Perseverance in Today's World

Perseverance can be a lonely road.

Or maybe a person just doesn’t know when to give up, quit.

As in Chuck Baldwin’s article below, most people just follow the crowd. The crowd is the mass of people who are following the seemingly easy path.

The mass are also the ones that are easily duped.

They cannot persevere when there are not too many people persevering along with them.

The reasons a person had for not going along with the crowd in the first place are no longer valid in their mind. After all, they may reason, Most of the people have abandoned me, so I must be wrong. Which, I admit, might be true. Sometimes a person just doesn’t know when to give up on his perseverance. He or she may be persevering in the wrong thing.

I agree with Mr. Baldwin. Most Christians probably do think a lot of the stories in the Bible are just fairy tales. Those martyrs in those “fairy tale” Bible stories standing for God’s Holy Word, standing against authorities who have over stepped their bounds, have nothing to do with our time today. Not here in the good ol’ US of A anyway. The circumstances back then could never happen today here in the United States.

Not like they happened in Rome, or not like it was in Nazi Germany, right?

Well, I am sure that the way it happened then is the way it is happening now here in our beloved country.

As Mr. Baldwin states in his article, Christians are turning against their brothers and sisters in Christ.

Those Christians are following the crowd; they are duped. They just can’t separate the true from the false. And they don’t see any correlation between our time and it’s tyrants and the past times with it’s tyrants.

It is sad and disturbing to see Christians betraying other Christians.

But we are all self-centered sinners, are we not?

We have no loyalty when it comes to our own feelings of security.

What a warning in Jeremiah 9:4,5.

I’m afraid that my cynical nature (maybe that should read “sin-ical” nature) doesn’t trust my brother or my neighbor. For I have experienced the sting of betrayal at times throughout my life, as I am sure most people have.

Read Chuck Baldwin’s article:

TIME FOR CHRISTIANS TO SHRED THEIR BIBLES

By Chuck Baldwin
December 16, 2010

chuckbaldwinlive.com

Many of us grew up in Sunday School and church. We have heard the great Bible stories over and over. We heard about the story of how Moses’ mother defied Pharaoh and hid her little baby boy in bulrushes. We heard the story of how Moses killed the Egyptian taskmaster defending a Hebrew slave and later became the great deliverer of God’s people. We heard the story of young David going out alone against the Philistines’ greatest warrior, Goliath. We heard the story of how Saul’s servants refused to carry out the king’s order to murder the priest Ahimelech. We know well the story of Daniel who defied his government’s order to refrain from praying. The names Shadrach, Meshach, and Abednego are very familiar to us. We heard our teachers and preachers extol their courage in defying the government’s order to bow to the image of their emperor. We remember that John the Baptist went to prison (and was eventually beheaded), not for preaching the Gospel, but for criticizing the king for his immoral behavior. We certainly recall the story of Simon Peter who bluntly told his civil magistrates, “We ought to obey God rather than men.” We know that the Apostle Paul wrote many of his epistles from inside government prisons. We certainly recall that before John penned the Revelation, he had been banished to an island-prison by his civil authorities.

I challenge Christians to objectively look at the great stories of Bible heroes (in both testaments) and observe how many times they are noted for either being martyred for defying a civil authority, or, perhaps, for being delivered from death for defying a civil authority. The stories of defiance to civil government (in one form or another) comprise a great percentage of all the stories contained in the Bible--perhaps even a majority of them.

So, how has it happened that a majority of today’s Christians, it seems, have become such sheepish slaves of government? How has it happened that, for the most part, the concept of courage in the face of government oppression has been totally lost to the average Christian, pastor, and church? For all intents and purposes, it is time for many Christians to shred their Bibles, because the lessons and principles of God’s Word have absolutely no influence over their attitudes and conduct.

For example, if the story of Peter in prison were being experienced today, instead of the church rallying behind their pastor and conducting an all-night prayer meeting for him, most church members would be excoriating him in the name of Romans chapter 13. Instead of Paul being let down the wall in a basket to escape the civil authorities trying to apprehend him, the average Christian today would be the first one to turn him over to the authorities.

In the mind of the average Christian, God is not God; government is God! For instance, when one well-known Christian attorney was recently confronted by the teaching of Scripture relative to the church’s independence from government (meaning, no church should allow itself to be subject to the government’s tyrannical 501(c)3 non-profit, tax-exempt status), he said, “That might be Biblically correct, but it is not legally correct.” In other words, the “Christian” attorney would rather a church be legal than Biblical. And, unfortunately, that seems to be the attitude of the vast majority of professing Christians today. They would rather please the government than please God; they would rather obey the government than obey God; they would rather be at peace with the government than be at peace with God.

And when it comes to the courage of risking anything of value in order to do right, forget it!

Think of what Abram risked when he obeyed God and left his country and kin and struck out for a land that God had not even told him of. Think of what Moses risked when he killed that Egyptian; think of what Joshua and Caleb risked when they defied the entire nation that was following the evil counsel of the ten spies; think of what David risked when he faced the giant; think of what Elijah risked when he confronted 850 false prophets all by himself; think of what the Old Testament prophets risked when they rebuked or challenged the kings of Israel and Judah; think of what the disciples risked when they “left all” and followed Jesus; think of what the early church risked when it embraced the Gospel and defied the wishes of Rome and Jewry (not to mention their own families and friends). But these stories are more like fairy tales to the average Christian today. They serve no practical benefit whatsoever!

Let a church deacon, trustee, or elder be told by some government-backed attorney that he is really a corporate officer, subject to the laws and punishments of IRS tax codes, and that church leader will say anything, sign anything, or do anything to save his own financial security. In order to not jeopardize his own standing with the IRS, that same church leader would turn his back on his best friend, or gladly join with the government in prosecuting a fellow believer.

I personally know of more than one case where professing Christians either lied against a beloved brother in order to protect themselves against threatened government (read: IRS) penalties, or actually testified for the prosecution (read: IRS) under oath in a court of law against a Christian brother. In each case, these “brothers” actually felt it was their “Christian duty” to betray their friends and brothers and help the government.

I am reminded of the verse where Jesus said, “Yea, the time cometh, that whosoever killeth you will think that he doeth God service.” (John 16:2 KJV)

I am also reminded of the warning from the prophet Jeremiah when he cautioned, “Take ye heed every one of his neighbour, and trust ye not in any brother: for every brother will utterly supplant, and every neighbour will walk with slanders. And they will deceive every one his neighbour, and will not speak the truth: they have taught their tongue to speak lies, and weary themselves to commit iniquity.” (Jeremiah 9:4,5 KJV)

Jeremiah’s prophecy is spot-on! Christians today cannot be trusted to be faithful to the truth; they cannot be trusted to not betray and turn against their brethren; they cannot be trusted to not be party with slander and libel. If it means saving their own skin, or keeping their bread buttered, or staying in the good graces of the IRS, they would sell out their best friend--maybe even their own mother! And it is no coincidence that Jeremiah, himself, experienced firsthand that which he had spoken. It is no wonder he said, “Trust ye not any brother.”

When will Christians get it through their heads (and in their hearts) that oftentimes government is the enemy of God? When will they understand that they have only one Sovereign: King Jesus? When will they come to comprehend that helping government perpetrate unjust action against fellow believers is a crime against Heaven? When will they stop talking about the Bible and actually start internalizing its teachings, examples, and principles?

It has gotten to the point today many unbelievers are far more trustworthy than today’s Christians--especially when it comes to the subject of resisting unjust government. It grieves me say that many “Christian” attorneys, politicians, pastors, and church leaders are merely shills and toadies for a government that has often become both oppressive and illegitimate!

May God help us! He will have to, because we won’t get much help from the vast majority of today’s professing Christians. That is for sure!

Abigail's Birthday

Last Wednesday was Abigail's birthday. She turned 12. Allen and Natasha got to spend Tuesday night here and Rachel took them home after the birthday celebration. We also had two other friends over.

Thanksgiving Week

Elise and Gabriel drove up for Thanksgiving. They got here on Sunday morning (early) and stayed through Thursday.
Two expecting mothers. Rachel's due date is December 17 and Elise is due the first week of June.

Our neighbor gave Jordon an ATV because something was wrong with it. He fixed it up and we all got to ride it.
Even Gabriel. Dad rode too, but I don't have a good picture.
Abigail checking it out.
Jordon speeding.
Boaz has a lot of fun with it.

FCC takeover of the internet

I am sure you have heard of the power hungry (what bureaucracy isn't!) FCC moving toward regulating the internet.

What comes to my mind is the 1st Amendment to the constitution:

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances.

How in the world did we get here, creating all these "quasi-government agencies"????????????????????????

Let's see, we have the APHIS, ATF, CCC, CFTC, BA, ETA, ESA, EPA, EEOC, FCE, FAA, FCC, FDIC, FEC, FERC EREN, FHA, FMC, FRA, FTC, FDA, NRC, SEC, DHHS, DOE, USDA, DOT. FEMA, HUD, etc., etc., etc......

For an article on the latest news go to:

http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2010/dec/2/wave-goodbye-to-internet-freedom/

I really like the second paragraph in that article.

From historyplace.com:

Following the Boston Tea Party, Dec. 16, 1773, in which American colonists dumped 342 containers of tea into the Boston harbor, the British Parliament enacted a series of Acts in response to the rebellion in Massachusetts.

In May of 1774, General Thomas Gage, commander of all British military forces in the colonies, arrived in Boston, followed by the arrival of four regiments of British troops.

The First Continental Congress met in the fall of 1774 in Philadelphia with 56 American delegates, representing every colony, except Georgia. On September 17th, the Congress declared its opposition to the repressive Acts of Parliament, saying they are "not to be obeyed," and also promoted the formation of local militia units.

Thus economic and military tensions between the colonists and the British escalated. In February of 1775, a Provincial Congress was held in Massachusetts during which John Hancock and Joseph Warren began defensive preparations for a state of war. The British Parliament then declared Massachusetts to be in a state of rebellion.

On March 23rd, in Virginia, the largest colony in America, a meeting of the colony's delegates was held in St. John's church in Richmond. Resolutions were presented by Patrick Henry putting the colony of Virginia "into a posture of defense...embodying, arming, and disciplining such a number of men as may be sufficient for that purpose." Before the vote was taken on his resolutions, Henry delivered the speech below, imploring the delegates to vote in favor.

He spoke without any notes in a voice that became louder and louder, climaxing with the now famous ending. Following his speech, the vote was taken in which his resolutions passed by a narrow margin, and thus Virginia joined in the American Revolution.

No man thinks more highly than I do of the patriotism, as well as abilities, of the very worthy gentlemen who have just addressed the House. But different men often see the same subject in different lights; and, therefore, I hope that it will not be thought disrespectful to those gentlemen, if, entertaining as I do opinions of a character very opposite to theirs, I shall speak forth my sentiments freely and without reserve.

This is no time for ceremony. The question before the House is one of awful moment to this country. For my own part I consider it as nothing less than a question of freedom or slavery; and in proportion to the magnitude of the subject ought to be the freedom of the debate. It is only in this way that we can hope to arrive at truth, and fulfill the great responsibility which we hold to God and our country. Should I keep back my opinions at such a time, through fear of giving offense, I should consider myself as guilty of treason towards my country, and of an act of disloyalty towards the majesty of heaven, which I revere above all earthly kings.

Mr. President, it is natural to man to indulge in the illusions of hope. We are apt to shut our eyes against a painful truth, and listen to the song of that siren, till she transforms us into beasts. Is this the part of wise men, engaged in a great and arduous struggle for liberty? Are we disposed to be of the number of those who, having eyes, see not, and having ears, hear not, the things which so nearly concern their temporal salvation?

For my part, whatever anguish of spirit it may cost, I am willing to know the whole truth -- to know the worst and to provide for it. I have but one lamp by which my feet are guided; and that is the lamp of experience. I know of no way of judging of the future but by the past. And judging by the past, I wish to know what there has been in the conduct of the British ministry for the last ten years, to justify those hopes with which gentlemen have been pleased to solace themselves and the House?

Is it that insidious smile with which our petition has been lately received? Trust it not, sir; it will prove a snare to your feet. Suffer not yourselves to be betrayed with a kiss. Ask yourselves how this gracious reception of our petition comports with these warlike preparations which cover our waters and darken our land. Are fleets and armies necessary to a work of love and reconciliation? Have we shown ourselves so unwilling to be reconciled that force must be called in to win back our love? Let us not deceive ourselves, sir. These are the implements of war and subjugation -- the last arguments to which kings resort. I ask gentlemen, sir, what means this martial array, if its purpose be not to force us to submission? Can gentlemen assign any other possible motives for it? Has Great Britain any enemy, in this quarter of the world, to call for all this accumulation of navies and armies?

No, sir, she has none. They are meant for us; they can be meant for no other. They are sent over to bind and rivet upon us those chains which the British ministry have been so long forging. And what have we to oppose to them? Shall we try argument? Sir, we have been trying that for the last ten years. Have we anything new to offer on the subject? Nothing.

We have held the subject up in every light of which it is capable; but it has been all in vain. Shall we resort to entreaty and humble supplication? What terms shall we find which have not been already exhausted? Let us not, I beseech you, sir, deceive ourselves longer.

Sir, we have done everything that could be done to avert the storm which is now coming on. We have petitioned; we have remonstrated; we have supplicated; we have prostrated ourselves before the throne, and have implored its interposition to arrest the tyrannical hands of the ministry and Parliament.

Our petitions have been slighted; our remonstrances have produced additional violence and insult; our supplications have been disregarded; and we have been spurned, with contempt, from the foot of the throne. In vain, after these things, may we indulge the fond hope of peace and reconciliation. There is no longer any room for hope.

If we wish to be free -- if we mean to preserve inviolate those inestimable privileges for which we have been so long contending -- if we mean not basely to abandon the noble struggle in which we have been so long engaged, and which we have pledged ourselves never to abandon until the glorious object of our contest shall be obtained, we must fight! I repeat it, sir, we must fight! An appeal to arms and to the God of Hosts is all that is left us!

They tell us, sir, that we are weak -- unable to cope with so formidable an adversary. But when shall we be stronger? Will it be the next week, or the next year? Will it be when we are totally disarmed, and when a British guard shall be stationed in every house? Shall we gather strength by irresolution and inaction? Shall we acquire the means of effectual resistance, by lying supinely on our backs, and hugging the delusive phantom of hope, until our enemies shall have bound us hand and foot?

Sir, we are not weak, if we make a proper use of the means which the God of nature hath placed in our power. Three millions of people, armed in the holy cause of liberty, and in such a country as that which we possess, are invincible by any force which our enemy can send against us. Besides, sir, we shall not fight our battles alone. There is a just God who presides over the destinies of nations, and who will raise up friends to fight our battles for us.

The battle, sir, is not to the strong alone; it is to the vigilant, the active, the brave. Besides, sir, we have no election. If we were base enough to desire it, it is now too late to retire from the contest. There is no retreat but in submission and slavery! Our chains are forged! Their clanking may be heard on the plains of Boston! The war is inevitable -- and let it come! I repeat it, sir, let it come!

It is in vain, sir, to extenuate the matter. Gentlemen may cry, "Peace! Peace!" -- but there is no peace. The war is actually begun! The next gale that sweeps from the north will bring to our ears the clash of resounding arms! Our brethren are already in the field! Why stand we here idle? What is it that gentlemen wish? What would they have? Is life so dear, or peace so sweet, as to be purchased at the price of chains and slavery? Forbid it, Almighty God! I know not what course others may take; but as for me, give me liberty, or give me death!

Patrick Henry - March 23, 1775

Check out the Mao Tse Tung decor on Obama's Christmas tree.

Oh, Communist Tree, Oh, Communist Tree, Your ideology is so Obamanable

"China’s Mao Tse-tung was directly responsible for an estimated 30-40 million deaths between 1958 and 1960, as a result of what Mao’s regime hailed as the “Great Leap Forward.” Like Stalin, Mao’s crimes involved Chinese peasants, many of whom died of hunger from man-made famines under collectivist orders that stripped them of all private possessions. The Communist Party forbade them even to cook food at home; private fires were outlawed; and their harvests were taken by the state. Those who dared to question Mao’s agricultural policies—which sought to maximize food output by dispossessing the nation’s most productive farmers—were tortured, sent to labor camps, or executed."

Also,

For some great editorial cartoons check out Ben Lansing's at:

benlansing.com

Are We There Yet?

1 Samuel 8:1-20

1And it came to pass, when Samuel was old, that he made his sons judges over Israel.

2Now the name of his firstborn was Joel; and the name of his second, Abiah: they were judges in Beersheba.

3And his sons walked not in his ways, but turned aside after lucre, and took bribes, and perverted judgment.

4Then all the elders of Israel gathered themselves together, and came to Samuel unto Ramah,

5And said unto him, Behold, thou art old, and thy sons walk not in thy ways: now make us a king to judge us like all the nations.

6But the thing displeased Samuel, when they said, Give us a king to judge us. And Samuel prayed unto the LORD.

7And the LORD said unto Samuel, Hearken unto the voice of the people in all that they say unto thee: for they have not rejected thee, but they have rejected me, that I should not reign over them.

8According to all the works which they have done since the day that I brought them up out of Egypt even unto this day, wherewith they have forsaken me, and served other gods, so do they also unto thee.

9Now therefore hearken unto their voice: howbeit yet protest solemnly unto them, and shew them the manner of the king that shall reign over them.

10And Samuel told all the words of the LORD unto the people that asked of him a king.

11And he said, This will be the manner of the king that shall reign over you: He will take your sons, and appoint them for himself, for his chariots, and to be his horsemen; and some shall run before his chariots.

12And 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.

13And he will take your daughters to be confectionaries, and to be cooks, and to be bakers.

14And he will take your fields, and your vineyards, and your oliveyards, even the best of them, and give them to his servants.

15And he will take the tenth of your seed, and of your vineyards, and give to his officers, and to his servants.

16And he will take your menservants, and your maidservants, and your goodliest young men, and your asses, and put them to his work.

17He will take the tenth of your sheep: and ye shall be his servants.

18And ye shall cry out in that day because of your king which ye shall have chosen you; and the LORD will not hear you in that day.

19Nevertheless the people refused to obey the voice of Samuel; and they said, Nay; but we will have a king over us;

20That we also may be like all the nations; and that our king may judge us, and go out before us, and fight our battles.

Fixing the Bureaucracy God’s Way

Written by Dr. Ted Baehr, Publisher (Saturday, 27 November 2010 17:29)

Some of my favorite people work for the government. They are humble, dedicated and gracious. However, after a while, even the most intelligent of them start to change into creatures out of Kafka’s book THE TRIAL. They begin to believe they know more than they actually do!

The beginning of true wisdom is understanding your limitations so you can discern the good from the bad and develop the common sense to choose the good.

One government bureaucrat, who had been very clever as a child, started to think that government workers knew more then those citizens for whom he worked. He admitted that elected officials were prone to corruption, but bureaucrats were special.

Did they know how to run a company? Probably not, but they could tell people running companies how to run them.

Did they know how to cure my wife’s disease – cicatricial pemphigoid? Of course not, but they could tell her doctors how to treat her.

Could they make a great Hollywood movie? Maybe, but doubtful.

In fact, they all were singularly incompetent, but they thought they could run other people’s lives.

So, the cure is simple:

Before they go into government, make each potential bureaucrat do something else –anything productive – for at least seven years. Then, make sure they don’t stay in government more than five years, and test them frequently for bureaucratic arrogance.

Furthermore, they should all have to watch THE LIVES OF OTHERS, read about Austrian Economics, raise a family, run a business, work on a farm, and ask forgiveness constantly for having their cohorts at the IRS steal our money to pay for their service to the taxpayers they are supposed to serve.

Finally, they must not receive a pension, no way, no how!

Of course, another solution is not to give so much power to government and government bureaucrats, including judges and the judicial/legal system, in the first place!

After all, as God makes perfectly clear in 1 Samuel 8:1-20, big government and high taxes are signs of slavery.

So, maybe the Christian church should take back all of the power that modern governments have stolen in the last 150 years or so. To that end, we perhaps should look to what Moses had to say to the assembly or church of God’s chosen people about the power of the church and its leaders in Deuteronomy 16:18-20:

“Appoint judges and officials for each of your tribes in every town the Lord your God is giving you, and they shall judge the people fairly. Do not pervert justice or show partiality. Do not accept a bribe, for a bribe blinds the eyes of the wise and twists the words of the righteous. Follow justice and justice alone, so that you may live and possess the land the Lord your God is giving you.”

Amen! So be it!

Editor’s Note: Dr. Tom Snyder, editor of MOVIEGUIDE® contributed to this column.

PRO-GUN RIGHTS

I am posting a really good presentation on gun rights, BUT FIRST,

a disclaimer to the song that is used in this video, The Battle Hymn of the Republic:

This song does not mean what you think it does. Here is an article to read on it. You can google to find more:

`The Battle Hymn of the Republic' What It Really Means

By Michael Dan Jones

One of the most enduring traditional American hymns and patriotic songs is Julia Ward Howe’s "The Battle Hymn of the Republic." It is a staple with many Christian church choirs and hardly a patriotic holiday passes without this song being sung and played at ceremonies nationwide. But is "The Battle Hymn of the Republic" truly appropriate for religious hymnals and patriotic ceremonies? Who was the author? What motivated and inspired her? What message was she trying to convey?

What do the words mean? What meaning do they have for us today?

The author, Julia Ward Howe, was born in 1819 in New York City. She married a prominent physician, Dr. Samuel Howe Gridley (1801-1876) in 1843 and they lived in Boston, Mass. where they raised five children. She was a much celebrated author, a tireless supporter of the anti-slavery movement, preached in Unitarian churches, and was a zealous worker for the advancement of women, prison reform, world peace and other humanitarian movements. She died 17 October 1910 at her summer home in Oak Glen, Rhode Island.

News reporters of her day delighted in describing this unusual woman. She was diminutive in stature, barely over five feet; invariably wearing a white trimmed, black dress and lace cap and had the habit of peering over her silver-rimmed glasses as she read her lecture in a crisp Boston-Yankee accent.

But her literary works had dark themes, such as murder, suicide and betrayal, perhaps reflecting her own unhappy marriage with her domineering and unfaithful husband. Her church, the Unitarian Church, although it claimed to be Christian, denied the divinity of Jesus Christ, the Doctrine of the Holy Trinity.

And although she was devoted to the anti-slavery movement, like many other Nothern radicals of her time, such as Abraham Lincoln, her own words reveal her to be a hypocrite on the subject of race. Julia Ward Howe believed and wrote the "ideal negro" would be one "refined by white culture, elevated by white blood." She also wrote, "the negro among negroes, is coarse, grinning, flat-footed, thick-skulled creature, ugly as Caliban, lazy as the laziest brutes, chiefly ambitious to be of no use to any in the world. . . He must go to school to the white race and his discipline must be long and laborious." Her own disgusting words expose the kind of hypocrisy that was rampant in the abolitionist movement.

Mrs. Howe and her husband, Samuel Gridley Howe, were supporters of the most radical and violent wing of the anti-slavery movement. These "disunion abolitionists" wanted to tear apart the American republic of sovereign, independent states, and reconstruct it along their own radical political, cultural and religious ideals. History records only how too well they succeeded with their treason.

Her husband and her pastor, Unitarian Rev. Theodore Parker, were conspirators in the treasonous group known as "The Secret Six." These wealthy Northeasterners financially supported terrorist and murderer John Brown in his insane Harpers Ferry raid, and advocated slave rebellion that would destroy the original American republic.

Brown’s Anti-Southern terror campaign started in Kansas in the mid-1850s. There, on 23 May 1856, Brown and his murderous band descended on a settlement of Southerners at Pottawatomie Creek. They carried with them newly sharpened swords — an image that played a prominent part in Mrs. Howe’ssong. Her hero and his fellow terrorists literally hacked to death five innocent men. Northern historians try to excuse this crime by saying Brown was exacting revenge for atrocities committed by pro-slavery "Border Ruffians." This is a lie!

The first three of his victims, James P. Doyle and his sons, Drury and William, were Catholics from Tennessee who moved to Kansas to get away from slavery. They never had a thing to do with the institution. But because they spoke with a Southern drawl, and possibly because they were Catholic, Brown marched them to a clearing where their heads were split open with the sharpened swords. Drury’s arms were chopped off. Mrs. Doyle was later asked why her husband and sons had been so brutally murdered? She replied, "just we were southern people, I reckon."

The other victims of Brown’s murderous rampage were Southern settlers Allen Wilkinson, executed while his wife and children stood by in horror, and William Sherman, whose mutilated body was found floating in the creek with his left hand hanging by a strand of skin and his skull split open with "some of the brains" washed away.

When she got word of the massacre, Julia Ward Howe’s own words reveal her to have been perversely thrilled and inspired by this grisly crime. The "terrible swift sword" in her song was terrible indeed, but hardly reflecting Christian values. Mrs. Howe and Brown mutually admired one another, as their own words demonstrate. Mrs. Howe wrote Brown was "a Puritan of Puritans, forceful, concentrated, and self-contained." Brown wrote of Mrs. Howe, in a letter to a friend, that she was "a defiant little woman" and that her personality was "all flash and fire." After the failure of Brown’s bloody raid on Harpers Ferry, her husband, who was deeply involved in the treasonous conspiracy, like a coward in the night, fled to Canada until he was assured he was safe from prosecution in Massachusetts.

Mrs. Howe, in a letter to her sister at the time, made it clear she was in complete sympathy with the attempt to start a slave rebellion in the South, and tear the nation apart. She wrote, "I have just been to church and hear [James Freeman] Clarke [another Unitarian minister] preach about John Brown, whom God bless, and will bless! I am much too dull to write anything good about him, but shall say something at the end of my book on Cuba, whereof I am at present correcting the proof-sheets. I went to see his poor wife, who passed through here some days since. We shed tears together and embraced at parting, poor soul. . . .[Brown’s] attempt I must judge insane but the spirit heroic. I should be glad to be as sure of heaven as that old man may be, following right in the spirit and footsteps of the old martyrs, girding on his sword for the weak and oppressed. His death will be holy and glorious—the new saint awaiting his martyrdom, and who, if he shall suffer [execution], will make the gallows glorious like the cross."

What "martyrs" could Mrs. Howe have been speaking of in her letter? Surely she could not mean the early Christian martyrs who were slain in many perverse, cruel and cold-blooded ways by the ancient Romans, just as her hero, John Brown, slew the Southern martyrs in Kansas. Her fascination with his sword is also revealed in the letter. This grotesque and warped view of Christian values is reflected in her violent and bloody war song.

Here we have the author of the much revered "The Battle Hymn of the Republic" condoning murder and treason by a ruthless and brutal killer. Her dark fascination with Brown’s bloody sword and the killer’s unbridled violence seemed to thrill the diminutive author. Clearly, the seeds of inspiration for her "The Battle Hymn of the Republic" had been planted in the poisonous soil of murder, rebellion and treason.

But what was the final inspiration for the famous lyrics? In November 1861, after the start of the tragic war the Howe’s had for so long worked to instigate, a party which included the Unitarian Rev. James F. Clarke and Mrs. Howe, visited an outpost of the invading Union troops in Northern Virginia. However an unexpected Confederate attack canceled the review. Mrs. Howe and her party were waiting in a

buggy while Northern troops came marching by, returning from the skirmish. The camp visitors heard the Yankees merrily singing an obscene version of "John Brown’s Body."

When the party returned to Washington D.C., the Rev. Clarke asked Mrs. Howe if she could supply more dignified words for the popular tune. So, inspired by the memory of her late, "martyred hero," John Brown, and the skirmish that so rudely interrupted her review of her beloved invading Northern vandals, she wrote the words for the famous Anti-Southern abolitionist anthem, "The Battle Hymn of the Republic," by candlelight in the middle of the night at the Willard Hotel.

James T. Fields, the editor of the Atlantic Monthly, accepted the song and published it as a poem in the February 1862 issue. This bloody, hate-filled, song has been marching on ever since. The "hymn," sung by so many church and school choirs, was inspired not by the Bible or a stirring religious sermon, but by a dastardly killer, John Brown, and by the march of Northern invaders trampling over Southern soil, Southern lives and Southern rights in quest of subjugating or killing the Southern people.

And what horrible crime was the South guilty of to warrant its extermination?

The people of the South were guilty of only wanting independence for a government of their own choosing, a pro-Christian, God-based government that safeguarded states’ rights, individual liberty and put strict limits on the national government. This was was the type of government the founders established in 1776, and the South was trying to preserve it as handed to them.

It was Abraham Lincoln, who is said to have cried the first time he heard the abolitionist war song, and radicals like Mrs. Howe who were the real revolutionaries. It was their forces who, by brute force of arms, destroyed the original voluntary union of sovereign, independent states at the cost of 620,000 dead Americans, and changed the nation into an involuntary union of defeated, militarily occupied, captive states.

In 1863, Mrs. Howe recited "The Battle Hymn of the Republic" at a gathering of fanatical abolitionists. One of those who saw and heard her, commented, she had a "weird, penetrating voice." Considering the bloody, ungodly history of her war song, what a chilling experience that must have been.

In summary, here is a "hymn" celebrating celebrating the killing of Southerners on Southern soil, written by someone involved in the most radical causes of her day, who supported the most extreme and violent response to the South, who wrote the song after being inspired by the murderous career of John Brown and her Northern vandal invaders of the South. Whenever "The Battle Hymn of the Republic" is played, five innocent men hacked to death by the "terrible swift sword" of John Brown should be remembered. It is also a dirge for the 620,000 Americans who died in the War for Southern Independence and which war transformed America into a despotic centralized state with practically unlimited powers

What meaning does the song have for the South today?

It is, in effect, a "stealth" heritage attack. It is conditioning Southerners to accept the Yankee myth of history that their ancestor’s were wrong, and their Northern "betters" were right and they should be glad 260,000 Southrons were slaughtered in the War for Southern Independence. The message of the song is, "Believe in Mrs. Howe’s almighty centralized government to tell you what is right and what is wrong." Don’t listen to the founders of 1776 or 1861, is the message of this hymn. Yes, Mrs. Howe’s abolitionist hymn is still doing her work, quietly and covertly, of destroying Southern heritage by conditioning Southerners to accept her fanatically leftist cultural and religious philosophy.

How ironic that such a joyous traditional Southern song as "Dixie" is now all but banned throughout the South, while a vicious Anti-Southern war song such as "The Battle Hymn of the Republic" is sung in churches and patriotic ceremonies all over the Confederate states.

What meaning does it have for the Church?

Did Jesus Christ teach that God is a vengeance seeking, sword-wielding maniac that slaughters innocents and tramples people under His wrathful feet, as Mrs. Howe’s violent and bloody lyrics would have you believe? No, such lyrics don’t fit in with any Christian liturgy I’m familiar with. They do fit in the theology of radical egalitarianism which says everyone must be equal in all aspects of life, or the full force and power of the federal government will destroy you. It also fits in the philosophy of giving to the government god-like powers to declare a whole segments of humanity as nonpersons, such as the unborn, who can then be legally slaughtered by the millions at the whim of the mother and abortionist.

If Americans truly care about individual liberty, limited, constitutional government, and the sacred right of self-government of the people in their states assembled, then all such false icons as "The Battle Hymn of the Republic" must be exposed and rejected.

For further reading, I suggest: "The Secret Six: The True Tale of the Men Who Conspired with John Brown," by Edward J. Reunion Jr. (New York, 1995); "The Secret Six: John Brown and the Abolitionist Movement" by Otto Scott (Murphy, Calf., 1993); "The Singing Sixties: The Spirit of the Civil War Days Drawn from the Music of the Times" by Willard A and Porter W. Heaps (Norman, Okra., 1960); "Notable American Women 1607-1950: A Biographical Dictionary" Vol. 11, Article on Julia War Howe, (Cambridge, Mass.); and "The Encyclopedia of Religion" Vol. 15&16, Article on Unitarians, (New York, 1995).

Now for the presentation:

`

Firearms

View more presentations from GeorgeCastonguay.