The E. Michael Jones thread

William87 has a pagan mindset.


Christ is Jewish, and man, and he is also God. So the Jewish part really is secondary to him being a man.

I don't read the King James Bible, it's a protestant bible and I'm Catholic. I read the Latin Vulgate which was translated by St. Jerome in the 5th century and to english in the form of Douay Rheims in 1582. Attached video argues about Sir. Francis, Bacon, Shakespeare, and the KJV...none of which matter to me.

I appreciate your info, I have a family member who thinks along your lines. The bible was released as a massive psy op for the goyim, and the Jews did this to control the goyim. Pretty intelligent for a small marginal colony of the Roman empire, whose temple was totally destroyed, and lost their land less than 100 years later to get it back in 1947. That's a long term plan I'd say.

You'll have to tell us your beliefs and this Nebuchadnezzar.

Fixation on race and its purity is a surefire way to destruction. He who loses heaven loses the earth also.
 

jakester318

Sparrow
There are other things that can be done: restrict such entertainment (e.g. by banning porn). Encourage troublesome ones to go to Israel. Restrict dual citizens from serving in elected office. Restrict usury. Etc.

Ok, as far I can tell, this is the first time I am seeing a true answer to my question: what do we do about it?

This is exactly the implication that I suspected: "Encourage troublesome ones to go to Israel." The Germans asked the same question about the Jews: "how do we integrate Jews who are not ethnically German into German society?" Their reasoning was that they were not loyal to Germany and that presented a problem in the minds of the Nazis. Even though many Jews served in the Germany Army during the 1st World War and many gave their lives. Though their numbers were small, they sacrificed themselves because of their love for Germany.

The problem, in my opinion, with encouraging troublesome ones to go to Israel is that this follows the same pattern followed by the Germans. Let's get rid of the "subversive" ones and then the next time around, we'll round them all up and figure out what to do next. Oh, you know what, now that we have them all together, let's kill them all. This is the progression.

We honor the citizenship of American people. That means something. We can try to restrict the above things you mentioned. We can also try to punish people who violate laws here but in the end, I don't think banishing citizens of this country to their perceived ancestral origins is what we should be doing. But that's my opinion, solely because of history. And I think what you are advocating for will lead to the same result for the Jews 70 years ago.
 

kel

Ostrich
Whenever possible, I always support authors by buying their books directly, since Amazon takes 30% of every sale. Amazon may like a great way to get the word out, but it turns into entrepreneurial serfdom in the long run.

An important thing for all of us to do, I do likewise. And, in general, I try to find alternative places to buy things online. I'll take my chances with getting a hard drive from bobscomputers.com rather than buying on Amazon, no matter how bad Bob is he's probably preferable to that beast.

It takes a few extra minutes, and sometimes it'll cost you a few extra dollars, but we have to be willing to accept minor inconveniences if it means supporting good people, or at least not supporting the worst of the worst.
 

NoMoreTO

Ostrich
Ok, as far I can tell, this is the first time I am seeing a true answer to my question: what do we do about it?

This is exactly the implication that I suspected: "Encourage troublesome ones to go to Israel." The Germans asked the same question about the Jews: "how do we integrate Jews who are not ethnically German into German society?" Their reasoning was that they were not loyal to Germany and that presented a problem in the minds of the Nazis. Even though many Jews served in the Germany Army during the 1st World War and many gave their lives. Though their numbers were small, they sacrificed themselves because of their love for Germany.

The problem, in my opinion, with encouraging troublesome ones to go to Israel is that this follows the same pattern followed by the Germans. Let's get rid of the "subversive" ones and then the next time around, we'll round them all up and figure out what to do next. Oh, you know what, now that we have them all together, let's kill them all. This is the progression.

We honor the citizenship of American people. That means something. We can try to restrict the above things you mentioned. We can also try to punish people who violate laws here but in the end, I don't think banishing citizens of this country to their perceived ancestral origins is what we should be doing. But that's my opinion, solely because of history. And I think what you are advocating for will lead to the same result for the Jews 70 years ago.

Since this is the EMJ thread.

I think EMJ would argue that hitler got alot right. He banned usury, increased manufacturing productivity at an astounding rate. In the early days he was paying for tickets to Israel, but the Jewish there didn't want to take them.

The Catholic approach is similar, but what you do is let them exist and don't declare a war on them. But I think its important to realize that international zionists declared war on Germany in 1931. So would we really have peace if we instituted a Catholic Confessional state? This is where converts come in and a national ethos which pushes actual values, no LGBT BS, no BLM socialisim, no Gay Marriage, big families, no mass immigration especially from Non Catholic/Christian lands. You can see the model being successfully shown in Hungary.

You really could reduce the influence without banning people. Ban AIPAC as foreign influence, do not allow dual citizenship so criminals can't run back to israel, change middle east policies, legislate Christian representation in Media / Hollywood etc.
 

Blade Runner

Pelican
William87 didn't read my post, nor does he know about the Bible, the Gospel, or history. The people you call "Jews" currently are a novel religion, it's called Rabbinical Judaism. They put the Talmud and Midrash above the Torah, since they are pretty much forced to ... why? As I've said before the "Jews"

1. Have no temple
2. Thus, have no sacrifice
3. Have no priestly line.

It has been almost 2000 years since the destruction of the Temple and as a result, all of the above. How can they be faithful to the Torah without these? :oops:

Christians have all 3. Thus, they are the real "Jews" if you want to use your parlance. But as I stated in my last post, they are more importantly, the "Israel of God."
 

Athanasius

Pelican
Ok, as far I can tell, this is the first time I am seeing a true answer to my question: what do we do about it?

This is exactly the implication that I suspected: "Encourage troublesome ones to go to Israel." The Germans asked the same question about the Jews: "how do we integrate Jews who are not ethnically German into German society?" Their reasoning was that they were not loyal to Germany and that presented a problem in the minds of the Nazis. Even though many Jews served in the Germany Army during the 1st World War and many gave their lives. Though their numbers were small, they sacrificed themselves because of their love for Germany.

The problem, in my opinion, with encouraging troublesome ones to go to Israel is that this follows the same pattern followed by the Germans. Let's get rid of the "subversive" ones and then the next time around, we'll round them all up and figure out what to do next. Oh, you know what, now that we have them all together, let's kill them all. This is the progression.

You seem to want to lead things in a sinister direction when that's not a natural progression at all, nor is it a direction I support. You also completely skipped the key portion, which is discernment. You can engage with someone else from here.
 

911

Peacock
Gold Member
I've read some posts here on E. Michael Jones and recently listened to the podcast Roosh did with him. As a Christian and as someone who recognizes that I have been grafted into family of the God of Israel, I am indebted to the Jewish Messiah and to the Jewish fathers of the faith who follow in the likeness of Abraham's faith.

That being said, when I listened to the podcast, I was struck by a potential implication of what E. Michael Jones believes. Namely, given that he is calling out Jews for many of the societal ills that are plaguing the West, what would his response be to the Jewish people as a whole, given that he feels they are responsible for those problems? It seems that if the Jews are being blamed for homosexuality, pornography, abortion, race relations, etc., then the implication would be that they need to be stopped. That seems like the most likely implication of what E. Michael Jones is saying. But I feel that this rhetoric is eerily reminiscent of how the Germans began to blame the Jews for the economic issues they faced during the time leading up to the second World War. And why should we care that there are some similarities?

If you are a Christian (Catholic, Protestant, or Orthodox), you ought to know the history of both the Jewish people and the Church. As Jones rightly pointed out in the podcast with Roosh, the Jews killed the Messiah. And they also gladly advocated that his blood be upon them and their children. There is no disputing that fact. And the implications of that are that the Jews have been judged by God since that fateful day when they crucified the Messiah. They were driven out of the land of Israel and were scattered among the nations for nearly two millennia. The Holocaust was probably the most extreme and visible manifestation of God's judgment of the nation.

However, not all who are of Israel have forsaken the Lord. Obviously, the Messiah himself is a Jew. The apostle Paul was a Jew. Peter, the pillar of the Catholic church was a Jew. The early Christians were Jewish and spread the Gospel to the nations, that if it were not done, all of us who make a claim to be a disciple of Messiah Jesus would not know the name of the Lord had it not been for those faithful followers of Jesus in the first century. We all owe a debt of gratitude to Jews for giving us the hope of the Gospel that we believers share in until this present day. Moreover, even though Israel rejected Jesus, God has always kept a remnant of his people who believe. And rest assured, there are Jews among us that have kept the faith of father Abraham and walk in the fear of Messiah Jesus. But given that it was the Jews who did forsake the Messiah and have him crucified, how should we then respond to the Jews today who are in rebellion against Messiah Jesus? Should we call them out? Should we direct our anger towards them? Are they to blame for all of the evil propaganda and lasciviousness that is rampant in Western society today?

Consider this, o Christian. If God wanted to cause the Jews to be jealous for his love by turning his affection towards the Gentiles, does that mean that God has forsaken the Jews? You see, were it not for God hardening their hearts and turning his affection towards us Gentiles, the reconciliation found in Messiah Jesus would not have come to us. It was through the rebellion of the Jews that we Gentiles have become partakers of the grace of God. But we cannot become proud or turn our eyes to the Jews in judgment because of their rebellion. Listen to the words of Paul:

"For if their rejection is the reconciliation of the world, what will their acceptance be but life from the dead? 16 If the first piece of dough is holy, the lump is also; and if the root is holy, the branches are too. 17 But if some of the branches were broken off, and you, being a wild olive, were grafted in among them and became partaker with them of the rich root of the olive tree, 18 do not be arrogant toward the branches; but if you are arrogant, remember that it is not you who supports the root, but the root supports you. 19 You will say then, “Branches were broken off so that I might be grafted in.” 20 Quite right, they were broken off for their unbelief, but you stand by your faith. Do not be conceited, but fear; 21 for if God did not spare the natural branches, He will not spare you, either. 22 Behold then the kindness and severity of God; to those who fell, severity, but to you, God’s kindness, if you continue in His kindness; otherwise you also will be cut off. 23 And they also, if they do not continue in their unbelief, will be grafted in, for God is able to graft them in again. 24 For if you were cut off from what is by nature a wild olive tree, and were grafted contrary to nature into a cultivated olive tree, how much more will these who are the natural branches be grafted into their own olive tree? 25 For I do not want you, brethren, to be uninformed of this mystery—so that you will not be wise in your own estimation—that a partial hardening has happened to Israel until the fullness of the Gentiles has come in; 26 and so all Israel will be saved"

Secondly, we can blame the Jews for being perverse and spreading perversity. We can find fault with them for many things. But consider this, simply attempting to spread evil and carnal perversion in the world is one side of the coin. The fact that we in the West are willing participants in this perversion makes us just as wretched as the people peddling it. You think you can blame the Jews for spreading pornography but not blame yourself for watching it? You think you can blame the Jews for advocating for abortion and not blame yourself for aborting your child because the laws gave you provision to do so? The Jews may be responsible for these things but what sort of evil people are we for participating in the very evils that we have blamed the Jews for creating?

If you are a Christian, take heed to yourself and walk wisely and circumspectly. If you don't think you are worthy of condemnation, you are deceived. If you participate in the public judgment of the Jews but consider yourself a follower of Messiah Jesus, you don't realize that you are passing judgment on God's people. Judgment of God's people is reserved for God and rather than be on the side of history that tried to remedy the world of the Jews, I urge you not to fall into the hands of the living God. Rather than stand in judgment of the Jewish people and inwardly hope for their retribution, we ought to pray that God would not delay the sending of his Son into the world so that finally, the Jews would become the true people of God and that the Jewish Messiah would begin his reign as King of the Nations.


The grip of Dispensationalism on many American Protestants is very strong. In terms of control over the goyim and getting the goyim to outright worship them as their masters, this was probably the best return on their money the Rothschilds ever got.
 

Athanasius

Pelican
The grip of Dispensationalism on many American Protestants is very strong. In terms of control over the goyim and getting the goyim to outright worship them as their masters, this was probably the best return on their money the Rothschilds ever got.

I'm a non-dispensationalist protestant, which, by the way, all protestants were before around the 1830s. Where is it documented that Jewish money was involved in swaying the Campbellites, Scofield, Ryrie, etc? What's the source of this? I have seen a number of scholarly Reformed and other critiques of dispensationalism, but never one that discussed the certainty or possibility of Jewish money corrupting things. Instead, I've always seen it discussed as simply sincerely-believed but errant theology based on misreadings of passages in Daniel, the Olivet discourse, etc. I've also been around a ton of Lutherans, Reformed Baptists/Presbyterians, and non-denom dispensationalists over the years, and not one of them has ever mentioned the topic... so just curious.
 

911

Peacock
Gold Member
I'm a non-dispensationalist protestant, which, by the way, all protestants were before around the 1830s. Where is it documented that Jewish money was involved in swaying the Campbellites, Scofield, Ryrie, etc? What's the source of this? I have seen a number of scholarly Reformed and other critiques of dispensationalism, but never one that discussed the certainty or possibility of Jewish money corrupting things. Instead, I've always seen it discussed as simply sincerely-believed but errant theology based on misreadings of passages in Daniel, the Olivet discourse, etc. I've also been around a ton of Lutherans, Reformed Baptists/Presbyterians, and non-denom dispensationalists over the years, and not one of them has ever mentioned the topic... so just curious.

Short answer, Samuel Untermeyer, who was a Rothschild funded lawyer and chairman of the American Jewish Committee, sponsored Darby and got the Scofield bible through Oxford Publishing.

Some good background on Scofiled here:


And who was Cyrus Scofield?

As a young con-artist in Kansas after the Civil War, he met up with John J. Ingalls, an aging Jewish lawyer who had been sent to Atchison by the "Secret Six" some thirty years before to work the Abolitionist cause. Pulling strings both in Kansas and with his compatriots back east, Ingalls assisted Scofield in gaining admission to the Bar, and procured his appointment as Federal Attorney for Kansas. Ingalls and Scofield became partners in a railroad scam which led to Cyrus serving time for criminal forgery.

While he was in prison, Scofield began studying the philosophy of John Darby, pioneer of the Plymouth Brethren movement and the "any moment now" rapture doctrine.

Upon his release from prison, Scofield deserted his first wife, Leonteen Carry Scofield, and his two daughters Abigail and Helen, and he took as his mistress a young girl from the St. Louis Flower Mission. He later abandoned her for Helen van Ward, whom he eventually married. Following his Illuminati connections to New York, he settled in at the Lotus Club, which he listed as his residence for the next twenty years. It was here that he presented his ideas for a new Christian Bible concordance, and was taken under the wing of Samuel Untermeyer, who later became chairman of the American Jewish Committee, president of the American League of Jewish Patriots, and chairman of the Non-sectarian Anti-Nazi League.

Untermeyer introduced Scofield to numerous Zionist and socialist leaders, including Samuel Gompers, Fiorello LaGuardia, Abraham Straus, Bernard Baruch and Jacob Schiff. These were the people who financed Scofield's research trips to Oxford and arranged the publication and distribution of his concordance.

It is impossible to overstate the influence of Cyrus Scofield on twentieth-century Christian beliefs. The Scofield Bible is the standard reference work in virtually all Christian ministries and divinity schools. It is singularly responsible for the Christian belief that the Hebrew Prophecies describe the kingdom of Jesus' Second Coming, and not the Zionist vision of a man-made New World Order.

And it is precisely because Christians persist in this belief that they remain blind to the reality of Zion.

Scofield served as the agent by which the Zionists paralyzed Christianity, while they prepared America for our final conquest.



There is abundant evidence linking CJ Scofield to Samuel Untermeyer, an agent of the Rothschilds empire. Untermeyer paid Scofield's expenses while he composed his references for insertion in the biblical text, giving us the infamous Scofield Reference Bible. Then the Rothschilds published it through their wholly controlled Oxford Press. This Bible was heavily marketed and adopted to the point that it became a common standard of "serious scholarship" and only those who consciously rejected it are unstained by its flawed assumptions. This marketing scheme was promoted throughout the broad collection of evangelical denominations, creating a vast pool of middle and lower class adherents, and in some cases spinning off new denominations and organizations to pursue this new and increasingly popular approach to prophecy.

Follow the money. This stuff was rammed down our throats, as it were, because it was perfectly adapted to Zionist needs to build a solid support base in the US, the biggest bully of nations in modern times. There were a host of other efforts at the same time, but the program for the US to create a broad evangelical Christian Zionist network continues to reap a harvest of fanatical and entirely unreasoned support for Israel. The modern State of Israel can commit any crime imaginable with impunity. This was precisely the reason Untermeyer invested in it.


Untermeyer was the head of the American Jewish Committee, he also was a key player in setting up the Federal Reserve cartlel and getting the US into WW1 through the blackmail of Woodrow Wilson.


EMJ covered Dispensationalism in the videos here:

 

jakester318

Sparrow
The grip of Dispensationalism on many American Protestants is very strong. In terms of control over the goyim and getting the goyim to outright worship them as their masters, this was probably the best return on their money the Rothschilds ever got.

To merely respect the Jews for their role in God's redemptive history and to accept them as brothers in the common faith in Messiah Jesus is hardly tantamount to worshiping them. But you don't care to understand that nor you do you understand the Gospel either, because if you really did, we wouldn't be having this conversation.
 

NoMoreTO

Ostrich
To merely respect the Jews for their role in God's redemptive history and to accept them as brothers in the common faith in Messiah Jesus is hardly tantamount to worshiping them. But you don't care to understand that nor you do you understand the Gospel either, because if you really did, we wouldn't be having this conversation.

First - Jews don't believe in Jesus as the messiah.
Second - its not about us accepting them, but them accepting Jesus Christ as messiah.

There is no universal brotherhood. In the Gospel Jesus Christ explains that he came with the sword, to divide. So how can we brothers in common faith when the Gospel says a Christian is divided against non Christians, even blood family members?
 

JohnQThomas

Woodpecker
Ok, as far I can tell, this is the first time I am seeing a true answer to my question: what do we do about it?

This is exactly the implication that I suspected: "Encourage troublesome ones to go to Israel." The Germans asked the same question about the Jews: "how do we integrate Jews who are not ethnically German into German society?" Their reasoning was that they were not loyal to Germany and that presented a problem in the minds of the Nazis. Even though many Jews served in the Germany Army during the 1st World War and many gave their lives. Though their numbers were small, they sacrificed themselves because of their love for Germany.

The problem, in my opinion, with encouraging troublesome ones to go to Israel is that this follows the same pattern followed by the Germans. Let's get rid of the "subversive" ones and then the next time around, we'll round them all up and figure out what to do next. Oh, you know what, now that we have them all together, let's kill them all. This is the progression.

We honor the citizenship of American people. That means something. We can try to restrict the above things you mentioned. We can also try to punish people who violate laws here but in the end, I don't think banishing citizens of this country to their perceived ancestral origins is what we should be doing. But that's my opinion, solely because of history. And I think what you are advocating for will lead to the same result for the Jews 70 years ago.
And it will lead to the same 70-plus years of bad optics for any political movement that goes about addressing (even genuine) problems by targeting a whole religious or ethnic group.
 

JohnQThomas

Woodpecker
Since this is the EMJ thread.

I think EMJ would argue that hitler got alot right. He banned usury, increased manufacturing productivity at an astounding rate. In the early days he was paying for tickets to Israel, but the Jewish there didn't want to take them.

The Catholic approach is similar, but what you do is let them exist and don't declare a war on them. But I think its important to realize that international zionists declared war on Germany in 1931. So would we really have peace if we instituted a Catholic Confessional state? This is where converts come in and a national ethos which pushes actual values, no LGBT BS, no BLM socialisim, no Gay Marriage, big families, no mass immigration especially from Non Catholic/Christian lands. You can see the model being successfully shown in Hungary.

You really could reduce the influence without banning people. Ban AIPAC as foreign influence, do not allow dual citizenship so criminals can't run back to israel, change middle east policies, legislate Christian representation in Media / Hollywood etc.
But no theocracy, please. There may be legitimate roles in the “scheme of things” for a few countries with state religions—for those who choose to live there.
My country (the U.S.A.) is not a theocracy and I intend that it never will become one. Not an Islamic theocracy; not a Jewish theocracy; and not a Catholic or Protestant or Mormon theocracy. The America I love is one where I can be a Christian because I sincerely and of my own free will choose to follow Christ, not because Christianity is compulsory or “strongly encouraged” or an informal requirement for making the “right” business or social contacts.
(I suspect that Jesus prefers followers who actually “mean it”, without ulterior motive.)

Happy Independence Day to my fellow Americans.
 
Last edited:

godfather dust

Hummingbird
Gold Member
If a new country rises from America's ashes I absolutely do want a theocracy.

This would not involve forced conversions or compulsory religious practice. I haven't thought about the specific details (I'll try to come back to this later it's late) but the Constitution is not perfect.
 

JohnQThomas

Woodpecker
Fixation on race and its purity is a surefire way to destruction. He who loses heaven loses the earth also.
I just saw this; surprised it did not happen sooner. You know what they say though - when you are getting flack, that means you are over the target!

EMJ is definitely making waves - even Roosh didn't have all of his books banned at once.

Whenever possible, I always support authors by buying their books directly, since Amazon takes 30% of every sale. Amazon may like a great way to get the word out, but it turns into entrepreneurial serfdom in the long run.
And also, our efforts to share the Gospel might be more effective if they didn’t alternate with recurring bouts of harsh measures against those we deem “enemies”.
 

JohnQThomas

Woodpecker
If a new country rises from America's ashes I absolutely do want a theocracy.

This would not involve forced conversions or compulsory religious practice. I haven't thought about the specific details (I'll try to come back to this later it's late) but the Constitution is not perfect.
It’s best to work out the specific details before trying to implement a theocracy. Making a revolution with no idea as to what will follow rarely turns out well.
 

jakester318

Sparrow
First - Jews don't believe in Jesus as the messiah.
Second - its not about us accepting them, but them accepting Jesus Christ as messiah.

There is no universal brotherhood. In the Gospel Jesus Christ explains that he came with the sword, to divide. So how can we brothers in common faith when the Gospel says a Christian is divided against non Christians, even blood family members?
NoMoreTO: I did specify that I meant brothers IN the common faith, those who actually share the faith. Additionally, most Jews do not believe Jesus is the Messiah but there are many who do. Do you consider a Jew who believes in the Messiah as a brother in the common faith if you are a Christian?
 

NoMoreTO

Ostrich
NoMoreTO: I did specify that I meant brothers IN the common faith, those who actually share the faith. Additionally, most Jews do not believe Jesus is the Messiah but there are many who do. Do you consider a Jew who believes in the Messiah as a brother in the common faith if you are a Christian?

Yes. EMJ Explains that when a Jew converts, they become a Christian. This would be a minority but of course they are brothers in Christ. When we speak of Jews, we speak of the vast majority.
 

NoMoreTO

Ostrich
But no theocracy, please. There may be legitimate roles in the “scheme of things” for a few countries with state religions—for those who choose to live there.
My country (the U.S.A.) is not a theocracy and I intend that it never will become one. Not an Islamic theocracy; not a Jewish theocracy; and not a Catholic or Protestant or Mormon theocracy. The America I love is one where I can be a Christian because I sincerely and of my own free will choose to follow Christ, not because Christianity is compulsory or “strongly encouraged” or an informal requirement for making the “right” business or social contacts.
(I suspect that Jesus prefers followers who actually “mean it”, without ulterior motive.)

Happy Independence Day to my fellow Americans.

Even if we go back 40 years, most countries had a State Religion. France & Spain were Catholic, in Scotland - the Church of Scotland (Presbyterian) is still officially recognized as the state religion. Obviously, these countries are not USA. Having a State Religion does not mean that you crack skulls of everyone who is in the minority, at least not in the Christian example. A level of freedom is provided with the understanding that the laws of the country are inherently Christian, and the non Christian is somewhat of an 'outsider'. The cultural ethos of the country is Christian, and laws are made to match Gods law so things like abortion, sex education are not allowed.

I used to subscribe to the idea also that 'maximum freedom gives you total choice in choosing God'. The freedom and purity of it have alot of appeal. But as we can see ever more today, when the society is a cesspool, more and more souls are lost. People are encouraged to go off of the path. Think about how marriage laws, gambling laws, drug laws, prostitution laws have all been all but stricken from the books over the past decades. Is a Christian libertarian (as I would describe your mindset) protecting and securing his brother from sin? Is he helping to ensure his son doesn't have a gambling problem by keeping the casino out of town? Is he his brothers keeper ? Yes, he can still do all these things on an individual level, but maybe your brother needs that brothel closed to help him on his path. Or better yet, he never went to the brothel in the first place because it didn't exist.

Sunday shopping is a good example. Americans are given freedom to shop on Sunday. Then the corporations open all their doors. Now people have to decide whether they should keep their job or go to Church on Sunday. Surely we are better off when the law of the land is instituted for Sunday. This is the old testament example with the sabbath. It wasn't - celebrate the sabbath or choose to take it off as you see fit.

Many Americans over time held these views as constant, and as no infringement at all on their rights, but just community sensibility. Over time the libertarian mindset, along with big business, and moral relativism have caused these positions to be chipped away at.

When comments like, "in God we Trust" or "God given Rights" were coined by the founders, every American was a Christian, and felt that it implied a Christian God. Peter Helland teaches that their error along with the initial rebellion against the King's authority was not invoking the name of Jesus Christ. The south pushed for this. Freedom of religion was interpreted as denominational freedom, not Hinduism. The founders were masonic and slipped this intentional vagueness in.

Would you be ok with the name of Jesus Christ being used in replacement of God in the constitution?
 
Top