States." You might be right, but North Korea is not more dangerous than the United States. Statistically speaking, the average human being is more likely to have her "unalienable rights" -- with which she was "endowed by our Creator" -- infringed by someone on the payroll of the U.S. federal government than by someone on the North Korean payroll, or any other government, or any drug cartel, organized crime syndicate, or terrorist organization, including ISIS and Al-Queda. Some have estimated U.S.-inflicted casualties at close to 100 million during my lifetime. You may say that's an exaggeration. Maybe. But how many millions of people would you say were actually murdered, maimed, or made homeless by the United States? Is your revised figure acceptable to Jesus Christ, the "Supreme Judge of the World?"
I admit I voted for some of the Congressmen who appropriated funds to this paroxysm of global murder and destruction. Even though I called myself a Christian. Even though these Congressmen may have called themselves Christians.
Ukraine
After the fall of the Soviet Union, the United States was the world's sole "superpower." Many U.S. influencers want the world to stay that way. They do not want a world where the U.S. is just one player along with Russia, China, India, Brazil, and other growing nations. Many U.S. leaders believe the U.S. must rule the world. "Hegemony." "Uni-polar."
In July of 2024, the United States is using Ukraine as a puppet to wage war ("regime change") against Russia. The U.S. is willing to kill a million people in Ukraine in order to use Ukraine as a weapon against Russia, to keep Russia from competing with the U.S. This has been in the works for decades.
The war has already cost the lives of 500,000 Ukrainians, and if the war escalates into a nuclear exchange, millions of people will be murdered. Neoconservatives don't care. The Council on Foreign Relations doesn't care. Joe Biden doesn't care.
- Throughout his entire career, Biden has served the military-industrial complex. He has relentlessly promoted NATO enlargement and supported America’s deeply destabilizing wars of choice in Afghanistan, Serbia, Iraq, Syria, Libya, and now Ukraine. He defers to generals who want more war and more “surges,” and who predict imminent victory just ahead to keep the gullible public onside.
- Moreover, Biden and his team (Antony Blinken, Jake Sullivan, Victoria Nuland) seem to have believed their own propaganda that Western sanctions would strangle the Russian economy, while miracle weapons such as HIMARS would defeat Russia. And all the while, they have been telling Americans to pay no attention to Russia’s 6,000 nuclear weapons.
The Real History of the War in Ukraine: a Chronology of Events and Case for Diplomacy — Jeffrey D. Sachs
"America" is an ideal: "Liberty Under God."
"The United States" -- The Military-Industrial-Congressional-Financial-Academic-Pharmaceutical Complex -- is at war with "America," the ideal.
In order to save "America," we must abolish "The United States."
"The United States" is not a force for peace, but of endless wars.
I believe this deadly militarism began on July 4th, 1776.
Independence Day is about the overthrow of the government through violent armed revolution. This is first cousin to the idea of "national defense." These two ideas are either the parents or the children of the idea of "The State." This website argues that this whole mess is an idolatry and a false religion. And yet Christians and even Christian clergymen have risen to defend them all.
Here is a well-researched article by David Barton: The American Revolution: Was it an Act of Biblical Rebellion? The article proves that America's Founding Fathers were not -- in their own minds -- rebelling against the Bible when they embarked upon armed revolution. They justified their violent overthrow of the government with Biblical citations. They were Theocrats. As noted above, it is "unconstitutional" to teach public school students that the Declaration of Independence is objectively true, because the Declaration is a Theocratic document. America was originally a Theocracy. The word literally means "governed by God," or turned on its head, "Under God." America was always a nation "under God."
But we can fool ourselves. Greg Bahnsen has written about "the apparent paradox of self-deception": that a person can exercise his mind to sincerely and genuinely believe something he knows deep down is not true. America's Founders knew the Bible better than most people today. But they also knew the "classics." They convinced themselves that they could harmonize the two. They tried to blend "Jerusalem and Athens."
America's militarism goes back beyond July 4th, 1776. It goes back to Rome, Athens, and Babylon.
The United States is living proof that you can't serve two masters. A four-hundred year-long experiment.
"Syncretism" is a fancy-sounding word which describes an attempt to combine two contradictory religions. The most basic conflict in all of human history is God's religion ("Love the Lord with all your heart") and Satan's religion ("Ye shall be as gods" Genesis 3:5). Augustine described this conflict as "The City of God" vs. "The City of Man." We could also speak of the clash between "Theonomy" (God's Law) vs. Autonomy (self-law). The prophet Elijah saw the conflict between the Lord God of Israel vs. the false lord of the pagans ("Baal" means "lord"):
1 Kings 18:21
And Elijah came to all the people, and said, “How long will you falter between two opinions? If the Lord is God, follow Him; but if Baal, follow him.” But the people answered him not a word.
You believe in Baalism, which you were taught in U.S. public schools:
What is Baalism?, by James B.Jordan
Matthew 6:24
No man can serve two masters: for either he will hate the one, and love the other; or else he will hold to the one, and despise the other. Ye cannot serve God and mammon.
You serve "mammon."
As Dorothy Day may have said, “Our problems stem from our acceptance of this filthy, rotten system,”
1 Corinthians 10:21-22
Ye cannot drink the cup of the Lord, and the cup of devils: ye cannot be partakers of the Lord's table, and of the table of devils.
Devils teach our children in public schools. Those that are not devils are not as wise as serpents (Matthew 10:16), and don't resist the devils (James 4:7; Ephesians 4:27; Ephesians 6:11-12; 1 Peter 5:8-9; Revelation 12:9-11). These teachers go to church, and they mean well, but they follow the devil's instructions.
2 Corinthians 6:14-16
Be ye not unequally yoked together with unbelievers: for what fellowship hath righteousness with unrighteousness? and what communion hath light with darkness? And what concord hath Christ with Belial? or what part hath he that believeth with an infidel? And what agreement hath the temple of God with idols? for ye are the temple of the living God; as God hath said, I will dwell in them, and walk in them; and I will be their God, and they shall be my people.
The "Public Sector" should be called "The Infidel Sector." It dominates "the Private Sector."
| “Private Sector” | “Public Sector” |
| Non-“Government” Sector | “Government” Sector |
| Competitive Sector | Monopoly Sector |
| Persuasive Sector | Coercive Sector |
| Peaceful Sector | Violent Sector |
| Productive Sector | Parasite Sector |
| Servant Sector | Archist Sector |
| "Economic Man" | "Political Man" |
Revelation 3:15-16
I know thy works, that thou art neither cold nor hot: I would thou wert cold or hot. So then because thou art lukewarm, and neither cold nor hot, I will vomit thee out of My mouth.Joshua 24:15,23
And if it seem evil unto you to serve the LORD, choose you this day whom ye will serve; whether the gods which your fathers served that were on the other side of the flood, or the gods of the Amorites, in whose land ye dwell: but as for me and my house, we will serve the LORD. 23 Now therefore put away, said he, the strange gods which are among you, and incline your heart unto the LORD God of Israel.1 Samuel 7:3
And Samuel spake unto all the house of Israel, saying, If ye do return unto the LORD with all your hearts, then put away the strange gods and Ashtaroth from among you, and prepare your hearts unto the LORD, and serve him only: and he will deliver you out of the hand of the Philistines.James 1:7-8
For let not that man suppose that he will receive anything from the Lord; 8 he is a double-minded man, unstable in all his ways.James 4:8
Draw nigh to God, and he will draw nigh to you. Cleanse your hands, ye sinners; and purify your hearts, ye double minded.
America's Founding Fathers were double-minded. They wanted to serve Christ and Greco-Roman Baals.
Their minds were more set on Christ and the Scriptures than anyone in Washington D.C. today, but they were also diligent students of "the Academy."
The purpose of this website is to prove these dreary facts to you, and show you how to become
• An Extraordinary American,
• An Extraordinary Christian,
• An Extraordinary Human Being.
Scenes from coming attractions:
James 1:27
Pure and undefiled religion before God and the Father is this: to visit orphans and widows in their trouble, and to keep oneself unspotted from the world.
We are going to see that the tyrannical woke regime in Washington D.C. is not only indifferent to orphans and widows in their trouble, the United States inflicts trouble on widows and orphans around the world. In fact, the U.S. empire creates more widows and orphans -- by murdering husbands and fathers -- than any other government, terrorist organization, drug cartel, or organized crime syndicate. This will be proven below.
America's Founders -- to their credit -- would have been horrified and angered at the government they created. But they created it. They set the wheels in motion. They leavened the loaf (Galatians 5:9; 1 Corinthians 5:6-7; Luke 12:1; Mark 8:15).
This website will suggest that you are living your life day today under a false and impure religion. Your thinking is "spotted by the world." You will be asked to convert to the true religion of the Bible.
On the 4th of July, I no longer celebrate armed revolution and the creation of the United States. I look back and wonder how I could have so boldly defended mass murder when I was younger. How could I "support the troops" when other Christians did not, and even Muslims like Muhammad Ali denounced the killing and destruction of innocent people's homes?
Cornelius Van Til said, "There is no alternative but that of theonomy and autonomy." Theonomy is the standard of perfect righteousness. Autonomy is perfect rebellion. Nobody I know is 100% consistent with either of these standards. Every day that I study God's Law I learn more about the perfect standard of righteousness by which we will all be judged, and I ask, "How could I have missed that? How could I have been living so inconsistently? Was I even saved?" If not, then today is the day: "Behold, now is the accepted time; behold, now is the day of salvation." 2 Corinthians 6:2
I don't want to walk into the thorns of theological dispute over "assurance of salvation" and "election" and doctrines like that. A member of a dangerous authoritarian cult can still be "elect," but someday he's going to repent and get out of the cult.
J. Gresham Machen, Founder of Westminster Seminary and the Orthodox Presbyterian Church, said that mainline "liberal" Christianity -- Methodists, Episcopalians, Presbyterians -- you know the crowd -- was not a species of Christianity, but was a completely different religion. Machen was excommunicated from the mainline Presbyterian church. May I suggest that affirming the Virgin Birth is just as much a different religion from liberalism as not celebrating violent revolution is from most conservative or postmil churches. Perhaps Augustine would join Machen in saying that these are the two competing religions in history
May I suggest that if you do not advocate disarmament of the City of Man, you are presently an adherent of a false religion, and not an adherent of Biblical, Theonomic Christianity?
Would you be willing to be examined (Proverbs 18:17), sharpened (Acts 17:10-12), and forced to search the Scriptures (Acts 17:11) to see if this is true?
Jesus said there would be many people surprised to find they didn't have the true religion:
Matthew 7:21
“Not everyone who says to Me, ‘Lord, Lord,’ shall enter the kingdom of heaven, but he who does the will of My Father in heaven. 22 Many will say to Me in that day, ‘Lord, Lord, have we not prophesied in Your name, cast out demons in Your name, and done many wonders in Your name?’ 23 And then I will declare to them, ‘I never knew you; depart from Me, you who practice lawlessness!’
What is the mark of the true religion?
James 1:27
Pure and undefiled religion before God and the Father is this: to visit orphans and widows in their trouble, and to keep oneself unspotted from the world. (cf. also Matthew 25:31-46)James 4:4
Do you not know that friendship with the world is enmity with God? Whoever therefore wants to be a friend of the world makes himself an enemy of God.
The United States not only doesn't care for orphans and widows, it creates widows and orphans on a massive scale. By any Biblical measure, the U.S. is the enemy of God. But Christians are generally favorable toward this government, and completely closed-minded toward beating swords into plowshares.
After the fall of the Soviet Union, the "Cold War" was replaced with "The War on Terror." During these wars, "my" government in Washington D.C. murdered, crippled, or made homeless tens of millions of innocent, non-combatant, non-white civilians around the world, creating millions of widows and orphans by murdering their husbands and fathers, and further traumatizing them by bombing their homes, schools, factories, and roads. This is all so far over on the side of "Autonomy" and so far away from the side of "Theonomy" that you'll excuse me if I speak in very absolutist -- if not hysterical -- terms.
The Vietnam war exacted an enormous human cost: estimates of the number of Vietnamese soldiers and civilians killed range from 966,000 to 3 million. The U.S. dropped more tons of bombs on Laos and Cambodia than it did on the entire world during World War II, killing approximately 800,000 people in each country, destabilizing Cambodia, which led to the rise of Pol Pot and the murder of 1/3 of the Cambodian population. Nobody today says the war in Southeast Asia served some long-lasting Christian purpose. It was evil. Horribly, shockingly evil. But as a conservative, I said those who opposed the war were "insane."
I was wrong. Ali was right. Why did Ali get it right and so many Christians got it wrong? I dismissed the anti-war protesters as "anti-American" and "a buncha commies." Maybe they were, but shouldn't conservative Bible-believing Christians have been giving a truer alternate public witness in support of the millennial goal of "swords into plowshares?"
Christians in Iraq arguably had more religious freedom under Saddam Hussein than Christians in the U.S. do under Joe Biden. Saddam never sent his secret police to arrest Christians who sang hymns at abortion clinics, to be imprisoned for a decade or more. (Correct me if I'm wrong; I admit Saddam was a thug.) If you walked up to a Muslim in Saudi Arabia and said, "Hello Mr. Muslim, may I preach the Gospel and show you how to become a Christian?" you would have your head removed. Not in Iraq under Saddam Hussein. This is why Iraq boasted the largest community of Christians in the Arab world.
The U.S. military-industrial complex overthrew Saddam's government, murdering, crippling, and making homeless hundreds of thousands of Christians, replacing this secular, non-Muslim "Ba'athist" government with an Islamic Theocracy under Shariah law, where Christian churches are burned to the ground with impunity.
I would argue that this is not just sinful, but even abominable. It's horrible. America's "Representatives" spend $8 trillion on the "War on Terror." The money spent, the lives lost; it should shock the conscience. But churches "support the troops." (Or at least they supported the troops back then. Today, most people quietly admit the invasion and destruction of Iraq was based on lies. Why weren't Bible-believing conservative Christians denouncing the lies and the murder and the destruction? Were they viewing the world through the lens of a false religion? I'm not saying I wasn't or they weren't Christians. But somehow they believed and advocated horribly unBiblical ideas. Jesus Christ would not have approved, no matter how merciful He is.
Conspiracy Theory: The atheistic, pro-abortion, pro-homosexual U.S. government is willing to risk killing millions of people in a nuclear war for the cause of "regime change" in Russia because Vladimir Putin publicly promotes Christianity and opposes the LGBT agenda. Change my mind.
Those are just a couple of wars the U.S. has waged. Don't forget Afghanistan, Libya, Yemen, Syria . . . the list goes on:
This evil is breath-taking, heart-stopping, jaw-dropping, mind-numbing . . . no. seriously. This is all really really evil. How could I have supported it? What causes this kind of blindness?
You will say I'm a heretic for being a pacifist. But if I'm right, what would the authors of Scripture say about you, who vote for politicians that drop bombs (weapons of mass destruction) all over the world? They would say you're the heretic, and you're a member of a cult.
The Apostle Paul admitted he was a "heretic":
Acts 24:14
But this I confess unto thee, that after the way which they call heresy, so worship I the God of my fathers, believing all things which are written in the law and in the prophets:
The word "heretic" comes from the Greek word for "choose." (Word Study)
Everybody is a "heretic" in someone else's eyes. Joshua said "Choose ye this day whom you will serve." Elijah told the people, "How long halt ye between two opinions? if the Lord be God, follow Him: but if Baal, then follow him." Elijah was a heretic in the eyes of the prophets of Baal.
The Bible lays on us a moral obligation -- a duty -- to choose; to become a "heretic." Either a "heretic" like Paul, Joshua, and Elijah, or the kind of heretic that chooses Baal, the world (James 4:4), or the city of man rather than the City of God.
We must choose between the Word of God and the word of man.
The Declaration of Independence in 1776 spoke of the moral imperative to risk "our Lives, our Fortunes and our sacred Honor" -- our reputation and acceptance by society, our mortgaged home and video games, and even our life.
There was a man named John Nelson Darby. He invented a doctrine called "dispensational premillennialism" in the early 1800's. As this doctrine spread, other doctrines, like Marxism (Karl Marx, born: May 5, 1818, Trier, Germany), also spread. Other men have been saying similar things for centuries. They have not been saying what the Bible says. If you believe what these men say, then you're not believing what the Bible says.
I believe Darby's doctrine is a "heresy." The "institutional church" does not agree with me. The "institutional church" teaches many parts of Darby's heresy.
Andrew Torba, founder of a social media platform called "Gab," wrote a book called Christian Nationalism: A Biblical Guide to Taking Dominion and Discipling Nations. I agree with a lot in this book, but Torba would say I'm a heretic, and I guess I would have to say the same thing about him. In my view, Torba's "Nationalism" (which I regard as unBiblical) is related to his unBiblical eschatology.
Chapter 7 of Torba's book is called "The Time for Lukewarm Christianity is Over." Of course he is completely correct about this. Jesus says that being lukewarm make Him want to vomit you out of His Mouth (Revelation 3:15-16). If lukewarm Christians aren't calling you an "extremist," you need to worry about what Jesus will call you. If the Pharisees aren't calling you a "heretic," then you need to check with Paul the Apostle and Heretic.
Torba writes:
For many Americans, Christianity has become a rapidly deconstructed fragment of their actual identity. People refer to themselves as a "Christian" when asked about matters of faith, but you won't find them openly proclaiming Christ as their central identity.
How many of us are living according to God's Word and how many are living according to the ways of the world?
In my early twenties I was calling myself a Christian, but I was living a very worldly life. God came secondary to my career and worldly desires. I wasn't attending church. I wasn't reading my Bible. I wasn't praying. What part of me was living a Christian life that could justify calling myself a Christian?
That all changed a few years ago when the Holy Spirit moved my heart closer to God. I started attending church, got married, became a father, and humbled myself as the worst of sinners before an Almighty God.
I'll concede that Torba has accomplished more admirable things in his 33 years on earth than I have in my 66. I've never been married. Never had kids. What a loser.
But at least I have repented of "nationalism," which has resulted in the murder of millions of innocent people, and the destruction of homes, schools, and hospitals around the world.
And I would contend that the heresy of "nationalism" is related to the heresy of "Adventism."
James 1:27 says that "true religion" is protecting widows and the fatherless. Nationalism creates widows and fatherless children by killing their husbands and fathers.
Micah 4 and Isaiah 2 say that in the age some call the "millennium" we will beat our "swords into plowshares." Adventists believe that we cannot and must not fulfill this prophecy until after the Second Advent of Christ. Until then, we must continue creating widows and orphans. People who object to killing fathers and traumatizing their widows and fatherless children by dropping bombs on their homes and hospitals are called "pacifists" or "anarchists," and are often denounced by nationalists and adventists as "heretics."
I would say that anti-pacifists have a different religion than pacifists. Pro-revolution Americans have a different religion than those who say we should "be subject" to "the powers that be" (Romans 13). It's two different religions. It's time to "choose" which religion you should follow.
Was Andrew Torba a genuine Christian in his twenties? Was his thinking poisoned by a false religion? Was he missing the "pure religion" of James 1:27? He admits he was "worldly." Was he therefore an enemy of Christ (James 4:4)? Is a lukewarm person a genuine Christian, if Jesus would "vomit" him out of His Mouth?
These are obviously very serious questions.
Torba, a Calvinist, would say that even though he was "lukewarm" and "worldly," and even an "enemy" of God in his twenties, he was still one of the "elect." But he needed to repent.
I.Q. stands for "intelligence quotient." You don't need a high I.Q. to understand this website.
M.Q. stands for "morality quotient." It means knowing the difference between right and wrong, and standing for right against wrong. I don't know if there's actually a thing called "M.Q." I just now made it up to make the point that this website has
a simple argument: Jesus says it's wrong to hurt people and take their stuff. It's especially wrong to kill people.
There are people with very high I.Q.s who invent new ways to kill people, and invent intelligent-sounding scholarly "theories" to justify killing people. Sometimes people with a low I.Q. (but an average M.Q.) know that killing people is wrong, but they're fooled by intelligent-sounding theories and rationalizations for killing, and low-I.Q./average M.Q. people can vote for killers, or go along with the killing. Sometimes because they want to be "patriotic."
It's time to stop going along with the killing.
That's the point of this website.
This is a very controversial website. It's also a HUGE website. It backs its controversial claims with mountains of evidence. It is designed for thoughtful people. Most Americans today don't want to think too much, and are content with bumper-stickers and "memes." Americans today are victims of educational malpractice.
There is a third reason Jesus would not be a happy celebrant on the 4th of July
3. Jesus hates ignorance.
Ignorance is often the root of hypocrisy. People who don't know much about a subject claim to know a lot. They are very dogmatic about the issue, and refuse to learn new facts which are contrary to their bold profession of error. Low I.Q./Low M.Q. people are easily impressed by scholarly-sounding theories justifying immorality, especially when these theories are advanced by rich or powerful people. Low I.Q./Low M.Q. people are easily swayed this way.
Thomas Jefferson said this
If a nation expects to be ignorant & free, in a state of civilisation, it expects what never was & never will be.
Civilization, as we explain here, is more about morality than intelligence. The Nazis seemed "civilized," but "intelligent" and "sophisticated" people can commit genocide using high-technology instruments of death. God says the end of their "civilization" is inevitable.
Jefferson went on to say,
The functionaries of every government have propensities to command at will the liberty & property of their constituents. There is no safe deposit for these but with the people themselves; nor can they be safe with them without information. Where the press is free and every man able to read, all is safe.
"The functionaries . . . ."
The Declaration of Independence lists the offenses of the tyrannical government. Among them is this:
"He has erected a multitude of New Offices, and sent hither swarms of Officers to harass our People, and eat out their substance."
Jefferson could have said, "he has sent hither swarms of functionaries."
He says, "The functionaries of every government have propensities to command at will the liberty & property of their constituents."
In other words, "power corrupts." A person ("functionary") who thinks he has the right ("power") to hurt people and take their stuff is corrupt, and becomes more corrupt as he uses his power, that is, has a propensity to hurt more and more people and take more and more stuff as time goes on.
Most Americans in 2024 are ignorant of the fact that today's "functionaries" are depriving Americans of more "liberty & property" -- and even lives -- than functionaries in Jefferson's day.
But Americans' ignorance is willful. Americans prefer to be ignorant. "Ignorance is bliss."
Americans especially love to be ignorant of the morality of a situation.
Jefferson said, "Where the press is free and every man able to read, all is safe."
Jefferson was wrong. Even if the people can read, they can still be immoral, and they will still be slaves of "functionaries."
Just because Jones can read from a free press does not insure that Jones will not vote for "functionaries of government" to take wealth from Smith and give it to Jones.
And when the people are immoral, and when a nation's education system bans the teaching of morality and even the Declaration of Independence itself, the press will be immoral. The press will not expose tyranny, it will be a willing pawn of tyranny. A "lapdog" media.
Prof. Jones might justify theft by functionaries of government using impressive-sounding theories in prestigious law reviews. But his theft is still theft. If you vote for a thief, you are a thief.
The People can be ignorant and free if they are moral and religious. As John Adams put it,
We have no government armed with power capable of contending with human passions unbridled by morality and religion. Our Constitution was made only for a moral and religious people. It is wholly inadequate to the government of any other.
Ignorance is certainly a problem, but it's not the most fundamental problem.
True, millions of Americans don't even know why they get off work on July 4th (if they have a job).
No, on "Independence Day" we do not celebrate "the freeing of the slaves."Go ahead. Laugh at these ignorant Americans. Their vote cancels out your vote:
Why is the 4th of July a holiday when so many Americans don't know what America stands for? Maybe you know that on "Independence Day" we celebrate the signing of the Declaration of Independence. But millions of Americans don't. Nobody really cares about a bunch of guys wearing powdered wigs and knickers signing their names on a piece of paper. There must be something more to the 4th of July than just signing names.
Is it the ideas contained on that piece of paper? Maybe in theory, but the vast majority of Americans couldn't really say much about what those ideas were. And if they were told about the ideas in the Declaration of Independence, it is by no means certain that the average American would support those ideas.
Maybe it was the effects of those ideas. Didn't these ideas make America the most prosperous and admired nation in history?
Some of the ideas did, and Jesus would approve of those ideas.
But some ideas in the Declaration of Independence led to a "War for Independence," or the "American Revolution," in which thousands of British Christians were murdered by American Christians, and vice versa.
That doesn't sound like anything Jesus would celebrate.
The Declaration of Independence says we have a "duty" (not just a "right") to abolish any government that becomes a "tyranny." Those who signed the Declaration said their government was a "tyranny," and they abolished it. But in 2024 we have a government which is ten, twenty, or even one hundred times more tyrannical than the government they abolished. And that means we are "dependent" -- because we refuse to abolish a tyrannical government that sends us welfare checks (whether welfare for the poor, welfare for the military-industrial complex, welfare for Wall St., or welfare for wealthy New York retirees who now live in Florida). Aren't we hypocrites for celebrating a document we don't believe in, and whose principles we don't practice?
Would Jesus celebrate war, tyranny, and hypocrisy?
Ignorance is not a problem if you don't steal from your neighbor, or kill people in foreign nations.
Ignorance is not a problem if you don't hypocritically boast of being wise and informed, or courageous and free when you're a slave and afraid to speak up.
Americans are ignorant about the Declaration of Independence because they would rather be dependent on a tyrant who promises them government benefits. And if the government has to murder millions of people to provide those benefits, Americans are OK with that. Americans are not willing to risk "our Lives, our Fortunes and our sacred Honor" to protect their freedom to obey "the Laws of Nature and of Nature's God." Americans are not worried about whether their actions really must pass judgment with "the Supreme Judge of the world." Americans do not have "a firm reliance on the Protection of Divine Providence." "In God We Trust" is a slogan, but in real life they trust politicians more.
That's not a problem about ignorance. That's a problem with their religion. Ignorance is not a "bug" in their religion; it's a feature. It's a selling point. "Ignorance is bliss." Be ignorant your whole life and go to heaven when you die.
Let's review the two reasons why Jesus wouldn't be celebrating "Independence Day" if He were here on earth in 2024:
1. Jesus hates violence. A revolution (such as America's Revolution) results in violence. Thousands of British Christians were killed by American Christians, and thousands of American Christians were killed by British Christians. How could Jesus celebrate that?
1a. It's true, Jesus hates tyranny, and the American Revolution was a revolution against tyranny.
2. But Jesus hates hypocrisy.
2a. Celebrating a violent revolution against tyranny is pretty hypocritical considering today's Woke Regime in Washington D.C. is incomparably more tyrannical and anti-Christian in 2024 than the British government was in 1776. Taxes in 2024 are 20x higher than in 1776. Americans today have no right to celebrate the violent overthrow of a tyrannical government by those who were willing to risk "our Lives, our Fortunes and our sacred Honor" when we risk nothing and tolerate what the Founders would see as unspeakable evil (and therefore intolerable evil).
I think the best way for me to convert you from a false religion is to dig deeper into these two reasons, think a little more, and dig a little deeper. It's the only way to counteract 13, 17, or 20 or more years of repetitive public school brainwashing.
Not a popular message. Maybe you're about to stop reading.
Some Americans say "God bless America."
But Jesus says "Blessed are the peacemakers" (Matthew 5:9).
Is the United States a "peacemaker?"
I was raised to believe that "socialism" or communism" was evil and "capitalism" was good. (I still believe that, if by "capitalism" is meant "freedom" or "free markets" and not "taxpayer bailouts for big corporations"). I was in junior high school when the Vietnam War raged, and when the nation was divided by
anti-war protesters. I believed that the anti-war protesters were a bunch of anti-American commies. They may well have been incited by Communists and used by Communists as tools or pawns in Moscow's attempt to bring down the American/capitalist system, but they were on the right side of the debate over an immoral war.
During my lifetime, during "the cold
war," the "war on terror," and many other wars, "my" government -- the "woke regime" in Washington D.C. -- has killed, crippled, or made homeless TENS OF MILLIONS of innocent, non-combatant, non-white civilians around the world, from Vietnam to Iraq to Afghanistan, Panama, Libya, Yugoslavia, Bosnia, Kuwait, Nicaragua, El
Salvador, Congo, and elsewhere. The United States drops a bomb somewhere in the world every 12 minutes, on average. Barack Obama, who won the Nobel Prize for Peace, dropped tens of thousands of bombs, used drones to assassinate American
citizens without due process, and maintained U.S. military bases in nearly 100 nations around the world.
The United States (Washington D.C.) is the biggest warmonger on the planet.
Can God bless such a nation?
Can God bless me if I've never even asked
that question?
Isn't asking that question the first step in being a "peacemaker?"
The Bible says we should beat our swords into plowshares. But "the powers that be" have high-sounding excuses for doing the opposite. We've all been taught that the "experts" know better than Jesus.
The politicians, the university professors, and
the Joint Chiefs of Staff: You can trust them.
Jesus, not so much.
Jesus was an irrelevant, impractical, unrealistic, utopian pacifist.
He was also way too "judgmental" (see His rant in Matthew 23 and His actions in Matthew 21:12-14).
Nobody today takes Jesus seriously.
Nobody cares if Jesus condemns them for the global violence that they vote for, thinking it will keep
their gas prices down.
The United States is the most evil and most dangerous criminal enterprise or terrorist organization on planet earth. Proof. The willingness of American colonists to shoot tax collectors in 1776 may be the first cancer cell that has now metastasized in 2024. Violence is the first reason Jesus would not celebrate "Independence Day." More details.
But before we dig deeper into the second reason Jesus would not celebrate Independence Day, there are two reasons why Jesus would praise the Declaration of Independence, and why Jesus would be somewhat tolerant of Independence Day and the Declaration of Independence celebrated on that day. (But again, I realize that nobody in 2024 cares what Jesus thinks.)
As we'll see below, Jesus hates even the slightest amount of tyranny.
America's Founders abolished their tyrannical government. John Quincy Adams, in an “Oration on the Life and Character of Gilbert Motier de la Fayette,” Delivered at the request of both Houses of the Congress of the United States, before them, in the House of Representatives at Washington, on the 31st of December, 1834, said:
The war was revolutionary. It began by the dissolution of the British Government in the Colonies; the People of which were, by that operation, left without any Government whatever.
"We the People" can govern ourselves. Billions of human beings do this every day, in our businesses and families. We know how to protect our liberty and property. As Jefferson said, "There is no safe deposit for these but with the people themselves."
Unfortunately, too many people vote for tyrants because tyrants promise them something for nothing. Free benefits. "Entitlements." Getting rid of tyranny means cutting off the government check. Getting rid of tyranny, theft, and compulsion means being "left without any Government whatever," which means "anarchy!"
In the Bible, if you look up every occurrence of the words "save," "savior," and "salvation," you'll find that in the overwhelming majority of cases, the word refers to freedom from tyrants, not freedom from hell after you are killed by tyrants. Tyranny is idolatry because the tyrant thinks he is society's savior, and because low-M.Q. citizens believe the tyrant, and trust the tyrant for "salvation" instead of God Himself. To oppose tyranny, you must believe that Jesus is the Christ -- Today. Surprisingly, this is a hard truth for most Christians to swallow.
America's Founders said "Abolish tyranny!"
Americans today say "But muh benefits!?"
We'll look more closely at tyranny, salvation, and "anarchy" below.
There you have it: two things Jesus would like about Independence Day: the opposition by the Declaration of Independence to atheism and to idolatrous tyranny.
The very two things most Americans don't want to hear: "Theocracy" and "Anarchy."
Here's the other reason Jesus would not celebrate Independence Day.
Nobody cares if Jesus is against violence. Nobody cares if Jesus calls them a "hypocrite."
If you actually care what Jesus commands you to do, then keep reading. My goal is to faithfully summarize things Jesus taught. Things you won't hear in this Sunday's sermon. Which is why your Pastor, unlike Jesus, has never been put to death. Or even arrested.
"Blessed are the peacemakers" (Matthew 5:9) gets translated in our minds as "Blessed are the pacifists." "Everybody knows" that Jesus commands His followers to be pacifists. "Love your enemies." "Turn the other cheek." We'll prove this claim in spades in a minute. Or go here.
"Peacemaker" is harder to ignore than "pacifist."
The word "pacifism" comes from the Latin word for "peace." It is not related to the word "passive." Christians actively oppose violence and evil, and are willing to give their own lives to save another, but Christians are commanded to
• love their enemies (Matthew 5:44),
• put
away their sword (Matthew 26:52), and
• follow Christ's example of non-defense (1 Peter 2:21-24).
I used to believe in "just wars," but I think my views are more Biblical now. Here is how I became a pacifist. The verses quoted in that
deposition constitute a "prima facie case" for pacifism. An anthropologist from another planet, here to study the human race, specializing in the teachings and influence of Jesus Christ, would see immediately that Christ and the Bible advocate
pacifism. Christ did not defend Himself against attack, and we are to follow "in His steps" (1 Peter 2:18-24). "Thou shalt not kill"
and "love your enemies" are clear commands.
Pacifism means violent revolution against the king is also wrong. This is why Jesus would not celebrate "Independence Day."
Here is a summary of the argument made below.
For years I opposed pacifism as "unrealistic" and "impractical."
I claimed that God imposed a moral requirement on me to "defend my family" in the event of a home invasion, and that pacifism in the face of such an attack was immoral, not just cowardly.
To discharge my moral responsibility, I voted for a system of self-defense called "The State." This was the only "realistic" view. I was "practical." "Responsible." Not like those crazy pacifists.
Now, as I begin my second half-century of life, I look back on a bad decision. Since I was born, the machinery of self-defense called "The United States Federal Government" has murdered, crippled, or made homeless tens of millions of innocent non-combatant civilians. Children, grandmothers, and breadwinners.
It started with my fear of an attack on my family by a random, anonymous home invader.
From this crippled, unrealistic, skewed vision of "self-defense" comes the global disaster known as "national defense."
“If American Christians simply gave a tithe rather than the current one-quarter of a tithe, there would be enough private Christian dollars to provide basic health care and education to all the poor of the earth. And we would still have an extra $60-70 billion left over for evangelism around the world.”
Book Review: The Scandal Of The Evangelical Conscience - Acton Institute PowerBlog
We could bribe half the world into abandoning Jihadism and becoming Christian. But American Christians prefer the delusion of "national defense" and comfortable entertainment in their mega-churches.
American Christians have the economic muscle to bring in "the millennium." But we waste it on "defense."
Conclusion: "Self-defense" is irresponsible and unChristlike. "National Defense" is unmitigated evil.
There are lots of objections to beating swords into plowshares, and they all sound good -- until you examine them closely. Here is a comprehensive examination of the most popular objections to following Jesus -- often written by those claim to be following Jesus.
Neither would America's Founders.
And neither should you.
Not in 2024.
The U.S. is a tyranny, and the Signers of the Declaration would say we are hypocrites.
In addition to not celebrating violence and revolution, we shouldn't celebrate "Independence Day" while living in dependence on tyranny.
- Celebrate the Declaration of Independence?
- In our day, it is illegal for public school students to be taught that the Declaration of Independence is really true. Objectively true. True regardless of what any government official believes about it. What sense does it make to celebrate a document that is banned in government schools?
The Federal Government says that teachers in government-operated schools paid for by your local property taxes cannot "endorse" or "promote" the ideas contained in the Declaration. Teachers cannot say The Declaration of Independence really is objectively true, regardless of whether any human being or any government believes it to be true, and that students should stand up and risk their lives, their fortunes and their sacred honor in defense of those unchanging true principles.
- Sure, government teachers are permitted to say that a bunch of dead guys wearing funny costumes used to believe those words were true.
- Implying that we're much more sophisticated today. And more cool.
- Or they can teach their students that they didn't really believe anything they were saying about all men being evolved equally. The Revolution was just to protect their slaves and their wealth.
- The unelected Supreme Court says endorsing or promoting the ideas found in the Declaration of Independence in government-run schools would be "unconstitutional." (Read that link.)
- But we still want to celebrate. Well, knock yourself out.
- The Declaration says we have a "duty" -- not just a "right" -- to abolish any government that becomes a "tyranny." Those who signed the Declaration felt their government had crossed the line, so they abolished it. Their government in 1776 was a kindergarten picnic compared to our government today. If the Signers could travel through time, they would be outraged that you are not outraged. "Why are you not taking up arms against tyranny?" they would ask us.
- Either we know that our government is tyrannical and ought to be abolished, or we have been intellectually and morally captured -- brainwashed -- by the enemy, and are so dependent upon the tyrants that rule over us, that we don't even want "independence."
- Americans today have no right to celebrate Independence Day. Independent from what?
- "Taxation without representation?" We have far more taxation, and far less representation.
- We have allowed our government to become the enemy of God and humanity around the world.
In any case, students in U.S. public schools cannot be told that the propositions in the Declaration of Independence are actually, objectively true:
- that there really is a God, and His existence is a "self-evident truth"
- that our rights really are the product of the intelligent design of our Creator
(not a gift from the government)- that all Americans really are obligated to conform their lives to
"the Laws of Nature and of Nature's God"- that one day our actions really must pass judgment with
"the Supreme Judge of the world"- that all Americans should have "a firm reliance on
the Protection of Divine Providence."- that Americans have a duty -- not just a right
-- to abolish any government that becomes a tyranny.
If the federal government allowed public school teachers to teach what Samuel Adams was taught, every student who in the summer of 2020 was looting and burning down buildings could become:
| • An Extraordinary American, • An Extraordinary Christian, • An Extraordinary Human Being. |
- Those (in media and academia) who are knowledgeable about the holiday (it has something to do with The Declaration of Independence) don't even agree with the meaning of the holiday:
- They would consider America's Founders to be "terrorists" if they were here today.
- The Founders took up arms to abolish the government. "Buncha anarchists!"
- The Founders considered their government to be a "tyranny," and would certainly consider today's Americans to be failures as Americans because our government is a mega-tyranny. Today's conservatives don't want to believe what the rest of the world thinks about our government. "Unpatriotic!"
- America was once the most prosperous and admired nation on earth.
- Today we are over our heads in debt, and despised around the world.
- OK, how about this:
More Hypocrisy
Consider these facts and the slogan "No Taxation Without Representation":
What did America's Founding Fathers fight for? What did they fight against? Why did they risk "our Lives, our Fortunes and our sacred Honor?" Is there any reason to celebrate in 2024? Would America's Founders be proud of what we have done with the nation they sacrificed for?
Sure, they would be impressed with our cars, iPhones, TVs, and anesthesia at the dentist office. But only for a short time. Soon, they would realize we've just been "bought off." We like the toys the crony capitalists give us after we give Washington insiders more than half of everything we earn.
America's Founders abolished their government. John Quincy Adams, in an “Oration on the Life and Character of Gilbert Motier de la Fayette,” Delivered at the request of both Houses of the Congress of the United States, before them, in the House of Representatives at Washington, on the 31st of December, 1834, said:
The war was revolutionary. It began by the dissolution of the British Government in the Colonies; the People of which were, by that operation, left without any Government whatever.
That's "poetic license." Something of an exaggeration. Americans were not "left without any Government whatever." Americans had self-government. James Madison, "the Father of the Constitution," is reported to have said this:
We have staked the whole future of American civilization, not upon the power of government, far from it. We have staked the future of all of our political institutions upon the capacity of each and all of us to govern ourselves ... according to the Ten Commandments of God.
Americans would be well-governed not because they had Congressional laws, statutes, Executive Orders, regulations, and Supreme Court opinions, but because they had the Bible.
The original purpose of public schools in America was to make sure everyone could read and understand the Bible. This was because government got its laws from the Bible, and the Bible made Americans a moral and religious people. As John Adams put it,
We have no government armed with power capable of contending with human passions unbridled by morality and religion. Avarice, ambition, revenge, or gallantry, would break the strongest cords of our Constitution as a whale goes through a net. Our Constitution was made only for a moral and religious people. It is wholly inadequate to the government of any other.
R. J. Rushdoony wrote the following:
|
|
I love this quote. I'm going to repeat it two more times on this page.
In principle, Adams is advocating "Theocracy." Adams is saying we should be governed by God and His Law Book, the Bible.
In principle, John Adams is also advocating "anarchy." A society without "The State."
No, he wasn't advocating "anarchy" directly. Adams' purpose was just to praise the Bible. He would probably say it was just "hyperbole."
The Bible as the "only law book?"
Nobody in government today would ever say what Adams said, not even in "hyperbole":
"We should take the Bible for our only law book."
That's too "radical." That's "extremist." It's "homophobic." Or something. Only a "domestic terrorist" would say something like that.
Rushdoony authored a book called Institutes of Biblical Law [read] [buy], explaining how the Bible had been used as a law book in John Adams' day (and throughout the history of Christendom), and how the Bible could be used today. Rushdoony's "law book" is not the same kind of "law book" as those found in a law library, containing statutes and decrees of government, enforced by violent earthly enforcers. Rushdoony's book explains how to take the Bible as our only law book.
The reason we don't need a library of books on compulsion and violence is because there is no verse in the Bible that anyone can point to and say,
This verse gives me the right to
and be assured God will not hold me guilty of sin for doing such things." |
Joe Biden cannot say that. Vladimir Putin cannot say that. No human being on planet earth in our day can say that. If you take the Bible seriously, that claim has staggering implications. Can you find such a verse in the Bible that Putin can legitimately point to?
Benjamin Rush signed the Declaration of Independence and served in the Presidential administrations of John Adams, Thomas Jefferson, and James Madison -- each of whom came from a different political party. And of what party was Rush? He answered,
I have been alternately called an aristocrat and a democrat. I am now neither. I am a Christocrat. I believe all power. . . will always fail of producing order and happiness in the hands of man. He alone Who created and redeemed man is qualified to govern him.
Another great quote. Watch for it again. The overwhelming majority of church-going Christians would be appalled at the idea of abolishing all earthly governments and submitting to the government of Jesus Christ, the Messiah-King. The Bible says Jesus is the only legitimate Governor. Human governments are idolatry. In the Bible, human governors are false gods.
Of course, Adams wasn't literally advocating the abolition of "civil government," but I believe the Bible does. Visible, physical, earthly kings are false gods, since only God is our King.
Where did Adams get the idea that human society requires human "gods?" He got it from the Greeks, not the Bible. From Athens, not Jerusalem.
When the Bible says we are to leave vengeance to God (Romans 12:19; quoting Deuteronomy 32:35), it's saying we should leave all "law enforcement" to God. But those who are reject Anarcho-Christocracy are deists. They don't believe God will intervene in history to take vengeance and establish justice.
I believe the only law book we need is the Bible. The Bible is a textbook for every subject, not just religion. In our day, that's one of the most offensive things anyone can say. "Law books" full of statutes and decrees to be enforced by government violence are written by "governments." No governments, no law books. No law books, no governments.
Every legitimate, non-sinful "service" provided by "civil government" is a service that can be provided by entrepreneurs in a Freed Market at a lower cost, in greater supply, and with higher quality. Nothing in the Bible prohibits businessmen from providing consumers with these services, in competition with those who claim to be "kings," and consumers are not prohibited by anything in Biblical Law from choosing a non-State service provider in a Freed Market. Eventually, the goal is the elimination of all visible, earthly, physical kings, as they all repent and join the Freed Market under King Jesus.
As long as they remain in power, all earthly, visible, physical kings eventually ban the Bible, because they (correctly) see the Bible as an "Anarchist Manifesto." Even once-called "Christian nations," like the U.S.A., have now banned the Bible. The primary purpose of American public schools when they were created 400 years ago was to teach the Bible. This is now outlawed in the United States, just like in Iran, North Korea, and Communist China.
A Christian society does not need a secular Washington D.C., or even a Washington D.C. that purports to be "Christian" or "Theonomic." A purportedly Theonomic "civil government" must use violence to suppress competition, or it is no longer a "civil government." By definition, a "government" has a monopoly on the use of violence, even as it uses violence to perform otherwise good deeds like "helping the poor." Good deeds which could be better performed by a Freed Market without violence.
The Bible says God is our Lawgiver, Judge, and King (Isaiah 33:22). That's all three "branches" of government under the U.S. Constitution.
The purpose of this website is to
There is more to the Declaration than the five points listed above. Let's take a closer look.
| Declaration of Independence | Scripture |
| Sometimes it becomes necessary for one people to dissolve the political bands which have connected them with another | The "political band" in this case is that of king (George III) and subjects. Where does the Bible say subjects can "dissolve" their relationship to the king? |
| Sometimes it becomes necessary for one people to assume among the Powers of the earth, the separate and equal station . . . | It's not always easy to figure out why certain words in the Declaration of Independence are capitalized. Why is "Powers" capitalized? Is this a reference to Romans 13? |
| Human beings have certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty, and the pursuit of Happiness. | Is there really such a thing as "rights" in the Bible? Or is a society where property is secure the result of adherence to our duty not to steal? Do rights exist in a society where everyone is his own god and determines good and evil for himself? Do you have a "right to life" if nobody believes they have a duty to God not to kill you? |
| That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, | What is the evidence that Governments (capitalized) are created to protect rights?
It has actually never happened in history. Governments are always created to violate the rights of the subjects and the conquered. |
| Governments derive their just powers from the consent of the governed. | This is also a myth. It's a self-contradiction. If everyone consents, then you have contracts and commerce. If one person does not consent, then you have abstention. All of this is in the realm of the "private sector." In the "private sector," there is no "governing" anyone. Everything is by consent. "Government" only occurs when one person does not consent and the governors impose the wish of the governors upon the unconsenting "governed." People are "governed" only when they do not consent. If both parties consent, they form a contract and commerce is initiated. Not "government." "Government" relies on a completely fictional "social contract." |
| That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, | Since "government" is coercion, force, and threats of violence against the unconsenting "governed," any attempt by the consenting governed to alter or abolish the government will be met by coercion, force, and threats of violence. Where does the Bible say the unconsenting governed have a right to trigger violence through revolution? |
| It is the Right of the People 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. | Where does the Bible say Smith has a right to "institute new Government" over Jones?
Where does the Bible say "Safety and Happiness" can be reliably effected by the creature rather than by the Creator? (Isaiah 33:22; Romans 1:25; 1 Samuel 8:7) |
| Prudence, indeed, will dictate that Governments long established should not be changed for light and transient causes; and accordingly all experience hath shown, that mankind are more disposed to suffer, while evils are sufferable, than to right themselves by abolishing the forms to which they are accustomed. | Paul told Christians living under the Roman Empire to "be subject" to the government -- a debauched, pagan, military dictatorship. Compared to Rome, and compared to the United States in 2024, the case for overthrowing the British government was non-existent. The grievances against George III were "light and transient" compared to the government Paul lived under (with no just cause for revolution) and the government we now live under. Behind the impulse to violent revolution is a lack of gratitude, even in the face of legitimate grievances (which always exist in the presence of every "government"). |
| It was the design of King George III to reduce Americans under , | Historically debatable. See below. |
| it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such Government, and to provide new Guards for their future security. | Again, "throwing off government" is an invitation to murder and destruction.
Again, human beings can never be as reliable a "new Guard" for their security, safety, or happiness as the God of the Bible. "Security," "safety," and "happiness" are key components of the Biblical concept of "salvation." Look up every occurrence of words like "save," "savior," and "salvation" in the Bible. They're usually talking about living peacefully under one's own “Vine & Fig Tree” -- not living under tyranny your whole life and going to heaven when you die. |
| Such has been the patient sufferance of these Colonies; and such is now the necessity which constrains them to alter their former Systems of Government. The history of the present King of Great Britain is a history of repeated injuries and usurpations, all having in direct object the establishment of an absolute Tyranny over these States. | Again, it is debatable that George III was conspiring to establish an "absolute tyranny" over the colonies. |
| We, the Signers of the Declaration of Independence, are the Representatives of the united States of America, | This is not so much a declaration of independence from government, as it is a transfer of power from one government to another. |
| We, the Signers of the Declaration of Independence, 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; | It would be one thing to declare independence from a government and then live freely and ungoverned under one's own “Vine & Fig Tree.” But that's not what happened, and apparently was never the goal. |
| 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. | The Biblical goal is statelessness, not a new state. |
There is a complete Theory of Government behind the Declaration. Every American should be required to take a Political Science course that explains this Theory of Government. But the course should also ask the question, Would Jesus agree with this Theory of Government?
Would Jesus even agree with the facts presented?
What if the U.S. had published a "Declaration of Non-Resistance" instead of a Declaration of independence? What if Americans had said, "Tyranny is evil, but we will not return evil for evil (Romans 12:19-21)?
What if, instead of getting out muskets and murdering tax collectors, American colonists had gotten out their Bibles and attempted to persuade the Red Coats to repent and beat their swords into plowshares?
Jesus might ask, Is it really "necessary" for people to abolish their government? Can this only be done by taking arms to kill people? Do human beings have "rights?" Do they have a right to "levy War?" Is "instituting a new government" really the best way to "effect their Safety and Happiness?" Is this thing called "government" the best "guard for their future security?"
There is a third reason that Jesus would not celebrate Independence Day. The two reasons listed above ("violence" and "hypocrisy") are fairly obvious and uncontroversial. Everybody admits that Jesus said "love your enemy." Controversy only ensues when someone starts taking Jesus seriously. The third reason is controversial because most Christians deny that Jesus actually thought this way.
Each of those points requires massive re-education and a "paradigm shift."
It won't be easy.
Those three "*" links compare the entire Bible and the entire concept of "government."
So why should you pursue the argument?
As we mentioned above, James 1:27 says that true religion is protecting widows and the fatherless. America's Revolutionary War was not only indifferent to the plight of widows, it created widows and fatherless children by murdering husbands and fathers. And the United States went on to murder, cripple, and make homeless tens of millions of human beings in the last few decades. How can a true Christian be indifferent to this evil?
But there's more to the verse.
James 1:27
Pure and undefiled religion before God and the Father is this: to visit orphans and widows in their trouble, and to keep oneself unspotted from the world.
"The world" is the world of high-I.Q./low M.Q. rulers, professors, CEO's and media executives.
James 4:4
Adulterers and adulteresses! Do you not know that friendship with the world is enmity with God? Whoever therefore wants to be a friend of the world makes himself an enemy of God.
President Eisenhower's Farewell Address originally spoke of "The Military-Industrial-Congressional Complex." Today we should speak of "The Military-Industrial-Congressional-Academic-Media-Pharmaceutical Complex." The Complex gets larger and more evil by the day.
You're friends with the world, but not with Thomas Jefferson and Samuel Adams. I should say, "Not even with Jefferson and Adams," and certainly not with the writers of Scripture, many of whom were imprisoned by the empire. You spend more time with the world's phone and TV than with the Scriptures.
I want you to change your religion, from an impure religion of creating widows and orphans, to the pure religion of Jesus Christ the pacifist/anarchist.
In addition to the three "*" links above, here are more essential links.
First, a survey of the entire Bible shows it to be opposed to the idea that one man ("monarchy") or a small group of men ("oligarchy" -- even if "democratically" elected) should
Here is a survey of the Bible in 95 "Theses":
The Bible has a completely different theory of Government than the one set forth in the Declaration of Independence. It begins with the origin of "government":
The Bible -- 30,000 verses' worth -- is mostly about "Political Philosophy." Augustine described the history of the world as a conflict between "The City of God" and "the City of Man." The Greek word for "city" is "polis," from which we get our word "political."
"Government" in the Bible is family-centered and market-executed:
Throughout the Bible, mention is made about the demonic "Powers of the earth":
This is why Romans 13 is not a hall-pass for government.
So where did America's Founders go wrong? Weren't they all about the Bible?
They were more about the Bible than we are today -- as Micah would put it, they went to "Jerusalem" for the Word of God -- but they were also captured by the philosophy of Athens.
Here is a very readable book for laymen on why the "Social Contract" theory embraced by many of America's Founding Fathers and expressed in the Declaration of Independence does not withstand moral scrutiny:
If they could see the Woke Regime of Washington D.C. in 2024, and read this book, America's Founding Fathers would reject the theory of government they got from Athens, and return to Jerusalem for the “Vine & Fig Tree” worldview. They were already partly there, and they were much closer than Americans are today.
This is a most hated word.
Jesus Christ commanded His followers to be "anarchists."
When asked "What is an anarchist," most Americans have been trained to imagine a bomb-throwing assassin who denounces Biblical morality and spreads chaos and lawlessness.
The word "anarchist" comes from two Greek words meaning "not an archist."
But what is an archist?
An "archist" is someone
who believes he has a right to
impose his will on others by force.
Our public schools are run by "archists." That's why you were trained to think of murder, bombs, chaos and lawlessness when you think of "anarchy" -- the absence of our leaders in Washington D.C. -- who are actually responsible for dropping the most bombs, assassinating the most leaders, banning the Bible from public schools, and spreading economic instability and lawlessness.
Jesus told His disciples not to be "archists." Christians are not to impose Christianity on the world by government force ("the sword")
In the Gospel of Mark, chapter 10, Jesus discovers His disciples arguing about who is going to be the "greatest" in the Kingdom of God.
They didn't understand that Jesus' Kingdom was quite unlike the kingdoms of the world.
|
But Jesus called them to Himself and said to them, "You know that those who are considered rulers over the Gentiles lord it over them, and their great ones exercise authority over them. {43} Yet it shall not be so among you; but whoever desires to become great among you shall be your servant. {44} And whoever of you desires to be first shall be slave of all. {45} "For even the Son of Man did not come to be served, but to serve, and to give His life a ransom for many." |
The Greek word translated "rulers" is the Greek word from which we derive our English word "anarchist."
"Lords," "rulers" and "great ones" are "archists."
Jesus clearly says His followers are not to be "archists." They are to be "servants" instead.
Must reading: "What is an 'Archist'"
According to Mark, Jesus spoke of the archists over the gentiles. Luke says that Jesus also used the word "kings" to explain this concept to His disciples:
Luke 22:25
And He said to them, “The kings of the Gentiles exercise lordship over them, and those who exercise authority over them are called ‘benefactors.’
The Bible speaks repeatedly about "the kings of the Gentiles." The books of history lead up to 1 Samuel 8, where Israel rejects God as King, and asks for a king "like the Gentiles." Many chapters of the books of the prophets are addressed to "the kings of the gentiles." All these chapters and verses are the Word of God. But why is God telling us so much about these ancient kings? What's the point?
The Bible is about replacing "the kings of the Gentiles" with one King over all the world. But most people miss this message.
There are 30,000 verses in the Bible. You can spend a lifetime in most churches and never hear more than a couple hundred of those verses. That's because most of the verses in the Bible show us how evil "archists" and empires are. Every human government is an idolatrous replacement for the Kingdom of God. The Bible is an Anarchist Manifesto. No church-goer wants to even think about whether that claim is true or not. If you're not an "anarchist," you must be an "archist." What would Jesus say about that? Start by reading Mark 10:42-45. Become a consistent opponent of hurting people and taking their stuff. Read this link:
Proving that Jesus hates governments is easy, but it will be resisted unless you have a high M.Q.
Being an "anarchist" today takes much more work than it would have taken 200 years ago.
Our elected representatives take an oath to "support the Constitution." If they kept their oaths, they would abolish unconstitutional bureaucracies. But they never do.
Imagine today is March 5, 1789. Yesterday the new government under the Constitution went into effect. As an anarchist, I would call for the complete abolition of this new government. Wow! Is that "radical" or what? That would entail the firing of dozens of people, and cutting several thousand dollars in government spending. ( Patrick Henry and George Mason -- great Americans who refused to sign the Constitution -- would enthusiastically approve of such a "radical" idea! )Republicans since Ronald Reagan have called for the abolition of the federal Department of Education. It is by far the smallest cabinet level department, but abolishing it would put thousands of government employees out of work and slash nearly $60 Billion in government spending. It will never happen. When a new administration takes power, they look forward to putting their own people behind every desk in the bureaucracy. They will never abolish the entire bureaucracy, even though they swore an oath to do so.
In 2024, there are people calling for "the restoration of Constitutional government." They do not call for abolishing the Constitution; they support the Constitution and want all unconstitutional government repealed. But imagine the change! "Restoring Constitutional government" today would involve firing tens of millions of people and cutting trillions of dollars!! Would Americans support this return to the Constitution? Of course not. "My brother-in-law works for that bureaucracy." "My business gets a check from that bureaucracy."
Americans celebrate "Independence Day," but they celebrate unconstitutional bureaucracies even more. In order for Americans to rise up and demand a return to the Constitution in 2024 would necessitate more education, more conversions, more regenerated hearts, more transformed worldviews, and a whole lot more footwork than convincing every American in 1789 to abolish entirely the recently-created federal government as it then existed.
But these pro-constitution people are called "conservatives" and a radical pacifist Christian is considered the "radical" because Jesus was an "anarchist." As a follower of Jesus, I am only a tiny bit more radical than anyone who truly wants to "restore the Constitution."Every single person who signed the Constitution would agree that nobody in Congress has any intention of restoring the government to its original Constitutional size and function. Despite taking a solemn oath to do so.
Jesus says His followers are not to be "archists" like the kings of the Gentiles: Pharaoh, Moloch, Caesar. Don't be like them, don't vote for them. Be a "servant" instead, Jesus says.
"But without Pharaoh or Caesar," many will object, we will be conquered by foreigners and enslaved.
Being a slave is the whole point of the Bible.
The same Greek word for "servant" in Mark 10 occurs in these passages:
|
Matthew
22 And Jesus answered and spoke to them again by parables and said: 2 “The kingdom of heaven is like a certain king who arranged a marriage for his son, 3 and
sent out his servants to call those who were invited to the wedding; and they were not willing to come. 4 Again, he sent out other servants,
saying, ‘Tell those who are invited, “See, I have prepared my dinner; my oxen and fatted cattle are killed, and all things are ready. Come to the wedding.”’ 5 But they made
light of it and went their ways, one to his own farm, another to his business. 6 And the rest seized his servants, treated them spitefully,
and killed them. 7 But when the king heard about it, he was furious. And he sent out his armies, destroyed those murderers, and
burned up their city. 8 Then he said to his servants, ‘The wedding is ready, but those who were invited were not worthy. 9 Therefore
go into the highways, and as many as you find, invite to the wedding.’ 10 So those servants went out into the highways and gathered together all
whom they found, both bad and good. And the wedding hall was filled with guests. John
2 On the third day there was a wedding in Cana of Galilee, and the mother of Jesus was there. 2 Now both Jesus and His disciples were invited to the wedding. 3 And
when they ran out of wine, the mother of Jesus said to Him, “They have no wine.” |
As "servants," Christians are to do whatever the boss says to do (unless the boss orders the servant to disobey God [Acts 5:29]).
It is often objected that if Christian pacifists had enough votes to abolish "national defense," that America would be invaded and taken over by the Communists, the Jihadists, or the enemy-du-jour, and we would all be enslaved.
There are three problems with this objection:
That means YOU gave the government $24,000 for every man, woman, and small child in your family to destroy these two nations. Family of four? $96,000.
Did the government really represent your best interests or desires?
What did we get for our money? In Iraq, a government which guaranteed religious freedom for Christians, and was home to the largest community of Christians in the entire Arab world, was replaced by an Islamic theocracy under Shariah law. Hundreds of thousands of Christians were killed, crippled, or made homeless.
The CIA gave Stinger missiles to Osama bin Ladin, so that he could pester the Soviet Union. Years later, Osama led the attack on 9/11.
More people on planet earth hate the United States because of our "Defense" Department. We are less safe, our standard of living has been reduced, and our freedoms have been diminished.
Suppose instead of spending $8 TRILLION on a "War on Terror," we voluntarily "enslaved" ourselves to the Muslims. 300 Million Americans gave $24,000 each to the 2 billion Muslims on this planet. Muslims are among the poorest of the poor in the world. Around 40% of the Muslim population languishes in abject poverty, with nearly 350 million living under $1.25 a day ($600/yr). Giving Muslims the entire budget for the War on Terror would put $4,000 in the pocket of every man, woman, and small Muslim child on planet earth.
This would be astonishing.
We could also give every Muslim an MP3 player pre-loaded with a Bible-centered curriculum like Samuel Adams and John Hancock had when they were kids. That would lead to the conversion of millions of Muslims to Christianity. That would destroy the ability of terrorist recruiters to recruit new terrorists against the United States. ("Want to join our terrorist group and kill the American infidels?" "No, dude, the infidels just gave me a check!")
There are two ways Americans can obey Jesus and serve their enemies.
But Americans refuse to become the "slaves" of Muslims, so God has made us slaves to the U.S. Military-Industrial Complex. Soon, slaves to China. If a nation refuses to serve voluntarily, God will force them to serve as captives.
See this hypothetical letter to Muslims, written the day before 9/11.
"National Defense" usually means violent overthrow of the governments of other nations which are not compliant to the U.S. government.
Being a pacifist slave and being a violent revolutionary are two completely different religions.
Do you know why many Americans celebrate "Independence Day?" If you do know click here to skip ahead.
I would like to believe that if America's Founding Fathers could travel through time and see the nation they Founded, they would go "back to the drawing board" and re-think everything. They would re-consider their call to arms and their violent overthrow of the government, because they sowed the seeds of violence, and the United States is today the most violent nation on the planet. They would also re-think the whole idea of repealing the "Divine Right of Kings" and replacing it with a "Representative Republic."
If America's Founding Fathers could have a conversation with you about what's going on in 2024, and what you're doing about it, they would conclude that you are a victim of educational malpractice. As a result of your government-mandated atheistic/socialistic education, you are
The Founders would say you need to go back to school. All the way back to the schools that existed in 1776. Before the Bible and the Declaration of Independence were banned in government schools. Become as well-informed as the average American 15-year-old in 1776, and then apply that knowledge to the world of 2024. In a minute, I'll show you how to use the internet to compress 12 years of colonial American education into 1 year of online learning, in just minutes a day, not hours. This new education will transform you into
• An Extraordinary American,
• An Extraordinary Christian,
• An Extraordinary Human Being
I admit I could complain about the government all day long. I believe the United States is the most evil and dangerous entity on the planet. You might object: "The government of North Korea is more evil." Maybe, but the North Korean government is not more dangerous to the human race. The average human being on planet earth is more likely to have her "unalienable rights" infringed by someone on the payroll of the United States government (or working for a corporation funded by Washington D.C.) than by a North Korean. The United States is the enemy of Christian Civilization.
So let's do something productive.
I propose we go back to school.
I propose that beginning on Sunday, July 5th, we replicate the curriculum of the typical colonial American one-room schoolhouse. Using the internet, we can cram 12 years of colonial education into 12 months, listening to MP3s as we commute to work and back home again, or as we exercise, walk, or do the dishes.
We could even turn off the TV and make the kids listen too.
You say, "Wait a minute; I'm not as ignorant as those folks in the video."
I'll concede that point. But America's Founding Fathers would still say you are a victim of educational malpractice.
I'll prove it, and then I'll describe my plan to make up for it.
Public schools were invented in America 350 or so years ago to teach everyone in town the Bible.
The entire concept of "public schools" was created by Bible-believing Christians following the Protestant Reformation in order to make sure every citizen could read the Bible. [If you already know this, skip the evidence that follows.]
One of the first public school laws in America is known today as "The Old Deluder Satan Act" because it began with these words:
It being one chief project of that old deluder, Satan, to keep men from the knowledge of the Scriptures, as in former times by keeping them in an unknown tongue, so in these latter times by persuading from the use of tongues, that so that at least the true sense and meaning of the original might be clouded and corrupted...; and to the end that learning may not be buried in the grave of our forefathers, in church and commonwealth.... It is therefore ordered that every township in this jurisdiction, after the Lord hath increased them to fifty households shall forthwith appoint one within their town to teach all such children as shall resort to him to write and read, whose wages shall be paid either by the parents or masters of such children, or by the inhabitants in general....
"The Old Deluder Satan Act," Massachusetts, 1647
The 1636 rules of Harvard declared:
Let every student be plainly instructed and earnestly pressed to consider well the main end of his life and studies is to know God and Jesus Christ which is eternal life (John 17.3) and therefore to lay Christ in the bottom as the only foundation of all sound knowledge and learning. And seeing the Lord only giveth wisdom, let every one seriously set himself by prayer in secret to seek it of Him (Prov. 2, 3). Every one shall so exercise himself in reading the Scriptures twice a day that he shall be ready to give such an account of his proficiency therein.
That's the start of my "Back to School" Program. Read the Bible twice a day. Get a Harvard education like Samuel Adams.
The 1690 Connecticut law declared:
This [legislature] observing that... there are many persons unable to read the English tongue and thereby incapable to read the holy Word of God or the good laws of this colony... it is ordered that all parents and masters shall cause their respective children and servants, as they are capable, to be taught to read distinctly the English tongue.
You were denied this kind of Bible-centered Education. You are a victim of educational malpractice. Atheistic education and ubiquitous secular media have consumed the majority of your waking hours and a moral cancer has metastasized in your heart, mind, soul, and strength.
In In the early 1960's, the U.S. Supreme Court banned the Bible* from public schools, along with voluntary prayer. One of the Justices who concurred in this secularization was honest enough to admit that removing religion from public schools was directly contrary to the intentions of America's Founders:
- Religion was once deemed to be a function of the public school system. The Northwest Ordinance, which antedated the First Amendment, provided in Article III that
- "Religion, morality, and knowledge being necessary to good government and the happiness of mankind, schools and the means of education shall forever be encouraged."
Many territories, when they applied for admission to the union. repeated those words verbatim in their state constitutions. Nebraska in 1875 was the last state to copy these words into their constitution.
The Government today prevents students from being taught the Bible, "religion, morality, and knowledge." Every single person who signed the Declaration of Independence and the Constitution would say that secular schools are a threat to "good government and the happiness of mankind," and a government that imposes secularism on the people should be "abolished," just as they abolished the British government over the colonies for offenses far less serious.
Samuel Adams, the "Anti-Federalist," did not always agree with his cousin John Adams, the "Federalist." Sam wrote:
Let divines and philosophers, statesmen and patriots, unite their endeavors to renovate the age, by impressing the minds of men with the importance of educating their little boys and girls, of inculcating in the minds of youth the fear and love of the Deity . . . and, in subordination to these great principles, the love of their country. . . . In short, of leading them in the study and practice of the exalted virtues of the Christian system. 1790 Letter to John Adams,
who wrote back: "You and I agree."
Four Letters: Being an Interesting Correspondence Between Those Eminently Distinguished Characters, John Adams, Late President of the United States; and Samuel Adams, Late Governor of Massachusetts. On the Important Subject of Government
(Boston: Adams and Rhoades, 1802) pp. 9-10
This is exactly what this "Back to School" program will do for you. You can compensate for what the federal government denied you as a little boy or girl by enrolling in our year-long online Home-Study program.
If America's Founding Fathers could travel through time, what would they say is America's Most Pressing Problem?
I think they would say it is the fact that America is no longer a nation "Under God," but is an atheistic nation ("secular" sounds so much nicer than "atheistic"). The nation that once sent missionaries and Bibles around the world is now the world's greatest exporter of pornography and weapons of mass destruction.
And the root of this problem is a national system of compulsory atheistic education for all children 5-17 years of age. America's Founders would be horrified, outraged, apoplectic. Princeton professor Archibald Hodge saw the trend back in 1887, and sounded this alarm:
He was right. If our Godly and virtuous ancestors could see American schools and American culture today, they would be screaming: "Are you people insane??". . . I am as sure as I am of Christ's reign that a comprehensive and centralized system of national education, separated from religion, as is now commonly proposed, will prove the most appalling enginery for the propagation of anti-Christian and atheistic unbelief, and of anti-social nihilistic ethics, individual, social and political, which this sin-rent world has ever seen.[1]
I'm not talking about "the 3 R's." I'm talking about the worldview that made America the most prosperous and admired nation in history.
By skipping "the 3 R's" (which you can quickly learn through the Ron Paul Curriculum or the Kahn Academy if you need to), twelve years of colonial American worldview education, covering "religion, morality, and knowledge" can be covered in just 12 months by reading through the entire Bible and four other works which are among the most important works in the history of western civilization, listening to audio lessons on the commute to work and back home in the evening, 20 minutes each way. Then each week attend a live Q&A webinar for laser coaching and clarification. Share your progress with others in an online community.
We call this program:
We need to think about pedagogy. "Pedagogy" is the science of educating. As a writer, I must ask, how can I best teach my reader?
The first version of this website was published on the internet over 20 years ago. Here is one of the first archived copies at archive.org, from May of 1999: MOURN ON THE 4TH OF JULY
When I first began publishing on the internet, I thought everyone was going to flock to the publications of Vine & Fig Tree, and the entire world would be changed.
Today I am older and (I hope) wiser, but sadder. I'm wise enough to realize that if there are magic words that will automagically entice someone to follow the Bible, and join me in making the world a “Vine & Fig Tree” world, I haven't figured out the formula.
My current view is that becoming a Christian is a lifelong journey. One post on Facebook is not normally going to create a convert. The first Jews who became Christians had spent a lifetime (without TV) studying the Scriptures. Paul told Timothy to keep studying the Scriptures as he had been doing since he was an infant.
America's Founding Fathers had been studying the Scriptures since they were infants. They attended public schools whose chief purpose was to help students understand and apply the Bible to every area of life, including government.
Those who wrote the Declaration of Independence had a lifetime of Bible study under their belts.
Unfortunately, America's Founders had missed the warning of a church father named Tertullian, who said,
What indeed has Athens to do with Jerusalem? What concord is there between the Academy and the Church?... Our instructions come from “the porch of Solomon” . . . .
In addition to learning in Jerusalem (the Bible), America's Founders had been studying in Athens and Rome (the "Enlightenment").
Americans today are victims of educational malpractice. So a lifetime journey begins by going "back to school." They need the same Bible-based elementary education that America's Founders had. Plus they need to be de-programmed from the cult of Athens and Rome and Washington D.C. and Madison Ave.
So I propose creating an online "university" that will teach what America's Founding Fathers knew about the Bible, but also debunk their (and our) "Enlightenment" myths.
It will give the student the same knowledge of the Bible that Samuel Adams, John Hancock, and John Adams had before they walked into their first class at Harvard University.
Then it will give the student the same instruction in the Bible and Empires that America's Founders had when they graduated from college.
This can pretty much be done over the internet in one year.
The hard part is accepting the truth. Questions will be raised. They will be answered in years 2-4.
This website is now very long. It summarizes this university curriculum, a program of education that is necessary to understand why Jesus would not celebrate Independence Day. It links to many other pages. It will take 25 hours to read. It quotes hundreds of Bible verses. I don't see any other way to persuade you that "Independence Day" was a disaster, and not something to celebrate. And also to persuade you that you should join other Americans who are willing to risk "our Lives, our Fortunes, and our sacred Honor" to see tyranny abolished and re-create a “Vine & Fig Tree” America.
Here's what's ahead:
|
|
TABLE OF CONTENTS Foundational Admission: Overview:
| |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| 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. | God is here and He is not silent. He has given us His revelation in the Bible, also referred to as "The Laws of Nature and of Nature's God" |
| We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty, and the pursuit of Happiness. | Because we are created in the Image of God, we have a conscience (literally, "with" + "know," something man knows with God) that cannot escape knowing certain "self-evident truths," among them that God is there and He is not silent, and we must not infringe on the life, liberty, and property of others (see duties below). |
| He has waged cruel war against human nature itself, violating its most sacred rights of life and liberty in the persons of a distant people who never offended him, captivatng and carrying them into slavery in another hemisphere, or to incur miserable death in their transportation thither. This piratical warfare, the opprobrium of INFIDEL powers, is the warfare of the CHRISTIAN king of Great Britain. Determined to keep open a market where MEN should be bought and sold, he has prostituted his negative for suppressing every legislative attempt to prohibit or to restrain this execrable commerce. | This paragraph is an excerpt from Jefferson's draft of the Declaration. Many Christians wanted to abolish slavery, but the so-called Christian King of Britain, George III, would not permit this. (Eliminating slave labor might reduce productivity, and that might reduce royal tax
revenue. So keep the slaves.) Immediately after the Declaration of Independence was signed, many American states began abolishing slavery, beginning with Vermont in 1777.
Slavery still exists in the Muslim world. Americans can be proud. Pacifism and Slavery But, on the other hand, Jefferson's anti-slavery paragraph was removed by the Continental Congress to secure approval of slave-holding states for the plan for Independence-through-muskets. In order to be able to wage war against Christians from Britain, Abolitionists compromised on slavery. Christian states which opposed slavery were willing to be "united" with Christian states which wanted to retain slavery in order to protect the ability to wage war. Slavery was protected in order to protect "national defense." Had abolitionist states been pacifists, unwilling to kill British Christians, and willing to "be subject" to British "tyranny," and had they not "united" with slave-holding states, the Civil War to protect the union would have been unnecessary, and 750,000 American lives would have been saved. Who knows how much sooner slavery would have been eradicated. We can't be pacifists, we are told, because we will be conquered and "enslaved." By Britain. And so in order to protect our "Second Amendment rights," we perpetuate literal chattel slavery for millions of blacks. A true Christian worldview takes action against social and global injustice. There is no area of human thought or action where a worldview does not prescribe duties or reform thinking. |
| 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. | Not a single person who signed the Constitution was a "deist" (one who believed in an impersonal creator-god who never involves himself/herself/itself in the creation). America's Founding Fathers believed God answered their prayers and miraculously and supernaturally intervened in America, changing what would otherwise be the "natural" course of history. "Providence" is the act of the "Supreme Judge" intervening in history against wicked judges and on behalf of their victims; for the good and against the evil. |
The Declaration of Independence provides another standard we can use to evaluate our worldview: compare it with "The Laws of Nature and of Nature's God." The Ten Commandments summarize a Biblical worldview. In reverse order, here are the questions the Ten Commandments begin to ask about your worldview:
| Am I filled with resentment from envying the rich and coveting what I don't have? Most Political Campaigns appeal to envy, resentment, and covetousness. "Vote for me and I'll take money from the rich and give it to you!" An economy based on covetousness eventually self-destructs. |
| Do I lie to cover up my character defects? What would politics be without lying? |
| Do I cheat others to gratify myself? The essence of politics today is stealing from others to get something for nothing. "Thou shalt not steal--except by majority vote" is how politicians have re-written this commandment. |
| Have I kept my marriage vows? Do I lust and have impure thoughts and actions? It's astonishing how many of today's most famous politicians left their first wife for a younger, prettier lobbyist. The Family is God's central institution, not "the State." |
| Am I willing to hurt other people to protect myself? "The State" is symbolized by "the sword." It kills people who get in its way. |
| Am I angry at my parents, and is our relationship broken? Do I project my anger against them onto other authorities? |
| Do I work to serve God and others, or do I expect something for nothing? Am I able to rest, and trust God? |
| Do I take the Lord's Name in vain? Politicians say "I will support the Constitution, so help me God." They never do. |
| Do I cover up my character defects with "religion" and false spirituality? America's Founders warned against "false religions" |
| Is my relationship with God broken because I am trying to be my own god (Genesis 3:5)? Do I seek to be god over others? One of America's greatest problems is viewing the government as savior, which is a false god. It is a sin to be a false god, as well as to trust in false gods. The Bible is an "Anarchist Manifesto." America's Founders believed that choosing "security" over liberty was the mark of idolatry. |
A campaign to reduce the size and intrusiveness of government will be futile unless it deals with the worldview question. Gary North writes:
What is the main problem we face? Conspiracies? No. The real problem is [worldview:] the set of moral, intellectual, and economic ideas that the West's voters have accepted as valid that have led to their partial enslavement. The conspirators use these false religious principles to control Western societies. These false principles include the following:
1. Mankind is essentially unified.
2. There are no conflicting moral issues that divide people permanently.
3. Man must "take control" of man.
4. Mankind will eventually evolve into a "higher species" — a "leap of being."
5. Elite planners can use the laws of evolution to speed up this evolutionary process.
6. Men can be saved through State legislation.
7. Men can be saved through education.
8. Ideology is irrelevant; only "interests" count.
9. "Deprived" individuals are not personally responsible for their acts.
10. The State is the primary welfare agency rather than the family.
11. The State should redistribute wealth to benefit "the People."
12. The State must protect inefficient producers from free market competition.
13. The State must supervise education.
14. We need to construct a one-State world in order to achieve peace, freedom, and prosperity.
When a majority of voters accept a majority of these premises, the triumph of one or another conspiratorial group is assured. It is by means of these man-worshipping, State-worshipping ideas that conspirators enlarge the power of civil government, and it is by the power of civil government that they rule. To attempt to remove the ruling conspiracies without first removing most people's confidence in these false ideas is about as useful an effort as a condemned man's switching from hanging to the firing squad. Jesus described the results of such a self-defeating "housecleaning":
When the unclean spirit is gone out of a man, he walketh through dry places, seeking rest, and finding none. Then he saith, I will return into my house from whence I came out; and when he is come, he findeth it empty, swept, and garnished. Then goeth he, and taketh with himself seven other spirits more wicked than himself, and they enter in and dwell there .... (Matthew 12:43-45a).
The owner of the house is worse off than he was when he started. This is the legacy of all political revolutions that are not grounded in biblical principles of social order. Men "throw the rascals out," only to find that a worse gang of rascals has replaced the first one.
During your first semester, you will do an in-depth study of Micah's Vine & Fig Tree prophecy. Each day during your first FREE semester, we'll also study Five Things that America's Founders would say you should have already been taught -- but weren't. Each week during the 16-week semester we'll study one core theme from Micah 4:1-7.
Supporting: love, joy, peace, patience, gentleness, goodness, faith, meekness, sobriety
Opposing: Secularism, Humanism, Anti-Family Sex, Hedonism, Autonomy, Totalitarianism, and Mass Death
| The name "Vine & Fig Tree" comes from the fourth chapter of the prophet Micah, and is set forth here. You've probably heard Micah's words before -- we beat our "swords into plowshares" and everyone dwells safely under their own "Vine
& Fig Tree."
America's Founding Fathers were familiar with this vision: "Vine & Fig Tree" is the worldview that made America "the greatest nation on God's green earth." It could be called "The Original American Dream." |
|
“Vine & Fig Tree” in American HistoryTwo centuries ago, the “Vine & Fig Tree” vision transformed America into the most prosperous and admired nation in human history. Tragically, we then experienced The Paradox of Deuteronomy 8: God blessed us, but we forgot God and said, "My power and the might of mine hand hath gotten me this wealth” (Deuteronomy 8:17), and then God judged our pride by turning our prosperity into bankruptcy and admiration into ridicule and hate. The United States is now despised around the world as a self-centered post-Christian bully. George Washington's Diaries are available online at the Library of Congress. The LOC.GOV website introduces Washington's writings with these words:
Many other American Founders wrote of this ideal. "Vine & Fig Tree" is the original "American Dream." The phrase occurs a number of times in Scripture. These references are visual reminders of the Hebrew word for salvation, which means Page Smith was a historian, winner of the Bancroft Prize, earning his M.A. degree in 1948, and Ph.D. degree in 1951 from Harvard. In his book Religious Origins of the American Revolution (Scholars Press, 1976), Smith writes about graduates from the older Harvard, like Samuel Adams (1740), John Hancock (1754), and John Adams (1755). He says the passage in the book of Micah about “every man…under his vine and under his fig tree” was
The Westminster Standards are the highest expression of "the Reformed Faith." Indeed, Smith adds, in early America, the Reformation
As remote or repugnant as Puritanism may be to some, Smith says “it is essential that we understand that the Reformation in its full power was one of the great emancipations of history.” America became the most prosperous and admired nation in history because it was a Calvinist Theocracy. <-- Check out that link. You were trained by your government-approved teachers to be offended and appalled at that claim. And it is unfortunate that Calvin and his progeny were not consistent Christian Theocrats. They tried to combine "Jerusalem and Athens." Instead of a pure "Theocracy," which literally means "God governs," they wanted clergymen to govern. |
We are working to create an online "university" which can be put on a hand-held electronic device for billions of Muslims and billions of "Christians" around the world. It will give the student the Bible-based education that America's Founding Fathers received when they were children.
At Vine & Fig Tree University we're trying to duplicate the now-extinct Harvard University -- a Bible-based Christian university founded by the New England Puritans to promote the Christianity of the Protestant Reformation in the New World -- which is now an atheistic university at war with the original goals of Harvard.
Graduates of today's government-run "public" schools have been brainwashed into believing that Harvard's original Christian worldview is not as good as today's secular worldview. Nobody wants an education approved by the Protestant Reformers and the New England Puritans. Nobody is searching in Google to find a university that teaches what Harvard's Founders wanted students to learn in 1636 -- and nobody knows as much about the Bible and social virtues as Harvard expected high school applicants to know before their first college class.
But at Vine & Fig Tree University we believe that Harvard's Founders were not perfectly consistent with the teachings of the Bible. So we seek to reform the reformers. We want to be more pure than the Puritans. But our reforms are viewed as heretical, and we only incur additional wrath from those who already oppose the original Founders of Harvard.
After 1647, students wishing to enroll in Harvard were required to give their assent to the Westminster Standards in order to be admitted as a student. Probably nobody who will be starting as a Freshman at Harvard this Fall has studied the Westminster Standards, much less agrees with them. Applicants to Harvard in the early 1600's had a much higher level of academic attainment than graduates of atheistic public schools -- victims of educational malpractice -- in the early 2000's. And high school students in the 1600's already had a Biblical worldview before their first day of college.
The Westminster Confession of Faith and the Larger and Shorter Catechisms were written in the 1640's. They reflect the growth of Protestant theology that began in 1517 with Luther's "95
Theses" and continued under men like John Calvin.
John Frame says
The assembly’s Confession of Faith, completed in December, 1646, is the last of the classic Reformed confessions and by far the most influential in the English-speaking world. Though it governed the Church of England only briefly, it has been widely adopted (sometimes with amendments) by British and American Presbyterian bodies as well as by many Congregational and Baptist churches.
B.B. Warfield, professor at Princeton in the late 1800's, wrote of the Westminster Standards,
[T]hey are the final crystallization of the elements of evangelical religion, after the conflicts of sixteen hundred years. . . . [T]hey are the richest and most precise and best guarded statement ever penned of all that enters into evangelical religion . . . .
Richard Gardiner, in his impressive collection of "Primary Source Documents Pertaining to Early American History," lists many sources which introduce the average Secular Humanist to the now-unknown religious foundations of American Revolution and Government. Among these sources are the Westminster Standards. Gardiner says of them:
 The Westminster Confession of Faith (1646) In addition to being the decree of Parliament as the standard for Christian doctrine in the British Kingdom, it was adopted
as the official statement of belief for the colonies of Massachusetts and Connecticut. Although slightly altered and called by different names, it was the creed of Congregationalist, Baptist, and Presbyterian Churches throughout the English speaking world. Assent to the Westminster Confession was officially required at Harvard, Yale, and Princeton. Princeton
scholar, Benjamin Warfield wrote: "It was impossible for any body of Christians in the [English] Kingdoms to avoid attending to it."The Westminster Catechism (1646) Second
only to the Bible, the "Shorter Catechism" of the Westminster Confession was the most widely published piece of literature in the pre-revolutionary era in America. It is estimated that some five million copies were available in the colonies. With a total population of only four million people in America at the time of the Revolution, the number is
staggering. The Westminster Catechism was not only a central part of the colonial educational curriculum, learning it was required by law. Each town employed an officer whose duty was to visit homes to hear the children recite the Catechism. The primary schoolbook for children, the New England Primer, included the Catechism. Daily recitations of it were
required at these schools. Their curriculum included memorization of the Westminster Confession and the Westminster Larger Catechism. There was not a person at Independence Hall in 1776 who had not been exposed to it, and most of them had it spoon fed to them before they could walk. |
The Shorter Catechism begins with this notice:
| Agreed upon by the Assembly of Divines at Westminster, with the Assistance of Commissioners from the Church of Scotland, as a Part of the Covenanted Uniformity in Religion Betwixt the Churches of Christ in the Kingdoms of Scotland, England, and Ireland.
and Approved Anno 1648, by the General Assembly of the Church of Scotland, to Be a Directory for Catechising Such as Are of Weaker Capacity, |
"Weaker capacity." Like 5-year olds.
The "Larger Catechism" is described as "a Directory for catechising such as have made some proficiency in the knowledge of the grounds of religion." Like 12-year olds. A Protestant Bar-Mitzvah.
90% of the "Pastors" of today's churches do not know as much about theology as the average 8th-grade American in 1776.
The word "Theocracy" is a frightening boogeyman in our day. Many people are disturbed by the idea of a government official entering a home and dictating what children should learn when it comes to religion. Harvard University and the Westminster Standards were both designed to promote a Christian Theocracy. Neither one embraced the modern concept of "separation of church and state," which more accurately means "separation of God (religion, Christianity) and Government." Harvard/Westminster stood for the proposition that both Church and State must be "under God." Vine & Fig Tree University questions whether "the State" -- which is a Monopoly of Violence -- can ever truly be "under God," that is, obedient to God's Commandments. Similarly concerning the institution called "the church." The Westminster Assembly, predominantly Presbyterian, was strongly opposed to Roman Catholicism, yet in many ways is still very similar to Roman Catholicism in structure and power-dynamics. John Milton said "New Presbyter is but Old Priest writ large."
The Bible says all believers are priests and kings:
Revelation 1:6
Jesus Christ has made us kings and priests to His God and Father, to Him be glory and dominion forever and ever. Amen.Revelation 5:9-10
And have redeemed us to God by Your blood And have made us kings and priests to our God; And we shall reign on the earth.
Roman Catholics claimed to have priests; Harvard and Westminster denied this.
Harvard's most notable graduates in its first 200 years -- Samuel Adams, John Hancock, John Adams, etc. -- denied the claim of "the divine right of kings."
Vine & Fig Tree University
contends that we are all priests and kings, and nobody is a priest or a king.
Vine & Fig Tree University denies the modern concept of "separation of church and state." We believe in "the abolition of church and state." We believe in an orderly
self-governing society, and a truly religious society, without the institutions of "church" and "state."
Both Harvard and Westminster believed in the institutions of "church" and "state" because "the church fathers" did. Not everything "the church fathers" believed came from the Bible. "The church fathers" believed many things because Aristotle and Greco-Roman humanism taught them to believe these things. One of the primary purposes of Vine & Fig Tree University is to strip away Greco-Roman humanism and go back to the Scriptures. At many points the Protestant Reformers and the New England Puritans wanted to "reform" and "purify" in this way, but they were products of their time.
Vine & Fig Tree University and "The Great Commission" is not about promoting any particular church or denomination, nor any particular nation. The only legitimate "church" is the Body of Christ, and the only legitimate nation is "the holy nation" spoken of in 1 Peter 2:9.
Here are the chapters of the Westminster Confession, with links to the section below where we compare the Westminster Standards with the core values of Vine & Fig Tree University:
| Chapter 1 — Of the Holy Scripture | Chapter 12 — Of Adoption | Chapter 23 — Of the Civil Magistrate |
| Chapter 2 — Of God, and of the Holy Trinity | Chapter 13 — Of Sanctification | Chapter 24 — Of Marriage and Divorce |
| Chapter 3 — Of God’s Eternal Decree | Chapter 14 — Of Saving Faith | Chapter 25 — Of the Church |
| Chapter 4 — Of Creation | Chapter 15 — Of Repentance unto Life | Chapter 26 — Of the Communion of Saints |
| Chapter 5 — Of Providence | Chapter 16 — Of Good Works | Chapter 27 — Of the Sacraments |
| Chapter 6 — Of the Fall of Man, of Sin, and of the Punishment Thereof | Chapter 17 — Of the Perseverance of the Saints | Chapter 28 — Of Baptism |
| Chapter 7 — Of God’s Covenant with Man | Chapter 18 — Of the Assurance of Grace and Salvation | Chapter 29 — Of the Lord’s Supper |
| Chapter 8 — Of Christ the Mediator | Chapter 19 — Of the Law of God | Chapter 30 — Of Church Censures |
| Chapter 9 — Of Free Will | Chapter 20 — Of Christian Liberty, and Liberty of Conscience | Chapter 31 — Of Synods and Councils |
| Chapter 10 — Of Effectual Calling | Chapter 21 — Of Religious Worship, and the Sabbath Day || work six days | Chapter 32 — Of the State of Men after Death, and of the Resurrection of the Dead |
| Chapter 11 — Of Justification | Chapter 22 — Of Lawful Oaths and Vows | Chapter 33 — Of the Last Judgment |
The Puritan Church-State of Massachusetts created Harvard in 1636, and in 1647 created "public schools." The purpose of both was to promote widespread understanding of the Bible. Bible-educated citizens would then help create and maintain a Christian Theocracy. The Founders of Harvard believed that it was necessary to create a "civil government" to promote religion and civic order. They did not understand how religion and social order could be promoted by a Market Freed from threats of government force. Vine & Fig Tree University exists to promote this "paradigm shift." It will not take thick textbooks and long classroom lectures to do this. It simply requires taking the most basic precepts of the Bible seriously and consistently. This is not complicated or "tricky." It doesn't require high levels of intelligence. It takes high levels of ethics. Just be a consistently moral person, and ignore the "experts" who say the Bible is outdated or "utopian."
You will not graduate from Vine & Fig Tree University unless you can assent to the following doctrines:
These propositions might seem at first glance to be perfectly reasonable and perfectly acceptable to any church.
But Vine & Fig Tree University pursues these doctrines with relentless logical and Biblical consistency.
If you think about these doctrines, and practice or meditate on them with logical consistency, they are astonishing, and then they are offensive. Most pastors don't want their congregations thinking about these things too much. They want their congregations to feel good.
If you take these doctrines seriously, you will be considered a "heretic." I've been told by many people that I'm not even a Christian because I believe these things.
Let's think about these simple propositions like Bereans (Acts 17:11). You'll see why no pastor wants a Vine & Fig Tree University graduate anywhere near his church.
Here is the foundational text for Vine & Fig Tree University:
|
Micah 4:1-7 1 But it shall come to pass, |
This is also the foundational Bible passage for America. This is the original "American Dream."
Here are the key concepts in Micah's prophecy:
Micah 4:1-7 |
Key Concepts |
| 4 for the mouth of the LORD of hosts hath spoken it. | 0. Bibliolatry: God speaks, we worship the Word |
| 1 But it shall come to pass, | 1: Calvinism/predestination: "It shall come to pass" |
| in the last days | 2: Preterism: "in the last days" of the Old Covenant |
| that the mountain | 3: Creationism: The "mountain" = Eden |
| the house of the LORD | The temple of the LORD: Where is it today? |
| shall be established | This has already happened (Acts 2:36) |
| in the top of the mountains, and it shall be exalted above the hills; |
U.S.A/U.S.S.R./U.K etc. are all rival mountains |
| and people shall flow unto it. 2 And many nations shall come, and say, |
4. Optimillennialism: "Peoples will stream; nations will come" This is currently happening. |
| Come, and let us go up to the mountain of the LORD, and to the house of the God of Jacob; and He will teach us of His ways, and we will walk in His paths: for the Law shall go forth of Zion, and the Word of the LORD from Jerusalem. |
5: Theonomy: "the Law of God"
4 for the mouth of the LORD of hosts hath spoken it. |
| 3 And He shall judge among many people, and rebuke strong nations afar off; |
6: Theocracy / Christocracy: "He shall judge" |
| and they shall beat their swords into plowshares, and their spears into pruninghooks: nation shall not lift up a sword against nation, neither shall they learn war any more. |
7: Pacifism: "swords into plowshares" |
| 8: Archistlessness: no war = no state || Jesus is the One True Archist | |
| 4 But they shall sit every man under his vine and under his fig tree; and none shall make them afraid: |
"dwell safely" - "none afraid" |
| Family Education | Family Business |
| 9: Patriarchy: "His Vine"
10: Education: Family does the teaching of God's Law 11: Character: We teach God's Law because |
12: Agrarianism: Vine & Fig Tree
13: Property/Communism: Compulsory sharing is theft, but sharing is Christian |
| 5 Although all people will walk every one in the name of his god, we will walk in the name of the LORD our God for ever and ever. |
11: Character vs. "Mass Formation Psychosis" standing alone against public lawlessness and unbelief |
| 6 In that day, saith the LORD, will I assemble her that halteth, and I will gather her that is driven out, and her that I have afflicted; 7 And I will make her that halted a remnant, and her that was cast far off a strong nation: |
14. Socialism/Community: the ones "God has afflicted" |
| and the LORD shall reign over them in mount Zion from henceforth, even for ever. |
15: Eternity: "forever" The Kingdom that Christ inaugurated in "the last days" of the Old Covenant lasts forever. |
During the typical 15-week semester, we will always come back to 15 Core Values found in Micah's the “Vine & Fig Tree” prophecy.
|
|
Let's combine these themes from Micah's prophecy with the chapters of the Westminster Standards.
Micah's Prophecy |
Westminster Standards |
Vine & Fig Tree University |
The Westminster Shorter Catechism famously begins:
I say "famously" because 300 years ago, every literate human being in North America and the entire English-speaking world could have answered that question from memory. Rick Warren began his multi-million best-selling book The Purpose Driven Life with the four words "It’s Not About You." Those are good words, and yet the book really was all about the reader. And the reader's church. John M. Frame writes,
Satan's temptation in Genesis 3:5 is "Ye shall be as gods," determining good and evil for yourselves. History shows that when man obeys God, life is heavenly; when man is his own god, as John Adams put it, “this world would be something not fit to be mentioned in public company — I mean hell.” John Milton, in his work Paradise Lost, put these words in Satan's mouth:
“But his subjects hated him and sent a delegation after him, saying, ‘We don’t want this man to rule over us!’” (Luke 19:14) |
| Micah's Prophecy | Westminster Standards | Vine & Fig Tree University |
| "It shall come to pass" | Chapter 3 - God’s Eternal Decree | How does Micah know what will "come to pass?" Answer: God told him (see "Bibliolatry" below). How does God know what will "come to pass?" Answer: He predestined it. God is omniscient, and knows the end from the beginning (Isaiah 46:10), because the future has already been created.
Some say that predestination "makes man a robot." But you and I both know that we are not robots. We were created in the Image of God. We have the capacity for reason, to plan for the future, to compose and appreciate symphonies. We understand God's Commandments, and we have a moral obligation to obey them. We know that as we get in the car and drive to the prostitute's house, that we should turn the car around. We know that God is just to hold us responsible for our actions. In the end, "every knee will bow and every tongue will confess" that we made the choice to sin and God is just and fair to hold us accountable. These things cannot be said about the other animals. Omnipotence is the basis for omniscience. God knew what every atom in the universe would do before He created them, because He created everything that way. Nobody was there to force God to create the world in a way God did not want it to be. God knew what He was doing. God is Sovereign, but God is also Love. This has tremendous implications for our actions in history. Calvinism: "Liberty Under God"
Futurists say that "prophecy" reveals a grim future. War, Great Tribulation, the Antichrist, and Armageddon are all predestined (though not all futurists would use that word -- but what's the difference between "prophesied" and "predestined?"). Micah does not say that tribulation and annihilation has been predestined, but a Vine & Fig Tree world has. |
| Chapter 2 - God, and of the Holy Trinity |
The Sovereignty of GodI believe in God. There are a lot of people in churches on Sunday morning who say "I believe in God," but what evidence is there of this on Monday through Saturday? I believe God is the creator. The Bible says God created everything there is, probably no more than 10,000 years ago. (Yikes! A "creationist!" A "fundamentalist!") There is an unbridgeable gap between the Creator and the creature (Romans 1:25). The Westminster Confession and Catechisms set forth a "Calvinist" doctrine of God. Many people hate that term. I believe in "the Five Points of Calvinism." Calvin would not have let me in his church. Calvin would have put me to death. If I were to describe what I think God is like, most people would say they don't believe in that kind of God. And they're even more offended that I try to impress this "Calvinist" theology into every area of my life, even "secular" areas, including Monday through Saturday. Predestination Before the Creator created all that is, the Creator knew the end from the beginning (Isaiah 46:10; Revelation 1:8; Revelation 21:6, 13). God knows the future because God created it. The future has already been created. This is called "predestination," meaning the the destination of the creation was designed and set in motion before ("pre") it was even created. The path of every molecule and sub-atomic particle in the universe was set in motion, and is carefully and lovingly conducted by God through history to its predestined end. The thoughts I think and the feelings I feel are wave-particles of energy and chemicals that travel across the synapses of my brain and through my heart and "reins." All predestined by God. Some say my belief makes man a "robot." But God did not create man as a robot. You and I both know that we are not "robots." God created man in His Image. That means when I think and plan, when I paint a picture or compose a symphony, when I build a log cabin or a skyscraper that can house 25,000 people, I am engaged in the wonder-filled task of exercising dominion over the earth (Genesis 1:26-28), something animals do not do. No matter how glorious I think man is, by virtue of his being created in the Image of God, there are those who feel that my conception of God "violates" human "free will." "Arminians" call me a "Calvinist." They don't want me in their churches.Conventional "Calvinists" call me other terms, but join the Arminians in ordering me far from their churches. When God created everything that exists, there was nothing else to say to God, "You shouldn't create everything that way." Nobody put any pressure on God to change anything He was creating, because nobody else had been created yet. Psalm 135:6 Daniel 4:35 God is the Director of a cosmic play. |
|
| Chapter 9 Free Will | The Myth of "Free Will" | |
| That's a place to transition to the second of my propositions. I believe that if you believe in "free will," you do not believe that the Bible is the Word of God.
I say that not on the grounds that the Bible teaches something other than "free will," but because if God cannot "violate" man's "free will," there cannot be a Bible at all. The Bible came into existence through the "violation" of man's "free will." So let's consider what the Bible says about the Bible. |
| Micah's Prophecy | Westminster Standards | Vine & Fig Tree University | ||||||||||||||||||
Micah 1:1 |
Chapter 1 - the Holy Scripture | I have numbered this theme "0" (zero) because it undergirds all the other themes.
The Westminster Confession of Faith begins with a chapter on the Bible. And rightly so. Everything taught at Vine & Fig Tree University is grounded in the Bible because the Bible is the Word of God. The Bible is the Word of God, written by the will of GodThey say "history books are written by the winners." The Bible is a real long history book. If you believe in "free will," or that God cannot "violate" man's "free will," then you cannot logically believe that the Bible is the Word of God. The words in the Bible were written by the hands of human beings, but I believe the Bible is the Word of God. God speaks through those human words. This says something God wrote the Bible using "human pens." God made their hands move the way He wanted them to move. In the Bible, the will of God is sovereign over the will of man. 1 Peter 1:21 says
Of course, it was the "will" of Moses and Isaiah and Paul and other authors to write down words. Moses wrote what God told him to write, but perhaps Moses would say he wrote those words "of my own free will." Nobody pointed a gun at Moses' head and forced him to write. But what Peter says is controversial. Even though Moses and other Biblical authors freely wrote the words they intended to write, God was doing something through them and the words they wrote. They did not write those words solely by their own "free will." Their hands moved the way God willed them to move. It's true, we can tell the differences between the words Moses wrote, the words Luke wrote, the words John wrote, and the words Paul wrote. They all had their own individual personalities and writing styles. But the men who wrote the words of Scripture had their lives — their parents, training, and life experiences — all orchestrated by God so that — guided by the Holy Spirit — they would write the exact words that God wanted to be written so that God could communicate exactly what He wanted to communicate to the human race. Their words are God's words. God's will trumps their will. Paul told Timothy that God "breathed out" His words through these human authors (2 Timothy 3:16, [theópneustos (Strong's #2315, from 2316 /theós, "God" and 4154 /pnéō, "breathe out"]). To say that the Bible is the Word of God is to say that God's will is sovereign over the will of man. Some people find this deeply offensive. God made the mouths of Moses, David, and Isaiah speak the words God wanted spoken. God made the hands of Matthew, Paul, and John write the words God wanted written. If God did not overrule the "free" and fallible will of man, how did their will to speak and write beget the infallible Word of God? I don't use the term "free will," because secular philosophers use that term to suggest that if there is a god, such a god doesn't know what's going on, and is constantly being surprised at what the will of man does. So I would never say that I have "free will" and can do something that will catch God off-guard. God knows what I think and what I feel and what I will do because He predestined it all. But I am not a rock, or an insect, or an animal, or a robot. I am a human being created in the Image of God. Amazing.Some will say that since God predestines even sin, and then punishes sinners for the sin God predestined them to commit, it would be better if sinners had never been born. They had no "free will." They had no choice. "That's not fair." And if it's not "fair," it can't be true. This claim is logical. If a man has no free will, and gets punished for what God predestined him to to, it would be better for him if he had never been born. But Mark 14:21 says exactly that: God predestined Jesus to be sinfully put to death:
That's pretty scary. Judas had no choice in whether he would be born. God created Judas without asking Judas for permission, and predestined Judas to commit a terrible sin (John 19:11). But Judas was created in the Image of God. All sinners are created in the Image of God. And in the end, every knee will bow and every sinner will admit that God's Judgment is fair (Isaiah 45:23; Romans 14:11; Philippians 2:10-11). All sinners will say "I admit. I sinned." All sinners will admit that God is just. Even though He predestined them to sin (Romans 9; Isaiah 10). Christians who oppose the Sovereignty of God and uphold the "free will" of man claim that predestination "makes man a puppet." But as I said, man is clearly not a puppet; man is created in the Image of God, and we all know this. But the Bible agrees that God's sovereignty makes man a "puppet" of God's decree. The Bible describes man not as a "puppet," however, but as a bucket of water. Well, not a bucket, but a river of water.
How is this not like being "a puppet?" "Bibliolatry"I believe the Bible is the Word of God.
The Bible claims to be the Word of God. It claims that God speaks to human beings. It claims that God used human beings the way I am using a keyboard as I write this. Let's consider first the claim that God speaks, and the Bible is God speaking to us.
Imagine that a UFO lands on the White House lawn, and an extraterrestrial being hands the President a Peace Treaty. The ET says, "Read this Treaty. It tells you how to cure cancer, end war, obtain free energy, eliminate the threat of global warming, and extend lifespans by hundreds of years. If you agree to abide by its terms, our race will help your race. If you do not agree, we will destroy you. We will wait right here for your answer." Network television will have their cameras at the White House 24/7. Commentators will be speculating endlessly about what the extraterrestrial Treaty says, and whether or not the President will accept their terms. People will cancel vacations and having children, breathlessly waiting for the decision, knowing their entire future hangs in the balance. If there are any ET's in the universe, they were created by the God of the Bible. His Word is more important than the word of any ET. But we spend more time watching CNN or FoxNews than we spend listening to the Bible, even though the news channels aren't covering anything as interesting as a UFO on the White House lawn. For some, "news" doesn't get our attention as much as sports, soaps, or celebrities. All the while, we have a book from the Creator of the universe sitting un-read on a shelf next to the Flat Screen TV. What the heck is wrong with us? The Bible is a Peace Treaty -- a Covenant -- that God is willing to enter into with those who have been in rebellion against Him. The Treaty calls for unconditional surrender on our part. The Treaty promises blessing -- "salvation" -- on God's part. The "Berean" SpiritHere is perhaps the #1 reason no church wants to be infiltrated by someone who believes the Bible was actually written by God.
The Bereans are commended for questioning the church. They heard a message from the Apostles and checked what they heard with the Scriptures. There is no entity on planet earth who wants their members questioning what the church has taught and comparing church doctrine with the Bible. Especially regarding the "heretical" ideas I'll be raising below. Even though Protestant churches champion "sola Scriptura" and the "priesthood of all believers." They don't really mean it. They don't like Bereans. We should search the Scriptures. We should do that every day. The Bible is our starting pointI am a "Bible-believing" Christian. Feel free to accuse me of engaging in bibliolatry, fundamentalism, extremism, creationism, Calvinism, Theonomy, etc. Guilty as charged. Acts 17:10-12 is one of three texts worth studying:
The Bereans appeared to be like modern libertarians, with their bumper-sticker that says "QUESTION AUTHORITY." The Apostles gave them the Gospel of Jesus Christ, but the Bereans didn't just take the Apostles' word for it, but checked what they were told against a higher authority, the Scripture. The Bereans are more dogmatic authoritarians than those who mindlessly accept the word of clergy or creeds. Additionally, the Bereans studied the Bible "daily." The verses on that link show that daily engagement with the Bible is an imperative. This attitude makes one a better Christian, as seen in our second text.
My goal in this article is to be your "friend." I hope you'll be my friend as well, and challenge my thinking in a loving way. I am not against "authorities" or "experts." I rely on them and quote them. An "expert" can be your friend and sharpen you, but you might have to pay the expert ("mentor," "professor" "seminary"). This article is free. May you be sharpened. May we be friends. Third text:
What you learned in church seems right to you. Wait until you compare it with what the Bible says. |
||||||||||||||||||
| Chapter 7 God’s Covenant with Man | Covenant as Treaty of Unconditional Surrender
How to Become a Christian by Signing God's Treaty of Unconditional Surrender |
|||||||||||||||||||
ExtremismMark 12 I love the Lord with all my heart, mind, soul, and strength. Not just part-way. That makes me an "extremist." People tell me I take the Bible to an extreme. I think I just take it consistently. At least I try. If you disagree with this -- if you want to avoid "extremes" -- then you want to be at point "M" on the chart below:
Do you want to be a Grade "A" Christian? Then you had better avoid being a Grade "Z" Christian with all your heart, mind, soul and strength.
If you are not an extremist in defense of the Bible, what is the guiding principle that prevents you from being a defender of tyranny, atheism and hate? Is "moderation" the Grand Principle that you believe will keep America from collapsing into chaos and lawlessness? When Jesus said "Love your neighbor," was He really just telling us not to hate our neighbor, to avoid extremes, and have an attitude of "moderation" toward our neighbor? Can Lukewarm Indifference ever be Christlike? Even if my goal were no more than "moderation," if you are at point "Z," I must be an "extremist" in the opposite direction, and advocate "A" in order to get you to point "M," because if I only advocate "Moderation," "Z + M" only brings you to point "T." Life is a tug-of-war. If you don't pull the rope with every ounce of strength you have, you're in the mud. Jesus said the struggle to overcome the world is "agonizing." I advocate "A" on the scale above. I'm trying to get you to adopt "A" as your position as well. If you're a Moderate and I move you toward "A" to any degree, I've succeeded. For now. If you follow some of what the Bible says, you are not following anything the Bible says. If you pick and choose, you are your own god. Even if you choose to follow Jesus 99% of the time (using your "free will"), it is still YOU who are choosing, you who approve of 99% of Jesus' commands, you who put yourself in the place of God and judge some of what Christ said to be wrong, you who are acting as lord of your life. You view religion as a Smörgåsbord. You pick and choose depending on what YOU like, but do not view the Word of God as an absolutely binding package deal. Everybody agrees with something Jesus said, even some real sickos. A Christian is someone who believes everything Jesus said. Nothing less than full submission counts for anything. |
| Micah's Prophecy | Westminster Standards | Vine & Fig Tree University |
| "in the last days"
And it will come about in the last days |
Chapter 32 - the State of Men after Death, and of the Resurrection of the Dead
Chapter 33 - the Last Judgment |
EschatologyOne of the most important issues in the last 100 years is "futurism" vs. "preterism," or "pessimillennialism" vs. "optimillennialism." The Westminster Confession relegates eschatology to the last two chapters of the Confession. But we believe the subject is extremely important in our day, because the subject is plagued by errors, and these errors are popularly believed and have a global impact. Millions of copies of books speculating about "the last days" have been sold in this generation. Everything about Micah's “Vine & Fig Tree” prophecy is undermined by today's erroneous eschatologies. They all deny that it is even possible -- much less mandatory -- for us to beat our "swords into plowshares" and pursue the fulfillment of Micah's “Vine & Fig Tree” prophecy. Eschatology is critical. (We wouldn't necessarily place the subject at the very top of the list, but it occurs right off the bat in Micah's prophecy, so here it is. But it deserves higher placement than the last two chapters of the Confession.) Micah says his prophecy will be fulfilled in "the last days." What does this mean? Commentators suggest two meanings:
I believe "the last days" of the Old Covenant are now in our past. We are not now living in "the last days" of the Old Covenant. The Old Covenant came to a definitive end in AD 70 when the temple in Jerusalem was destroyed. As a result, Jesus is reigning as the Christ today. |
| Micah's Prophecy | Westminster Standards | Vine & Fig Tree University |
| That the mountain of the House of the LORD Will be established as the chief of the mountains And it will be raised above the hills |
Chapter 4 Creation |
CreationismThe Bible says four rivers flowed out of (downhill from) Eden, indicating that Eden was on a "mountain" or elevated plateau. Ever since then, and throughout the Bible, the mountain has been a reminder of Eden. Was there actually a Garden of Eden in history? Are the first few chapters of Genesis a chronicle of history, or a "religious" poem of some kind? How would Jesus answer that question? If you can believe that Jesus rose from the dead, in violation of "scientific law," why can't you believe God created all things a few thousand years ago? Politicians who feel threatened by the Bible, seeing it as an "anarchist manifesto" want you to believe the Bible is "pre-scientific" and cannot be trusted. Karl Marx said his "scientific socialism" was grounded in history. Jesus grounded His teachings in the history in Genesis. Marxists and Christians have very different views of history. One of the biggest tests of Biblical character is the ability to stand against "the science" of evolution. "Listen to the science" we are constantly told. Is your faith informed and able to stand against the crowd? Evolutionism is not science; it is a religion; it is the religion of archism. It is one example of a "Mass Formation Psychosis." ("Archism" is the belief that members of a ruling class have the right to impose their will on others by force or threats of violence. Jesus said His followers are not to be archists "like the kings of the gentiles" (Mark 10:42-45). Evolutionism is a religion designed to buttress the power of archists. It's actually the theory of archism. Elitism. Racism.) We discuss "archists" below, or see this: Jesus is the Savior of the World
In what sense is Jesus the "Savior" of those who do not believe? In the sense that "salvation" in the Bible usually refers to conditions in this life, rather than conditions in the next life. God restrains the depravity of all men. The vast majority of the 8 billion human beings on planet earth are "basically good" in a way they were not before the birth of the Savior of the World. The few we call "sociopaths" are not beyond the help that can be given them by the "City upon a Hill." Sociopaths emulate archists. Christ's ekklesia [see below] needs to preach the gospel to archists and persuade them to repent of archism. The New Jerusalem is a New Creation. Micah 4:1-2 says Jerusalem (Mt. Zion, the mountain of the House [temple] of the Lord) will be "established." This is actually the creation of a New Jerusalem. This is the restoration of the conditions that originally existed in the Garden of Eden before the Fall. Evolutionary premillennialism sees a vast past and no future. It's all going to end in our day. Planet earth is a miracle, not an accident. Supernatural design, supernatural creation, supernatural administration. There is no such thing as "nature."
|
| Chapter 6 the Fall of Man, of Sin, and of the Punishment Thereof |
Thesis 13: The Fall of Man
The Fall of Man -- the Desire to "“To Be As Gods” -- “Knowing Good and Evil” |
| Micah's Prophecy | Westminster Standards | Vine & Fig Tree University |
| That the mountain of the House of the LORD Will be established as the chief of the mountains And it will be raised above the hills |
Chapter 25 the Church
Chapter 26 the Communion of Saints Chapter 30 Church Censures Chapter 31 Synods and Councils |
In the Old Testament, "The House of the Lord" was the temple in Jerusalem. The temple was where God dwelled.
But that temple was destroyed in AD 70. So what is "the House of the Lord" in our day? Catholics might say "the Vatican." Protestants might say "the local church." The Apostle Paul says Christians are the new temple of God.
Edifying People = Building the Kingdom Most Christians reject a "preterist" eschatology because of what "the church" teaches. But if preterism is true, it revolutionizes ecclesiology. Why the word "Church" is a Fine Translation of "Ekklesia"The institutional church is all about misdirection. Like a magician, it focuses your attention on something irrelevant, so you don't look at what's really going on. There's no evidence that Christians in the Book of Acts ever got together in a public building at 10:30 am on Sunday mornings. But that's what the institutional church wants us to focus on. The rest of the week, archists are killing millions and stealing trillions. More on "Church" |
Chapter 21 Religious Worship, and the Sabbath Day
Chapter 20 Christian Liberty, and Liberty of Conscience |
The Day of Rest is the seventh day. "The Lord's Day" is the first day/eighth day, commemorating the resurrection. The two concepts are distinct, but too often confused. The fourth of the ten commandments is to work six days and rest on the seventh. The fourth commandment does not say to work five days, rest on the
seventh, and "go to church" on the eighth day. Clergymen emphasize the importance of "going to church" on Sunday, and ignore the importance of work as the main source of prosperity and government. Businesses create government because they foster habits and character which undergird order, which make profit possible. More on "work."
What is "WORSHIP"?The basic meaning of the word "worship" is service. To "worship" God is to serve Him by putting every area of one's life under His Law. As The New Bible Dictionary puts it, "[T]he essential concept in both the Old and New Testaments is 'service.'" John Murray writes,
Worship in the generic sense is thus service to God in every area of life; total slavery to Him Who is Lord of all. In the Old Testament there was also a more specific usage for "worship," namely, the observance of the ceremonial rituals given to a Spiritually juvenile pre-Pentecost people. These ritual observances typified worship in every area of life. Animal sacrifice, the burning of incense, attendance at temple, and other rigors were imposed on the slave-like people of Egyptized Israel (Galatians 3:24 - 4:9), and were but shadows of the worship of the New Covenant. Jesus spoke of the New Covenant form of worship in John 4. The woman at the well, having been confronted with the ethical demands of the Lord Jesus (regarding her adulterous life), attempts a "doctrinal" diversion: she asks Jesus about "worship." Putting words in Jesus' mouth, she claims that worship occurs in a certain place (Jerusalem) (John 4:20). Jesus denies it:
Here is the "Mountain" of Micah 4, the New Zion which covers the entire globe (Daniel 2:35). In the common, specific sense, "worship" means attending to the ceremonial requirements of the Old Covenant, going to a certain place (cf. Acts 8:27). But these acts only symbolized true "worship," and were necessary to prod a Spiritless people to that Christian worship which is obedience to God in every area of life. Thus, the phrase "worship service" is quite redundant! Can you find one occurrence in the New Testament of "worship" in the ceremonial/specific sense being required of Christians? Or are the occurrences of "worship" speaking of obedience in every area of life? Do any of the Greek words used for "worship" occur in any sense requiring Christians to go to Jerusalem, or a specific "mountain" to "worship" God? Would we expect centralized ceremonial "worship" to be required in light of Micah's prophecy? (If you "attend church," have you been trained to search the Scriptures to find the answers to such questions as these [Acts 17:11], or do you need to ask your "pastor"?) The New Testament is clear: the "worship" required of believers does not consist in ceremonial ritual. Colossians 2:18 says,
The Greek word translated "worship" is "religion" in James 1, where we are told,
Of course, "worship" is not limited to visiting orphans and widows, but involves obedience outside the temple, outside the synagogue, outside the cathedral, in every area of life. |
|
| Chapter 27 the Sacraments
Chapter 28 Baptism Chapter 29 the Lord’s Supper
|
Preterism and Sacraments
I don't believe in "sacraments." These Old Testament rituals were dug up and mimicked by what we call "The Roman Catholic Church." Most Protestant churches are only partially-reformed Roman churches. What we call "the Last Supper" was Jesus observing Passover with His disciples. Jesus destroyed the temple in Jerusalem at His coming in AD 70 (see "Preterism" above). Paul told Christians (many of whom were converts from Judaism) to continue observing Passover until Jesus comes. This made sense at the time, as Passover was closely connected with the temple.
First-century Christians continued to observe Passover until Christ came in the power of His Kingdom, in the lifetime of those who witnessed His First Advent, to take vengeance against those Israelites who rejected Him as their Passover Lamb. Jesus the Death Angel did not pass over Israel in AD 70. The old Israel was destroyed as the new Egypt: Revelation 11:8 Jesus came in the power of a new Kingdom. The old kingdom -- the new Egypt -- was destroyed so that the New Israel -- God's Kingdom -- could be built. "Sacraments" were a part of the Old Covenant, but not the New. John the Baptist was an Old Testament prophet who foretold the coming of the Messiah and the New Covenant. Paul said he never baptized anyone (1 Corinthians 1:13-17). The Old Covenant and its sacraments were passing away (Hebrews 8:13). Most Christians see the practice of their faith occurring for one hour in a "church" building on Sunday morning. But the most important aspects of our faith should be occurring the other six days of the week. |
| Micah's Prophecy | Westminster Standards | Vine & Fig Tree University |
| And the peoples will stream to it. And many nations will come and say, "Come, let us go up to the mountain of the LORD And to the House of the God of Jacob |
The Westminster Catechisms contain more on this them than the Confession:
Day 150: The Lord's Prayer, part 3 - "Thy Kingdom Come" Day 151: The Lord's Prayer, part 4 - "Thy Will Be Done"But there isn't a separate section in the Westminster Standards on "Post-Millennialism," or as we call it, "Optimillennialism." |
We have often heard that all religions are equal; we're all headed up to the top of the same mountain, just climbing along different paths. But in the last few decades, it has become obvious that one religion is not like the others (and one religion
is superior to the others). The religion of Jihadism has been in the news. This religion is not going up the same mountain as those who say all religions are equal. The religion of Jihadism wants to blow-up the entire mountain with everyone on it; even if this kills the Jihadist suicide
bombers themselves. They don't believe in converting others to their religion by persuasion/reason, but by violence, forcing others to submit to the terrorists' religion/rule.
The World must be Christianized. | "All nations, all peoples" | By persuasion/regeneration The whole planet is going to be Christianized. As we will see, Micah says this means beating "swords into plowshares." That requires a willingness to be pacifists and therefore anarchists Postmillennialism or Optimillennialism requires pacifism and anarchism. It requires an end to "nationalism." "Salvation" is not only about an individual going to heaven after dying. That's not what God's play is about. It's about billions of human beings worshiping God on the other six days of the week.
Optimillennialism is optimism about the future progress of the Kingdom of God on earth. It defies entropy, and is not evolutionary. Therefore Optimillennialism depends on Creationism. |
| Chapter 8 Christ the Mediator
Chapter 10 Effectual Calling Chapter 11 Justification Chapter 12 Adoption Chapter 13 Sanctification Chapter 14 Saving Faith Chapter 15 Repentance unto Life Chapter 16 Good Works Chapter 17 the Perseverance of the Saints Chapter 18 the Assurance of Grace and Salvation |
Much of the Westminster Confession is taken up with a very narrow examination of "salvation" or "justification." It is generally related to what happens to you after you die.
At Vine & Fig Tree University we take a "Theonomic" approach to "justification." Notice that chapter 8, "Of Christ the Mediator," is not complemented with a chapter on "Christ the King." The concept is in the Westminster Standards, but buried. |
| Micah's Prophecy | Westminster Standards | Vine & Fig Tree University |
| That He may teach us about His ways And that we may walk in His paths." For from Zion will go forth the Law Even the Word of the LORD from Jerusalem. And He will judge between many peoples And render decisions for mighty, distant nations. |
Chapter 19 the Law of God
Continued below |
The word "Theonomy" comes from two Greek words meaning "God's Law." It stands for the proposition that the entire Bible is the Word of God and we are to be governed by it. This is controversial because many Christians do not believe they have to obey laws in the Old Testament, and they do not believe they are obligated to obey God's commands during the work-week, but only on Sunday mornings or in their "spiritual life."
There is no morality without authority. Humanistic authority produces a humanistic morality. When Americans learned the Bible in public schools (and public schools were Bible schools), America was the most prosperous, most admired nation on earth. This is Biblical authority and morality.
• The God who gave you life deserves your respect Being "judgmental" vs. Hitler Micah says the law of God must be taught, and people will stream to learn God's Law. Therefore Theonomy leads to Education (#10 below). Theonomic education leads to Godly character (#11). When we obey God's Law, God Governs us Theocracy = God Governs Theonomy leads to Theocracy Our moral obligation to obey God's Commandment counters those who complain that our advocacy of predestination leaves man without "free will." You are morally obligated to choose to obey God's Law. I don't know whether you have been predestined to be obedient or not. But you know what you must do, and you will eventually admit that you chose to do what you wanted to do. Every knee will bow and every tongue will confess that our Sovereign God is perfectly fair (Philippians 2:10; Romans 14:11). Theonomy vs. Autonomy Chapter 19 of the Westminster Confession seems to endorse "Theonomy," but it actually repudiates it, and is fundamentally flawed. R.J. Rushdoony said the Confession was guilty of "nonsense" at this point. Even "blasphemy." Section 4 of chapter 19 says:
This statement is a serious error. This is based on Greco-Roman categories, not the categories of Hebrew Law, or Biblical Law. We must consider four key terms:
Israel was not a "body politic" in the conventional sense of "politics." Our word "politics" comes from the Greek word polis, which can be translated "city," "city-state," or even "empire." Babylon was a city and an empire. Rome was a city and an empire. Augustine wrote a book called This stands in contrast to "The City of Man." Israel was not a kingdom of politicians, but a "kingdom of priests" (Exodus 19:6). Israel did not become a "political" body until 1 Samuel 8, when Israel rejected God as her King (as the text explicitly reveals), choosing to emulate the pagan nations around her. It was not God's intention that Israel "mature" from a tribe-based kingdom of priests to a polis-based kingdom of politicians. The Patriarch Abraham is our model, and it was Moses' goal that Israel become Abrahamic patriarchs again (Numbers 11:29). The word "economics" comes from two Greek words meaning "law of the home." For Abraham, all law was economic law, no law was political law. "Political Philosophy" is the only college course you need to take, and the one no university offers. Abraham's priest was Melchizedek (Genesis 14:18), just as our priest is Christ (Hebrews 7). Moses gave Israel "Levitical law." When Israel disobeyed God's "economic" law, there were laws that brought cleansing, or atonement, for violations of the "economic law." The Levitical priesthood was temporary; a kind of social "training wheels." Today the Levitical laws can only be obeyed by faith in Christ, "the Lamb of God" (John 1:29). The "economic law" reflects the unchanging moral character of God. We could call this social system PATRIAGORA: The Bible says Abraham obeyed My Voice, and kept My Charge, My Commandments, My Statutes, and My Torah. (Genesis 26:4-5) In this entire body of laws, none could be called "judicial laws" or "civil laws." Moses gave laws for patriarchs (heads of families) not politicians. None of God's Law in "the Scriptures" has "expired" as the Westminster Confession erroneously claims. We still have a High Priest and a Temple to attend to. We have a King who governs us. If we don't entertain guests on the roof of our house, we don't need to build a rail around the roof, but if we do have people up there, we need to follow Deuteronomy 22:8, which some today would call a "judicial law." In generations past, when Americans understood the Bible better than we do today, American juries awarded verdicts in tort cases where safety rails were not in place, based on Deuteronomy 22:8. To say that these "expired" laws only bind governments if the government sees some kind of "general equity" is to open the door to totalitarianism. This "general equity" theory is based on Roman law, not Biblical Law. See this:
This has very important implications. This is not just about "law." This line of argument is calling for a complete re-organization of human society. "Patriarchy" is, as Gary North describes it, a "Bottom-Up Theocracy." The Duty of Man
We live in a culture that does not want to be reminded of its duties. It prefers to talk about its "rights." I don't believe in "human rights." I don't believe in "Justification by mere belief." I believe in Justification by Allegiance. Obedience (ethics) is more important than intelligence. The word "Theocracy" comes from two Greek words meaning "God Governs." Our duty is to be governed by God. "We must obey God rather than man" (Acts 5:29). We've been trained in our secular schools to fear "Theocracy." But we're not tempted to accept an Islamic Theocracy, where Allah is our national god. We've been trained to reject a Christian Theocracy. We accept a Secular Humanist theocracy, where every man is his own god (Genesis 3:5). As Augustine wrote, our job as Christians is to convert the entire planet from the City of Man -- autonomy -- into "The City of God" -- Theonomy -- a Christocracy. The Westminster Catechism contains an exposition of the Law of God under the category of the Ten Commandments. This exposition is, on the whole, wonderful. If we take these three commands seriously:
the implications are astounding. Nobody disagrees with these views in the abstract, but if I make them too practical, or apply them to the wrong people, then these views become heretical and offensive. Together these views lead me to a conclusion that everyone rejects. Passionately rejects. I used to reject it myself when I was younger. We'll consider it below. |
| Micah's Prophecy | Westminster Standards | Vine & Fig Tree University | ||||||||||||||
| Focus text: "He shall judge"
He will teach us of His ways, |
The Law (con't)
|
"Theonomy" = "Theocracy"
He will teach us of His ways, The Law-Giver is our Judge and King (Isaiah 33:22). If you don't believe in Theonomy, then you don't believe Jesus is a Christ-King. He's just a homeless story-teller. He has nothing to say to Pharaoh, Caesar, Hitler, Stalin, Trump, or Biden. Jesus cannot command them to repent if there is no Theonomy. Micah is prophesying a global Theocracy. The word "Theocracy" comes from two Greek words meaning "God Governs." God "governs" us when we obey His commandments. America was originally a Theocracy. James Madison, "the Father of the Constitution," is reported to have said,
America was originally a Christocracy. Benjamin Rush signed the Declaration of Independence and served in the Presidential administrations of John Adams, Thomas Jefferson, and James Madison -- each of whom came from a different political party. And of what party was Rush?
Only our Redeemer should be our Ruler. America was originally a Trinitarian Christocracy. On March 6, 1799, President John Adams proclaimed a national day of prayer in which Americans would
Everyone lives in a theocracy. Either the God of the Bible governs us, or some other god, or everyone gets to be his own god. Daniel 2 is a prophecy of global Christocracy. In the days of the Roman Empire, Daniel predicted, Christ would be born. He would crush the ancient Demonic Imperial Paradigm and begin spreading His own Kingdom over the earth. Historians have documented the on-going fulfillment of this prophecy, which continues today (though not without local and temporary ups-and-downs):
The prophet Micah speaks of the universal reign of God's Law over the earth. John Adams invited us to think about a world where human law-makers are put out of business, and God's Theonomy replaces man's law-books and creates God's Theocracy. R. J. Rushdoony wrote the following:
In principle, Adams is advocating "Theocracy." Adams is saying we should be governed by God and His Law Book, the Bible. Preterism claims that Jesus became the Christ in the past, and now IS the Christ. But to say "Jesus is the Christ" is to say that Jesus alone is the Christ. The "kings of the gentiles" (Mark 10:42-45) bitterly resent this claim. They say that John Adams, in principle, is advocating "anarchy." No, he wasn't advocating "anarchy" directly. Adams' purpose was just to praise the Bible. But nobody in government today would ever say what Adams said: We should take the Bible for our only law book. That's too "radical." It's "homophobic." Or something. Only a "domestic terrorist" would say something like this. Taking Jesus as our Messiah and the Bible as our only lawbook puts "the kings of the gentiles" out of business. Jesus can rule the nations because the Word of God is the Sword of the Lord, and is more powerful than the military sword of man:
A global Christocracy is possible because God uses His Sword-Word to change hearts and bring world peace through global obedience.
This is why we are commanded to read, study, and meditate on God's Word daily. My case for the “Vine & Fig Tree” worldview will only be persuasive if you read the verses of Scripture and let them change your mind. |
||||||||||||||
| Chapter 22 Lawful Oaths and Vows | I studied law and passed the California Bar Exam. I was completely qualified to become an attorney, but the Supreme Court of the United States has ruled that Christians -- whose allegiance to God trumps their allegiance to the government -- cannot be permitted to take the oath required of all attorneys. Details.
An oath is an act of religious worship, not a secular formality. Vows are an important tool in developing character according to God's Law. Understanding Vows |
|||||||||||||||
| Chapter 21 Religious Worship, and the Sabbath Day | The Day of Rest is the seventh day. "The Lord's Day" is the first day/eighth day, commemorating the resurrection. The two concepts are distinct, but too often confused. The fourth of the ten commandments is to work six days and rest on the seventh. The fourth commandment does not say to work five days, rest on the
seventh, and "go to church" on the eighth day. Clergymen emphasize the importance of "going to church" on Sunday, emphasizing "worship" as a series of rituals in "church," and ignore the importance of worship as service/work in every area of life Monday-through-Saturday, as the main source of prosperity and government. Businesses
create government because they foster habits and character which undergird order, which make profit possible.
Christ governs our lives not just on Sunday morning, but all during the week, including our business lives. The economy is where Education, Theonomy, Character, and business as sacred calling and worship all intersect. |
|||||||||||||||
Work, not Theft || Service, not "Public Service"A Jewish scholar named Franz Oppenheimer divided people into two groups. The first group he called "Economic Man." "Economic Man" engages in work, produces things of value (or provides valuable services) and gets paid, then trades that money for things other people produce. The second group he called "Political Man." These people do not produce, they confiscate. Because Christians are "pacifists," they believe in overcoming evil with good. In Romans 12, we respond to evil with food or drink, and in Romans 13 we respond to evil with gifts of money, hoping in these cases that God will grant repentance to those who do evil to us. Taxation is extortion, a form of theft. There isn't a single verse in the Bible to which any human being alive today can point to and say, "This verse assures me that if I declare myself to be the king, I can threaten you with violence if you do not give me the money I demand, and God will not hold me guilty of sin." If someone sins against you, and you do everything Jesus says to do in order to help that person repent and right his wrongs, Jesus says to "excommunicate" him (our modern terminology, not His), and treat him like someone who cannot possibly be a genuine Christian: "a tax collector" (Matthew 18:17). If there is no theft, there is no "State." "Civil Governments" do not exist without "taxation," which is theft. "Civil government" is distinguished from businesses and charities by its claim to have a right to steal.
Private Service Creates Public Order "Public Service" Creates Disorder Business is government. Employers should disciple employees (Matthew 28:18-20). Use God's Sword-Word. |
||||||||||||||||
| Let's consider next the commandment, "Thou shalt not kill." (Exodus 20:13, quoted by Jesus, Mark 10:19) That link contains the exposition of the 6th Commandment in the Westminster Larger Catechism. It is "a pacifist manifesto." |
| Micah's Prophecy | Westminster Standards | Vine & Fig Tree University | |||||||
| Then they will hammer their swords into plowshares And their spears into pruning hooks; Nation will not lift up sword against nation And never again will they train for war. |
|
I believe that God says "Thou shalt not kill." "Everybody knows" that Jesus commanded His disciples to be "pacifists," but most churches say we can't take that to an "extreme." Most churches defend some killing. If
someone personally insults you, you might be a "pacifist." It's OK to be "super spiritual" in your "private" life. But if some foreigner publicly insults your secular government, you'll "support the troops" as they drop bombs and kill children. "Spiritual" in the private sector, "responsible" and
"practical" and "realistic" in the public sector.
During the 20th century, hundreds of millions of human beings were murdered by atheists, many of whom attended churches regularly. During my lifetime, "Christians" who worked for "my" government killed, crippled, or made homeless tens of millions of innocent non-combatant civilians around the world. I think the United States is the enemy of God and humanity. I guess other Christians think it's OK to inflict mass suffering and terror in order to keep gas prices down. "U.S.A.! U.S.A.! U.S.A.!" "I Pledge Allegiance...." The Bible says we should beat our "swords into plowshares" (Micah 4). Most churches disagree. They cheer their members when they don the uniform of a soldier for a "New World Order." Jesus commands us to
PacifismI was born in the year of "Sputnik," the Russian satellite that inaugurated "the Space Race" which was a part of "the Cold War." I wasn't yet in high school when the Vietnam War raged, and when the nation was divided by anti-war protesters. I was raised to believe that socialism was evil and capitalism was good. I believed that the
anti-war protesters were a bunch of anti-American commies. (They may well have been incited by Communists and used by Communists as tools or pawns in Moscow's attempt to bring down the American/capitalist system. But they were on the right side of an immoral war.*) The message of this sermon is that a person is not a real Christian if that person is not a pacifist. You may not agree with the conclusion, but following the argument will stimulate thought. You will be glad you gave the argument some attention. Most people would agree that a person who says we should hammer our "swords into plowshares" and "never again train for war" (Micah 4:3) is a "pacifist." Is this a "fringe" belief or is it central to the Christian faith? Consider James 1:27
If it's wrong to fail to "visit" or "watch over" widows, it is certainly wrong to create widows by killing their husbands. The United States is the greatest Widow-Maker on earth. This makes the United States the enemy of pure religion. But I had been raised to believe that all good Christians were to "support the troops." In the last section of Matthew 25, Jesus says the way you treat widows and orphans and the sick and homeless and illegal aliens and those in prison is a measure of how Christian you are. People who traumatize widows and orphans and cause them to cry themselves to sleep at night are probably "goats," not "sheep." Take an American child who has not yet entered government-run schooling and show the American child a photo of a child in Yemen or Iraq who has had her arms blown off by a U.S. bomb. That American child will know that something is wrong. Show that same photo to that same child after the child has graduated from Harvard University and has a prestigious job in the U.S. State Department. Watch the five-dollar words start flying: "Collateral Damage." "Realpolitik." "U.S. Partners and Allies." "National Security Interests." Pacifism and EnemiesSome might say that we are not commanded to take care of women and children if their husbands and fathers are our "enemies." That is, if those poor men have been conscripted at gunpoint by a tyrannical dictatorship and forced to fight against "U.S. armed forces" invading their homeland. After all, they are our "enemies." "Kill the commies." "Support our troops." But Jesus commands His followers to love their enemies.
Jesus sacrificed Himself to save His enemies.
The heartfelt desire of every true Christian is the It is better to be killed than to kill. Jesus chose to be killed rather than to kill. All of this is obvious to a child, but we adults don't buy this nonsense. "Pacifism" Defined by ChristThe word "pacifism" comes from the Latin word for "peace." It does not come from the English word "passive." Supporters of the Vine & Fig Tree worldview are active in beating swords into plowshares. The dictionaries usually give two definitions for "pacifist." First, an opponent of war. Second, an opponent of self-defense. That second definition is inaccurate. I know of no pacifist who would say that if you have a shield and someone comes after you with a sword, you cannot defend yourself against aggression with your shield. The real issue is lethal "self-defense." If your sword-bearing attacker gets tired of whacking his sword against your shield, and lies down to take a nap, the pacifist would say you should defend yourself against further attacks by running away, not by cracking your attacker's skull open with your shield. Our definition of "pacifist" is "one who keeps the commandments of Christ." Here's what "swords into plowshares" pacifism means: Jesus said ("Thou shalt not kill." Mark 10:19, quoting Exodus 20:13). John Calvin recognized that
Jesus also said "Thou shalt not steal," (Matthew 19:18; Exodus 20:13-16; Deuteronomy 5:17-20), meaning, Thou shalt not confiscate someone else's property. So can we all agree that basic Christian morality includes this:
But Jesus goes further.
Then if someone else decides to hurt you or take your stuff.
That means that if someone hurts you or takes your stuff, and you seek reconciliation, but you're rebuffed, then you cannot hire a Mafia "hit-man" to take vengeance against your unrepentant enemy. Most Christians will agree with that. But here's the kicker: If someone hurts you or takes your stuff, and you seek reconciliation, but you're rebuffed, then you cannot "vote" for a "representative" to tax your neighbor and build a "military-industrial complex" to take vengeance against your unrepentant enemy. You will vote such politicians out of office. If you vote all non-pacifists out of office, you will no longer have a "government." That claim causes many people to do a double-take. Your Sunday School teacher never put it quite like that. All pacifists are anarchists.
Myth:
Fact:
Peace through Peace, not through "Strength." | "Swords into Plowshares"
Pacifism leads to Anarcho-Theocracy Peace is possiblePeace is inevitable The U.S. is the world's superpower. Two hundred million Christians in America could bring about world peace in 2024. Details. Peace is the opposite of Violence. The State is a monopoly of violence. Therefore pacifism produces anarchism or archistlessness. |
|||||||
VengeanceNobody can read the Bible and avoid the conclusion that the institution we call "the State" is institutionalized vengeance. If someone does something you don't like, you are prohibited from taking vengeance, from confiscating his property, or depriving him of his life. You are also prohibited from hiring a "contract killer" to kill him. Wouldn't you agree? You personally didn't do the killing -- the "hit-man" you hired actually did the killing -- but you share in the guilt. You are also prohibited from "voting" for someone to be your "representative" and kill people you don't like. Every political science professor in every university on planet earth will agree that the essential nature of "the State" is violence. It claims a "monopoly on violence." Wikipedia || Encyclopedia Britannica || Oxford So |
| Micah's Prophecy | Westminster Standards | Vine & Fig Tree University | ||||
| Focus text: "swords into plowshares, never again train for war"
Micah 4:3 And He will judge between many peoples |
Chapter 23 the Civil Magistrate | So what is the result of my extreme Biblicism?
I call it the “Vine & Fig Tree” worldview. I created a non-profit organization to promote this worldview. People tell me that my extremism is "unrealistic," "impractical," and "utopian." Again, the quotation from John Adams: In his diary on February 22, 1756, John Adams, later second President of the United States, wrote this:
I believe the only law book we need is the Bible. I'll say more about this in just a minute. The Bible is a textbook for every subject, not just religion. In our day, that's one of the most offensive things anyone can say. If you said this from the pulpit, half the church would leave, and the other half would leave as soon the first half explained to them what you meant. I know my way around a law library. I've spent hundreds of hours in law libraries studying the law. I passed the California Bar Exam, but was denied a license to practice law because America -- once a Christian nation -- is now a secular nation, and Christians cannot become attorneys, according to the Supreme Court of the United States, because their allegiance to God's Law Book trumps their allegiance to Washington D.C.'s law books. Details. Not everyone is going to take the Bible as their only law book, and behave like Jesus commands all men to behave. What should we do about these people? Jesus gave us a step-by-step blueprint to follow in Matthew 18. Here's how that could work out. The Bible never commanded human beings to form "governments" to deal with criminals by taking vengeance against them. In fact, it is a sin to create a government. Creating a government is a rejection of God (1 Samuel 8). The cost to society of a government is greater than the cost to society of criminals under anarcho-pacifism. We'll return to this below. ArchistlessnessBeating "swords into plowshares" implies a theory of government, as well as a theory of eschatology.
The word "anarchist" comes from two Greek words meaning "not an archist." Anarcho-PreterismLet's examine the word "anarchism," which is even more offensive to most Christians than "preterism." Even more offensive to modern Christians than the belief that Jesus IS the Christ (today) (and we shouldn't be waiting around for a second advent of Jesus) is the claim that Jesus is THE Christ today; that in our day there is no other legitimate Christ, no other legitimate king. Nobody believes in "kings" anymore. So let's update our language.
As we will see below, Isaiah 33:22 confirms this:
As we will see below, it was a mistake for Israel to want an earthly king to replace God (1 Samuel 8). And as we will see below, Jesus prohibits His followers from aspiring to rule over others. Jesus said a Christian must not be an "archist." An "archist" is a "ruler." We here at Vine & Fig Tree invented the word "archist," deriving it from a Greek word found in Mark 10:42-45, from which the English word "anarchist" is derived. In the Gospel of Mark, chapter 10 (see more below), Jesus discovers His disciples arguing about who is going to be the "greatest" in the Kingdom of God. Their concept of the Messiah was someone who would use force and violence to vanquish the Roman occupation army that held Israel under tribute. They looked forward to the coming of a Messiah who would enlist them into a Messianic Israeli Army which would "stick it to" the Romans. But just as Micah said we should beat "swords into plowshares," Jesus said His disciples should "love your enemies," and if their soldiers conscript you to carry their provisions for one mile, you should go with the occupation forces two. (This form of pacifism completely refutes the legitimacy of "national defense.") The disciples didn't understand that Jesus' Messianic Kingdom was quite unlike the kingdoms of the world.
The word translated "rulers" comes from the Greek word from which we derive our English word "anarchist" ("a + archist" -- the first "a" is the Greek letter "alpha," known as the "alpha privative," meaning "not" -- a[n]archist -- the letter "n" bridges the "alpha privative" and the word "archist"). "Lords," "rulers" and "great ones" are "archists." An "archist" believes he has the right to impose his will on other people by force. He need not rely solely on persuasion. He need not give others anything of value in exchange for what he wants from others. He can threaten violence, and carry out those threats if he doesn't get what he wants. It would be sinful for others to engage in such violent extortion or vengeance, but the "archist" claims a "legal" and moral right to do what others must not do. Jesus clearly says His followers are not to be "archists." They are to be "servants." A Christian society is an archist-free society. We have been brainwashed in "public" schools (run by archists) to believe that an "anarchist" is:
Anyone can be called an "anarchist" by someone who wants to vilify an opponent, but most of those who call themselves "anarchist" have reached their position by their opposition to violence. I am a pacifist, therefore I am opposed to any institution of systematic violence and coercion (e.g., "the Mafia," "the State," etc.). By etymological definition, the opposite of an "anarchist" is an "archist." By being trained to believe that "anarchists" are bad, we've been subtly inculcated with the belief that those who protect us against "anarchists" (logically, "archists") are good. But the Bible says archists are bad, and explicitly prohibits us from being archists. Jesus says His followers are not to be archists. Connect the dots. www.HowToBecomeAChristianAnarchist.com Mark 10:42-45 (and other passages we're going to be considering in a moment) teaches that
All Pacifists are AnarchistsIf you oppose violence, you cannot be an "archist." A logically consistent Christian pacifist is also an anarchist, for two reasons: As I read the Bible, the bad guys are the "archists." Chapter after chapter in the Bible says "archists" are false gods. Only Jesus is a legitimate Archist. People who don't see earthly "archists" as bad guys are themselves guilty of idolatry. The Bible is an "Anarchist Manifesto." From cover to cover, the Bible condemns archists -- violent people, like Cain, Lamech, violent men that provoked the flood in Noah's day, Nimrod, and so on. These evil, violent people are the ones who created "civil governments." The Origin of "the State" ("Civil Government") - Political Philosophy 101 According to the BibleChristians who strongly oppose "anarchism" (I used to be one of them) believe the Bible prescribes (not just describes) civil governments. They believe God's Law contains laws for "governments." Every political science professor in every university on planet earth will agree that the essential nature of "the State" is violence. It claims a "monopoly on violence." Wikipedia || Encyclopedia Britannica || Oxford || More: The State as Monopoly of Violence Using the Greek word from which we derived the English word "anarchist," Jesus plainly says His followers are not to be "archists." Mark 10:42-45. We are to be servants, not "archists." "Not" + "archist" = "anarchist" Only Jesus is a legitimate Archist. People who don't see earthly "archists" as bad guys are themselves guilty of idolatry. God says "Thou shalt not steal." There is no ethical difference between "taxes" and "extortion." Here's an example of me butting-in on someone's blog and promoting my views: Godwords. "What about Romans 13?" I'm always asked this question when I say I'm an "anarcho-pacifist." Romans 12 and 13 are a unit on not resisting evil. "Bless those who persecute you" (Romans 12:14) does not mean that persecutors have God's ethical approval. They need to repent. We are not to resist evil (Romans 12:19), but to overcome evil with good gifts (Romans 12:21), even (turn the page) the most evil entity on the planet: The State (Romans 13:1ff). Paul refers to the Empire as "the Powers." Everywhere that Greek word is used in the New Testament, it means "demonic." Even the Romans believed that demons (daimones, daimoneV) guided the Empire. The message of Romans 13 is "be subject to evil." The message of Romans 13 is not "evil is good." Yes, "all things work together for good" (Romans 13:4; 8:28), even evil things, like "principalities and powers" (Romans 8:38) and their sword (Romans 8:35). But evil people have a moral obligation to repent of things that pacifists have a moral obligation to submit to. |
| Micah's Prophecy | Westminster Standards | Vine & Fig Tree University |
| Focus text: "His Vine"
And each of them will sit under his |
Chapter 24 Marriage and Divorce
|
This verse assumes "family values" taught elsewhere in the Bible in more detail.
The monogamous heterosexual family is the root of civilization. "Patriarchy" is a hated word. It doesn't mean what you think it means.
Pierre Joseph Proudhon: Patriarchy and Agrarian Jurisprudence The modern concept of "separation of church and state" -- which really means the "separation of God and the Public Square" -- denies the concept of Biblical Theocracy. This website not only denies "the separation of church and state," but promotes "the abolition of church and state." The Bible uses “Vine & Fig Tree” imagery to describe a time when we beat our "swords into plowshares" and everyone dwells peacefully under his own “Vine & Fig Tree.” The New Testament describes Christians as "sons of Abraham" the Patriarch. Abraham and Sarah were not under the rule of any State or Empire. The desire to have a creaturely king is a rejection of God the Creator as King (1 Samuel 8; Romans 1:25). The real meaning of Easter is that Jesus is now -- in 2022 -- the only legitimate King. Every king on planet earth should immediately abdicate and get a real job in "the Private Sector." This is one reason why every government in the last 2000 years has eventually banned the Bible. Even the United States, where The Supreme Court has ruled that public school teachers cannot tell students that Jesus the King says "Thou shalt not steal" (Matthew 19:18; Exodus 20:13-16; Deuteronomy 5:17-20). Creaturely kings are "false gods" in the Bible, and they correctly view the Bible as a threat to their idolatrous reign: to them, The Bible is an "Anarchist Manifesto." According to the Bible, creaturely government is "The Most Dangerous Idolatry." It will take me a while to convince you that the Real Meaning of Easter is “Vine & Fig Tree.” I'll have to persuade you to read a lot of Bible verses through new eyes. Abraham and Sarah did not "go to church." Their priest was Melchizedek, as in ours. Family = "undemocratic" says progressives When families are functional, the State is unnecessary;Archism is socially unapproved John Adams: importance of mothers The Family is God's central unit of society. The family is commanded to teach God's Law. Therefore next installment: Education |
| Micah's Prophecy | Westminster Standards | Vine & Fig Tree University |
| Micah 4:2
"Come, let us go up to the mountain of the LORD That He may teach us about His ways |
Supplemental texts:
Deuteronomy 4:9f.; 6:7f., 20f.; 11:18-21, etc. Education is something all of us must do.
Law-teaching all the nations through hospitality and open borders. Different from evangelism - Converting the existing generation vs. teaching the next generation "Education" includes "character" by way of "apologetics" and service. Lifelong learners / lifelong teachers
|
| Micah's Prophecy | Westminster Standards | Vine & Fig Tree University |
| Though all the peoples walk Each in the name of his god, As for us, we will walk In the Name of the LORD our God forever and ever. |
"Character" is the ability to stand against the crowd, in faith, in obedience to God. • What you do when nobody is watching • What you do when everybody is watching (and mocking) Micah highlights the importance of teaching God's Law. Ethics is more important to civilization than intelligence.
True education enables a Christian to stand against unbelief. Character and pacifism - forgiveness, nurture vs. rule |
| Micah's Prophecy | Westminster Standards | Vine & Fig Tree University |
| Focus Text: Vine and under his
fig tree,
And each of them will sit under his |
The story of the Bible is "paradise lost" and Paradise Restored. The blessings God promises in Deuteronomy 28 are (on the surface) primarily agricultural. Would you be willing to live for hundreds of years in the Garden of Eden with a community of sanctified people . . . but no cell phone? Agrarianism vs. technology/industrialism: we have barely begun to weigh the evidence for and against debt-financed state-directed industrialization. See the Israeli study of Polio. "Salvation" in the Bible means the restoration of the conditions of the Garden of Eden (Genesis 1-2)
Studies in Mutualist Political Economy: Industrialism vs. Decentralism -- The Role of the State Agrarian Man vs. Industrialist Man: Political vs. Economic Man Pierre Joseph Proudhon: Agrarian Jurisprudence Compare first three chapters in Genesis with last three chapters in Revelation: Edenic imagery - Garden of Eden / City of GodWilderness vs. Garden: Garden = Order
If you don't grow your own food, you're dependent on food that must be stripped of nutrition so that it doesn't spoil as it travels vast distances and sits on the shelf at Walmart. Living off land depends on owning the land. Therefore Agrarianism is related to Property. |
| Micah's Prophecy | Westminster Standards | Vine & Fig Tree University |
| Focus text:
Micah 4:4 |
"Communism" is a word like "Theocracy" -- everyone hates the word. The Bible is individualist The Bible says "Thou shalt not steal" stuff that pertains to another. This means someone possesses something and should not be dispossessed. The world "Property" comes from the Latin proprietas, from proprius ‘one's own, particular.’ Related to the word "proper." Someone representing himself in court comes before the court "In Pro Per" or In Propria Persona. Your person is your basic property. If you turn a wilderness into a garden, the garden is your property. It was wrong for Jezebel and Ahab to steal Naboth's vine and fig tree. Naboth said to Ahab, “The Lord forbid that I should give the inheritance of my patriarchs to you!” (1 Kings 21:3) The Bible holds out the ideal of property free from princes and pirates. See the phrases "dwell safely" and "none to make them afraid" in the Bible. But the Bible is also communitarian (or some English word that substitutes for the Greek word κοινωνία, koinōnía). Christian fellowship is more than each man standing on his front porch with an AK-47 protecting his right to "private property." If you turn wilderness into a garden, you "own" the garden. How some Christians practice "communism": Bruderhof – Community of Goods America errs on the side of individualism to the neglect of "fellowship," "sharing" "community," "extended family," and other Biblical concepts.
Some opponents of archism are also opponents of private property. The French anarchist Pierre Joseph Proudhon famously said, "Property is theft." But what he meant was what Isaiah likely intended: "Woe to you who add more houses to your houses and more fields to your fields. Finally there is no room left for other people. Then you are left alone in the land" (Isaiah 5:8). Some people hire archists to prevent farmers from living off the land. Accumulation without use and productivity is not the ideal. But one individual accumulating more property than others and producing more than others and becoming richer than others need not be discouraged. See Abraham, Genesis 13:2. God's creation consists of unlimited wealth. There's more than enough property for everyone. Anarchists who are also "socialists" or "communists" |
| Micah's Prophecy | Westminster Standards | Vine & Fig Tree University |
| Focus text: the ones God has afflicted
In that day, saith the LORD, |
I was raised to believe that "capitalism" was better than "socialism." Unquestionably, freedom is better for humanity than centralized control and planning. State "Socialism" has resulted in poverty and mass death wherever it has been tried: Soviet
Union, China, Cuba, Venezuela, etc.
But in 2022, young people who are unaware of the history of State Socialism in the 20th century have been victims of "Mass Formation Psychosis" and pay lip service to "socialism" and criticize "capitalism." What they criticize under the name "capitalism" is not freedom from archists. It is not 100% pure laissez-faire capitalism with 0% socialism. They are criticizing a "mixed economy." Before the rise of monopoly capitalism in the latter part of the 19th and early 20th century, critics of the State were also champions of the poor, the weak, and the oppressed. These anarchists have also called themselves "socialists." 19th-century anarchists and socialists were critical of economic policies like usury (interest of any amount secured by a legal privilege), which the Bible also criticizes. In addition to usury, anarchists and socialists like Benjamin Tucker were critical of Too often, "anarcho-socialists" have been envious of the rich, regardless of whether the rich accumulated their wealth fairly in the service of others, or by state-assisted exploitation. We can learn from "socialist" opponents of archism if we are also discerning.
"No man is an island." Community: Serving the weak rather than the powerful | The "driven out" and "afflicted"
God "afflicts" and "drives out" using "archists." |
|
Chapter 5 Providence
|
Capitalism, Not SocialismThis is the most important issue in the world today, and -- if you think about it -- it is the most important issue in the Bible. Mass Death It is the most important issue in the world today because hundreds of millions of human beings have been murdered by those attempting to impose "socialism," and the lives of billions have been subjected to poverty and tyranny, while billions of people have had their lives improved under capitalism -- the freedom to live free from socialists and other archists. Idolatry and False Religion Biblically speaking, this is evidence of whether you believe in God or not. Specifically, whether you believe in Providence. If you don't believe Jesus is the all-powerful Messiah, then you are a deist, if not an atheist, and the god of deism is a false god. The concept of "The Invisible Hand of Divine Providence" is personal, while deism eventually sifts out as evolutionary. Evolution is the impersonal and random soil in which socialism thrives. Evolution is a religion; an archist religion; a rival to the religion of Christ. Idolatry is the subject of the First Commandment, it is the #1 issue in the pages of the Bible, and socialism is idolatry. Human archism is a false god. "Civil government" is an idol. The vast majority of church-going Christians cannot understand how Jesus could be reigning as the Messiah right now -- today -- without being physically present on earth, sitting on a literal throne in Jerusalem. It is because they do not understand this that they cannot coherently explain one of the most important concepts in our world today: Why Capitalism is better than Socialism. Because they don't understand economics, they don't understand how Jesus can reign as Messiah without creating a police state. Most church-goers cannot explain why capitalism has created the highest standard of living in human history, while socialism leads to poverty and mass death. Capitalism is a pacifist economic system. Capitalism is for "Economic Man." Socialism is for "Political Man." Church-going Christians do not understand how God governs the world. Church-going Christians do not understand how God wants the world to operate. Church-going Christians do not understand the Kingdom-Reign of God and our role in it. Socialism is when your life is all about "standing up for your rights." Archism. The Bible is a capitalist blueprint for healing our world. That's "good news." And "good news" is the meaning of the word "gospel" The word "Capitalism"Some people (generally on the "left") agree with us on the moral necessity of free markets, but dislike the word "capitalism." They make good points.
|
| Micah's Prophecy | Westminster Standards | Vine & Fig Tree University |
| forever
Micah 4:5 As for us, we will walk and the LORD shall reign over them in mount Zion |
When the Vine & Fig Tree world is "established" (verse 1, fulfilled in Acts 2, esp. v.36), it is said to last "forever and ever."
PreterismThe Latin word for "past" is praeter. The word "preterism" comes from the Latin word for past, which is brought into English words like "the preterit tense" and a school of eschatology called "preterism." Saying a prophecy was fulfilled in the past is called "Preterism." According to Peter in Acts 2, and elsewhere in the New Testament, the Apostles were living in "the Last Days" of the Old Covenant. This is when Jesus was made the Christ: in the past. So where does "the second coming" come in? This may be the most controversial doctrine in Micah's “Vine & Fig Tree” prophecy. The vast majority of Christians believe Jesus will begin reigning as the Messiah (or "Christ") at His "second coming." Until then, life on earth is going to get worse and worse. I believe life on earth has been getting better and better because Christ began reigning in His Kingdom in the past. I believe "the second coming of Christ" already happened. It happened exactly when the Bible said it would happen: before "that generation" died out. It happened at the destruction of Jerusalem in AD 66-70. Jesus came a second time in judgment against those who rejected Him as the Christ. The same generation that witnessed His first coming also witnessed His second coming. It happened in the past. The claim that Jesus is the Messiah today (not just in the future) is the claim that Jesus was made "Lord and Christ" in the past. This is the "good news," or "Gospel." The Antichrist, the Great Tribulation, Armageddon, and Jesus are NotComingSoon.net |
|
|
The table above contains a lot of information, and 10x more if you follow the linked articles. The vast majority of government mis-educated Americans do not have the mental or spiritual discipline to work through the argument above. America's Founding Fathers, however, already familiar with the Westminster Standards, would be able to follow the argument and reach this astonishing conclusion: We must abolish the United States and replace it with a Christocracy.
If Americans would follow the instructions of the Declaration of Independence and abolish the U.S. government, all other nations would follow suit, probably beginning with the smallest (least archist) governments. It would initiate a "millennial avalanche" around the world.
In a sentence, this is the view of Vine & Fig Tree University:
Jesus is the Christ.
In 2024, almost nobody believes that statement to be true.When you first hear it, you might think that the juxtaposition of "Jesus" and "Christ" is obvious and not at all controversial. But when you dig deeper, it appears that this is the most controversial proposition on planet earth.
And -- most surprisingly -- the vast, overwhelming majority of professing, church-going (or non-churching) Christians do not believe that Jesus is the Christ today.
I defend the proposition that Jesus is the Messiah right now, and has fulfilled or is fulfilling all the "messianic prophecies" -- even those prophecies most Christians reserve for "the millennium" or "the New Heavens and New Earth."
And I respect the fact that you think I'm a dangerous looney for claiming that the Second Coming already happened. I used to think that way too. Here are the verses on "this generation" and the "any moment return of Christ."
The focus of the New Testament is on the generation that rejected Jesus as the Christ, not any generation thousands or millions of years in the future. The "Second Coming" of Christ -- a coming in vengeance against those who murdered Him -- is said to be imminent everywhere in the New Testament. Atheists say Jesus was wrong about His Second Coming, but that's because atheists ignore those rules above. Jesus never predicted the imminent end of planet earth. He predicted the destruction of the temple in Jerusalem, the end of the Old Covenant, and the beginning of the New Covenant. This all took place in the past, hence "preterism."
| There is not a single verse in the New Testament which was intended by its author and understood by its original audience to be prophesying an event thousands of years in the future. |
People tell me I'm insane (not rational) for believing this. After I show them my reasons for believing this, they might grant that I'm not irrational, but they say I'm heretical, because even if I have the Bible on my side, I don't have "the Church Fathers" on my side. In fact, some go so far as to say that I'm not a Christian at all for believing this.
When I was younger I did not believe this, and I would have said that anyone who believed this was either non-rational, heretical, or should be excommunicated as a person who cannot possibly be a genuine Christian.
I believe "the Second Coming of Christ" already happened. In the past, not in our future.
Virtually every Christian I meet says this is insane. Unhinged. Looney. Not rational.
They'll tell me, "Open your eyes! Just look around! Seriously??"
Believe me, I know that my views are considered "out there." And this view is the most "out there" of all. Most church-goers are aware that some Christians are "pacifists." That can be tolerated. Some of these Christians, because they oppose killing and extortion, want to have nothing whatever to do with "government," and they are called "anarchists" or "anabaptists" and other insults. They're considered kooky (unlike the violent revolutionary assassins who are called "anarchists" even though they are actually "archists" who use violence to get their way, and want to be in charge of their own new government; pacifists are "kooky," but revolutionaries are "dangerous").
But the claim that the Second Coming of Christ already happened is either dangerously heretical or flat out insane.
|
How To Interpret the Bible
Rules for Interpreting Scripture:
Applying these simple and universally-agreed upon rules leads to this controversial conclusion:
The Second Coming of Christ happened in the past
and there is no prophecy of a Third Coming of Christ in our Future
In order to convince you that I am not insane, I need you to read a couple hundred verses of Scripture (found below). If you're willing to make the effort to get inside the mind of the authors of Scripture, by taking a couple of hours to read a lot of verses you haven't thought about before, you will say something to me like, "OK, you're not insane. I can see why you would come to that conclusion."
But even though you might admit that I'm not insane, you won't be able to admit that the Bible does not teach that Jesus will return in our future.
"If you don't believe in a future coming of Christ," you'll tell me, "you've denied The Faith and you're not even a Christian."
Even though I'm making a rational attempt to follow the teachings of the Bible.
"The Faith" means "the doctrines of the catholic church." The doctrines of "the church fathers."
Many people have told me I'm not a Christian because of the way I interpret the Bible on the issue of "eschatology." They believe this very strongly and dogmatically.
But their passion is matched by their ignorance of the Bible.
If you're willing to read a couple hundred verses of the Bible and re-think what you've been taught since Sunday School, click here and here.
We need a real revolution.
The American Revolution of 1776-1784 was more of a "reform" than a true revolution.
Abandoning "the Divine Right of Kings" seemed revolutionary at the time, but in retrospect the difference between monarchy and oligarchy is not that great.
America's Founding Fathers lived in an age when the Bible and Christianity was the centerpiece of public schools. This is why they were more perceptive about the evil of tyranny than we are today.
But they weren't perfect. Too many of those fine men believed that both slavery and institutionalized violence ("The State") were "ordained" by God. They believed in violence despite being followers of the Prince of Peace.
America's Founding Fathers abolished their government. If they could travel through time to our day, they would say it is much more important that we abolish our government than it was to abolish theirs.
But we should do so without muskets or violence of any kind. That means we must rely on education, persuasion, and ballots rather than bullets.
But having abolished the government, what should we then do? The Constitution failed to create a government that didn't need to be abolished.
We don't need a "government." We don't need a "public sector." We need to trust and obey God in a Freed Market. Our standard of living will be dramatically improved under 100% pure laissez-faire capitalism and 0% socialism.
But we must worship and serve God, and teach our children His Commandments. Liberty must be "Liberty Under God."
There is nothing that human beings ought to do or want to do that can not be accomplished without extortion and threats of violence (that is, without "government"). Capitalism creates miracles. Socialism creates poverty and mass death.
We must recognize that failing to have the Bible as our only lawbook (as John Adams recommended) is a form of idolatry. Voting for archists is rejecting God. This is what most of the 30,000 verses in the Bible are talking about.
Jesus forbids His followers from being archists.
We must be an-archists if we wish to avoid idolatry. Archists are false gods, according to the Bible.
We should be non-violent anarchists.This claim causes heads to explode.
But this is the logical conclusion one comes to if one takes the Declaration of Independence seriously.
How would you like to wager $1,000.00 that our home Bible study program can transform you into
| • An Extraordinary American, • An Extraordinary Christian, • An Extraordinary Human Being. |
If you complete all the assignments,
you will experience
the most profound, beneficial,
massive, and lasting personal transformation of your entire life,
or we will DOUBLE your money back.
We're calling it the
Listen to an audio tour of this website, from 2009:
|
|
Or mail your check to Vine & Fig Tree |
|
"Anarcho-Theocracy" |
|
|
|
|
|
