The Gospel, Part II

In the previous article, it was necessary to tackle the subject of the definition of ‘gospel’ and to provide examples of various gospels throughout world history. However, there is still much confused ground to cover concerning the details professing Christians consider about the Gospel of the Kingdom of Heaven.

Because gospels are political campaign messages, contextually definitive of how societies should be maintained, it should be obvious that the political campaign message of King Jesus the Nazarene was fundamentally different than the false gospels that preceded it and still come after it. Whereas the gospels of civil rulers and Benefactors who exercise authority necessarily enticed the people to contractually bring themselves into bondage while promising them liberty, then the gospel of Christ obviously stands in direct contradiction and exclusive competition to offers of man-made civil society.

His Gospel promised true, uncompromised freedom, not by the might and power of social contracts, but through faith, meaning that if the people are faithful to God alone to be their ruler and magistrate, then God will be faithful to them and maintain their society by His Spirit. This is the very essence of relying on God’s Providence. This Spirit indwells every faithful citizen of God’s kingdom, giving them hearts of flesh, compelling them to love their neighbors as themselves, allowing them to remain faithful to social virtues because they are faithful to each other, making faith a primary component of interpersonal relationships rather than relying on contract laws.  When the people are bound by social contracts in believing on the false gospels of false christs, their hearts harden to each other, creating an unnatural indifference towards their fellow man because they are no longer compelled to maintain organic relationships of service, but can expect their society to be maintained by bureaucratic compulsion. When you outsource your social virtues to human institutions, you (un)naturally become indifferent to your neighbor.

Whereas the gospels of pagan societies necessitate human rulers to acquire the powers of choice and the wealth of society, the politics of Christ reversed that relationship where He willingly gave up His royal, wealthy estate in order to be made poor, leading the people through an example of service and humility, compelling them to establish a network, not of a bureaucracy fueled by taxation and socialist benefits, but of an adhocracy fueled by charity and capitalistic integrity. When the legal and judicial order of authoritative gospels remake men into their own image, washing the outside of the cup through positive law and requiring them to narrowly specialize their skills to strengthen the false economies of collectivist societies, they become bound together in contracts, entitlements, and taxation. But when the God of the Kingdom of Heaven, through the Gospel of Jesus Christ writes his natural law onto your heart where you are naturally compelled to love your neighbor as yourself, and to productively retain your liberties and the rights to your family and property, then your society becomes bound together in faith, hope and charity. Both of these kinds of gospels and their kingdoms are inherited from generation to generation. While one inheritance is of a bastardized bondage, calling earthly rulers ‘fathers‘, the other inheritance is of liberty and everlasting life.

In order to continue, it is necessary to explicitly express this dichotomy in common Christian language by endeavoring to put that language back into context of the Kingdom of God: The kingdoms of men are ‘worldly‘ institutions that are centered on ‘the flesh’. They appeal to the things of our flesh. They entice us with wanton covetousness of socialist meat, benefits, creature comforts, daily bread, safety, security, fiat wealth, and authoritarian organization to partake in all of these things in a systematic way. These kingdoms change the nature of society in a spiritual way, causing the people to be dead and born of the flesh. The Kingdom of God, however, is of the Spirit causing redeemed men to be born of the Spirit so that they can retake their self-control and other fruits of the Spirit, and to seek to serve their neighbor by sacrificing and laying their lives down for their neighbor when they had previously only required their neighbor’s taxed contribution to provide for their civil society. These images will be useful in further exploring the Biblical concepts surrounding the Gospel in accurate context.

For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have everlasting life.  For God sent not his Son into the world to condemn the world; but that the world through him might be saved. He that believeth on him is not condemned: but he that believeth not is condemned already, because he hath not believed in the name of the only begotten Son of God. And this is the condemnation, that light is come into the world, and men loved darkness rather than light, because their deeds were evil. For every one that doeth evil hateth the light, neither cometh to the light, lest his deeds should be reproved. But he that doeth truth cometh to the light, that his deeds may be made manifest, that they are wrought in God. (John 3:16-21)

Each of the time the word ‘world’ is mentioned in this passage it is translated from the Greek ‘kosmos‘ referring to ‘an apt and harmonious arrangement or constitution, order, government’ referencing the kinds of human civil governments exemplified by the Roman New World Order at the time and, in this case, as synecdotal reference to those within its jurisdiction. When John says that God loved the world, it means that God loved those trapped into civil bondage by chasing after the socialist desires of their flesh. When John says that God sent Christ to not condemn the world, it means that Christ’s arrival was not one of punitive judgment against their political rebellion and usurpation of God’s jurisdiction, but one of restorative offering of repentance. Read carefully that passage. It is saying that an alternative kind of politician in the person of Christ, along with his alternative kind of kingdom is a new and renewed rebuttal to the status quo of the kingdoms of darkness. The very introduction of the Kingdom of Light as an idea is enough to expose the wickedness of the hearts of men who find their citizenship to reflect the gospels of the ‘world’. They had broken the commandments of God, each and every one of them sinning by doing that which God prohibited, thereby finding themselves under the power of civil magistrates. Sin leads to darkness and death, as everybody knows, except that modern Christians cannot fathom that God’s perfect Law of Liberty can keep men from the imperfect laws of civil bondage, and that their breaking of that law is the very reason why they pay taxes and bear the heavy burden of civil law and ever-diminishing freedom. They cannot fathom that truly believing on the campaign promises of King Jesus may liberate them from those fruits of their sins.

After these things came Jesus and his disciples into the land of Judaea; and there he tarried with them, and baptized. And John also was baptizing in Aenon near to Salim, because there was much water there: and they came, and were baptized. For John was not yet cast into prison. Then there arose a question between some of John’s disciples and the Jews about purifying. And they came unto John, and said unto him, Rabbi, he that was with thee beyond Jordan, to whom thou barest witness, behold, the same baptizeth, and all men come to him. (John 3:22-26)

Although the image of washing with water was often utilized in Israel’s history to signify a sanctifying purification that sets apart a people or a project for the cause of God, the ceremony of baptism was not exclusive to the servant-ministers or the ritual induction into the Kingdom of Heaven. As a symbol of traditional preparation and solemn intent, the act of baptism was an expression of naturalization into a civil jurisdiction. It was an act of making one a citizen as an official statement regarded by witnesses. And, at this time in Israel’s history, John the baptizer on behalf of the Kingdom of God, was not the only one offering ritual immersion into a civil society.

Herod the Great, in order to secure the favor and loyalty of the people, and in addition to his civil engineering projects like aqueducts and the building, and incorporating of the temple in Jerusalem, had also established an offer of baptism so that the people could enter into his jurisdiction, provided by his New Deal of civil citizenship through social security registration. He had employed, not only the Pharisaical civil bureaucracy as teachers into his socialist schemes, but also a sect of Essenes to be his missionaries, to preach the not-so-great-commission of his worldly gospel.

Herod the Great had a grand scheme of a vast worldwide membership. This involved sending evangelists out all over the world. The participants of this system of social security were ritually baptized after an application and payment to Herod’s ministers of the prescribed fees. Annual contributions would be collected and recorded by the scribes…
Membership was marked by the display of a white stone seal or token with a registered Hebrew name whenever entering homes for the weekly gatherings or at synagogues or temples and applying for social benefits. The temple tax collectors now collected an annual contribution that brought great wealth to the government, Herod, and his administrators…
The missionaries… with their leather wallets full of white stones, would come back with the same wallets full of money, in foreign currency. Once put into Jewish currency by the money-changers [porters of the temple], it would be stored in vaults, ready to be used by Herod for his vast building projects, or any subsequent causes…
Herod’s scheme of initiation into a new form of Judaism was immensely successful. Jews everywhere were willing to join the worldwide society whose meetings were held in the evenings in private houses. Entry was for members only; they had to show at the door an admission token in the form of a white stone from the river Jordan which the missionaries gave them at baptism. On the stone was written their new Jewish name. (Jesus and the Riddle of the Dead Sea Scrolls by Barbara Thiering)

The notion of a white stone as a form of identification that stood as a proxy for the person bearing it, was not exclusive to Herod’s New World Order. Scripture says that even those who are baptized into God’s kingdom will receive a white stone with a new name. Not a legal name like that which is used by human civil governments to have power over their citizens, but a name known only by the one to whom it is given.

The Baptism of Christ was a competitive alternative to the baptism of Herod. Its offer of citizenship into the Kingdom of God required an exclusive allegiance to that kingdom and a willingness to sacrifice for one’s neighbor willingly rather than compel one’s neighbor to sacrifice for them through Herod’s bureaucratic socialist projects. This competition is the premise of the whole message of Christ, the Gospel of the Kingdom of God.

In fact, the image of Baptism: the washing away of an old civil obligation and putting on a new, pure one, is borrowed by other Biblical metaphors, like ‘being born again’ ‘as a new creature’.

Jesus answered and said unto him, Verily, verily, I say unto thee, Except a man be born again, he cannot see the kingdom of God. Nicodemus saith unto him, How can a man be born when he is old? can he enter the second time into his mother’s womb, and be born? Jesus answered, Verily, verily, I say unto thee, Except a man be born of water and of the Spirit, he cannot enter into the kingdom of God. That which is born of the flesh is flesh; and that which is born of the Spirit is spirit. Marvel not that I said unto thee, Ye must be born again. (John 3:3-7)

This takes us back to the differences between the corruptible seed of the flesh and the incorruptible seed of the spirit (1 Peter 1:23) where the people were once destined to bear the image of God, but were instead born into the sin of civil bondage characterized by ‘the flesh’, inheriting their parents’ curses through birth certification and social security, as they inherited it from their parents ‘unto the third and fourth generation‘ which keep the people dead. However,

Blessed be the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, which according to his abundant mercy hath begotten us again unto a lively hope by the resurrection of Jesus Christ from the dead… (1 Peter 1:3)

This notion of being ‘born again’ and becoming a ‘new creature’ is not just some hyper-spiritual mantra meant to make professing Christians convince themselves that they are faithful through the witchcraft of repeating Biblical phrases and rhetoric. The notion explicitly refers to classical sumerian cuneiform, to ancient Abrahamic history, of which Christ expected Nicodemus to know: ‘Art thou a master of Israel, and knowest not these things?‘ A little bit of that history is as follows:

Abraham had rejected the false gospels of the city-states of Ur and Haran, and undermined their civil authorities by rescuing their civil slaves to form a free society in an obedient kingdom with him in the wilderness. Before doing so, Abraham was familiar with the interwoven Mesopotamian cultures in the Indus Valley, including Sumer, Akkadia, and Lagash. He and his people had conflict with the ‘merchants of men’ there, a mercantile caste who considered the people to be their property and merchandise through debt and taxation. This conflict was characterized by a ‘bitter struggle for power between the temple and the palace—the “church” and the “state”— with the citizens … taking the side of the temple’ which justified their individual rights. It was during the reign of Urukagina that opposition with ‘the wealth and criminality of the tamkarum [merchant-moneylenders]’ who had enslaved the people had formed. It is in the historical cuneiform ‘document that we find the word “freedom” used for the first time in man’s recorded history; the word is amargi…’ which may literally be translated ‘return to the mother’ or her womb. (The Sumerians: Their History, Culture, and Character By Samuel Noah Kramer documents of 2350 BC in the reign of Urukagina) The term ama-argi or ama-gi produced the idea of ‘freedom’, as well as ‘manumission’, ‘exemption from debts or obligations’, ‘reversion to a previous state’ Akk. anduraāru. and release from debt, slavery, taxation or punishment.

In other words, the notion of being ‘born again’ is entirely related to being adopted into mankind’s original liberty before he was enslaved into the jurisdictions of civil magistrates and the human Benefactors who exercise authority, ceremonially expressed through baptism and ritually washing away your debt to your old social contracts. To be born again is to be remade into God’s image after having been born into the image of civil fathers who make you their property through civil law and societies of flesh. This principle is common throughout Scripture and God’s people were often given explicit instructions on how to not build a society on debt and interest, and to intentionally manumit their neighbor from their debt obligations.

And ye shall hallow the fiftieth year, and proclaim liberty throughout all the land unto all the inhabitants thereof: it shall be a jubilee unto you; and ye shall return every man unto his possession, and ye shall return every man unto his family. (Leviticus 25:10)

This is the essence of the Gospel of Jesus Christ. Not only is it a campaign promise of a better society, but it is a promise of freedom from the societies that have already bound you through contracts, entitlements, and taxation to the mercantile caste of your choosing. It promises you equity and allodium, and a renewed natural relationship to your family, without the legal titles in marriage certificates and birth registration. What’s more important is that it is the only gospel in existence that offers these things and has the power to deliver them.

In order to continue to thoroughly analyze gospel-related material, the next article will endeavor to explore the significance of a few of the highlights of Christ’s ministry, and to solidify them as wholly kingdom-related examples of his consistently political message.

 

The Gospel, Part I

The third tenet of the abolitionist ideology can also be considered its central, and most pivotal tenet in the literal sense. The message of the Gospel of the Kingdom of God is not only the centerpiece to a Christian, Anarchist, and Abolitionist worldview, and the crux upon which they rest, but it is the very tenet around which the other tenets revolve.

The notion that the Gospel means ‘good news’ is a correct one but, on its own, this association does the connotation of ‘Gospel’ an anachronistic disservice, for not every piece of beneficial information was or should be considered a ‘gospel’. Rather, the gospels are inherently and historically news of political messages. To get to the point, a gospel represents an exclusive platform of political campaign promises in order to win the hearts and minds of potential constituents in order to place their faith in the authority and persons of their representative politicians. Gospels represent policy changes to be adopted by their believers, and the promise of their respective magistrates to fulfill those policies. This will be further explained shortly.

The reason that this is so important is because, without the message of an offer of citizenship for believers into an alternative Kingdom to the man-made nations of the ‘world‘, there would be no hope for abolishing human archism in any meaningful sense of the idea. The abolitionist message would be a purely philosophical and intangible one of a wistful imagination that lacks any practical implication or application. If Biblical doctrines surrounding the Kingdom of Heaven were exclusively defining a hyperspiritual, afterlife kingdom in Heaven for dead souls who made a meager profession of faith during their time being alive, and not the supernatural imposition of Heaven’s kingdom-model onto the earth as a literal, civil, and jurisdictional nation to begin seeking, building, and establishing, then the Gospel of God becomes a far cry of what was preached by Jesus Christ and what was believed by the earliest Christians. The Abolitionist message then necessarily becomes a myopic and truncated one that makes a mockery of the lives of Biblical heroes which, by comparison, call into question the very things that modern ‘Christians’ call Christianity.

These all died in faith, not having received the promises, but having seen them afar off, and were persuaded of them, and embraced them, and confessed that they were strangers and pilgrims on the earth. For they that say such things declare plainly that they seek a country. And truly, if they had been mindful of that country from whence they came out, they might have had opportunity to have returnedBut now they desire a better country, that is, an heavenly: wherefore God is not ashamed to be called their God: for he hath prepared for them a city

And others had trial of cruel mockings and scourgings, yea, moreover of bonds and imprisonment: They were stoned, they were sawn asunder, were tempted, were slain with the sword: they wandered about in sheepskins and goatskins; being destitute, afflicted, tormented; (Of whom the world was not worthy:) they wandered in deserts, and in mountains, and in dens and caves of the earth. And these all, having obtained a good report through faith, received not the promise: God having provided some better thing for us, that they without us should not be made perfect. (Hebrews 11)

If the characters mentioned in this passage were willing to forsake the national and political environments that they inherited through the flesh, in favor of remaining entirely and physically separate from pagan nations under human civil governments, or under threat of receiving persecution unto imprisonment and literal death (even by crucifixion), then professing Christians of today who are eligible to ‘receive the promises‘ fulfilled by Christ’s kingship but do not ‘embrace‘ them and ‘confessthemselves to be unstained from the world, cannot said to be Christians at all, but false converts, blinded by blind guides, who take the Lord’s name in vain while trying to serve two political masters.

And [Jesus] came to Nazareth, where he had been brought up: and, as his custom was, he went into the synagogue on the sabbath day, and stood up for to read. And there was delivered unto him the book of the prophet Esaias. And when he had opened the book, he found the place where it was written,

‘The Spirit of the Lord is upon me, because he hath anointed me to preach the gospel to the poor; he hath sent me to heal the brokenhearted, to preach deliverance to the captives, and recovering of sight to the blind, to set at liberty them that are bruised,

To preach the acceptable year of the Lord.’ And he closed the book, and he gave it again to the minister, and sat down. And the eyes of all them that were in the synagogue were fastened on him. And he began to say unto them, This day is this scripture fulfilled in your ears. (Luke 4:16-21)

The very nation and city on which the faithful mentioned in Hebrews staked their entire lives were fulfilled in Christ’s ministry to be received by the faithful of his generation and every generation thereafter. It is as false as it is common to reduce this scriptural prophecy to an ethereal, post-mortem fate for those who dress up to go to religious service providers once a week, where they sing songs, listen to clergymen recite sophistry, call this the extent of their Christian obligation, and still have the audacity to say ‘Lord, Lord‘. Perhaps most of the problem of the confusion between what modern Christians believe and what the early Christians practiced lies within the scope of the meaning of the word ‘Gospel‘, and how the definition cannot be contextually or essentially separated from civil and political implications; for the exact same reason why every would-be political savior (god) has a political campaign message (gospel) for societal redemption and reformation (salvation). Contrary to popular assumption, the term ‘gospel’ was not invented for Christian use concerning Christ’s message, but was assimilated and repurposed as a sort of plagiarized competition with the message of the efficacy of Roman citizenship. This homogenization of rhetoric is not exclusive to the word ‘Gospel’ either, but also to words like ‘Providence’ and ‘Ekklesia‘, which modern Christians recognize as ‘church’, but is intended to mean something similar to ‘political party.’ It is important to note two things here: Firstly, that the Christian co-opting of these terms did not change their original meanings from something political to something hyperspiritual and esoteric and, secondly, that this competition between civil jurisdictions was not exclusive to that of early Christian society and Roman society, but was and is categorically between every kingdom of ‘this world’ and the Kingdom of Heaven.

The Gospel of Cain, for instance, included accruing, through consent, the liberties and rights of the people through contracts in socialist bondage. ‘The real destroyers of the liberties of the people is he who spreads among them bounties, donations, and benefits.’ (Plutarch) In order to establish the earth’s first recorded city-state, Enoch, Cain had to ’till’ the ‘adamic clay‘ necessitating a rule of force and tyranny to cause those who personified the same dust from which Adam was created to be made merchandise for Cain. The tribute extracted from the working class was used to provide welfare benefits to the people in a collectivist setting. This is a common denominator between all Old Testament city-states, or pagan societies, and even between all modern human civil societies. As we can see from Cain’s story, this is something that God is displeased with, and rejects, curses, and condemns. He prefered that Cain be his brother’s keeper, willingly serving him, rather than rule over the people and live by force and violence, which exiled him from ‘the presence of the Lord’ in retreating shame. It should be expressed that the ‘Sons of God‘ mentioned in Genesis 6 patterned their city-states after Cain’s socialist inspiration, and subjected the people to civil bondage, justified by superstitious lies about the alleged approval of God. The faithless saw fit to partake in their gospels until God saw fit to send a great deluge, recorded by all of the ancient cultures, as a gospel of tabula rasa.

The Gospel of Nimrod (Gilgamesh) also fits the model established by Cain and inspired by Satan. In saying that the rebellious, tyrannical and ‘divine’ king of Babylon was a ‘mighty [provider] [instead of] the Lord’ (Genesis 10:9), Scripture explains the difference between the people relying on the Providence of God and the people relying on the providence of false gods, which is pragmatism. According to Jewish legend, Nimrod had a massive bureaucracy by which to exercise authority over the people, but by implication, to also provide socialist benefits in order to obtain that authority. This is exemplified in maxims of law: ‘No one is obliged to accept a benefit against his consent. But if he does not dissent, he will be considered as assenting.‘ (Dig. 50.17.69) ‘Every man is presumed to intend the natural and probable consequences of his own voluntary acts.‘ (1 Green. Evid. \ 18; 9 East, 277) Jewish texts testify to this government of Nimrod’s Babylon:

Our king and our god! Wherefore art thou in fear by reason of a little child? There are myriad upon myriad of princes in thy realm, rulers of thousands, rulers of hundreds, rulers of fifties, and rulers of tens, and overseers without number. Let the pettiest of the princes go and fetch the boy and put him in prison. (The Legends of the Jews: From the Creation to Jacob, Vol. 1, Chapter V)

The magistrates of the Babylonian Mystery religion became an ordered, collectivist rule of force and tyranny to compel the sacrifices of the slothful for the benefit of the covetous, and to establish ‘justice’ and met out punishment. This is the true gospel of Benefactors who exercise authority. It is not just that the people get to come together to have one purse and be surety for each other’s debt, but it is also that they get to outsource their personal responsibilities to social virtues and the weightier matters to the bureaucracies of public works. It is important to note that Babylon became a readily available archetype for all of the world’s systems of bureaucracy and socialism that also included a complicated subtext of superstitious myths and paganism. When God frustrated this one world government by splintering its citizenry through unintelligible communication and dismantling its ziggurat, the people naturally scattered in migration and took with them their shared practices, beliefs, and models for society that each eventually evolved into every cultural practice, icon, and ‘religious’ iteration that we have seen throughout history. It included an intertwined system of pagan superstition and pageantry full of idolatrous symbols that became cultural shorthand for nationalistic institutions. In this way, temples housing bureaucratic institutions were characterized by various members of their pantheons. The ziggurat (Tower) of Babel became pyramids, erected all over the earth. Likewise, currencies, central banks, and nationalistic symbols were characterized by animism, or even by rulers.

Continuing on the course of human history, the Gospel of Pharaoh most notably promised salvation to the tribes of Israel from drought and famine, through an offer of socialist benefits. Egypt had become one of the earliest civilizations committing to collectivism and rebellion to God after the Flood. Its translated name, Mizraim, means ‘besieged places or a place where we were besieged by masters‘ to illustrate this fact. However, just like in every other instance of human civil government, this was not done through compulsion, but through voluntary socialism by passively or actively receiving benefits. This is also illustrated by maxims of law: ‘Those captured by pirates and robbers remain free.‘ (Dig. 49. 15. 19. 2.) ‘Things captured by pirates and robbers do not change ownership.‘ (1 Kent, Comm. 108, 184)

And Joseph bought all the land of Egypt for Pharaoh; for the Egyptians sold every man his field, because the famine prevailed over them: so the land became Pharaoh’s. And as for the people, he removed them to cities from one end of the borders of Egypt even to the other end thereof… Then Joseph said unto the people, Behold, I have bought you this day and your land for Pharaoh: lo, here is seed for you, and ye shall sow the land. And it shall come to pass in the increase, that ye shall give the fifth part unto Pharaoh, and four parts shall be your own, for seed of the field, and for your food, and for them of your households, and for food for your little ones. And they said, Thou hast saved our lives: let us find grace in the sight of my lord, and we will be Pharaoh’s servants. And Joseph made it a law over the land of Egypt unto this day, that Pharaoh should have the fifth part; except the land of the priests only, which became not Pharaoh’s.

And Israel dwelt in the land of Egypt, in the country of Goshen; and they had possessions therein, and grew, and multiplied exceedingly. (Genesis 47:20-27)

For a twenty percent tax, the people of Israel, and many others, became civil slaves, employed into Egyptian economy. By believing on Pharaoh’s gospel of salvation, the tribes of Israel, formerly free people under God, could allegedly be spared the destruction of their own sloth for failing to prepare for the oncoming famine by selling themselves into civil bondage due to their own jealousy in selling their brother Joseph into chattel slavery. After generations of ever-increasing servitude through the acceptance of benefits and protection, God through Moses and a series of miraculous events that dissolved the superstitious power of Egyptian institutions, offered up a gospel of true salvation that liberated the repentant from their Egyptian civil citizenship.

Redemption is deliverance from the power of an alien dominion and the enjoyment of the resulting freedom. It involves the idea of restoration to one who possesses a more fundamental right or interest. The best example of redemption in the Old Testament was the deliverance of the children of Israel from bondage, from the dominion of the alien power in Egypt. (Zondervan’s Pictorial Encyclopedia of the Bible)

It was in the receptive wilderness that God established a Constitution for an embryonic free society that was meant to preserve their liberties through personal and interpersonal accountability to their societal responsibilities, rather than continuing to outsource them to ‘heads of state’ and their bureaucracies. However, like all pragmatic and faithless people, they quickly regressed and began to act on the same common gospel of the nearsighted who are willing to give up their liberties for temporary safety. As a result, not only did they attempt to create an idolatrous, centralized bank and a national economy, but they were determined to preserve themselves by creating their own city-state. All this, after having just left the bondage of Egypt which had damned them for generations.

The existence of false gospels is not exclusive to what is common considered ‘the old testament’, but continued as a major setting on the world stage when Jesus Christ was incarnated in ‘occupied’ Judea. The Gospel of Caesar, still modeled after its Babylonian predecessor, was complete with a myriad of institutions symbolized by members of a pagan pantheon, and had a much more intricate system of social, economic, political, and idiomatic details that are readily available to be perceived by purveyors of western culture for the very reason that all contemporary western societies have directly modeled themselves after Roman civilization. Including its superstitious ritualism. Even before the first Caesar came into power, the republic of Rome had already been voluntarily backsliding into a socialist dystopia.

But when a new generation arises and the democracy falls into the hands of the grandchildren of its founders, they have become so accustomed to freedom and equality that they no longer value them, and begin to aim at pre-eminence; and it is chiefly those of ample fortune who fall into this error. So when they begin to lust for power and cannot attain it through themselves or their own good qualities, they ruin their estates, tempting and corrupting the people in every possible way.  And hence when by their foolish thirst for reputation they have created among the masses an appetite for gifts and the habit of receiving them, democracy in its turn is abolished and changes into a rule of force and violence. For the people, having grown accustomed to feed at the expense of others and to depend for their livelihood on the property of others, as soon as they find a leader who is enterprising but is excluded from the houses of office by his penury, institute the rule of violence; and now uniting their forces massacre, banish, and plunder, until they degenerate again into perfect savages and find once more a master and monarch.” (Polybius: The Histories [composed at Rome around 130 BC] Fragments of Book VI, p289)

Consequently, the increasing savagery of the Romans did enable them to receive a series of ‘saviors’ wielding their gospels, further enticing the people into a more organized system of benefits and oppression, otherwise known as ‘civilization’. Within this collectivist polity of providence and liability included birth registration, social security, public education, civil engineering, executive, legislative, and judicial powers of government, a worldwide banking system, and a standing military. The ever-increasing Empire of Rome led to a global, militaristic world government, as is common to socialist civilizations, and its endeavors even co-opted the local bureaucratic institutions of the false gospel of Judea and its own rulers and magistrates. When Octavian became the first Emperor of Rome and established, through military might and global civil organization, a sort of ‘everlasting peace’, the people naturally praised him with the same language that Christians would later repurpose for Jesus Christ and the same language that was prophesied about him. The gospel of Caesar Augustus is boiled down to the following:

Whereas the Providence which has guided our whole existence and which has shown such care and liberality, has brought our life to the peak of perfection in giving to us Augustus Caesar, whom it (Providence) filled with virtue for the welfare of mankind, and who, being sent to us and to our descendants as a Savior (soter), has put an end to war and has set all things in order; and whereas, having become visible, Caesar has fulfilled the hopes of all earlier times… not only in surpassing all the benefactors who preceded him but also in leaving to his successors no hope of surpassing him; and whereas, finally, that the birthday of the God (i.e. Augustus) has been for the whole world the beginning of the gospel (euangelion) concerning him, therefore, let all reckon a new era beginning from the date of his birth, and let his birthday mark the beginning of the new year.’ (Letter of the Proconsul to the Cities of Asia [9 B.C.])

Sound familiar? What should be mentioned is that even Virgil’s historical fiction was similarly written to praise Caesar Augustus and to further jettison his personage as a savior-hero of the people. One might imagine though, through the pride of being God’s chosen people throughout history, and being ever studious concerning the fulfillment of Biblical prophecy, that the social and political rulers of Judea would have known to reject Caesar’s gospel with prejudice and without deliberation. However, the readily available idolatry in making secure one’s livelihood and political power is often common to those who should know better. When ‘other christs‘, through legislative and judicial power offer to reform their policy and bend to the will of the people, codifying civil privileges and answering their prayers for ‘justice’ and mercy, the people will allow themselves to be bought out and ensnared into civil bondage as hastily as the Israelites did under Pharaoh.

The annual Temple-tribute was allowed to be transported to Jerusalem, and the alienation of these funds by the civil magistrates treated as sacrilege. As the Jews objected to bear arms, or march, on the Sabbath, they were freed from military service. On similar grounds, they were not obliged to appear in courts of law on their holy days. Augustus even ordered that, when the public distribution of corn or of money among the citizens fell on a Sabbath, the Jews were to receive their share on the following day. In a similar spirit the Roman authorities confirmed a decree by which the founder of Antioch, Seleucus I. (Nicator, [d Ob.280 B.C.]) had granted the Jews the right of citizenship in all the cities of Asia Minor and Syria which he had built, and the privilege of receiving, instead of the oil that was distributed, which their religion forbade them to use, [e Ab. Sar ii. 6] an equivalent in money. [Jos.Ant. Xii. 3. 1]. These rights were maintained by Vespasian and Titus even after the last Jewish war, notwithstanding the earnest remonstrances of these cities. No wonder, that at the death of Caesar the Jews of Rome gathered for many nights, waking strange feelings of awe in the city, as they chanted in mournful melodies their Psalms around the pyre on which the body of their benefactor had been burnt, and raised their pathetic dirges.” (Life and Times of Jesus the Messiah Chapt. V)

In detailing the gospels of false christs throughout the past, present, and future of the human condition, the context to understand the uniquely efficacious Gospel of Jesus Christ and the Kingdom of God can be better understood by those who desire to immerse themselves into Abolitionist ideology and those who seek redemption and atonement from their socialist bonage. Whereas this article serves as a backdrop against which the Christian gospel should be contrasted, the next article will endeavor to more elucidate the details of its message.

Providence vs Pragmatism

Providence vs Pragmatism

In order to remain beholden to the narrow ideology of Abolitionism, it is important to touch on the subject of its second tenet and what it means to be reliant on God’s Providence. It is important to discuss how such an endeavor is contrasted against the pragmatism of an unbelieving and perverted generation lost to its own statism.

Achieving results, i.e., “getting things done” in business and public affairs, is often said to be “pragmatic.” There is a harsher and more brutal connotation of the term in which any exercise of power in the successful pursuit of practical and specific objectives is called “pragmatic.” The character of American business and politics is often so described. In these cases “pragmatic” carries the stamp of justification: a policy is justified pragmatically if it is successful. (Encyclopædia Britannica)

In other words, the quintessential description of pragmatism is the idea that the ends justify the means without regard to crossing moral boundaries and compromising one’s principles. All political pursuit is therefore a pragmatic approach, necessitating that the needs of the many outweigh the needs of the few. To even become a civil citizen, one must be a pragmatist, believing it acceptable to give up one’s essential liberty to purchase a little temporary safety. Scripture has much to say on the subject of pragmatism and, more pointedly, about the myopic ‘wisdom’ of men who walk by their own sight and follow their own machinations towards destruction.

Alternatively, the nature of relying on God’s Providence includes being beholden to righteousness and faith without concern or worry for the end result of one’s actions. This is not to say that Abolitionists do not make practical decisions and disregard entirely the consequences for their actions, but rather they realize that it is more important to be good and not compromise their goodness than it is to cheat in order to prosper. Because if you try to do good things while being bad, willing to sacrifice your character to reach a good end, then you lose any right to the good end you were ever fighting for. God notoriously blesses the righteous in spite of their ability and supplements the weak efforts of the faithful. There are numerous Biblical examples to express how this principle is a tenet held by the people of God.

Now Jericho was straitly shut up because of the children of Israel: none went out, and none came in. And the Lord said unto Joshua, See, I have given into thine hand Jericho, and the king thereof, and the mighty men of valour. And ye shall compass the city, all ye men of war, and go round about the city once. Thus shalt thou do six days. And seven priests shall bear before the ark seven trumpets of rams’ horns: and the seventh day ye shall compass the city seven times, and the priests shall blow with the trumpets. And it shall come to pass, that when they make a long blast with the ram’s horn, and when ye hear the sound of the trumpet, all the people shall shout with a great shout; and the wall of the city shall fall down flat, and the people shall ascend up every man straight before him. (Joshua 6:1-5)

No doubt, the pragmatist approach to besieging a city in wartime might include a literal attack, or a waiting out of enemy provisions, or a midnight assassination of city officials, or even a parley with military captains to determine terms of surrender. But the method of laying siege to the city-state of Jericho included the Israelites foolishly marching around it in pageantry, but also in direct obedience to their God. And because they relied on His providence, and walked by faith, God used a miracle to display His power and simultaneously strip the socialist might of a pagan nation from their institutional superstitions, not only leveling the city, but making its people prostrate with humble reason to abandon their covetous, slothful, and self-defeating way of life.

In addition to the Battle of Jericho, God declared his efficacy as a Ruler of His people through Gideon, who was instructed to very narrowly and purposefully limit his militia to a mere three-hundred men in order to conquer the Midianites who far outnumbered them. It may not be prudent to list every example of how God’s Providence in scripture triumphs over obvious pragmatism, but it is necessary to express that there is actually an aspect of competing civil jurisdictions between two very different kinds of kingdoms (not to be confused with ‘two kingdom theology’) when it comes to obediently choosing to rely on God’s providence or to pragmatically choose to rely on the providence of false gods.

Woe to them that go down to Egypt for help; and stay on horses, and trust in chariots, because they are many; and in horsemen, because they are very strong; but they look not unto the Holy One of Israel, neither seek the LORD!

Yet he also is wise, and will bring evil, and will not call back his words: but will arise against the house of the evildoers, and against the help of them that work iniquity.

Now the Egyptians are men, and not God; and their horses flesh, and not spirit. When the LORD shall stretch out his hand, both he that helpeth shall fall, and he that is holpen shall fall down, and they all shall fail together. (Isaiah 31:1-3)

No doubt that those who believe in the efficacy of human civil government will commit to mental gymnastics to make this passage exclusively about literal horses and literal chariots, in the same way that those who argue against the second amendment of the American Constitution might say that the weapons in question exclusively refer to muzzle-loaded, smoothbore firearms. The passage is actually a motif that is repeated all throughout scripture referring to the pragmatism of relying not only on the military might of human civil government for some feudalistic protection (Protection draws to it subjection; subjection protection. -Coke, Littl. 65.), but to any of the applications made to human civil government that bring the people into bondage. Other examples include, but are not limited to, socialist provision (Genesis 47:23-25) and perverted justice (Mark 7:9-13). It is no wonder that the characteristics of the relationship between the obedient and God are similar to, and perverted in, the relationship between the pragmatic and false gods (rulers of human civil government).

Whereas God is Provider to his people, commanding them to provide for each other in a national network of charity, and miraculously supplementing that charity when it tallies shy of sustaining their whole nation, false gods provide for their nation in a much more sinister way. Through taxation. Pragmatism tempts a people that they should have one purse together, centralizing their economy by making each individual in their civil society contractually obligated to work for and pay for his neighbor’s welfare, allowing a bureaucracy full of greedy people to siphon out the wealth of society, inflating its currency, and bringing it to a moral and fiscal bankruptcy in a socialist gambit of pragmatism. While the God of good men makes much wealth out of a little charity, the gods of wicked men make much debt out of a little greed.

God is the heavenly Father who adopts the faithful into a literal, civil kingdom and secures them into a truly patriarchal adhocracy where biological fathers (pater familias) are meant to retain the equitable rights to their families and possessions and to redistribute the wealth of their estates through charity to other elders and their families in a network that sustains their free nation as God’s Kingdom. This description is inherent to being made in God’s image. False gods posit themselves as ‘Fathers of the earth‘ (Pater Patriae, Patronus, Conscripti Patri) who entice biological parents to give up the equitable rights to their children through birth registrationsocial security enrollment, patriotism, and other contracts for civil, socialist benefits like tax write-offs, protection, education, participation in false economies, and anything else they take for granted. These pragmatic benefits also ensnare the biological parents and bastardize biological children, remaking them in the image of false gods to become slaves to the civil Fathers of the Nation and their bureaucracies who have jurisdictional authority to their adopted children, or ‘citizens.’

The God of Heaven is a Protector to His people, foremost by instructing them to love their neighbors as themselves, and to supplement that brotherly love and mutual, sacrificial protection with miraculous providence. In God’s Kingdom, the people must participate in the Hue and Cry process for the apprehension of thieves or in the protection against invasion, realizing that the safety and security of the possessions of one member of the community is synecdotal for the integrity of the whole community. When the proverbial shofar is heard, the Posse comitatus selflessly assembles as a militia, willing to establish protection for even its most ‘insignificant’ members. When those faithful to God assemble together, even if it is just two or more Providence-reliant individuals, then God may directly intervene on their behalf. There are many stories throughout Scripture of this occurring: from within lions’ dens, to repentant prostitutes, to prophets in the wilderness, to apostles in prison. The examples are exhaustive. In contrast, the pragmatism of looking for protection from false gods reveals how they endeavor to slowly strip away the ability for the people to protect themselves as free souls under God, but rather establish socialist provision for bureaucracies consisting of ‘protecting’ agents ranging from policing precincts, to firefighting departments, to military might. This slippery slope invariably leads to what is commonly called ‘surveillance’ and ‘police’ states. False gods strip away the rights that men have to their labor through income tax in order to provide salaries for professional police and arbiters of protection. More aggressively, the false god takes

‘your sons, and appoint them for himself, for his chariots, and to be his horsemen; and some shall run before his chariots. And he will appoint him captains over thousands, and captains over fifties; and will set them to ear his ground, and to reap his harvest, and to make his instruments of war, and instruments of his chariots.’ (1 Samuel 8)

This, of course, describes a military draft into a standing army which is entirely unable to protect people from the very forces that have enslaved them into their military to begin with. This does not even begin to acknowledge the perverse effects that military service has on its willing participators. The pragmatism of worldly protection does not even establish any real protection at all, but only fascist fear-mongering oppression over the people.

God is the one Lawgiver and Judge of freemen, compelling them to keep their communities righteous instead of corrupt, productive instead of slothful, and charitable instead of covetous. He established natural and customary laws, and their non-statutory guidelines, thereby making a framework to unify a free community without taking away individual liberties. This is the essence of a capitalist society. Justice, in a free society, is also established ad hoc by consent of the people who know to correct each other through a process of personal and societal accountability. ‘The lex fundamentalis of natural law is the duty of every man, so far as in him lies, to strive that the welfare of human society in general be secured and maintained.’ (Pufendorf: On the Duty of Man and Citizen) The Biblical guidelines for this practice are commonly repeated, and fairly often, but go misunderstood by professing Christians who are already reliant on the providence of false gods. Early Christians under Christ’s tutelage were instructed to create a voluntary network of free societies, who were bound by charity. In this way they were free from relying on the pragmatic provision of false gods who acquired their contributions by force and taxation. When free people decided not to ‘even eat‘ with unrepentant sinners and ‘hand them over to satan‘, this meant that they no longer included the unrepentant sinners in their networks of charity, and effectively kicked them out of their freewill welfare congregations, where they would either be forced to starve to death in their stubbornness, or to seek socialist benefits, and put on again the yoke of bondage provided by false gods and their civil citizenship. Punitive justice in a free society largely consists of excommunication through idiomatic ‘stoning‘ unto spiritual death as a result of exile. This is all that is needed in a society under God’s jurisdiction because he rules every man individually by writing His Law onto his heart and mind, and instructs the people not to rule over each other, but to serve each other, and only discontinue that service for people who refuse to be ruled by God and bear righteous fruit.

In respect to the ground of the authority of law, it is divided as natural law, or the law of nature or of God, and positive law.

Positive Law is, “Law actually ordained or established, under human sanctions, as distinguished from the law of nature or natural law, which comprises those considerations of justice, right, and universal expediency that are announced by the voice of reason or of revelation…” (Bouvier’s Law Dictionary)

Positive law, therefore, is an example of pragmatism, consisting of man-made, civil sanctions authorized by false gods who must write their statutes on hearts of stone which belong to a people who refuse to walk by faith, but choose to dismiss their community ethics and outsource their social virtues and the weightier matters of God to authoritative bureaucracies. ‘The civil law reduces the unwilling freedman to his original slavery; but the laws of the Angloes judge once manumitted as ever after free.’ ( Co. Litt. 137) Civil law is evidence of bondage. This is a noteworthy fact considering that most of what passes for civil law provided by false gods is actually ‘contract law‘ and includes the enforcement of those contracts created by vows, and by applying for legal citizenshiplegal titles to property and legal relationships to community. That enforcement ranges from fines (generic financial restitutions to be placed into the coffers of false gods to ‘avenge society’), to imprisonment (which reduces the productivity of the criminal and keeps him in suspended animation that increases his fiscal debt), to a literal death penalty (which most often is applied hypocritically in false convictions to innocent suspects). The horrors of the pragmatism of legal and judicial systems of worldly kingdoms are only made even more muddy in a bureaucratic quagmire for those who endeavor to reconstruct civil law in a quixotic attempt to codify their interpretations of God’s law into positive law. This invariably would compromise the laws of nature, twist them into something unnatural, and make a mockery of God’s intention for a free society by continuing to place His commands under the jurisdiction and scrutiny of false gods. This, too, is bondage. Just bondage falsely christianized because, in every single instance, civil law is the law men establish for themselves. Foolishly trying to make one’s interpretation of God’s Law into civil law is the definition of moving away from what’s actually lawful towards establishing legalism.

But the word of the LORD was unto them precept upon precept, precept upon precept; line upon line, line upon line; here a little, [and] there a little; that they might go, and fall backward, and be broken, and snared, and taken. (Isaiah 28:13)

When people in bondage have been given over to debased minds because they wish to be governed and ruled by the glory of false gods instead of remaining as free souls under the glory of the one, true God, they become confused and blinded about many things, but especially about the meaning behind God’s word. Taking his name in vain, they seek to use their interpretations of it to exercise authority over each other through the socialism of democracy. God’s word therefore becomes a stumbling block to them, breaking them, and so they ensnare themselves by looking to be ruled by and to rule over each other, and are taken into bondage simply because they look to legislative fathers to write a perversion of God’s laws onto hearts of stone instead of allowing God to write His true laws onto hearts of flesh. They look to pagan gods to punish their fellow man because they lack the diligence to maintain a righteous society and let God punish the evildoer.

God is the Savior of the people delivering them from the maladies of famine, being orphaned, invasion, and lawlessness through the means mentioned in the above paragraphs, but the most noteworthy aspect of salvation by God is from the spiritual and jurisdictional bondage that the people experience after they look to false gods to be their saviors. Repeated throughout scripture are examples of those who profess to be God’s people selling themselves into bondage through covetousness for socialist provision, or through sloth in failing to maintain a society strong enough to elude invasion, conquering, and capture, and therefore acquire for themselves a civil slavery that lasts from generation to generation until, eventually, God steps in and redeems the people who might better appreciate His mercy and provision after having experienced generations of bondage.

“Redemption is deliverance from the power of an alien dominion and the enjoyment of the resulting freedom. It involves the idea of restoration to one who possesses a more fundamental right or interest. The best example of redemption in the Old Testament was the deliverance of the children of Israel from bondage, from the dominion of the alien power in Egypt.” (Zondervan’s Pictorial Encyclopedia of the Bible.)

This sort of salvation and mercy of God is not exclusive to the Old Testament. God even sent his Son, who was born a freeman, was recognized as the rightful King of Judea, and established a kingdom for free men, and died a martyr’s death by regicide, in order to secure for him a people who would not be subject to the kingdoms of the Pax Romana and the kingdoms modeled after the Roman political world. We have written about this extensively here. And also here. The Kingdom of God, then, is a refuge for repentant sinners, saved by grace from the civil laws of ruling men, through faith in a God who replaces the civil yokes of taxation and judicial liability with a lighter yoke of charity and God’s Law.

And you, being dead in your sins and the uncircumcision of your flesh, hath he quickened together with him, having forgiven you all trespasses; Blotting out the handwriting of ordinances [man-made laws] that was against us, which was contrary to us, and took it out of the way, nailing it to his cross; And having spoiled principalities and powers [bureaucratic rulers], he made a shew of them openly, triumphing over them in it.’ (Colossians 2:13-15)

It is popular but dead churchian tradition to make this passage about God’s laws being blotted out on the cross, even though the rest of the New Testament still describes God’s Law as a good thing. This is because churchians remain in the same bondage experienced by Jews of Christ’s generation and have not yet received the salvation bestowed upon the Christians of Christ’s generation. They believe that their bondage is part of their Christianity, unable to grasp any sense of liberty beyond their normalcy bias. This is because churches, seminarians, and laymen believe the same sophistry about scripture as the Pharisees did, and are just as incorporated by pagan governments under false gods as was the temple of Herod in Jerusalem. Their confusion about the real meaning of most of scripture starts right there.

‘Jesus answered them, Verily, verily, I say unto you, Whosoever committeth sin is the servant of sin. And the servant abideth not in the house for ever: but the Son abideth ever. If the Son therefore shall make you free, ye shall be free indeed. I know that ye are Abraham’s seed; but ye seek to kill me, because my word hath no place in you. I speak that which I have seen with my Father: and ye do that which ye have seen with your father.’ (John 8:34-38)

This is a critique of the salvation (and fatherhood) of false gods who falsely promised liberty to the people, but were actually ‘servants of corruption’. The rhetoric in Rome regarding ‘manumission‘ (setting captives free) included the mercy of turning chattel slaves into the ‘adopted sons’ of government officials. However, this ‘freedom’ unfortunately merely meant that those chattel slaves were being delivered into a civil bondage no different than the people of the world experience today. Chattel slaves in Rome could be ‘freed’ by the grace of their civil fathers (patronus) to become their clients (voting constituents and jurisdictional servants) and plebeians (civil slaves). The ‘saviors’ of human civil government promised the people freedom, but it was not the ‘freedom indeed’ as Christ’s Gospel came to elucidate. This bait and switch about ‘freeing’ chattel slaves into civil bondage is not unfamiliar to modern societies, as we have touched on here.

‘The Fourteenth Amendment uses the word “citizens” as a word denoting membership, as opposed to the former use of the word, which denoted merely an inhabitant. This is not to say that there was not citizenship of the United States prior to the amendment, for there surely was. The Fourteenth Amendment was an across-the-board offer of citizenship as a member of the United States Federal Government.’ -The Covenant of the Gods, Citizen vs. Citizen

It is not uncommon for caste systems to have social means for the members of its lowest class to navigate a step or two up the social ladder, or pyramid, or ziggurat. After all, the more citizens there are, the more of the socialist debt there is to spread around which stymies the inevitable economic collapse of society. ‘Freeing’ slaves in 19th century United States unto the civil bondage of American citizenship is no exception. However, manumission is not the only way that false gods practice a pragmatic ‘salvation’ of the people. A far more convenient method has always been one of imperialism.

It was during the Hasmonean civil war that Queen Salome created the Sanhedrin which included giving the Pharisees both legislative ability and judicial authority in a rabbinical council over Judea. They eventually used this power to invite the foreign imperialists of Rome to play arbiter between the Hasmonean dispute for the Judean throne and to decide which of the competitors was the rightful heir. History tells us that this adulterous cry for help was the invited foot-in-the-door for Rome’s occupation of Judea, justifying their resulting perpetual involvement by their obligation and national interest in defending their decision with military might and political input. In this way, the people of Judea looked to the false gods of Rome for pragmatic ‘salvation’ from the self-destruction of civil war and political implosion. That salvation shattered the national sovereignty of the Jewish nation and made them pragmatic participators in an imperialistic one world government.

The common theme of these examples of the dichotomy between relying on God’s Providence and pragmatically relying on the providence of human civil magistrates is simple: One cannot possibly make a deal with the Devil and expect to succeed in any discernible way. Human civil governments who wield the double-edged sword of authority, covetousness, and compromised morality all belong to Satan, and they do not wield that sword in vain. Anybody who desires to live by that sword, will die by it, finding themselves effortlessly split in twain in the same bitter irony that corrupted King Saul into insanity and only ever brought the nation of Israel into bondage over and over again throughout Biblical history. However, it is the Abolitionist imperative to remain set apart and unstained from that world; to rely on God’s providence and keep themselves to the narrow strategy passed down from King Christ. As for the pragmatists who are beholden to cumbersome and self-defeating political pursuits, preach to them the Gospel of reconciliation, and, if necessary, dust off your feet and let the dead bury the dead.

Providence.jpg

 

Ye Cannot Serve God and the Federal Reserve

Ye Cannot Serve God and the Federal Reserve

Big corporations will sell cheaper, less quality product, or product with less amount of substance in order to circumvent the effects of inflation. Their motive for not just selling the same quality product at a higher price, is to not be seen as greedy villains who take advantage of the consumer, which would inspire the public to lash out in betrayal and damage their branding. They could not possibly explain to their loyal customers the finer details of their ever-increasing business overhead. So, they act with moderate deception.

The unintended consequence of manipulating the product instead of the price is the whitewashing of the horrors of devalued currency. In some other situation, in some other nation, the posted prices may increase so that the consumer may start to eventually understand the problem, justifiably begin to panic, and withdraw all of their checkings and savings, creating a national crisis for the sake of salvaging worthless paper money.

Smaller banks are not required to keep any of the deposits on their books in the vault. Medium-sized banks are only required to reserve three percent of deposits. Larger banks, only ten percent. This is the bare minimum of the ‘reserve requirement.’ The rest is loaned out to clientele. The bank profits on all of the interest of those loans. When there’s a ‘run on the bank‘ through mass, fiscal panic, that fraction of a fraction of the deposited assets cannot possibly cover the withdrawal claims. All of the money is already loaned out and no bank owner is going to cough up the profits made on the interest of the loans made with other people’s deposits. The bank’s insured, anyway. When a bank is called upon to pay back more money it has borrowed from clients than it has in reserve, it borrows the deficit from a bigger bank. Ultimately, from the Federal Reserve. This relationship is determined by an FDIC relationship, though the Reserve is just as ready to loan to non-FDIC approved institutions when called upon.

But, as is good banking practice, the Reserve does not loan out the profits it makes on interest rates. Rather, the Reserve has the exclusive right and favored practice of printing more money, and loans it out to keep banks from declaring bankruptcy. It inflates the market with valueless currency as a solution created by valueless currency that has already been inflated by scenarios just like this.

Take the big corporations. Or any corporation. When, for whatever reason, a corporation must file bankruptcy, there may be an incentive for the US Government to bail it out. Of course, the government is also bankrupt. But, because it is always expressing a vested motive in accruing more of a controlling interest in, well, everything, it borrows from the Federal Reserve, who prints more valueless currency to loan to the government so it can purchase and further own businesses that already contractually exist by its permission. Not only does the bail-out fund go to inflate the economy, but the interest for the bail-out loan is deferred to the taxpayers as well.

This cycle of inflation, devaluing the economy, going into debt through applying for loans, just to have the economy further devalued through hyperinflation as a supposed solution to inflation, can never prevent the inevitable: a collapsed market, a ruined society, a starving people with wheelbarrows full of life savings that cannot even afford a loaf of bread.

This is the damnation culminating from the broad path of sinful socialism, the road that leads to destruction. The end result of human civil bondage created by human civil government, and its socialist institutions that make merchandise of men, compelling them to sacrifice their liberties and equity in exchange for debt notes. A covetous, idolatrous, morally bankrupt people, who defer their responsibilities to civil institutions in social contracts, will only ever incur a fiscally bankrupt society. This is a cautionary tale that has been repeated by every major culture since the introduction of sin. From Babylon, to Rome, to Venezuela, and eventually, to the United States. The bill always comes due. There is always weeping. There is always gnashing of teeth.

The United States does not have a capitalism problem because fiat currency cannot be said to resemble capital. It has no equitable value for the same reason Chuck E. Cheese tickets have no viable wealth. Even most, if not all, of what is considered property: from land to housing to vehicles, are all possessed through legal titles where the US-backed socialist bureaucracy retains the equitable rights as the true owner. It also retains the rights to play arbiter over your occupation and recreation through Federal Identification with social security registration, income taxation and licensing, including giving permission for corporations to even exist and operate legally. It even retains the equitable rights to your children through birth registration and social security, granting you the privilege of having stewardship through legal guardianship while being its true father, provider, and source of discipline.

By voluntarily rendering unto Caesar that which is God’s, the people have found themselves in a socialist problem forfeiting all capital and equity in exchange for debt notes and legal titles. This is the nature of the social contract which binds men together by force in a mutual economy of ever-depreciating value.

‘Lay not up for yourselves treasures upon earth, where moth and rust doth corrupt, and where thieves break through and steal:

But lay up for yourselves treasures in heaven, where neither moth nor rust doth corrupt, and where thieves do not break through nor steal:

For where your treasure is, there will your heart be also.’ (Matthew 6:19-21)

The Kingdom of Heaven on earth features no fiat currency that can be inflated. It requires real equity, allodium, and commodity money belonging to the people, and not some centralized, institutional government. Lending is rare, interest forbidden. Its currency is love, expressed through charity, and when that charity comes up short, it is subsidized by the charity of Heaven, miraculously multiplying its citizens’ humble offerings, whether or not those offerings are just loaves of bread and some fish. This relationship is fundamentally different than the ways of the world. This is the road to life, and life more abundantly. Life everlasting. This is the road enjoyed by the early abolitionists whose kingdom of God on earth only grew more wealthy and prosperous as the kingdom of Rome collapsed into moral, social and financial ruin.

Federal reserves ruin nations. Or they allow nations to physically ruin themselves after abandoning the law of God as a recompense. One of the most famous acts of King Christ was to turn over the national bank of Judea from the political world over to a repenting people learning to provide for each other a more fruitful society. Many people believe that it is time to ‘End the Fed’, but Jesus Christ, first born of all creation, accomplished that feat in the first century.

The way of Christ is the only way to salvation. The American way leads to death, destruction, and damnation. Believe on the Lord Jesus Christ and the campaign promises of His Gospel, so you may be baptized into his kingdom and out of the kingdoms of this world, and be saved from their inevitable collapse and ruin. Today is the day of salvation.

Idolatry

A Dirge for Common Sense

A Dirge for Common Sense

‘Common sense is not so common.’ -Voltaire

Fortunately, this claim is untrue. Common sense is universal to mankind. Sure, that statement is tautological, but only to thoroughly express the claim that: Everybody has common sense because God made them upright and in His image.

The disconnect between what Scripture says about human nature being upright and full of common sense, and with the common observations of human nature being foolish, clumsy, prideful and sinful begins with the fact that people must actively choose ‘common nonsense’ because they cannot handle the implications of the common sense that God had granted to them at conception. Being imbued with sense would not allow the people to reject God and his righteousness while simultaneously rejecting false gods and the bondage of their civil societies. So, they must lie. They must to pretend to give up the truth in order to pretend to be dumb in order to pretend to be comfortable. They must lie, even to the point of usurping their God-given common sense. In doing so, they usurp God as their god and choose politicians as their gods to rule over them instead. They must even lie about the nature and desires of God, making Jesus compatible with their patriotism or their political pursuits.

So God gives them up to their pretense, so that they may realize their self-delusions. When they reject the law of God that washes the inside of the cup, in favor of the legal systems of men which wash the outside of the cup only, they earn for themselves a debased mind, which invariably justifies the perverse justice of bureaucratic, legislative backpedaling into an acrimonious disorder and confusion that we call damnation. When the internalized Law of God which sanctifies men gets replaced by the legalism of men in civil authority, God gives you up to be ruled by the gods of your choosing, and abandons you to the self destruction that comes with it.

‘And such were some of you.’

‘The fool hath said in his heart, There is no God. They are corrupt, they have done abominable works, there is none that doeth good.’ (Proverbs 14:1)

The original Hebrew does not include the phrase ‘there is’ in the preceding verse. The phrase was added by translators in order to try and make sense out of the verse for their audiences. The verse should read:

‘The fool hath said in his heart, No God.’

This is not a description of atheism, for the early Christians were called atheists by the polytheistic Romans for desiring to be ruled by God alone and not the many civil magistrates (represented by ceremonial, nationalist icons of a superstitious pantheon).

The verse describes the foolishness of despising God’s dominion and going out from under His rule only to be, through sloth or covetousness, ruled by human magistrates who offer socialist benefits and exercise bureaucratic authority.

This foolishness is also consistently described in another passage:

‘Because that which may be known of God is manifest in them; for God hath shewed it unto them. For the invisible things of him from the creation of the world are clearly seen, being understood by the things that are made, even his eternal power and Godhead; so that they are without excuse: Because that, when they knew God, they glorified him not as God, neither were thankful; but became vain in their imaginations, and their foolish heart was darkened. Professing themselves to be wise, they became fools, And changed the glory of the uncorruptible God into an image made like to corruptible man, and to birds, and fourfooted beasts, and creeping things.

Wherefore God also gave them up to uncleanness through the lusts of their own hearts, to dishonour their own bodies between themselves: Who changed the truth of God into a lie, and worshipped and served the creature more than the Creator, who is blessed for ever. Amen.’ (Romans 1:19-25)

God made man upright, to have the common sense that it is foolish to despise the dominion granted to the obedient by Him, only to give up that dominion and become property of false gods through taxation and perverted social compacts. Fools give up God’s glory which inspires men to love Him as their one lawgiver and judge and to love their neighbor as themselves. They exchange His natural law for the civil laws of human civil governments and turn away from Him as their figurehead in order to pursue the godheads represented by animism and dead rulers whose names plaster temples made by human hands, like all government institutions and bureaucratic offices. Even the word ‘creature’ in this passage means ‘civil institution’ as it does in the Great Commission.

Fools become fools when God gives them up to a debased mind after they give up God for the uncleanness of socialist lusts and to dishonor their bodies by making them a surety for debt through corvee bondage.

Abolitionism is inherently an anarchist endeavor, and vice versa. They cannot be separated from each other. Statism is sin and sin is often characterized by some degree of statism, for when men refuse to be ruled by God in their hearts and minds, they will look to democracy to codify and give license to their desires and foolishness. They will legalize plunder and murder and homosexuality and adultery. They will create authority in their own image in order to fill the vacuum left by God’s authority and the being made in His image as a jurisdictional privilege of that political reality.

There is no abolition without the Kingdom of God, a competing nation and government (that does not exercise authority) to the foolish ones established by statists. Even if some of those statists are professing Christians who take the Lord’s name in vain by committing themselves to democracy in futile, useless vanity.

It is common sense that anarchy does not lead to chaos. What it does do is reject the fundamental sins of outsourcing your God-given responsibilities to love your neighbor and execute justice and show mercy and provide for the needy to the satanic cabal of human civil government that exercises authority over society while pretending to play benefactor. Anarchy prevents chaos through moral fidelity to social virtues.

The (un)righteousness of false gods in tailor-made suits with partisan politics, corridors of power, and campaign managers will invariably destroy a society. When you have man-made authority and contracted welfare-through-taxation, you do not need family to hold you accountable or charity to sustain you. When you have anaerobic departments of ‘peacekeepers’ and military subsidized by forced contributions, you do not need voluntary self-sacrifice to protect your neighbor, your children, or yourself.

‘Society in every state is a blessing, but Government, even in its best state, is but a necessary evil; in its worst state an intolerable one: for when we suffer, or are exposed to the same miseries BY A GOVERNMENT, which we might expect in a country WITHOUT GOVERNMENT, our calamity is heightened by reflecting that we furnish the means by which we suffer.’ -Thomas Paine, Common Sense

Do you find abortion to be wicked, homosexuality an abomination, imperialism to be revolting? You still have a conscience. Do you find human civil government to be an efficacious instrument to improve society? You have lost your common sense.

Romans1 USA.jpg

The Constitution of the Kingdom of Heaven

The Constitution of the Kingdom of Heaven

‘Are men the property of the state? Or are they free souls under God? This same battle continues throughout the world today.’ -Cecil B. DeMille, The Ten Commandments, 1956

The Ten Commandments are best interpreted when they are understood in the context of a constitution given to a people recently freed from human civil bondage who were formally property of the State of Egypt. The Israelites, having repented of and forsaking Egyptian citizenship, then received the ten Laws in the wilderness as they endeavored to form their new, free society. Likewise, the Christians, having repented of and forsaking Roman citizenship, received the Perfect Law of Liberty as they underwent their baptisms and began to form their network of congregations sustained by charity and jurisdictional purity. Both historical ceremonies, the Exodus and Pentecost, establish a salvation of men from civil bondage into the Kingdom of God, and therefore one fact becomes increasingly clear. The law of God becomes the only constitution capable of keeping men free from the dominion of man. One stark implication of this reality is that one common suggestion that the constitution of the United States was inspired by God, like many american patriots endeavor to claim, is one that shows an ignorance of the purpose of the American constitution and a willingness to ally oneself with a god other than the one of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob.

Referring to the Ten Commandments as a constitution might be a foreign concept to most, but this is most likely due to the fact that churchians look at Scripture through a hyper-spiritual, fairly superstitious, and strictly personal lens. Under such a worldview, the ten commandments become personal guide stones and a moral checklist rather than a framework by which to judge nations which it is meant to be.

‘The Bible is for the Government of the People, by the People, and for the People.’ -John Wycliffe, 1384

 

The preamble of God’s constitution reads thusly:

‘I am the LORD thy God, which have brought thee out of the land of Egypt, out of the house of bondage.’

The bondage that Egypt provided for its citizens was one of ‘corvee’, also known as statute labor. Scripture tells us that the Israelites had suffered under an income tax agreement with Joseph of twenty percent of their labor. (In fact, that rate is still the relative average for Egypt today.) God had unequivocally referred to that arrangement as a bondage and slavery that can only be remedied through redemption. Americans today, however, pay anywhere from thirty to 50 percent and foolishly refer to their own arrangements as an evidence of their liberty in ‘the greatest country on earth’, in crippling ignorance of God’s constitution that offers real liberty. The point that God is making in declaring the He brought the Israelites out of bondage is to establish that the Israelites did not free themselves from their own covetous and slothful entanglements, but that it was the Providence of God that liberated them upon their repentance, by their hope and faith.

‘Redemption is deliverance from the power of an alien dominion and the enjoyment of the resulting freedom. It involves the idea of restoration to one who possesses a more fundamental right or interest. The best example of redemption in the Old Testament was the deliverance of the children of Israel from bondage, from the dominion of the alien power in Egypt.’ -Zondervan’s Pictorial Encyclopedia of the Bible

 

Article 1.

‘Thou shalt have no other gods before me.’

Whereas most people who read this phrase assume it to refer to imaginary, superstitious, and ‘religious‘ figureheads, in actuality the Hebrew, Greek and even Latin words for ‘god‘ also means ‘magistrate, or ruling judge.’ It is true that pagan nations have often ‘worshipped‘ other ‘deities’, the most familiar being the Greek, Roman, Egyptian or even Norse pantheons, all of which having strikingly similar characteristics and mythologies to each other. This probably has something to do with the fact that they all represent civil institutions, whose temples were places of government bureaucracy including banking, public education, welfare, agriculture, and military. All of which are included by the pantheon of the United States. The Israelites were instructed to not raise up men to rule over them which is an affront to God who desires to be their ruler without competition. It is almost arbitrary for translators to take the Hebrew word ‘elohyim’ and the Greek word ‘theos’ and make them both say either ‘judges’ or ‘gods’, but those two terms are indistinguishable in their original languages and have the same meaning. ‘God’ is undoubtedly a concept closely related to being an authority with civil jurisdiction, moreso than it is strictly a theological reference. So, the point in God declaring that His people should have ‘no other gods’ is to tell his people not to establish a ruler to exercise authority over themselves, determining right and wrong through a legal system, and establishing a providence through benefits and military protection is in direct competition with the God of the Bible. This necessarily includes the magistrates that Americans have established for themselves through the authoritarianism of democracy.

‘For so it was, that the children of Israel had sinned against the Lord their God, which had brought them up out of the land of Egypt, from under the hand of Pharaoh king of Egypt, and had feared other gods, and walked in the statutes of the heathen, whom the Lord cast out from before the children of Israel, and of the kings of Israel, which they had made.’ (2 Kings 17:7-8)

 

Article 2.

‘Thou shalt not make unto thee any graven image, or any likeness of any thing that is in heaven above, or that is in the earth beneath, or that is in the water under the earth:’

The purpose of statues made out of precious metals like a golden calf, which was a common practice throughout the ancient world (it was even practiced in New Testament Rome) was to display a reserve fund of the people. When the people pool their collective resources together and make monetary sacrifices to the community reserve for the socialist good of their whole society, then the result is that they have enslaved each other and themselves through a social contract as a mutual surety for the well-being of their society. When this occurs, every participant is consenting to be forced to provide for their neighbor through taxation unto the collective fiscal bureaucracy because it promises them strength-in-numbers where they live their lives by the assured contract of sight rather than the organic relationships of faith and personal responsibility. The federal reserve bank in America may not be represented by a literal graven image of a man or an animal, but the United States does have plenty of that kind of symbolism that readily corresponds to its own institution of statue labor and national identity. Between Mount Rushmore, the Statue of Liberty, and animism in bald eagles are just a few of the examples that serve the same purpose as the golden calf and other institutional idolatry for those who are enslaved by an income tax in the United States.

‘In Egypt, the centralized system and the excellent organization of harvests in state warehouses facilitated the development of the banking system.’ -A Sketch History of Banking, Camelia Maria Manea, University of Pitesti

 

Article 2.5.

‘Thou shalt not bow down thyself to them, nor serve them: for I the LORD thy God am a jealous God, visiting the iniquity of the fathers upon the children unto the third and fourth generation of them that hate me; And shewing mercy unto thousands of them that love me, and keep my commandments.’

Most of what is considered ‘the legal system’ in the United States right now is boiled down in principle to contract law (exemplified by the constitution). When you receive a benefit or make yourself eligible to receive a benefit from false gods and human magistrates (like socialist security), then you are compelled to become a liability for the institution that grants it. Anyone who can partake in a national economy with its fiat currency (because all of the real wealth is stored away by false gods, out of reach of the people), is also someone who has to provide for that economy with their labor (at least thirty to fifty percent of it in the United States). As we can see in America, as a prime example, that socialist curse is lasting to at least the third and fourth generation of those who began to enter in to such agreements. That curse will continue to affect future generations until the national economy collapses and the moth and rust have eaten up the worthless, paper currency. However, as the repentant slaves in Egypt, God will show mercy to those who forsake that socialist lifestyle and turn the other way, willing to go into the proverbial wilderness without institutional security and be ruled by God alone. You cannot have two constitutions to dictate your lifestyles and political existence, especially when they are in such direct contradiction to each other.

‘Labour was the first price, the original purchase-money that was paid for all things. It was not by gold or by silver, but by labour, that all wealth of the world was originally purchased.’ -Adam Smith, The Wealth of Nations

 

Article 3.

‘Thou shalt not take the name of the LORD thy God in vain; for the LORD will not hold him guiltless that taketh his name in vain.’

While the Israelites were serving false gods in Egypt through statute labor and nationalistic identity, they were hypocritically calling themselves ‘God’s people’. Christians in America are doing the same thing today, despite the fact that God says he spits the lukewarm out of his mouth. However, He has established a kingdom for people who want to be ruled by him exclusively and not be ruled by human judges and magistrates while falsely calling themselves servants of God. Christ said not to pray to the fathers of the nations for daily bread (welfare) but to pray to ‘our Father who art in Heaven’. You cannot do both at the same time.  To take God’s name or Christ’s name in vain, means that you are unfaithful to the principles and ideas represented by those names, while calling yourself faithful. Much like in matrimony, if a wife takes her husband’s name and devotes herself to another man, then she has taken his name in vain. In other words, thinking that nominally taking the label ‘Christian’ for yourself will spare you from the scrutiny and judgment about whether you have taken it sincerely, is practicing a form of witchcraft, relying on mere words to have a spellbinding effect of protection, while God will not hold you guiltless if your composure, lifestyle and citizenship do not reflect the Kingdom of Heaven and the God of Heaven. To take God’s name sincerely is to born again in God’s image.

‘For this is the covenant that I will make with the house of Israel after those days, saith the Lord; I will put my laws into their mind, and write them in their hearts: and I will be to them a God, and they shall be to me a people.’ (Hebrews 8:10)

 

Article 4.

‘Remember the sabbath day, to keep it holy. Six days shalt thou labour, and do all thy work: But the seventh day is the sabbath of the LORD thy God: in it thou shalt not do any work, thou, nor thy son, nor thy daughter, thy manservant, nor thy maidservant, nor thy cattle, nor thy stranger that is within thy gates: For in six days the LORD made heaven and earth, the sea, and all that in them is, and rested the seventh day: wherefore the LORD blessed the sabbath day, and hallowed it.’

In civil bondage, the Israelites learned to take their rest before their work, by borrowing against the future, only to have to pay back the debts of society later by contract. In fact, this is the practice that they were committed to in order to even be eligible to sell themselves into civil bondage. They had to look to Pharaoh for protection and provision because they were not diligent to prepare against the famine that put their lives in jeopardy. In this way, they broke the Sabbath Principle through their sloth, reinforced by their covetous socialism. To become a free people, they had to learn to do the opposite: To labor today, and work hard to provide themselves and each other with a comfortable lifestyle so that they did not have to put their neighbor or children up as collateral to be enslaved to a system that they are borrowing from through benefits and welfare and entitlements. If they worked now, they could rest later without accrued debt. If they rested now, they would have to work twice as hard later, working off not just the principle of the credit, but the interest too. This is why the national economy of the United States is so far in debt that the people will never be able to pay it off. As a result, the people are selling their own children into bondage so that they may be able to collect social security later on, and to keep the national economy from drowning in its own reckoning. The bill always comes due, and societies based on this socialist model invariably collapse. Social security is the readiest available example of a collective credit scheme. Anything you pay into the system, through taxation, goes to alleviate the credit received by your parents and grandparents who signed you away as collateral. Anything you receive from the system, through benefits, is borrowed against your children and grandchildren whom you have delivered unto Baal as a surety for your promised prosperity and fiscal harvest.

‘But when a new generation arises and the democracy falls into the hands of the grandchildren of its founders, they have become so accustomed to freedom and equality that they no longer value them, and begin to aim at pre-eminence; and it is chiefly those of ample fortune who fall into this error. 6 So when they begin to lust for power and cannot attain it through themselves or their own good qualities, they ruin their estates, tempting and corrupting the people in every possible way. 7 And hence when by their foolish thirst for reputation they have created among the masses an appetite for gifts and the habit of receiving them, democracy in its turn is abolished and changes into a rule of force and violence. 8 For the people, having grown accustomed to feed at the expense of others and to depend for their livelihood on the property of others, as soon as they find a leader who is enterprising but is excluded from the houses of office by his penury, institute the rule of violence; 9 and now uniting their forces massacre, banish, and plunder, until they degenerate again into perfect savages and find once more a master and monarch.’ –Polybius: The Histories Fragments of Book VI, p289

 

Article 5.

‘Honour thy father and thy mother: that thy days may be long upon the land which the LORD thy God giveth thee.’

Children should remain in the equity of their parents instead of being adopted by rulers through legal citizenship which breaks up the family and installs human Benefactors as equitable ‘fathers‘ and demotes parents as ‘legal guardians‘. Through birth certification, human civil governments assume equitable rights to the education, discipline, healthcare, welfare, and best interests of the child. In exchange, parents receive tax write-offs, and the assurance that their biological offspring will be taken care of by the collective through taxation and bureaucracy. The honor prescribed by this commandment is a double-edged sword. Children should also take care of their parents in their old age and not rely on the social security of socialist benefactors which makes their neighbor liable for them through covetousness and sloth. Christ called this ‘the Corban that makes the word of God to none effect.’ Children should assume personal responsibility to care for the elderly of society and not rely on the man-made institutions that appear to be fine establishments but change the nature of society by giving it hard hearts as those personal responsibilities are outsourced, again, to the collective. When children effectively honor their parents, the political party of the family thrives, and the equity and allodium of the family taking dominion over the earth remains in the family instead of being broken up by institutions that weaken the family. In this way, free societies demand strong families, which enable for ‘thy days to remain long upon the land.’

Pursuant to the parens patriae doctrine, ‘the primary control and custody of infants is with the government…’ – Ex parte Wright, 225 Ala. 220

 

Article 6.

‘Thou shalt not kill.’

Literal murder is certainly wrong. It is self-evident that nobody needs to be instructed in this. Cain understood the gravity of fratricide. Moses originally fled Egypt to escape the recompense of killing an Egyptian. Certainly, the Israelites in Egypt were familiar with the atrocity of murder. Not only was it proscribed by Egyptian legalism, but they experienced first-hand their own attempted murder fleeing from Pharaoh’s military at the parting of the Red Sea. This point should not be belabored with too many examples, but it should be obviously absurd to think that God redeemed the Israelites into the wilderness to teach them not to murder.

All throughout scripture, God uses the words ‘kill’ and ‘murder’ as hyperbolic references to socialist practices like taxation and enticing each other into bondage. The most repetitive example is in Proverbs 1:

‘My son, if sinners entice thee, consent thou not. If they say, Come with us, let us lay wait for blood, let us lurk privily for the innocent without cause: Let us swallow them up alive as the grave; and whole, as those that go down into the pit: We shall find all precious substance, we shall fill our houses with spoil: Cast in thy lot among us; let us all have one purse: My son, walk not thou in the way with them; refrain thy foot from their path: For their feet run to evil, and make haste to shed blood. Surely in vain the net is spread in the sight of any bird. And they lay wait for their own blood; they lurk privily for their own lives. So are the ways of every one that is greedy of gain; which taketh away the life of the owners thereof.’ (Proverbs 1:10-19)

When men establish societies through greed by making every person responsible for every other person through taxation, statute labor, and socialism, they are taking the rights of their fellow man, especially regarding property and labor. God calls this ‘murder’, for any man who is a slave cannot be said to be truly alive so long as he is oppressed. Even if he is the author of his own oppression. Life is inseparable from liberty. Rights are the essence of ourselves. Death is inseparable from bondage. When you receive benefits, services, or bureaucratic policy extracted from your neighbor’s labor, you are compelling him to live for you. You have taken his life and stripped him of God’s image, and made him something debased, like a beast of burden, or a tool in the hands of your arbiters of human civil government. You have conquered his spirit, corrupted his essence, and drunk his lifeblood, strangled by contracted violence and force, polluting his sacrifice to provide for your creature comforts. It is no wonder that the patriarchs of Israel consequently found themselves in bondage after stripping their brother Joseph of his life by selling him into bondage.

‘Society will develop a new kind of servitude which covers the surface of society with a network of complicated rules, through which the most original minds and the most energetic characters cannot penetrate. It does not tyrannise but it compresses, enervates, extinguishes, and stupefies a people, till each nation is reduced to nothing better than a flock of timid and industrious animals, of which the government is the shepherd.’ ― Alexis de Tocqueville, Democracy in America Volume 2

 

Article 7.

Thou shalt not commit adultery.

Like murder, the Israelites did not have to be escorted into the wilderness to learn that marital unfaithfulness is wrong. If the people had to be instructed that breaking marital vows is ignoble, then there would be no purpose in making marital vows in the first place. The vow itself implies the immorality of unfaithfulness.

God is using this conclusion of common sense as an idiom to describe political infidelity. When God’s people look for providence in the form of provision, justice, mercy, and protection from other gods in the form of magistrates, rulers, or Benefactors who exercise authority, and learn to serve that relationship through corvee, taxation, democracy, and nationalism, they are being unfaithful to God. Most of the time that the concepts of ‘adultery‘ and ‘fornication’ are mentioned in Scripture they are referring to those made in God’s image forsaking the responsibility that comes with being made in God’s image, and trading it for the benefits of being remade in the image of false gods who make them civil slaves in the transaction. Making false gods your lawgivers and judges, the heads of your religious organizations and marital unions, and the arbiters of your possessions and choices, is a rejection of God’s desire to have exclusive authority over your life. Turning to another provider, authority, and savior from temporal struggle and strife by anointing human rulers to offices of power and judgment, is to break the covenant with the God of the Bible, taking his name in vain while pledging yourself to another, and becoming unequally yoked with his civil harem.

‘And I saw, when for all the causes whereby backsliding Israel committed adultery I had put her away, and given her a bill of divorce; yet her treacherous sister Judah feared not, but went and played the harlot also. And it came to pass through the lightness of her whoredom, that she defiled the land, and committed adultery with stones and with stocks. And yet for all this her treacherous sister Judah hath not turned unto me with her whole heart, but feignedly, saith the LORD.’ (Jeremiah 3:8, 10)

 

Article 8.

‘Thou shalt not steal.’

The common denominator, and lowest hanging fruit, for those who passively imagine liberty to be a favorable notion is the idea that ‘taxation is theft.’ That statement may be true in the most general contexts, but a more detailed reality reveals that those who benefit from public religion are the thieves. Civil slaves are entitled to civil infrastructure, which is fueled by taxation. Bureaucratic policies and figureheads could not exist without salaries fueled by taxation. Benefits and services like welfare, healthcare, unemployment benefits, social security, military, police, firefighters, public education, subsidized corporations, all cannot exist apart from taxation. Stealing is not always direct. Sometimes it is done by governments for our ‘benefit’. When we take them up on that offer, we are stealing. We give them permission to steal for us through our application while simultaneously giving them license to take from us in order to benefit our neighbor. We are under tribute because we have accepted the notion that the ends justify the means and that the needs of the many outweigh the liberties of the individual. We are in bondage because we are pragmatists.

‘The essence of all slavery consists in taking the produce of another’s labor by force. It is immaterial whether this force be founded upon ownership of the slave or ownership of the money that he must get to live.’ -Leo Tolstoy

 

Article 9.

‘Thou shalt not bear false witness against thy neighbour.’

Lying is wrong. Again, the Israelites did not need to be liberated from generations after generations of bondage in order to learn that truth. However, there were many facets of their civil citizenship in Egypt that they took for granted which would qualify as deception by misrepresenting or concealing the truth. For instance, when we change the meaning of words in scripture to shy away from its inherent political injunctions or proscription of yoking with unbelievers in civil citizenship, in order to make our sins and shame more palatable, then we have lied to ourselves. When we offer up fiat currency as real wealth, we defraud our neighbor for his goods and services, exchanging ever-inflating debt notes for real equity and tangible means. When we say to human civil government with our applications for services, licensing, benefits and political reform: ‘Yes, my neighbor can provide for my greed. He can become collateral for my covetousness’, then we are bearing false witness against our neighbor. When we call ourselves God’s people while living in bloodthirsty bondage, claiming to have been baptized into God’s Kingdom while enjoying the citizenship of other kingdoms, committing witchcraft in assuming that mere words and phrases can make us something we are not, then we are bearing false witness, not only to our neighbor, but to ourselves. We are careless with the truth, inventing superstitious, heady theology that puffs up, tricking us into believing what we want to be true rather than what is, and our need for repentance along with it.

‘The modern banking system manufactures money out of nothing. The process is perhaps the most astounding piece of sleight of hand that was ever invented. Banking was conceived in iniquity and born in sin. Bankers own the Earth. Take it away from them, but leave them the power to create money, and with the flick of the pen they will create enough money to buy it back again…
Take this great power away from them and all great fortunes like mine will disappear, and they ought to disappear, for then this would be a better and happier world to live in. But if you want to continue to be slaves of the banks and pay the cost of your own slavery, then let bankers continue to create money and control credit.’ –Sir Josiah Stamp, Director, Bank of England, 1928-1941

 

Article 10.

‘Thou shalt not covet thy neighbour’s house, thou shalt not covet thy neighbour’s wife, nor his manservant, nor his maidservant, nor his ox, nor his ass, nor any thing that is thy neighbour’s.’

The word house here does not mean something akin to ‘domestic structure of brick and mortar’, or ‘hut’, or ‘igloo’ or some other physical domicile. It is the same sort of ‘house’ mentioned in the preamble: ‘I am the LORD thy God, which have brought thee out of the land of Egypt, out of the house of bondage.’ It is a reference to a man’s dominion and equity. The house and lineage of a patriarch included all of the accumulated property and power of choice that came with it. When you, through political pursuit in civil elections or bureaucratic entitlements, are able to determine how your neighbor’s rights and property are distributed, you are telling a man how to use his liberty and property. That makes them your liberty and property. Any benefit received through income tax or property tax, like public education for your children, or funds for food stamps, or social security benefits, or policy execution at the hands of public ‘servants’ are all acquired by coveting your neighbor’s goods. When a working man must surrender a part of his labor to human civil government through income tax in order to provide for services you take advantage of, then you have not only coveted the sweat of his brow, but the tools he uses to feed his family.

‘Accustomed to trample on the rights of others, you have lost the genius of your own independence and become the fit subjects of the first cunning tyrant who rises among you.’ -Abraham Lincoln, at Edwardsville, Illinois, September 13, 1858

 

The role of Abolitionism, as a vehicle for the Gospel, is to liberate man from the dominion of man. In order to do this, it must teach mankind to love Jesus the Christ, who measures that love by an effort to keep his commandments, summed up in loving God (as opposed to the false gods of pagan kingdoms), and loving your neighbor by keeping the weightier matters of the law (as opposed to outsourcing them to idolatrous, human institutions.) Obeying these natural laws is not only pleasing to God, keeping you righteous in your generations, but will keep you under the higher liberty, granting you eternal life, preventing you from engaging in the destruction inherited by socialist idolaters and nationalist fornicators. Every other contract, compact, covenant, and constitution are in direct competition with this constitution of God because they are deals made with the devil, notarized by false gods.

‘While they promise them liberty, they themselves are the servants of corruption: for of whom a man is overcome, of the same is he brought in bondage.’ (2 Peter 2:19)

The Kingdom of God was taken from those who ’caused it to suffer violence’ and who ‘took it by force‘  through the means mentioned above, and it was given to those who endeavored to keep God’s constitution and keep his commandments. This constitution is the only philosophy that can keep a nation free, and preserve a society from generation to generation. The good news is that the only thing that can even purchase a nation who has forsaken these commands and found itself in civil bondage, is the only thing that can give it another opportunity to maintain a free society: The blood of Christ, shed voluntarily for the redemption of mankind. That redemption restores to the people the right to be ruled by God alone, through grace, having these laws written on their hearts and minds, walking upright, as long as the people are repentant of the sins that led them into bondage in the first place.

‘Yet the LORD testified against Israel, and against Judah, by all the prophets, and by all the seers, saying, Turn ye from your evil ways, and keep my commandments and my statutes, according to all the law which I commanded your fathers, and which I sent to you by my servants the prophets.’ (2 Kings 17:13)

constitutions

American Gods, Part III

American Gods, Part III

The United States is just as pagan in principle as the pagan nations in ancient history. This is neither traducement nor libel towards American political culture, because it openly has exemplified innumerable characteristics of those ancient civilizations. What we call ‘Capitol Hill’, the Romans called ‘Capitoline Hill’. What we call ‘commander in chief’, the Romans called ‘Emperator’. What we call ‘president’, the Romans called ‘Principas Civitas’. What we call ‘appointer of supreme court justices’, the Romans called ‘ApoTheos’, or ‘Originator of Gods’. The political world of the United States is so much identical to the political world of the Pax Romana (which oversaw and decreed the persecution of Christians for endeavoring to be sanctified of that world) that our entire legal system is modeled after theirs.

“‘Civil Law,’ ‘Roman Law’ and ‘Roman Civil Law’ are convertible phrases, meaning the same system of jurisprudence. That rule of action which every particular nation, commonwealth, or city has established peculiarly for itself; more properly called “municipal” law, to distinguish it from the “law of nature,” and from international law. (See Bowyer, Mod. Civil Law, 19; Sevier v. Riley, 189. Cal. 170, 244 P. 323, 325)

It is therefore no surprise that, after witnessing how the office of President is identical to the offices of ancient rulers on all of the practical levels that so many of the superstitious characteristics will also bleed over.

Horatio Greenough. George Washington (1840)Horatio Greenough. George Washington (1840)

Greenough patterned the image after a classical statue of the Greek god Zeus at Olympia, one of the Seven Wonders of the Ancient World. Washington sits on a throne, its panels containing the image of Helios, one of Zeus’ innumerable sons, carrying the sun across the sky on a horse-drawn chariot. It harkens back to Ben Franklin’s remarks concerning the heroic figure of Washington as he sat in a chair during the Continental Congress. The image of the sun was carved on the back of the general’s chair.

Greenough HeliosHoratio Greenough. Helios.
Greenough HerculesHoratio Greenough. Hercules.

The other side of the throne shows the image of another son of Zeus. The baby Hercules and his twin brother Iphicles are shown in their crib. Their mother, Hera, became so enraged when she discovered Zeus had fathered Hercules by a mortal woman that she threw a snake into their crib. The infant Hercules is shown killing the snake with his bare hands. A five-pointed star is shown over the head of Hercules – an upside down pentagram.

Washington Monument original

The original design of the Washington Monument by Robert Mills was supposed to have been a Greek-style temple, topped by a sculpture of Washington in a chariot, and pulled by six horses. Greenough’s statue looks strikingly similar to the posture of Washington in Mills’ conceptual drawing. The outstretched hand that holds a sword would have actually been holding the reins of the chariot. It is probable that Greenough likely designed the statue as a demo to get the entire commission of Washington, chariot and four horses for the monument.

These depictions are strikingly similar to the artistic expressions of ancient civilizations, reminiscent of pagan temples and the hubris of constructing pyramids. Human rulers compel idolatry. While this fact is much more readily perceived in older cultures, American civil society seems to be tight-lipped about the mass adoration owed to mere men or, at the very least, endeavors to sanitize it through secularized, rose-colored glasses. The mythos surrounding Washington surely calls that whitewashing into question. But, if history is going to continue to repeat itself then, as is mentioned in Part II, the mythos surrounding Abraham Lincoln is going to attempt to upstage George Washington (and the Pharaohs too).

Daniel Chester Finch. Abraham Lincoln (1920)Daniel Chester Finch. Abraham Lincoln (1920)

The building is in the form of a Greek Doric temple and contains a large seated sculpture of Abraham Lincoln. Below Lincoln’s hands are representations of the fasces, or a bundle of rods bound by a leather thong. Fasces were a Roman symbol of power and authority, a bundle of wooden rods and an axe bound together by leather thongs. Fasces represented that a man held imperium, or executive authority. Exercising imperium, a Roman leader could expect his orders to be obeyed, could dole out punishment, and could even execute those who disobeyed. The fasces he carried symbolized this power in two ways: the rods suggest punishment by beating, the axe suggests beheading. On its surface, the fasces imply power, strength, authority, and justice. Depicted throughout the Lincoln Memorial, are the fasces, and even above one of them is the American motto “E Pluribus Unum,” or “Out of Many, One”, the crux of collectivism. ‘Fasces’ is the root word for ‘fascism,’ a political ideology marked by nationalism, totalitarianism, and imperialism that exerted a dramatic force over global politics particularly in the 1930s and 1940s, most infamously in Germany’s Nazi Party, which was modeled on the Italian fascist movement.

Temple: edifice or sometimes merely an enclosed area dedicated to the worship of a deity and the enshrinement of holy objects connected with such worship. The temple has been employed in most of the world’s religions. Although remains of Egyptian temples of c. 2000 B.C. show well-defined architectural forms, it seems likely that temples were hewed in living rock at a still earlier age: the cave temples of Egypt, India, China, and the Mediterranean basin may be viewed as later developments of such primitive shrines.

Doric: The Dorian immigration (before 1000 B.C.) was a prelude to the building of Greek temples, at first made of timber and sun-dried brick. The superb stone and marble buildings on a defined floor plan were achieved in the middle of the 6th cent. B.C., although the most perfect examples, like the Parthenon (5th cent. B.C.), came later. The Greek temple customarily stood in a temenos, or sacred enclosure, along with accessory shrines, colonnades, and buildings housing the temple treasures. It was built not as a place for assembled worship but as the dwelling for the deity, whose colossal sculptured representation was placed in the naos, and illuminated by the daylight entering through the tall entrance portal. In larger temples, to support the roof lintels, two interior rows of columns divided the naos into nave and side aisles.

Here is an original design of the Lincoln Memorial. Here are some more.

Lincoln Memorial original. Henry BaconHenry Bacon. Lincoln Memorial

‘Therefore concerning the eating of things sacrificed to idols, we know that there is no such thing as an idol in the world, and that there is no God but one. For even if there are so-called gods whether in heaven or on earth, as indeed there are many gods and many lords, yet for us there is but one God, the Father, from whom are all things and we exist for Him; and one Lord, Jesus Christ, by whom are all things, and we exist through Him.’ (1 Corinthians 8:4-6)

There were many gods and many lords for the people to choose from in first century Rome. They each desired to rule over the people, provide benefits for them through the providence of taxation, and receive their homage and worship through civil slavery and the unity of their elective voice, just as in the days of Nimrod. That one voice is what established the Tower of Babel where, if men could collectively come together by the civil yoke of the fasces, and create an idolatrous institution of human civil government, then they can become the masters of their own destiny and usurp God’s rule and, through rebellion, solidify the rule of a ‘so-called god’ – a man – who endeavors to play Benefactor while exercising authority.

This attempt to escape the rule of God only ever brings one under the rule of Satan, primarily by believing the same lies he invented in Eden. His yoke is heavy. It is a bondage in which the Israelites found themselves under Pharaoh (and many others) despite calling themselves God’s people. It is the same bondage experienced by those who claim to be living in ‘the land of the free’. While some of America’s slogans are complete fabrications like that one, some do not refer to the God of the Bible, but the top-down polity of Gentile tradition.

OneNationUnderGod

This blog post is the last part of a three part series. You can read the first part here and the second part here.