The US Constitution is made for a Moral and Religious People... it is wholly inadequate to govern any other

“Our constitution was made only for a moral and religious people. It is wholly inadequate to the government of any other.” — John Adams.

Our founding fathers were devout Christians, the precepts and hallmarks of our Constitutional Republic reflect our Christian values and standards... if you want to be an atheist, agnostic, or hedonist you must understand that our government was established on Judeo/Christian precepts and can not function properly without them.

Alexis de Tocqueville’s observation that “[l]iberty cannot be established without morality, nor morality without faith" was noted as the corner stone of America's greatness by Tocqueville... and that which separated us from the fallen governments of Europe. For, hundreds of years, the Natural Law and morality formed the foundation for our claim to certain unalienable rights, they were the source of our laws, and standards for social interaction and justice...

That has all changed. Today, People and governments see how far they can push the boundaries of good behavior and power without incurring rebellion or violence... For decades now, governments have adopted President Obama’s slogan of “Yes We Can”!Can we establish an entire branch of government dedicated to education even though there is no Constitutional grant of authority to do it? Yes We Can! We fight several undeclared wars lasting many years killing thousands, we create an entire dependent population thru social welfare programs none of which are Constitutional.

It is time we returned to our founding fathers faith and constitutional government... reorganizing and limiting the Federal Govrnments scope and power to those enumerated powers in the Constitution... and no more.  We must also restrict the Courts from using Stari Decisis and the courts judgments as LAW... they are not law, they are the Courts rendering of justice in a particular case and only that case.

Views: 1326

Reply to This

Replies to This Discussion

The Talbot is then a book written for Messianic Jews...  Jews who have accepted Christ as their Lord and Saviour. It is a RECENT compilation of an oral examination and the application of hisotrical doctrines contained in the Talmud, the Torah, and other long held Jewish doctrine... too, embrace or recognize, Christianity as the fulfillment of the Messianic prophecies...

P/S  Who then is a Jew?  According to Paul a Jew is not one who is a Jew outwardly... trusting in the law and the circumcisoin of the flesh... 

A true Jew is one who is circumcised of the heart and not necessarily the flesh... A born again Spirit filled individual, who recognizes Chrsit as Lord and Saviour... becomes a fulfilled Jew... a true Jew; understanding, that it is not by works or the law, that we are saved ... but by faith in Jesus Christ... who is the propitiation for our sins.

 The Apostles of the Bible were Gentile, Non Jew, Gentile (from Latin gentilis (“of or belonging to the same people or nation”), from gēns (“clan; tribe; people, family”) is an ethnonym that commonly means non-Jew according to Judaism. Other groups that claim Israelite heritage sometimes use the term to describe outsiders.

Hardly, every Christian Apostle of the early Church was first a Jew... not one of them practiced any other religion.  They were all born Jews, Hebrews.   St. Paul, aka Saul, some argue was the greatest of the Apostles, was born  a Jew.  St. Paul was a member of the Sanhedrin, a Jewish leader. He was a Hebrew of the Hebrews, a Pharisee of the Pharisee's; having more to boast, as a Jew, than most Jews could ever ascribed too... 

The early Church was largely made up of disaffected Jews... The early Christian's were considered a heretical sect of the Jewish faith, by most religious and government authorities of the time. St. Paul often visited Jewish Synagogues to preach the gospell of Jesus Christ...putting himself at great risk of being stoned... in fact, he was stoned 3 times... and left for dead. 

The Apostles of the New Testament were not Gentiles... Jesus Christ was a Jew, a Rabbi 

 God and his wisdom seen different.

 All prayers for The King, and now it went from respect to Jewish Faith and Christian Faith to Sharia Law.

 Now where is our Constitutional Wisdom in the Year of Our Lord Jesus Christ, in the Declaration Of Independence to the Constitution?

What?  What do you mean... God and his wisdom seen different?

 She said Ronald, enjoy your British Caliphate against the United States Constitution, and she does not want to hear nothing from a person who does not know what being Jewish is.

 You said you was not a Jew, have a very very nice day Ronald.

Oh ps, I am not Jewish also, but you can get over your opinions.

The Word of God is not an opinion...

See the articles below with references to scripture ... explaining who are the True Jews... Abrahams seed and covenant is not of the flesh.... it is  a covenant based on FAITH and the SPIRIT ... not the felsh.  This is  one of the secrets the Angels desired to look into... the truth regarding who the children of God actually are... and they are not of the flesh for God is a Soirit and the Father of Spirits:

SEE:

Who is a true Jew according to Apostle Paul?
https://kehilanews.com/.../who-is-a-true-jew-according-to-apostle-paul

Not every Jew is a true Jew. Paul continues his Pharisaic Shema-centered argument about God being the God of both Israel and the Nations, who not only visits wrath and judgement upon the wickedness of the covenant-breaking Jews (as the Romans seem to think), but will surely do the same upon those of the Nations as well.
Who Is a True Jew? Part 1 | Desiring God
https://www.desiringgod.org/messages/who-is-a-true-jew-part-1

So Paul is supporting the point from verses 17–24 that the Jewish people in general in his day were not teaching themselves the real meaning of the law (verse 21), and were transgressing it at its core. And having the external marks of the covenant, like circumcision, was of …
Who is a “True” Jew? | Veracity
https://sharedveracity.net/2016/05/30/who-is-a-true-jew

This apostle, who is called to preach the Gospel to the non-Jews, the Gentiles, must also address a thorny question as to why so many Jews have not received Jesus as their Messiah. In Romans 2:25-29, Paul talks about the concept of the “circumcision of the heart.” For Paul, even if a …
Who Is a True Jew? Part 2 | Desiring God
https://www.desiringgod.org/messages/who-is-a-true-jew-part-2

Gentiles Can Become Jews. Paul's purpose in this chapter is to underline the need of the Jewish people (along with the rest of the world) for the gift of righteousness which God gives freely to those who trust Christ (Romans 3:20,28; 1:16-17).
Who is a Jew? - Romans 2:25-29: Berean Bible Church
www.bereanbiblechurch.org/transcripts/romans_new/2_25-29.htm

But if you bear the name "Jew" and rely upon the Law and boast in God, Romans 2:17 NASB. Here Paul uses it of the national/physical Jew, those physically decedent from Abraham. Whereas, in 2:29 he uses it of Christians--any Jew or Gentile who has trusted in Jesus the Messiah.

:

Yiddish

And does the Col thinks he is a true Christian?

Gentiles separated by the word of God, to Moses.  Yiddish a international  language used by Jews in central and eastern Europe before the Holocaust. It was originally a German dialect with words from Hebrew and several modern languages and is today spoken mainly in the US, Israel, and Russia.

 The Roman Jews and Ashkenazic Jews, Crucified Christ.

 The Egyptian's a Ashkenazic Jewish Nation.

Does the Col thinks he is a true Christian?, "irrelevant, not connected with or relevant to something I asked".

Yiddish is my statuesque to Nelson.

A language doesn't determine your DNA, Race or Ethnicity... Some Statuesque... Your beauty is determined by your personal DNA... not Yiddish or German... or any other language.

What do they teach you in that University you go too?

RSS

LIGHTER SIDE

 

Political Cartoons by AF Branco

Political Cartoons by AF Branco

ALERT ALERT

Horrible: Democrats Set The Constitution On Fire With Fraudulent Impeachment

House Democrats unveiled two articles of impeachment against President Donald Trump on Tuesday morning after an investigation that violated fundamental provisions of the Constitution and the Bill of Rights.

The investigation of the president began with the complaint of a so-called “whistleblower” who turned out to be a rogue Central Intelligence Agency employee, protected by a lawyer who had called for a “coup” against Trump in early 2017.

Democrats first demanded that the “whistleblower” be allowed to testify. But after House Intelligence Committee chair Rep. Adam Schiff (D-CA) was found to have lied about his committee’s contact with the “whistleblower,” and after details of the “whistleblower’s” bias began to leak, Democrats reversed course. In violation of the President Trump’s Sixth Amendment right to confront his accuser, Democrats refused to allow the “whistleblower” to testify. They argue the president’s procedural rights, even if they existed, would not apply until he was tried in the Senate — but they also invented a fraudulent “right to anonymity” that, they hope, might conceal the whistleblower even then.

Schiff began the “impeachment inquiry” in secret, behind the closed doors of the Sensitive Compartmentalized Information Facility (SCIF) in the basement of the U.S. Capitol, even though none of the testimony was deemed classified. Few members of Congress were allowed access. Schiff allowed selective bits of testimony to leak to friendly media, while withholding transcripts of testimony.

Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi (D-CA), having allowed the secret process to unfold, legitimized it with a party-line vote authorizing the inquiry. The House resolution denied President Trump the procedural rights enjoyed by Presidents Richard Nixon and Bill Clinton, and denied the minority party the traditional right to object to witnesses called by the majority.

Rather than the House Judiciary Committee, which traditionally handles impeachment, Pelosi also deputized the House Intelligence Committee to conduct fact-finding; the Judiciary Committee was turned into a rubber stamp. Schiff held a few public hearings, but often failed to release transcripts containing exculpatory evidence until after they had passed.

In the course of the Intelligence Committee’s investigation, Schiff quietly spied on the telephone records of his Republican counterpart, Ranking Member Devin Nunes (R-CA). He also snooped on the phone records of a journalist, John Solomon; and on the phone records of former New York City mayor Rudy Giuliani, acting as President Trump’s personal lawyer.

Schiff’s eavesdropping violated both the First Amendment right to press freedom and the Sixth Amendment right to counsel. Yet he proceeded undeterred by constitutional rights, publishing the phone logs in his committee’s report without warning, confirmation, or explanation, alleging that Nunes and the others were part of a conspiracy to assist the president’s allegedly impeachable conduct. When Republicans on the Judiciary Committee asked the Intelligence Committee’s majority counsel, Daniel Goldman, to explain the phone logs, he refused to answer,

Ironically, Schiff had done exactly what Democrats accuse Trump of doing: abused his power to dig up dirt on political opponents, then obstructed a congressional investigation into his party’s and his committee’s misconduct.

Democrats’ articles of impeachment include one for the dubious charge of “abuse of power,” which is not mentioned in the Constitution; and one for “obstruction of Congress,” which in this case is an abuse of power in itself.

Alexander Hamilton, writing about impeachment in Federalist 65, warned that “there will always be the greatest danger that the decision will be regulated more by the comparative strength of parties, than by the real demonstrations of innocence or guilt.” Democrats have fulfilled Hamilton’s worst fears.

The Trump impeachment will soon replace the 1868 impeachment of President Andrew Johnson — which the House Judiciary Committee staff actually cited as a positive precedent — as the worst in American history.

In service of their “coup,” Democrats have trampled the Constitution and the Bill of Rights. The Republic has never been in greater danger.

You don't get to interrupt me

© 2019   Created by Steve - Ning Creator.   Powered by

Badges  |  Report an Issue  |  Terms of Service