Jump to content

The Protestant Community

Sincerely inquiring about the Protestant faith? Welcome to Christforums the Christian Protestant community forums. You'll first need to register in order to join our community. Create or respond to threads on your favorite topics and subjects. Registration takes less than a minute, it's simple, fast, and free! Enjoy the fellowship! God bless, Christforums' Staff
Register now

Christian Fellowship Community Forums

John Calvin puts forward a very simple reason why love is the greatest gift: “Because faith and hope are our own: love is diffused among others.” In other words, faith and hope benefit the possessor, but love always benefits another. In John 13:34–35 Jesus says, “A new command I give you: Love one another. As I have loved you, so you must love one another. By this everyone will know that you are my disciples, if you love one another.” Love always requires an “other” as an object; love cannot remain within itself, and that is part of what makes love the greatest gift.

Recommended Posts

Posted (edited)

The American Birthright

 

 

"We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights. . ." This is the essence of the American birthright, and is what distinguishes us from all other nations."

The Bill of Rights, put into the Constitution by James Madison and his Committee in the House, comes out of Isaiah 10: 1-2, and a few other texts like Psalm 9: 4, Lamentations 3: 5 and Malachi 3: 5. A Leftist or Marxist administration would began to undo that Bill of Rights, and that part of our Legal American Birthright, starting with the First and Second amendments.

 

https://johnmarsing.wordpress.com/…/the-american-birthright/

 

"A proposed movement based on the fundamental values of America, specifically CGUR found in the Declaration of Independence. This movement is first and foremost based on Law/Religion and secondly those things political. No discussion of something that is essentially a political question can be addressed unless it is in alignment with rights that come from the Creator." "CGUR" is "Creator Given Unalienable Rights."

 

The spiritual foundation of the American Birthright was developed during the 18th century Great Awakening Revivals.

The American Birthright was developed within the Protestant or Reformed Christian spiritual awakening in the 18th century, when individual Americans, Protestant congregations and to some extent the Culture of the Colonies at that time was transformed by the Spirit.

 

The spiritual foundation of the American Birthright came out of the Hebrew Birthright shown in the Old Testament - Genesis 12: 1-3, Genesis 17: 1-18. That Hebrew Birthright was given by God and was based upon a physical Bloodline from Abraham. But remember that the faith of Abraham in God was accounted to him for righteousness. "Even as Abraham believed God, and it was accounted to him for righteousness. Know ye therefore that they which are of faith, the same are the children of Abraham." Galatians 3: 6-7

"that the blessing of Abraham might come on the Gentiles through Jesus Christ ; that we might receive the promise of the Spirit through faith." Galatians 3: 14

 

Paul says in II Corinthians 3: 7-8, "But if the ministration of death, written and engraven in stones, was glorious, so that the children of Israel could not steadfastly behold the face of Moses for the glory of his countenance; which glory was to be done away; how shall not the ministration of the Spirit be rather glorious?"

 

Christ's sacrifice on the Cross made it possible for him, as God, to forgive sins, while what Paul in II Corinthians 3: 7 calls the ministration of death, in part because the Old Covenant system administered by men as priests, could not do what Christ was able to do in justifying men.

 

The faith of Abraham which Paul writes about in Galatians 3: 6-7 allows the Holy Spirit to change the individuals who have that faith, so that they become new creations or new creatures (II Corinthians 5: 17, Galatians 6: 15) in Christ Jesus.

 

And so the American Birthright as a spiritual gift is based upon faith rather than that which is physical, or genetic.

Edited by northwye

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Staff
4 hours ago, northwye said:

Creator Given Unalienable Rights."

How would you harmonize Scriptures which ordain the government with the right to wield the sword to combat evil taking life even through capital punishment? 

 

I think you nailed it already. Rights are defined by the Creator when His name is invoked. The right to life, therefore is limited by the Creator and the means by which He has instituted? 

 

Second question is sticky do Constitutional rights apply to only citizens birthed on U.S. soil or do they extend to all men on American soil? Think of the implications, then disregard them for the Precepts of the Lord!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

"Some amendments make occasional references to “the people”; for example in the 2nd Amendment—and that might be construed either as applying to citizens or all residents… these references are ambiguous and open to interpretation. They are few.

BUT. The most precious rights… those guaranteeing due process of law, a fair trial, right to privacy, and freedom of conscience and expression… these are almost overwhelming granted to “persons” or, by implication, to everyone who might be affected by those rights."

 

"We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness."

 

Jefferson's words here suggest that there is a God given right to due process as defined by a guarantee that criminal charges cannot be brought  against an individual for behavior which does not harm another individual.  But Jefferson's Declaration of Independence is not strictly a legal document.  For this principle to be law, it would have to be written into the Constitution as an Amendment. 

  • Informative 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Staff
1 hour ago, northwye said:

But Jefferson's Declaration of Independence is not strictly a legal document.  For this principle to be law, it would have to be written into the Constitution as an Amendment. 

Interesting, I have believed that the 1st amendment's historical context is defined by the Declaration of Independence? As true liberty and the pursuit of happiness through faithful lifelong endeavors can only be found in God. The government cannot actually grant these rights but only yield back in this area of soverign providence by which God rules. I mean strip "God" from the context and happiness can be defined as anything that makes a man happy. And the 2nd amendment given the historical context of the founding of America when a particular faith whether "Catholic, Protestant, Church of England, etc" has been dictated to rule oppressively over men, or whether the right to practice one of such faiths has been prohibited then to me it was nothing more than common sense that the 2nd amendment exists to protect the 1st from tyranny.

 

Also, have you read the pre or initial drafts of the Declaration of independence? Note nature's gods and what they were replaced with in the final draft and how they contrast the "Creator".

 

When in the course of human events it becomes necessary for a^ dissolve the political bands which have connected them with another, people to ^advance from that subordination in which they have hitherto and to separate and equal ^remained, & to assume among the powers of the earth the ^equal and independent station to which the laws of nature and of nature's god entitle them, a decent respect to the opinions of mankind requires the separation that they should declare the causes which impel them to ^change.

 

I cannot help but understand the 2nd amendment context is even here:

 

that to secure these ^ends, governments are instituted among men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed; that whenever any form of government shall becomes destructive of these ends, it is the right of the people to alter or abolish it, & to institute new government, laying it's foundation on such principles, & organizing it's powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their safety & happiness.

 

And before I forget welcome to CF @northwye!!!

 

@atpollard what are your thoughts? You're the one debating to run for a Florida office 😲

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, William said:

Interesting, I have believed that the 1st amendment's historical context is defined by the Declaration of Independence? As true liberty and the pursuit of happiness through faithful lifelong endeavors can only be found in God. The government cannot actually grant these rights but only yield back in this area of soverign providence by which God rules. I mean strip "God" from the context and happiness can be defined as anything that makes a man happy. And the 2nd amendment given the historical context of the founding of America when a particular faith whether "Catholic, Protestant, Church of England, etc" has been dictated to rule oppressively over men, or whether the right to practice one of such faiths has been prohibited then to me it was nothing more than common sense that the 2nd amendment exists to protect the 1st from tyranny.

 

Also, have you read the pre or initial drafts of the Declaration of independence? Note nature's gods and what they were replaced with in the final draft and how they contrast the "Creator".

 

When in the course of human events it becomes necessary for a^ dissolve the political bands which have connected them with another, people to ^advance from that subordination in which they have hitherto and to separate and equal ^remained, & to assume among the powers of the earth the ^equal and independent station to which the laws of nature and of nature's god entitle them, a decent respect to the opinions of mankind requires the separation that they should declare the causes which impel them to ^change.

 

I cannot help but understand the 2nd amendment context is even here:

 

that to secure these ^ends, governments are instituted among men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed; that whenever any form of government shall becomes destructive of these ends, it is the right of the people to alter or abolish it, & to institute new government, laying it's foundation on such principles, & organizing it's powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their safety & happiness.

 

And before I forget welcome to CF @northwye!!!

 

@atpollard what are your thoughts? You're the one debating to run for a Florida office 😲

Yes William, a lot of people do not understand the 2nd Amendment was implemented to protect the common "governed" man against tyranny. The founding fathers knew too well how power corrupts. I am a life member of the NRA and we believe in an armed citizenry.  

 

And before I forget welcome to CF @northwye!!! too!

  • Toast 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, William said:

what are your thoughts? You're the one debating to run for a Florida office

God saved me from that; my house was outside the official city boundary, so I was ineligible.  Since then it looks like more than half the city council will eventually face some criminal charges for the wide spread corruption involving drugs and cash.  Had I run, I would be in the middle of a state and federal corruption investigation.

 

To the question raised, I think that human beings can be counted on to live up to their fallen nature and only God can really make a difference.  King David was a divine right monarch who brought the blessings of God to the people.  The USSR was a democracy that starved millions.  

 

The He founding fathers believed, correctly in my opinion, that our government could only work by the providence of God. That requires, first and foremost, that Godly people be willing to take a stand for truth and for God.  Killing babies is wrong.  God says it is wrong.  No rational argument will ever make it right.  

 

I support the the second amendment because I agree with the founding fathers in the belief that it is better for the government to fear the people, than for the people to fear the government.  However, the reality is that even if the BATF lifted all restrictions on even fully automatic weapons and you could purchase an AK-47 at Walmart, your 30 round burst would do little against a Bradley APC let alone a Stryker or Abrams or A-10 Warthog.  The days of an armed citizen militia posing more than a nuisance are past.  You could do more damage with fertilizer and diesel fuel.

 

No, our hope as a free people lies in the strength of our Savior, not in our private arsenals.  Therein lies my great fear, that God is removing his hand of restraint and leaving our nation without the men of valor to lead it.  I am not a giant fan of end time prophecy, but I seem to read something about the last days being more and more like the days of Noah.  I can sort of see that in the world around us.

  • Like 2
  • Toast 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, atpollard said:

God saved me from that; my house was outside the official city boundary, so I was ineligible.  Since then it looks like more than half the city council will eventually face some criminal charges for the wide spread corruption involving drugs and cash.  Had I run, I would be in the middle of a state and federal corruption investigation.

 

To the question raised, I think that human beings can be counted on to live up to their fallen nature and only God can really make a difference.  King David was a divine right monarch who brought the blessings of God to the people.  The USSR was a democracy that starved millions.  

 

The He founding fathers believed, correctly in my opinion, that our government could only work by the providence of God. That requires, first and foremost, that Godly people be willing to take a stand for truth and for God.  Killing babies is wrong.  God says it is wrong.  No rational argument will ever make it right.  

 

I support the the second amendment because I agree with the founding fathers in the belief that it is better for the government to fear the people, than for the people to fear the government.  However, the reality is that even if the BATF lifted all restrictions on even fully automatic weapons and you could purchase an AK-47 at Walmart, your 30 round burst would do little against a Bradley APC let alone a Stryker or Abrams or A-10 Warthog.  The days of an armed citizen militia posing more than a nuisance are past.  You could do more damage with fertilizer and diesel fuel.

 

No, our hope as a free people lies in the strength of our Savior, not in our private arsenals.  Therein lies my great fear, that God is removing his hand of restraint and leaving our nation without the men of valor to lead it.  I am not a giant fan of end time prophecy, but I seem to read something about the last days being more and more like the days of Noah.  I can sort of see that in the world around us.

 

I am with you @atpollard when I see a fighter jet taking out some enemy targets by raining fire from heaven so to speak, I know an armed citizenry will have little effect today. We have become very prolific in killing people. The next world-wide conflict will be staggering but If history tells us anything, it tells us to expect such. I expect nuclear weapons will be used, maybe even for tactical purposes. Lord help us!  

blue-smiley-feeling-sad.gif.6ea4640974986df4563372fae4931278.gif

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Staff
39 minutes ago, deade said:

 

I am with you @atpollard when I see a fighter jet taking out some enemy targets by raining fire from heaven so to speak, I know an armed citizenry will have little effect today. We have become very prolific in killing people. The next world-wide conflict will be staggering but If history tells us anything, it tells us to expect such. I expect nuclear weapons will be used, maybe even for tactical purposes. Lord help us!  

blue-smiley-feeling-sad.gif.6ea4640974986df4563372fae4931278.gif

Those jets could come by rogue Generals. I'd rather an armed population that can form a militia under the command of Generals than having a General without enough armed militia ! George Washington served in the British military:

 

Years of service:1752–1758 – British provincial militia, 1775–1783 – Continental Army, 1798–1799 – United States Army

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Restore formatting

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


×
×
  • Create New...