Creation Truth
History of the Founders Regarding Non-Christians as Office Holders PDF Print E-mail
Written by Dr. G. Thomas Sharp   
Monday, August 30 2010 19:20

It is intriguing that some of our Founders left some direction that has merit concerning the present Moslem/mosque affair in Manhattan at ground zero.  Consider the comments of Justice Joseph Story, Governor Samuel Johnson and Justice James Iradell.

Note: (Justice Story was a member of the U.S. Supreme Court for 34 years, and authored 286 opinions 286. He, along with Chancellor James Kent (Chief Justice of the New York State Supreme Court) is known as the Father of American Jurisprudence. Justice Story wrote the majority opinion for the famous Holy Trinity vs. The United States case in 1892.)

In Justice Joseph Story’s legal wrote in his legal commentaries, that:

The real object of the First Amendment was not to countenance, much less advance, Mahometanism [his spelling], or Judaism, or infidelity, by prostrating Christianity; but to exclude all rivalry among Christians. (Joseph Story, Commentaries on the Constitution of the United States, Vol. III, p. 728, 1871)

Justice Story’s comments highlights the fact that America’s Founders were careful not to violate the principle of religious freedom established in the First Amendment (the right of America’s citizens to the free expression of religious worship, and the forbidding of the Federal Government to establish a state sponsored religion), while at the same time maintaining that “CHRISTIANITY” was and is America’s common law that they are often vulnerable to present day progressive criticism and gross misapplication—this is especially true when in a revisionist mode non patriots plunder and manipulate the Constitution (as is the case concerning this particular circumstance).

When reading early American history—it seems at first glance that the Founders established a completely pluralistic society. But on a more careful examination you will find that this is not the case at all—at least, it was their clear intent and belief for the first 100 years of our nationhood that Christianity, not a particular sect, or denomination, with tithes, tenets and ordinances, but general Christianity—Biblical Christianity—was America’s common law.

This intent is reflected in Story’s commentary above. But here is the difficulty…even though the Founders believed that Christianity was the founding reality of the America n Republic, they did not resist or prohibit other religions from their right to worship here. Therefore, they knew that a time could come when the people of America may change and allow another religion, or that people of “NO” religion could become dominate in the culture.

Consider this. In the North Carolina ratification convention for the American Constitution—before the turn of the nineteenth century—Governor Samuel Johnson explained:

It is apprehended that Jews, Mahometans (his spelling), pagans, etc., may be elected to high office under the government of the United States. Those who are Mohometans, or any others who are not professors of Christian religion, can never be elected to the office of President or other high office, but in one of two cases. First, if the people of America lay aside the Christian religion altogether, it may happen. Should this unfortunately take place, the people will choose such men as [that] think as they do themselves. Another case is if any persons of such descriptions should, notwithstanding their religion, acquire the confidence and esteem of the people of America by their good conduct and practice of virtue, they may be chosen. (Jonathan Elliot, ed., The Debates in the Several Conventions on the Adoption of the Federal Constitution, Vol. IV, pp. 198-199, 1836)

Supreme Court Justice James Iredell, who was nominated to the High Court by George Washington, further explained:

But it is objected that the people of America may perhaps choose representatives who have no religion at all, and that pagans and Mahometans [his spelling] may be admitted into office…But it is never to be supposed that the people of America will trust their dearest rights to persons who have no religion at all, or a religion materially different from their own. (Ibid, p. 194)

The tragedy is that most do not understand that our Founders never believed this day would come. But it has!

Last Updated on Tuesday, August 31 2010 15:22
 
Tea Party Speech - April 15, 2010 PDF Print E-mail
Written by Dr. G. Thomas Sharp   
Tuesday, June 01 2010 20:08

I’ve been watching the Tea Party Movement for some time now, and have even spoken at a couple of their rallies, in an attempt to ascertain what significant strains of emphasis would ultimately surface as their guiding agenda and purpose. It seems to me that I hear a constant clamor among Tea Party attendees for a return to historical conservatism—a conservatism in kind with our 1776 counterparts—a conservatism that is freely expressed in life, duty and faith—a conservatism that will again protect life, liberty and property, and a conservatism that will connect US inseparably to our Founding Era (1760-1805). It is to this end that I write this blog.

If, today, we only seek conservative practices without our Founder’s purpose and philosophy…

Read more...
 
Science Falsely So-Called PDF Print E-mail
Written by Dr. G. Thomas Sharp   
Thursday, November 19 2009 00:00

The limits of man’s imagination is boundless in a world that is guided only by evolutionary relativism. This is especially true in the present mysterious domain of dinosaur hunters. Nothing punctuates this reality more vividly than the recent “scientific discovery” (or more appropriately the evolutionary hope) of a fossil that was alleged to be a dinosaur with feathers. Now, before you break out in sidesplitting laughter, let me fill you in on the amazing details-it does get funnier!

Dr. G. Thomas SharpIt seems a team of 007-type smugglers from China, driven presumably by profit motive rather than scientific purity, beguiled the already overwrought imagination of several prominent evolutionists with a concocted fossil.  This prestigious group of scientists already believed birds came from dinosaurs, and as a result, were easy to fool.

A principal in this group, Mr. Stephen Czerkas of the Dinosaur Museum in Blanding, Utah, found the fossil in question at a gem and rock sale in either Utah or Arizona (both locations have appeared in the accounts).  The Sidney Morning Herald reported how Czerkas reacted when he first saw the fossil:

“It was stunning,” Mr. Czertas recalls. “I could see right away that it didn’t belong on sale. It belonged in a museum.” So he hastily contacted a patron who put up the $80,000 the dealer was asking...and took his prize home in a state of high excitement, convinced he had discovered evidence of a pivotal moment in evolution. (emphasis added)

Then without peer review, and in the emotion of the moment, the National Geographic...

Read more...
 
Share Points of Origins Posts With Others - Let Them Know They Are Not Alone PDF Print E-mail
Written by Dr. G. Charles Jackson   
Monday, November 30 2009 00:00

 

Dear Points reader,

compassYou know the faith of many is being methodically tormented and sometimes broken, by intellectual "bullies" in college classrooms (sometimes in high school).  If you've seen this first-hand, you know it is horrible.  And unfortunately, some of these bullies profess to be "believers" themselves.  The Book of Jude talks about these "teachers"; so does Romans 1:20-25.

Check out those behind this bullying (like the Nat Cent for Sci Educ Inc., a private creation-hate group ... www.ncseweb.org) and you'll see.  Atheistic evolutionists are moving, like Oxford professor Richard Dawkins in his book "The God Delusion."


Last Updated on Monday, November 30 2009 18:32
Read more...
 
"Ardi" Human-Link - Not! PDF Print E-mail
Written by Dr. G. Charles Jackson   
Monday, October 05 2009 00:00

Team leader Prof. Tim White head of the Human Evolution Research Center at UCal-Berkeley "new" Ardipithecus ramidus "missing link" fossil "We can't say this species was a direct ancestor of modern humans, so we have to be careful." Yet Owen Lovejoy chair of Anthropology at Kent Stateboldly says, "We're going to have to rewrite the textbooks."(USA TodayBut why? Dr. White says, Ardi's species could be the ancestor of Lucy, which could be the ancestor of humans ... Without additional fossil evidence, however, connecting the individual or dots is hazardous. (UCB news release 10/1/09 Lovejoy persists, this reverses the common wisdom of human origins. White boldly contradicts, “This is not that common ancestor but it’s the closest we have ever been able to come.”

Last Updated on Friday, January 15 2010 21:58
Read more...
 
<< Start < Prev 1 2 Next > End >>

JPAGE_CURRENT_OF_TOTAL

AddThis

Technogenics

Featured Products

ad

ad

About This Site

Since the 1960's, Dr. Sharp has dedicated his life to understanding and penetration key problems facing the modern Christian society. Read more

Current Visitors

We have 4 guests online