Non Consent of the Misgoverned


by Pastor Mark Downey

September 23, 2012

Scripture Reading: Micah 4:4-7

I’ve been using the phrase “consent of the governed” quite a bit this year, because 2012 is an election year and the arbitrary two-party system offers the Christian believer nothing in which to consent our lives and property over to a dictatorship of antichrists.  We should have objected around the turn of the 20th century when the acceleration of racial aliens changed the complexion of American culture.  Or perhaps even before that, preempting the American Civil War and the suspension of White Christian law based on the Bible, being substituted with Martial Law Rule.  We, the true Israelite people of Scripture, should always remember and demand the biblical basis for government and always refuse our consent to illegitimate secular government (such as we’ve become accustomed to).  Those who are opposed to our God and our race, support and promulgate the myth of ‘the separation of church and state,’ which in practice is the separation of God from government, by appealing to the idea of ‘consent of the governed,’ or the line in the Preamble of the Constitution:

We the People of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defence, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America.”

The claim is that government is secular and autonomous from God, created by "the people" and not God, and not accountable to God, but only to "the people."  When you think about this secular premise, not to mention a preponderance of the historical record, it becomes a very flimsy assertion.  Not a single signer to the Constitution would agree with that notion that it was to the exclusion of God and the Bible.  If we all “consent” to be slaves to jewish masters or to shed our blood for them, would such a law that makes that possible be morally justified in the minds of the people?  Well, not unless they were consciously suicidal.  A more likely scenario is that somewhere along the line, our people were subconsciously deceived, rather than consenting willingly.  Much like the cognitive dissonance to pay the IRS for your own destruction… voluntarily.  Why don’t they just knock on your door and ask you for your guns?  Because, once a national measure like that begins, the gun grabbers would be going home in a coffin.  People have to be fooled into consensual surrender, “voluntary compliance.”  “The price of freedom is eternal vigilance” – Thomas Jefferson.  That is the object of this sermon; I question the authority and sources of anything that tries to change my racial heritage.  Do you realize how free our race would be if our people knew who they were?  If Christian Identity were the norm?  By the same token, if we don’t understand what the freedom movement was all about 200 years ago, we’re not going to understand it today. 

The founding fathers and the system of law before them in America, believed that righteous laws were those that conformed to Divine Law.  The irony here is absolutely extraordinary.  Atheists and secularists try to deceive us into believing that the "consent of the governed" means that "The People" are sovereign, not God, and autonomous from His Law.  By doing this, secularists deny the foundation for freedom.  And even some churches have done their antinomian part in undermining a nation that would be Christian.  A government not "under God" is a government that loses its legitimacy when it governs outside of God's Law.  This begs the question; were the 13 colonies so lame in their thinking that they didn’t believe Jesus Christ is the way, the truth and the life and that the truth shall make you free?  Were they unaware of II Thes. 2:11, that if they believed a lie, God would send them strong delusion?  I don’t believe there’s any evidence that they were that stupid.  Should we, therefore, remove the cry, ‘No king, but Jesus’ from the history books, because it sounds too much like “We should obey God, rather than man” (Acts 5:29)?

They just freed themselves from England and the banking monopoly and Babylonian corporations.  Did they take credit for this new found freedom or did they attribute their deliverance to the benevolence of God’s Providence?  The latter is the historical record written time and time again.  Children can understand this simple cause and effect of Bible dynamics, but our children today aren’t taught the Christian perspective of history anymore in the schools.  So, it is all the more plausible for secular propaganda to persuade our people otherwise.  The founding father of jewish communism, Karl Marx, said, “Take away the heritage of a people, and they are easily persuaded.”  Obviously, we have been lied to about our Christian heritage and that God didn’t have anything to do with establishing the united States of America as a Christian nation; even though there’s a Supreme Court decision in 1892, that formally declared, “These and many other matters which might be noticed… that this is a Christian nation.” 

Should we fail to acknowledge that ‘consent of the governed’ is a biblical principle and not a secular one, then we will be subject to illegitimate state government that will transgress God’s Law.  If we are not vigilant, this can happen at any point in time.  And our founders were well aware of this relapse into tyranny.  That’s why we must not consent to the pretended sovereignty of secular humanism, which is just the window dressing for judaism.  When we walk into a voting booth, we are consenting to the legitimacy of that election.  Any secular government is an illegitimate criminal enterprise.  When you walk into the “bar” of a courtroom, you are consenting to admiralty jurisdiction.  If there’s a gold-fringed flag, you’re standing in enemy territory.

Where do we find ‘consent of the governed’ in the Bible?  White Christian Americans of the late 18th century believed government was of God according to Romans 13 and was in contradistinction to ‘the divine right of kings.’  In practice, a government that is not ‘under God’ is a government that thinks it is God.  Just as Rex Lex (the king is the law) was replaced by Lex Rex (the law is king), so too was ‘the divine right of kings’ eclipsed by ‘the consent of the governed,’ which would resist tyranny.  In fact, the creed of the American Revolution asserted that, “Resistance to tyrants is obedience to God.”  When I ran for office, my creed was Romans 13:3, “For rulers are not a terror to good works, but to the evil.”  9/11 was an inside job and the real terrorists are from within, because we have not been vigilant.  We are not vigilant because we are not free.  We are not free because our heritage has been taken away from us.  We are told we are not a Christian nation. 

In 1637, the Christian inhabitants of Massachusetts, having no grants of land or authority or any officers of the king in the quiet wilderness, would not be molested or annihilated by raiding indians.  “For two years (1637-1639) they acted without… formal agreement among themselves regarding the method or organization of their government, choosing and obeying their magistrates, electing and holding their assemblies, according to their habit before they came.  But in 1639 they adopted a formal constitution, which they called their "Fundamental Orders."  “The foundation of authority is laid in the free consent of the people,” Thomas Hooker said, preaching to them from Deut. 1.13, “Take you wise men, and understanding, and known among your tribes, and I will make them rulers over you.”  It is best that it should be so, for “By a free choice the hearts of the people will be more ready to yield" obedience.  This was the principle of the Fundamental Orders.  Their governor was always to be a member of some approved congregation; but any man might be a freeman and voter and fill any other magistracy whose town admitted him to be a resident, without test of doctrine or church membership; and the freemen were to elect the deputies by whom the laws of the colony were to be made in General Court” – from ‘History of the American People.’ 

And, of course, they should be Christian leaders.  Atheists were not allowed to hold office until 1961 (TORCASO v. WATKINS, 367 U.S. 488), because the Bible says that only men of the faith can take any oath genuinely; a true oath is one that is made in the presence and in the name of God.  So the idea that ‘We, the people’ is some kind of deification of man is a secular myth and a typical canard of atheists.  Sam Adams, reflecting on the long tradition of self-government throughout the Christian history of America said, “There are instances of… an almost astonishing Providence in our favor; our success has staggered our enemies, and almost given faith to infidels; so we may truly say it is not our own arm which has saved us.” 

Christian Identity is the only Christian entity, that I know of, that has discovered God’s ‘7 times punishment’ upon Israel, Which calculates to 2,520 years, from 745BC (the Assyrian captivity) to July 4th, 1776.  Are we to believe that after this expansive duration of judgment expired, that it was all of the sudden cursed with a secular conspiracy in its founding documents?  I think God had other plans, prophetic designs for what many White Christians anticipated, which was the birthing of the manchild i.e. a nation born in a day according to Isaiah 66.  Could it be that those who have been attempting to abort the manchild have corrupted our understanding of what happened in 1776?  What is it that we don’t understand?  Could it be that our ancestors, who gave their blood for future generations, gave it in the form of an inheritance.  They knew that we, the people of God, were heirs of the promise and that included land and liberty.  They just won their independence and had all this beautiful land, a Beulah Land.  The Bible has laws of inheritance that had been handed down from the days of Abraham.  God said He would “Appoint a place for My people Israel, and will plant them, that they may dwell in a place of their own, and move no more” II Sam. 7:10.  Don’t we believe that place is right here in America?  It has to be, because we have no where else to go in the world today as a race. 

If we were to realize, as did our founders, that the war was not necessarily fought over taxation, but more importantly over property rights they held as Christian Freemen, then we can look at the Preamble as, not a poetic platitude or sentimental introduction to the Constitution, but rather a national land inheritance in the form of a trust.  A trust is a lawful instrument: a right in property held by one person, called the trustee, for the benefit of another, called the beneficiary.  Can we catch up with the founding fathers intention to obey God by understanding the nature and character of the document?  The subversion is redirecting our attention at asking the wrong questions.  The question is not: was the Constitution divinely inspired?  America was already a Christian nation both in people and in law of its government.  The purpose of the document was not to restate the colonial Commonwealth’s jurisdiction that the government was Christian.  That point of law was already a given: the people were the government and the people were Christians.  And it did not pertain to any other people than the White race.  If you think “the people” meant Chinese or Somalians or Pakistanis, you would be mistaken. 

Psalms 102:13 specifies that, “Thou [God] shall arise, and have mercy upon Zion; for the time to favour her, yea, the set time, is come.”  Our rights as Christian heirs in Christ’s Kingdom are connected to the land inheritance in the end time nation of prophetic Zion and God reminds us of our national land inheritance at a “set time.”  The document was sealed at the ‘set time’ when a nation was born in a day and would be a nation bringing forth the fruits of the Kingdom.  There is no other nation on earth that can fulfill these signs of Jacob-Israel.  It was a time of blessing and they honored their land inheritance with thanksgiving to God for unprecedented natural resources and wealth.  Once the lawful intent is truly realized, it becomes apparent why they penned the document in the precise manner they did.  It was a ‘trust instrument’ for the purpose of passing something down to the next generations, their “posterity” which makes the subject matter racial.  All the more reason for distortions to distract us from the reality of who we are and what our responsibilities are.  Righteous stewardship is a divine institution with true Israel. 

Modern liberals would call the dispensation of land and liberty to a specific “posterity” racist!  And they would be correct; it was race-specific and to the exclusion of all other races and religions.  Today’s generation of whiggers are easily persuaded to loathe their heritage and so once again slip back into being a tax slave without clear title to property.  The founding fathers gave us alloidial title to land, free from any taxation and free to do what we wanted with the land.  We can’t say that today can we?  It’s unfortunate that the framers of the Constitution are being blamed for the immoral corruption that our contemporary society suffers from, when their intent was to avert White Christian culture from a relapse into tyranny through a formal trust instrument setting the conditions for the conveyance of lands and the duties of a jurisdiction that would maintain its integrity.  The “set time” of Psalms 102 had come.  After the War for Independence, all the land became the property of the people who lived in the several 13 States.  The land was owned outright and unencumbered.  This meant that there were no landlords or feudal overseers or banks holding mortgages.  And this really pissed off the aristocracy of oligarchs.  “Damn those upstart Americans.”  They set forth to abort the manchild, but have not quite succeeded, for Jesus Christ is the head of the body.  We are the body of Christ.  We know that in any normal birth, the head appears first, then the body.  So it is with these spiritual things.  Christ the head appeared first to become the Word made flesh, but the birthing process has continued unabated since that event.  The full birth is not completed until His entire body is brought to birth and also becomes the Word made flesh.

In the case of Wallace vs. Harmstead (44 Pa 492) in 1863, we read the opinion of the Court, “It was therefore necessary to extinguish all foreign interest in the soil, as well as foreign jurisdiction in the manner of government.  We are then to regard the Revolution and these Acts of Assembly as emancipating every acre of soil… from the grand characteristic of the feudal system.”  This is the kind of firsthand “opinion” that documents history.  The enemy can only resort to secondhand documentation in an attempt to form public opinion.  Who can deny the importance of ‘consent of the governed’ for a sound government or the non-consent of the misgoverned?  Not since the days of Moses, bringing Israel out of Egypt, had such a glorious event happened.   Never in the Christian era had a generation of Isaac’s sons i.e. Saxons, so extremely obeyed the command of our faith to “Stand fast therefore in the liberty wherewith Christ hath made us free, and be not entangled again with the yoke of bondage” Gal. 5:1. 

I suppose what perturbs me more than anything, due to the fact that I am a Vietnam War veteran, is the death toll of White blood in a war that was intentionally designed to be lost and to accrue huge profits for the international bankers and global elitists who could care less about our White Christian American heritage.  I have empathy for the blood that was spilled from Lexington Green to Yorktown, because they did not die in vain.  We are the beneficiaries of the document they fought for; an inheritance trust instrument.  They fought at a huge sacrifice that hardly anybody today ever considers.  Although the casualty numbers weren’t as many as in other US wars, it’s the percentage per population that has been overlooked.  An estimated 25,000 American Revolutionaries died during active military service.  The ratio of American deaths to the free White male population who served in the war (aged 16-45) was 1:20.  This would be the equivalent of about 3 million men today.  That was the price they paid for their “posterity.”  The 58,000 men that died in Vietnam and those who died in Iraq and Afghanistan died in vain, because their cause had nothing to do with restoring our liberties here in America or if you can even imagine abolishing property taxes.  If anything, we are taxed more heavily for the antichrist killing machine. 

When you hear talk of ‘The American Dream’ it’s usually about some goofy notion that non-Whites can come to America and if they work hard they can become wealthy.  But, that nightmare is not what our founding fathers envisioned.  I have a long list of sermon titles and one of them is ‘The Un-American Dream’ and it has to do with the alien invasion likened to a parasite on a host nation.  It’s a bad dream when White Americans work two jobs so that more than half of everything you earn can be taken by the government and given categorically under the heading “entitlements” to subhumans who think you owe them a living.  Is this what caused the founders to risk so much: their lives, their fortunes and their sacred honor?  What was their motivation?  To feed the bloated bellies of Nigerian babies so that they could breed us out of existence?  To give them the inheritance that God gave to us?  Was that their thinking? 

They were motivated with the idea of every White Christian American owning his own “vine and fig tree,” free and clear, and dwelling in safety and peace, without being molested by nobles, politicians, lawyers or tax collectors.  That’s why I choose Micah for today’s Scripture reading.  The founders were familiar with this passage, expressing the idea of our people owning property and enjoying the fruits of their labor without fear of theft or political oppression.  In fact, I dare say, the Bible was better understood by most Americans 200 years ago than it is today.  If you were to travel back in time and tell them what some people today think they were about, they would probably think you’re some kind of nut.  That’s because what we’re told about them today is not original firsthand documentation, but rather a demonization of our heritage.  It’s a rather clever plot; as clever as getting away with 9/11 and taking us into the next era of world wars.  Why is it that we never take the time to probe deeply into who is the real culprit?  I’ll tell you why: it takes time and hard work to investigate something in a scholarly manner. 

Few judaized Christians have heard the phrase “vine and fig tree,” but it sums up “The American Dream” (if we’re talking about hope and aspirations) as it was 200 years ago.  No theme appears more frequently in the writing’s of George Washington’s ‘Diaries’ than his love for his land.  After the Revolution, when he returned to Mount Vernon, he wrote, “At length… I am become a private citizen on the banks of the Potomac and under the shadow of my own vine and my own fig tree.”  This phrase occurs at least 11 times in his letters. 

You see, in ancient Palestine, vineyards and fig trees were commonplace and the property of most residents.  The vine was an emblem of our race.  For example, Psalms 80:8 says, “You brought out a vine from Egypt; you have cast out the heathen, and planted it.”  Likewise, the same could be said about us delivered from European persecution as well as the injuns of the wilderness in America, likened to the Canaanites.  Both of these plants formed a grateful shade spreading over a trellis or canapé.  Our people would study or meditate or pray under them.  It was a picture of domestic peace; each family gathered in harmony and rest under God; each content with what they had.  And hence, Micah is describing the future Kingdom of peace where nobody will make His people afraid, because the enemies of God will be as if they never existed (Obadiah 1:16).  The garden of vine and fig trees is an archetype of Adamkind, whereby our land and property are secure so long as we do not try to “be as gods”, which the serpent tempted Eve to do, but rather each of us must be self-governed, putting to death the autonomous ‘old man’ of the flesh and be resurrected to obedience in Christ.  If the early Americans understood this concept in Micah, then they also understood that the earth would pour out its fruit if we obey God’s Law. 

“Thou shalt not steal” is the foundation of peace.  It establishes private property as a godly stewardship.  Whenever the state gets into the property business, it is Babylonian property backed by violence and becomes adversarial to biblically based family owned property.  That was the Abrahamic Covenant; God would make the descendants of Abraham great and they would be a blessing to all the Israelite families of the earth.  It all stays within our race.  We have stewards or government officials of the land or nation that will bequeath property to individual families.  ‘To the victors goes the spoils of war,’ however, the American soil did not revert to a king or a Caesar, but to the inhabitants thereof.  That was the great concept of our founding fathers to secure the blessings that can only come from God, that we may enjoy the shade of our own vine and fig trees.  Non-Whites do not have the God-given mentality to understand property; if they want something, they take it without any sense of guilt or remorse and it’s called stealing.

This idea of an ongoing peace and tranquility did not all of the sudden come to screeching halt in 1787.  Just the opposite.  It signaled the “set time” of Micah 4.  A Christian nation was being birthed and there is no better example than the nature in which her children were being raised.  The dominance of the ‘New England Primer’ in the 1700's and the ‘McGuffey Readers’ in the 1800's, shows that education was Christian and biblical throughout this period.  The Constitution and the First Amendment were never understood to prohibit state and local governments from encouraging the teaching of Christianity in all schools.  The NE Primer was the most widely read school book in America for 100 years.  The best estimate is made that some 3,000,000 copies were sold from 1700 to 1850.  Noah Webster estimated that over five million copies of his ‘Spelling Book’ had been sold when the population of the US was less than 20 million.  Proverbs 22:6 tells us, “Train up a child in the way he should go: and when he is old, he will not depart from it.”  Ask yourself: when did our children start departing from the ways of the Lord in private institutions of learning and went with the tenth plank of the Communist Manifesto i.e. a free education for all children in public schools (in other words, compulsory anti-Christian brainwashing)?  Whose fault was that?  This is really the crux of the matter; who and when are we going to assign the blame to? 

Both before and after the ratification of the Constitution, America as a nation acknowledged its duty to be a nation "under God." The modern Supreme Court has repudiated that duty, making America an officially atheistic nation.  Never mind that every single person who signed the Constitution believed that America was and must always be a nation under God, and must always acknowledge its duty to God, the Court frankly admitted in ALLEGHENY COUNTY v. GREATER PITTSBURGH ACLU, 492 U.S. 573 (1989): “This court… squarely has rejected the proposition that the Establishment Clause is to be interpreted in light of any favoritism for Christianity that may have existed among the Founders of the Republic.”  Hell yes, it “existed.” 

The Court violates the central assumption of American Constitutional interpretation: that the document is to be interpreted in light of the original intent of its Framers.  The Court now believes it can make the Constitution "mean" anything it wants.  And what the Court wants is to "be as god."  And that means getting the real God out of the way by declaring, as the Allegheny Court went on to say, that: “The Constitution mandates that the government remain secular.”  What a mind blowing lie!  The Framers of the Constitution intended no such mandate, and never observed any such mandate.  Just as all individuals have a duty to worship God, so do nations. America's Founding Fathers honored that duty.  The Constitution did not repeal that duty. (The duty to "remain secular," in this particular case, means the duty of the government not to acknowledge Christmas.)  Sheesh… talk about Marxist dialectics. 

James Madison, the "Father of the Constitution," said in one of his most memorable addresses (in the ‘Memorial and Remonstrance’), that “Legislators should vote against any legislation if the policy of the bill is adverse to the diffusion of the light of Christianity.  The first wish of those who enjoy this precious gift ought to be that it may be imparted to the whole race of mankind. Compare the number of those who have as yet received it with the number still remaining under the dominion of false Religions; and how small is the former! Does the policy of the Bill tend to lessen the disproportion?  No; it at once discourages those who are strangers to the light of (revelation) from coming into the Region of it; and countenances, by example the nations who continue in darkness, in shutting out those who might convey it to them.”  In other words, Christianity was elevated above all other religions and it was exclusively under the possession of the White race.  The idea that America's Founding Fathers put "all religions on par with one another," or worse, equalized religion and non-religion, is completely contradicted by the totality of American history.  The Allegheny decision, which Judge Thompson relied on, made public nativity scenes unconstitutional, a ridiculous decision, and was based on the Supreme Court's earlier ridiculous decision to not allow school children to have a "moment of silence" because they might use that moment to pray.  I have to wonder, if that wasn’t an act of treason, then what is?  As Noah Webster said, "The ecclesiastical establishments of Europe which serve to support tyrannical governments are not the Christian religion but abuses and corruptions of it.”  George Orwell tried to warn us that “Those who control the present, control the past and those who control the past control the future.”  True or false: were the framers of the Constitution establishing a government of, by and for the people who were of, by and for God?  If I think this is true, then somebody is calling good evil; if I’m wrong, I’m calling evil good. 

It should go without saying that America's original 13 colonies were Christian Theocracies.  The word "theocracy" means "under God," an inescapable characteristic of early America.  The Framers of the Constitution had no intention of changing this.  Before the Constitution was ratified, the Continental Congress acknowledged its duty to be "under God."  The United States in Congress assembled, agreed to the following proclamation: “In times of calamity and impending danger when a vindictive enemy pursues with unrelenting fury a war of rapine and devastation to reduce us by fire and sword, by the savages of the wilderness and our own domestics to the most abject and ignominious bondage; it becomes the indispensible duty of the citizens of these United States with true penitence of heart publicly to acknowledge the over ruling Providence of God, to confess our offences against him, and to supplicate his gracious interposition for averting the threatened danger and preparing our efforts in the defence and preservation of our injured country.”  There was no objection from the general Christian population, but rather conversely, Americans gave their consent to be governed under the sovereignty of God Almighty. 

The change in America from a Christian nation that acknowledged its duty to worship God to a secular nation that spurned God did not come about in 1789 with the ratification of the Constitution, but 150 years later, with the invention of the modern myth of ‘separation of church and state,’ a euphemism for separation of God and government.  It doesn't really matter what the Framers intended. Christianity has in fact been judicially repudiated as the foundation of our law; it has been purged from the State's schools, and the courts are unanimous that this is now a secular nation. Whatever a Christian might think about America's "organic law" and the work of the Founding Fathers, in 1907 "the modern a" may be said to have dawned when Supreme Court Chief Justice Charles Evans Hughes remarked that "the Constitution is what the judges say it is."  What a tragic day for America!  Where is the outrage for this relapse into tyranny?  Regardless of what you think the Constitution is, it is now morphing into a weapon for dictatorship.  And do you know what?  If they can do that, they can also say the Bible is what the judges say it is i.e. the siamese pulpit prostitutes of church and state, whom our founders labeled “hypocritical clergy.” 

It’s not that difficult to show the original Christian intent for the entire system of government 200 years ago.  Madison testified, “We have staked the whole future of American civilization, not upon the power of government, far from it.  We have staked the future of all our political institutions upon the capacity of each and all of us to govern ourselves, to control ourselves, to sustain ourselves according to the Ten Commandments of God.”  John Adams also testified, “Our constitution was made only for a moral and religious people.  It is wholly inadequate to the government of any other.” 

The Constitution may not be perfect, but the intent of the founders was perfect.  Their intent was to “Form a more perfect Union, establish justice, Insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defence, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessing of Liberty.”  We have the same problem with the infallibility of the Bible when there are hundreds of translations and versions.  It is only when the scholar digs deeper into the original manuscripts, do we discover the original intent.  At the close of the Constitutional Convention in Philadelphia, Benjamin Franklin was asked, “What have we got?”  And he replied, “A Republic, if you can keep it.”  I think he might have been suggesting that the tremendous historical innovation of Christian liberty within the confines of a representational government could only be kept if the people gave their consent to be ruled by the Word of God.  It was the spiritual character of the people themselves that would make or break the magnificent experiment put in motion. 

As I suggested earlier, the most insidious form of bondage is the type in which we willingly surrender.  When our people consent to the machinations of evil, choosing the lesser of corrupt ideas, that’s when we make the transition from abundance to selfishness and from selfishness to complacency.  But, it places certain demands upon the Christian to revoke our consent to be ruled by thieves and murderers anytime a government acts on their own authority, to be as gods.  The legacy that the founders left us was basically the codification of Christian Identity even though it wasn’t called that.  Our racial posterity was given a chance to find their way to the Beulah land, a land married to God.  Just as the jews declared war on Germany in 1933 (years before the outbreak of a world war), so too have the jews, through a war of words, brought death and destruction to America in 2012.  "From the days of John the Baptist until now the kingdom of heaven suffers violence, and violent men take it by force” Mt. 11:12.  We need to fight back.  We need a war; a war of repentance, to change our failures of the past and become new creatures in Christ.  Even if you don’t think our founding fathers identified themselves with being a Christian nation, think of yourself as a Christian who shall turn the heart of the fathers to the children, and the heart of the children to their fathers, leaving our posterity something that God will identify them with once again as “An elect race, a royal priesthood, a holy nation”I Peter 2:9.  We have to hold each and every generation accountable to not only consent to righteous government, but to make known their non-consent of unrighteous government.  The culture war was designed to take away our heritage and they will succeed only if we let them.  I hope and pray that something in today’s sermon will persuade you not to throw the baby out with the bathwater.  One of my favorite passages is I Thes. 5:21, “Prove all things, hold on to the good.”  That admonition should lead us to that restful place where we can sit in comfort and peace under our own vine and fig tree and have fear of nothing.