Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 11

Thread: Understanding America's "Christian Patriot" Movement #1 of 2 - John Fenn

  1. #1
    Administrator fuego's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2015
    Posts
    16,319
    Thanked: 14175
    Blog Entries
    1

    Understanding America's "Christian Patriot" Movement #1 of 2 - John Fenn

    Really good article. Worth the read.
    _________

    Hi all,

    This is an attempt to explain in part why American Christians and American politics are so closely linked, focusing on 3 main points. It will show what is happening here politically, and in several Western nations.

    US Declaration of Independence, Constitution (and Bill of Rights) based on traditional Judeo-Christian beliefs

    When our forefathers declared the United States independent from Great Britain on July 4, 1776, the first paragraph after the opening statement (preamble) of that Declaration states:

    "We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty, and the pursuit of Happiness. That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers by the consent of the governed."

    "We hold these truths to be self-evident" mean these truths are obvious to everyone. Like saying leaves turn green in summer or the sky is blue, it's obvious to all.

    "That all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable rights."

    Because the context of the Declaration covers all men, women, and children in America, the word 'men' refers to mankind, to all concerned with the business of the Document. Only by pulling 'men' out of context can one twist the meaning to think it is only talking about the gender, man.

    "..endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable rights."

    Unalienable means; 'Cannot be taken away, denied, or transferred to another'. It says the Creator has given to all people rights and that is self-evident and cannot be taken away, denied or transferred by government (for He is God). To 'secure these rights' a government is formed.

    The difference between Conservatives and Liberals: God gives rights, not government.

    Up until July 4, 1776 no other nation had declared that it was founded upon the concept that God gives all people rights, and the role of government therefore is to help citizens secure those rights. Liberals by contrast, believe government gives and takes away rights.

    This is the core of why the 'Christian Patriot' movement is rising. It is to counter the liberal belief that government gives rights rather than God, and their assault on those who believe in the traditional Documents as written of our founding.

    About those rights and why Christian patriotism is growing

    Below are the 3 main points I'm covering to explain why Christianity and traditional American culture are so closely aligned with our founding documents.


    1. The Creator gives rights
    2. Those rights are unalienable (cannot be denied, infringed upon, transferred to another)
    3. 1 & 2 therefore establish that each person is responsible (to God) for their own life (how they handle those rights)


    What we see happening now among liberals in the US and other nations:


    A. The government gives rights

    B. Those rights may be determined by the government

    according to how they wish

    C. A & B establish that each person is responsible to the government



    The natural consequences of believing government gives rights, is that if anyone doesn't accept the government's C, they are branded unpatriotic or treasonous. Christians in particular are singled out because of their refusal to leave the original 3 principles. Government wants all to be in unity on A, B, & C. Inclusion to them means the acceptance as long as they adhere to A-C. Christians cannot compromise on the original #1-3, which sets the stage for conflict.


    Understand this: This is why the media attacks those who believe in the traditional family of married mom, dad, and children as 'far right' or 'fascist'. Before you enact a totalitarian government you must destroy the family, because those whose first allegiance is to family will not automatically obey government mandates that go against the traditional values. Therefore adherents to the traditional American culture must be vilified, called all kinds of names (Nazi's, fascists, traitors, unpatriotic, as we've seen in American politics and media, etc).


    The Declaration of Independence and Bill of Rights are written in the negative

    That means they outline what cannot be done by government rather than outline 'positive' actions it or others must obey in terms of rights. For example: "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of a religion or prohibiting the free exercise thereof." It tells what government cannot do, not what it can do. It's written in the negative.

    President Ronald Reagan said in the early 1980's: "I've read of other countries and how they are like ours in many ways, except for that one difference. Their Constitutions are documents in which the government tells the people what they can do. And ours is a Document that says the people are telling the government what it can do."


    Our Documents are written in the negative, describing what the government cannot do, thus empowering the citizens to tell it what they will allow their government to do. When in our times liberals have made the government rights-givers, seen for instance in the weaponizing the FBI and Department of Justice against conservatives*, people are rising up in the voting booths and by running for office to restore the core limits and role of government. From school boards to the Presidency, these are some core reasons we are seeing a Christian Patriot movement in the US.


    *As of this writing, a Roman Catholic pro-life leader had his home raided by a SWAT team and arrested, for a shoving match more than a year earlier involving a man endangering his young son with him. The other man sued and a court dismissed his case and claims. But over a year later the DOJ and FBI resurrected the case and raided the man's home, taking him away in chains in front of his wife and children. For a case dismissed in court about a shoving match proven to be in self-defense, maybe the authorities would talk to the man or his attorney if they wanted to further investigate, but never a SWAT team of more than a dozen heavily armed police.


    Actions like these in the west are one reason why people are rising up to vote in conservative valued officials. Similar voting for conservative values have taken place in the leadership of European nations for similar reasons - the 'populist' movement is electing conservatives who do believe in traditional family, national identity and so on - and are called all sorts of names in the media.


    I hope this first part has been interesting to learn the core differences in perspectives and what is happening in the US and so many western nations. Next week, how the liberals use the courts to enforce their way.


    Until then, blessings,

    John Fenn

  2. The Following 4 Users Say Thank You to fuego For This Useful Post:

    Cardinal TT (11-04-2022), Ezekiel 33 (11-09-2022), FireBrand (11-05-2022), GodismyJudge (11-04-2022)

  3. #2


    Read that this morning.



    .
    This I say therefore, and testify in the Lord, that ye henceforth walk not as other Gentiles walk, in the vanity (futility) of their mind, having the understanding darkened...
    (Ephesians 4:17-18)

    Blessed is the man that walketh not in the counsel of the ungodly...
    (Psalm 1)

  4. The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to GodismyJudge For This Useful Post:

    Ezekiel 33 (11-09-2022), fuego (11-04-2022)

  5. #3
    Senior Member Cardinal TT's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2015
    Posts
    7,647
    Thanked: 6000
    Blog Entries
    2
    All western nations are formed on Judeo-Christian foundations.
    That is the best way for God to bless a nation. Of course evil can still occur but nonetheless that foundation is the bedrock of society.

    USA was raised up to lead the way in these principles and to be the major light. The enemy if he can stamp out that light in the US knows it will follow to other nations.
    In Australia we have been blessed by that foundation but when the US goes down a path of evil we sadly also go down that path.

    That is why who governs in the US is paramount to every other nation


    As I was writing this I was going to abbreviate Judeo-Christian to be easier to write and then it occurred to me that it abbreviates to JC.
    I had not thought of that before. Maybe it's common knowledge to others but a first for me

  6. The Following 4 Users Say Thank You to Cardinal TT For This Useful Post:

    Ezekiel 33 (11-09-2022), fuego (11-04-2022), GodismyJudge (11-04-2022), John (11-07-2022)

  7. #4
    The trick is to get the message out. We have the media undermining our foundations and kids in school are being taught revisionist history that majors on our sins and minimizes our heritage. It will take a miracle to get the media to do their job. Well, for that matter, it will take a miracle to get us Christians to do OUR job. Raising good kids by teaching them American history is part of it.

  8. The Following 3 Users Say Thank You to Bookman For This Useful Post:

    Ezekiel 33 (11-09-2022), fuego (11-05-2022), tschau (11-07-2022)

  9. #5
    I agree 100% with the concept of "natural rights" as articulated in the USA's founding documents.

    But I see the concept originating from Enlightenment philosophers such as John Locke, not from the Bible.

    I don't see anywhere in the Bible a discussion of this topic; please, those who know better, let me know if it is mentioned there.

  10. #6
    Quote Originally Posted by Bookman View Post
    The trick is to get the message out. We have the media undermining our foundations and kids in school are being taught revisionist history that majors on our sins and minimizes our heritage. It will take a miracle to get the media to do their job. Well, for that matter, it will take a miracle to get us Christians to do OUR job. Raising good kids by teaching them American history is part of it.
    I'd say the key (at least in terms of the history we teach to kids) is to convey a balanced, fact-based message about our history. I wouldn't want kids to be taught a "Santa Clause" version of history, replete with fake heroes who are all good. Teach the great things that founders such as Jefferson did, but also teach the bad things. And the same goes for the actions our nation has taken: teach the good and the bad.

    I think a good teaching approach is to note that all people possess both good and bad traits, and that a nation comprised of persons will naturally exhibit both good and bad behavior.

  11. The Following 3 Users Say Thank You to njtom For This Useful Post:

    Bookman (11-07-2022), Ezekiel 33 (11-09-2022), tschau (11-07-2022)

  12. #7
    Quote Originally Posted by njtom View Post
    I agree 100% with the concept of "natural rights" as articulated in the USA's founding documents.

    But I see the concept originating from Enlightenment philosophers such as John Locke, not from the Bible.

    I don't see anywhere in the Bible a discussion of this topic; please, those who know better, let me know if it is mentioned there.

    Christianity

    The New Testament carries a further exposition on the Abrahamic dialogue and links to the later Greek exposition on the subject, when Paul's Epistle to the Romans states: "For when the Gentiles, which have not the law, do by nature the things contained in the law, these, having not the law, are a law unto themselves: Which shew the work of the law written in their hearts, their conscience also bearing witness, and their thoughts the meanwhile accusing or else excusing one another."[43] The intellectual historian A. J. Carlyle has commented on this passage, "There can be little doubt that St Paul's words imply some conception analogous to the 'natural law' in Cicero, a law written in men's hearts, recognized by man's reason, a law distinct from the positive law of any State, or from what St Paul recognized as the revealed law of God. It is in this sense that St Paul's words are taken by the Fathers of the fourth and fifth centuries like St Hilary of Poitiers, St Ambrose, and St Augustine, and there seems no reason to doubt the correctness of their interpretation."[44]

    Because of its origins in the Old Testament, early Church Fathers, especially those in the West, saw natural law as part of the natural foundation of Christianity. ...


    Natural law - Wikipedia




    This I say therefore, and testify in the Lord, that ye henceforth walk not as other Gentiles walk, in the vanity (futility) of their mind, having the understanding darkened...
    (Ephesians 4:17-18)

    Blessed is the man that walketh not in the counsel of the ungodly...
    (Psalm 1)

  13. The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to GodismyJudge For This Useful Post:

    Ezekiel 33 (11-09-2022), njtom (11-07-2022)

  14. #8
    Quote Originally Posted by GodismyJudge View Post

    Christianity

    The New Testament carries a further exposition on the Abrahamic dialogue and links to the later Greek exposition on the subject, when Paul's Epistle to the Romans states: "For when the Gentiles, which have not the law, do by nature the things contained in the law, these, having not the law, are a law unto themselves: Which shew the work of the law written in their hearts, their conscience also bearing witness, and their thoughts the meanwhile accusing or else excusing one another."[43] The intellectual historian A. J. Carlyle has commented on this passage, "There can be little doubt that St Paul's words imply some conception analogous to the 'natural law' in Cicero, a law written in men's hearts, recognized by man's reason, a law distinct from the positive law of any State, or from what St Paul recognized as the revealed law of God. It is in this sense that St Paul's words are taken by the Fathers of the fourth and fifth centuries like St Hilary of Poitiers, St Ambrose, and St Augustine, and there seems no reason to doubt the correctness of their interpretation."[44]

    Because of its origins in the Old Testament, early Church Fathers, especially those in the West, saw natural law as part of the natural foundation of Christianity. ...


    Natural law - Wikipedia

    Thanks for the response.

    I've always read that passage to be referring to the "general revelation" of basic principles of "right living" that God imparts into the conscience of every living human, regardless of whether they are believers. And it makes sense to refer to these principles as "natural law".

    But I view "natural law" as distinct from "natural rights". In my mind, "natural rights" refers to limitations on the powers of governments with respect to the people they govern, whereas "natural law" refers to how people should behave.

    Not all natural laws should be enforced by governments; some should be left to the individual.

  15. The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to njtom For This Useful Post:

    Ezekiel 33 (11-09-2022), GodismyJudge (11-07-2022)

  16. #9
    Quote Originally Posted by njtom View Post
    Thanks for the response.

    I've always read that passage to be referring to the "general revelation" of basic principles of "right living" that God imparts into the conscience of every living human, regardless of whether they are believers. And it makes sense to refer to these principles as "natural law".

    But I view "natural law" as distinct from "natural rights". In my mind, "natural rights" refers to limitations on the powers of governments with respect to the people they govern, whereas "natural law" refers to how people should behave.

    Not all natural laws should be enforced by governments; some should be left to the individual.
    Natural rights and legal rights - Wikipedia


    Some philosophers distinguish two types of rights, natural rights and legal rights.


    Natural rights are those that are not dependent on the laws or customs of any particular culture or government, and so are universal, fundamental and inalienable (they cannot be repealed by human laws, though one can forfeit their enjoyment through one's actions, such as by violating someone else's rights). Natural law is the law of natural rights.

    Legal rights are those bestowed onto a person by a given legal system (they can be modified, repealed, and restrained by human laws). The concept of positive law is related to the concept of legal rights.

    Natural law first appeared in ancient Greek philosophy,[2] and was referred to by Roman philosopher Cicero. It was subsequently alluded to in the Bible,[3] and then developed in the Middle Ages by Catholic philosophers such as Albert the Great and his pupil Thomas Aquinas. During the Age of Enlightenment, the concept of natural laws was used to challenge the divine right of kings, and became an alternative justification for the establishment of a social contract, positive law, and government – and thus legal rights – in the form of classical republicanism. Conversely, the concept of natural rights is used by others to challenge the legitimacy of all such establishments.

    The idea of human rights derives from theories of natural rights.[4] Those rejecting a distinction between human rights and natural rights view human rights as the successor that is not dependent on natural law, natural theology, or Christian theological doctrine.[4] Natural rights, in particular, are considered beyond the authority of any government or international body to dismiss.

    The 1948 United Nations Universal Declaration of Human Rights is an important legal instrument enshrining one conception of natural rights into international soft law. Natural rights were traditionally viewed as exclusively negative rights,[5] whereas human rights also comprise positive rights.[6] Even on a natural rights conception of human rights, the two terms may not be synonymous.

    The concept of natural rights is not universally accepted, partly due to its religious associations and perceived incoherence. Some philosophers argue that natural rights do not exist and that legal rights are the only rights...









    This I say therefore, and testify in the Lord, that ye henceforth walk not as other Gentiles walk, in the vanity (futility) of their mind, having the understanding darkened...
    (Ephesians 4:17-18)

    Blessed is the man that walketh not in the counsel of the ungodly...
    (Psalm 1)

  17. #10
    Senior Member Cardinal TT's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2015
    Posts
    7,647
    Thanked: 6000
    Blog Entries
    2
    Quote Originally Posted by njtom View Post
    I agree 100% with the concept of "natural rights" as articulated in the USA's founding documents.

    But I see the concept originating from Enlightenment philosophers such as John Locke, not from the Bible.

    I don't see anywhere in the Bible a discussion of this topic; please, those who know better, let me know if it is mentioned there.

    Western philosophers like John Locke were brought up under a Judeo-Christian worldview which shapes them. They obviously can add or subtract to their views over time but nonetheless they have been shaped
    with a 10 commandments mindset. Even if they end up rejecting God and scripture their morality was still shaped by a J-C ethos.

    People like Richard Dawkins who totally reject God/Bible when questioned on morality will try to give a convoluted answer on explaining where humans develop a moral code.
    Yet his own morality as a Englishman was still shaped by J-C ethics even though he rejects a creator.

    I have read how Americans will argue whether the framers of the Constitution were Christians or Deists. But it misses the bigger picture that even the Deist worldview was framed
    by the 10 Commandments and the J-C ethos.

  18. The Following 3 Users Say Thank You to Cardinal TT For This Useful Post:

    Ezekiel 33 (11-09-2022), fuego (11-07-2022), njtom (11-09-2022)

Tags for this Thread

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  
You can forget about unexpected repair costs with an extended service plan for your Lincoln. Many vehicle repairs can cost thousands of dollars in unexpected expense, now may be the time to consider an extended service plan for your vehicle.