Posts Tagged ‘patrick henry’

It is very heartening to hear of local officials in New York and elsewhere starting to stand up against the central government’s deceptive power grab disguised as gun safety.  It is the Biblical responsibility of the lower magistrate to lead the people against a tyrannical higher magistrate, in this case Barack Hussein Obama.

However, this legal right of the lower magistrate presupposes a commitment to  reestablish the rule of God and his law.  If this is lacking the resistance is no better than the Jewish rebels who resisted the Army of Nebuchadnezzar to the bitter end.  We must face the bitter reality that Barack Obama is America’s Nebuchadnezzar, called by God from a foreign land to discipline his lawless church.

Returning to the Constitution is exactly the wrong approach because the Constitution stands in defiance of the Word of God.  We must return to God and His law as our standard if we expect Him to bless our resistance.

Unfortunately, this is not usually the attitude of the typical American Christian conservative.  The February 15 edition of Freedom Outpost featured the 25-0 vote of the Oswego County legislature in a resolution against the recently passed draconian gun laws in New York state.

Oh my friends there are patriots abounding that are standing up for liberty and the Constitution. They will not have the law of the land trampled under foot by zealous, emotional politicians who would violate the law through means of unlawful laws in order to make themselves look good and place a feeling of security around the people they govern, while not providing a shred of security for them. They are moving in the direction of slavery, not liberty. They are making the people vulnerable, not secure or safe.

It’s good to see counties like Oswego and others standing up for the law and for liberty against the tyrants in New York’s government. Take heart, it isn’t just happening there, but around the country!

The article spoke of a “third militia” in addition to the federal military and national guard.  This third militia is said to be comprised of the people, who are called upon to defend the state when the others will not.

I wish it were true, but the terrifying fact is that our forefathers gave away most of our powers of self-defense when they ratified the Constitution in 1787.   This reality is hidden by the MYTH – popular among conservatives — of the citizen militia always on guard against tyranny.

Unlike the 21st Amendment, which specifically repealed the 18th, the 2nd Amendment did not repeal the damage done in the body of the Constitution.

Section 1: The eighteenth article of amendment to the Constitution of the United States is hereby repealed.

Section 2: The transportation or importation into any State, Territory, or Possession of the United States for delivery or use therein of intoxicating liquors, in violation of the laws thereof, is hereby prohibited.

Here are some excerpts from our MythBusters Case#19, where the nearly complete grant of power to the Federal government is exposed.

The central government has 13 positive powers related to “defense,” compared to the states two positives and two negatives.  Do the algebra and that is 13 to zero in favor of the central government.  They were no doubt smirking, “All of the power related to the militia belongs to us, but we’ll let you do all the heavy lifting of training them for us.”   What a deal!

The states can’t even defend themselves under the Constitution without permission from the national government now headed by Barack Hussein Obama.   The U.S. Constitution is a slender reed to rely on for defense against Federal tyranny.

The Bill of Rights did not repeal the 13 defense-related rights in the body of the Constitution.  The 2nd Amendment’s call for a well-regulated militia does not overturn the power delegated to Congress in Article I for “organizing, arming, and disciplining the militia…”?  The 2nd Amendment should have read something like this:

Section 1: The power for organizing, arming, disciplining, and governing the militia is hereby restored to the states individually and the states may use it to execute the laws of the state, suppress insurrections, or repel invasions as they see fit.

Section 2: A well regulated militia, being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed.

Conservatives like to boast that these are part of the “limited, delegated powers” that were granted to the Federal government in Article I.  Everything not listed here is reserved to the states or to the people.  Very comforting.  The big question is, what is not listed here?   Certainly not the right to regulate the militia.

Unfortunately, the Constitution doesn’t allow for the well-regulated so-called “third militia” comprised of the people.  The people are a subset of the states and as we have seen the surrender of power by the states was almost total.

Case Closed:  This was one reason Patrick Henry hated the proposed U.S. Constitution and fought its passage bitterly in the Virginia Ratifying Convention.  As he stated on June 9, 1788: “Are we at last brought to such an humiliating and debasing degradation, that we cannot be trusted with arms for our own defense?…. The power of arming the militia, and the means of purchasing arms, are taken from the states by the paramount powers of Congress….”

Three cheers for those local officials who are taking a stand, but unfortunately even the Biblical right of interposition has been stripped from us by Lincoln’s unCivil War.  It is time to repent before God and return to the bedrock of liberty found in the higher law as our authority.  That includes passages such as Psalm 149:6,7ff:  “Let the high praises of God be in their mouth, and a two-edged sword in their hand, to execute vengeance on the nations…”

The growing list of some 250 sheriff’s around the country willing to resist the illegal Federal crackdown on private ownership of firearms is heartening. The problem is there is not much foundation for this resistance based on the authority of the U.S. Constitution.

Oath Keepers is an American nonprofit organization that advocates that its members (current and former U.S. military and law enforcement uphold the Constitution of the United States should they be ordered to violate it.  The Oath Keepers’ motto is ‘Not On Our Watch.”  And their stated objective is to resist those actions taken by the U.S. Government that overstep Constitutional boundaries.

That entire paragraph is a direct quote from the Oath Keepers website.  MythBusters is grateful for the work of Oath Keepers and wish them success in mobilizing resistance to the encroaching Federal tyranny.    The appeal for passive resistance is the first line of defense.

Anything more than that at present could get you in big trouble under the Constitution.  MythBusters initial reaction was that Oath Keepers’ appeal to the U.S. Constitution could ultimately be turned against them.  This is because the Constitution handed over almost all defense-related powers — including the militia — to the Federal government.

Myth:   Local jurisdictions, especially the county sheriff, are authorized by the Constitution to organize armed resistance against the Federal government.

This myth showed up last week in our mail box in a letter from the Council On Revival.   COR is a group devoted to the noble goal of a 24-year Master Plan For Rebuilding America.  Unfortunately, they also are attempting to build on the sandy foundation of the United States Constitution.  This sentence caught our eye:

“Hopefully such confrontations will not arise, but the probability of a tyrannical, socialistic government (if it degenerates to that) attacking citizens in any county would be GREATLY REDUCED if even 60% of all U.S. counties had their own “well regulated militia” armed and ready to fight to the death if necessary for their God-given, constitutional rights.”

MythBusters began this investigation with a careful reading of Article I of the United States Constitution.  We came away with several key observations.  First, only Congress, not the states is authorized “to provide for calling forth the militia to execute the laws of the Union, suppress insurrections and repel invasions.”  Later Article I says that “No State shall, without the consent of Congress … keep troops, or ships of war in time of peace…or engage in war, unless actually invaded….”

***************

Is Public Education Really Worth The Price?

You Get What You Pay For It — Nothing!

Your Child Deserves the Best

At A Price You Can Afford

King’s Way Classical Academy

For Only $500 Annual tuition!!

***************

The only thing the states can do is 1) appoint the officers and 2) train the militia as specified by Congress.   This seemed to confirm our initial hunch that the plan outlined in the previous paragraph may not be legal under the United States Constitution.

But we decided to dig deeper.  Here’s a little project for you.  Read through Article I of the U.S. Constitution and write down all the powers related to defense that the states gave away to Congress.  Never mind, MythBusters did it for you.  Here’s the list of supposedly “limited powers” related to defense that “we the people” turned over to the national government in 1788.

Congress has authority to:

  • To lay & collect taxes…for the common defense
  • To declare war….
  • To raise & support armies
  • To provide & maintain a navy
  • To make rules for the government and regulation of the land and naval forces
  • To provide for the calling forth the militia

1)      to execute the laws of the Union

2)      to suppress insurrections

3)      to repel invasions

  • To provide for organizing, arming, and disciplining the militia
  • To provide for governing such part of them  [the militia] as may be employed in the service of the United States
  • To make all laws which shall be necessary & proper for carrying into execution the foregoing powers, and all powers vested by this Constitution in the government of the United States

States have authority to:

  • Appointment of the officers [of the militia]
  • Training the militia according to the discipline prescribed by Congress

States are specifically forbidden to:

  • … keep troops, or ships of war, in time of peace
  • …engage in war, unless actually invaded, or in such imminent danger as will not admit of delay.

The central government has 13 positive powers related to “defense,” compared to the states two positives and two negatives.  Do the algebra and that is 13 to zero in favor of the central government.  They are no doubt smirking, “All of the power related to the militia belongs to us, but we’ll let you do all the heavy lifting of training them for us.”   What a deal!

According to the Constitution the states can’t even defend themselves without permission from the Federal Congress.  It would appear that anybody relying on the United States Constitution for defense against Federal tyranny needs to readjust their thinking cap.

The Bill of Rights never repealed the above powers.  Does the 2nd Amendment’s call for a well-regulated militia, overturn the power delegated to Congress in Article I for “organizing, arming, and disciplining the militia…”?   We don’t think so.

Conservatives like to boast that these are part of the “limited, delegated powers” that were granted to the Federal government in Article I.  Everything not listed here is reserved to the states or to the people.  Very comforting.  The big question is, what is not listed here?   Certainly not the right to regulate the militia.

Try this test:  you have 1 minute to write down 1 legitimate, Biblical power of government that is not included on the list in Article I.  OK, time’s up………Maybe you need more than a minute?

Unfortunately, the Constitution doesn’t allow for the well-regulated militia to be “organized legally under one’s own county sheriff or state governor,” as COR would like to believe. This is one of the main reasons that Patrick Henry so adamantly opposed the Constitution in the Virginia Ratifying Convention.

As he stated on June 9, 1788: “Are we at last brought to such an humiliating and debasing degradation, that we cannot be trusted with arms for our own defense?…. The power of arming the militia, and the means of purchasing arms, are taken from the states by the paramount powers of Congress….”

Case Closed:  Oath Keepers and COR are asking former government officials to honor their oath to defend the United States Constitution against all enemies foreign and domestic.  They could get what they ask for:  Under the Constitution they themselves might be declared domestic enemies for trying to mobilize and encourage the states to “keep troops, or ships of war, in time of peace.”

This is why Patrick Henry said of the proposed Constitution, “I despise and abhor it.”   Better to appeal to the “higher law” of God in the Bible.   We can only conclude that God’s judgment is descending on this nation precisely because this covenant-breaking Constitution has rejected that very law.  MythBusters Rating:  Yellow Flag (caution) to Oath Keepers and COR for their dangerous reliance on the U.S. Constitution.

It is heartening recently to see some Christian leaders placing themselves in a position of interposition between the people and their evil rulers.

In one example of interposition, Newsmax recently reported that “the Rev. Billy Graham has thrown his support behind embattled Chick-fil-A President Dan Cathy and announced plans to stop by the fast food restaurant next Wednesday as part of Mike Huckabee’s “Eat Mor Chikin” promotion.”

In like manner, “Dr. James Dobson is taking a defiant stand on Obamacare and issuing a loud and clear message to President Obama: ‘I WILL NOT pay the surcharge for abortion services. … So come and get me if you must, Mr. President. I will not bow before your wicked regulation.’”

These are encouraging signs and a departure from the prevailing head-in-the-sand mentality that has characterized most evangelical church leadership for much of the past 100 years.

MYTH:  Christian leaders are obligated to obey every edict of the civil magistrate without resistance of any kind, in accordance with Rom. 13:1.

It is the responsibility of church leadership to inform the civil magistrate when his law does not conform to God’s law.  It may also be the responsibility of church leadership to disobey such a law because the church is a separate legal jurisdiction.  The great failing of church leadership in America today is its refusal to proclaim the law of the King of kings to the civil magistrate.

For John the Baptist, announcing Christ’s authority to Rome was as much a part of “preparing the way for the Lord” as was his ministry of baptism (Ps 2:10-12).  Baptism was John’s “priestly” preparation, but he was also announcing to Rome that a new King had arrived and Rome must obey His law:   Mt. 14:4,5 – “For John had been saying to him (Herod), ‘It is not lawful for you to have her.”  That was the kingly preparation.

This would make proclaiming God’s law to local magistrates as much a part of the job description of church leadership, as baptizing new converts.  This kind of interposition is not an option.  That’s the reason early Christians were sent to the lions: they boldly proclaimed, “there is another king, Jesus and His law is supreme.” Rome could care less how much they baptized.

The Failure of Modern Church Leadership

Our civil leadership today at every level is guilty as Rome in defying the law of God.  How does American church leadership respond to this?  From what I’ve seen across the board, it’s pretty much apathy — none of our concern.  Is not that very apathy and rejecting the duty of interposition that has led to our current desperate plight?

The most energetic response the contemporary church can muster at this time of crisis seems to be scheduling the next church picnic or rock concert.  But, throughout the Bible we see church leaders standing before kings and taking the initiative to instruct civil leaders in the law of God.  We may protest that we have no time, but John the Baptist was probably short on time also.

If we don’t start taking God’s law seriously in the matter of interposition how can we avoid His displeasure or judgment of even our worship, just as He smote Uzza in the midst of a very charismatic worship service (I Chr 13:9,10).  “He that turneth away his ear from hearing the law, even his prayer shall be an abomination” (Pr. 28:9).

One pastor indicated to me that has denomination had made several overtures to the Obama Administration a while back.  There was no response and therefore that fulfills the church’s responsibility.  That was a good start toward interposition, but refusal of the evil “king” to respond to this and many other appeals leads necessarily to the 2nd Biblical step.  That is appeal to the local or lesser magistrate to fulfill his oath-bound duty to position himself between the people and the evil king.  That is the Biblical answer to tyranny, seen many times in the book of Judges (e.g. 3:9; 4:2,3; 6: 6-12).

Failure to do this leaves the congregation and the community exposed to the wrath of God, as was the case with David’s census.  Almost every day we see outrageous assaults on our freedom.  These are doubtless orchestrated gradually by God in mercy to wake us up.

America is under the authority of a man who 1) defies the law of God in the most audacious manner and 2) is intent on using his executive power to enslave the people.  We have economic insanity, strip searches in airports, the government encouraging people to spy on each other in 4,000 WalMart stores, the FCC taking initial steps to neutralize the internet, and much more.

This is all right out of the “1984” playbook.  Or more specifically the “Rules for Radicals” playbook for Communist takeover as taught by Mr. Obama in Chicago.  This is a direct result of an isolationist church that refuses to represent the Kingship of Christ to the civil magistrate.  It is in danger of being thrown out and trodden under foot by men.

The Biblical Doctrine of Local Interposition

The doctrine of interposition is seen throughout the book of Judges and summarized by Calvin in Chapter XX, par. 31, pp. 1518-1519 as follows:

“For if there are now any magistrates of the people, appointed to restrain the willfulness of kings…I am so far from forbidding them to withstand, in accordance with their duty, the fierce licentiousness of kings, that, if they wink at kings who violently fall upon and assault the lowly common folk, I declare that their dissimulation involves nefarious perfidy, because they dishonestly betray the freedom of the people, of which they have been appointed protectors by God’s ordinance.”

Calvin here denounces failure of leaders to interposition at the local level in the strongest terms.  He is calling for the “magistrates of the people” to refuse obedience to the lawless king and not to “wink” at him as the Nazis blindly followed the orders of Hitler.

Mr. Obama has been advised by the godfather (Soros) to ignore Congress and the courts and impose his will via the agencies.  They are testing our tolerance for tyranny a step at a time.  Would our Puritan forefathers have tolerated this?  Would Patrick Henry or George Washington have tolerated this?  Would John Knox or John the Baptist have tolerated this?

The current strategy of many churches is to raise up future generations who will eventually deal decisively with these problems.  It seems to me we are passing the buck to our grandchildren or great-grandchildren to perform the work of reformation that is staring us in the face.  If we do not take the necessary Biblical action of interposition in the present I think it is more likely that our great granchildren — if any survive — will look back and curse this generation for its passive response to the clear and present danger.

Case Closed:  It is the duty of the lower magistrate, supported by the clergy, to lead the people against a tyrant who refuses to obey the law of God.  How can we expect anything but judgment from God if we refuse this duty?  Like Jonah who fled from Ninevah at first, maybe God will spare us if we turn and carry his law into the heart of our city and warn the rebellious officials.