Go to: => TOP Page; ROAD MAP; Search Page; What's New? Page; Emmaus Ministries Page
DISCLAIMER: Trying to get an amendment to the Constitution is tricky business. Even with a good amendment, it could lead to unexpected consequences, such as a constitutional convention, for which America is not prepared. Or, at least, the Biblical folks are not prepared. The convention could be high-jacked by globalists, etc.
So my advocacy of certain amendments is not to charge ahead to get them implemented, but to get discussion going among Judeo-Christians about what a Biblical government would look like should we ever have the chance to get one again.
We will -- if we get intelligently obedient to God.
(Note: an addition regarding the Islam situation has been added below.) See how the Dutch are putting themselves in a noose, and other recent comments in Europe.
Our constitution was written above all to ensure open and honest discussion and administration (coercion, enforcement) of public policy. Legislated public policy always involves coercion.
Danger thus arises because everything government does is done, as it were, at gun point. As George Washington stated, "Government is not eloquence, it is not reason, it is force." We make laws to enforce or forbid something. We usually do not see the gun because we agree with the laws. But if, for example, you should absent your child from public school attendance, you will find a truant officer at your door, not usually at first with gun drawn (there are cases of such), but there will be a gun (enforcement) implied even though unseen in the wings.
Government is about coercive control. Under Godly government, the kind for which our Constitution was written, coercion is there only to protect and administer our God-given freedom, and thus to prevent the abuse of freedom. Biblical government is about freedom, and control is administered only to protect that freedom, not to constrict it. But Biblical freedom is ordered freedom, ordered by the law and grace of God (and thus not self-destructive).
Administering that kind of freedom requires open and honest discussion of all public policy matters. The separation of powers is instituted to keep illegitimate coercion from influencing the debate. But wrongful influence can come from ways other than overt coercion, such by as deception and mind-control.
Government focuses on control -- and so do occult (meaning 'hidden') practices. There is a large underworld of occult societies in various stages of cooperation and/or conflict, all through probably every culture. Magic is mostly a side-show for the occult. The real aim is control -- the real aim of magic.
That control is needed because a Godless world dissolves into chaos. The only order available is that imposed by the strong man, so coercive control is compulsive in a Godless world. Believers in the spiritual occult often try to tap into the "forces of the universe" to bring control into their own hands.
Persons who are focused on control (rather than truth and freedom) as a way of life will tend to gravitate toward government because it is the most powerful human center for control. But for the control-minded, truth is merely another tool for them to use for their purposes. They are not interested in a democratic republic under God, and will subvert it at every opportunity. History is chock full of examples in probably every known government.
Politics is, at its very foundations, a religious arena, the key question being, "Who is God? Who decides the difference between right and wrong? Who is the ultimate judge?" It will, in the end, be either Jesus or civil government. Civil government is winning handily in the West because we cowardly and inept Judeo-Christian folks have been run from the public arena.
Holding membership in a secret (occult) society is effectively breaking covenant with one's fellow citizens. It is not "living in the light". It makes no sense for people to have laws made for them by persons who are not living in that kind of open relationship. If truth is the basis for good government, then membership in secret societies cuts right at the heart of that principle.
Furthermore, though, by its very nature, it is difficult to discern precisely what happens in a secret society, the available information is reasonably consistent among researchers and among those who have come out of the occult.
Vows are often taken which override and conflict with reasonable governmental responsibilities in a free society. Vows are allegedly taken, among the Masons, for example, to protect each other from prosecution. At the beginners level, these vows may exclude murder and treason, but at the higher levels, these vows do not exclude murder, treason, or anything else. So anyone in that secret society being prosecuted will be protected by other government representatives of that secret order. That secret collusion is one reason why government officials are so hard to convict of serious crime, and why government agencies get away with crimes against their citizens regularly. That, some say, is why Clinton could never be found guilty of serious charges. The sexual nonsense was probably just a sideshow to distract from far worse crimes such as treasonously selling military secrets to the Chinese.
Persons who take such vows have a hidden earthly allegiance overriding their allegiance to the people of their own country. That is treason. Their oaths to defend and protect the Constitution of America are meaningless. They will do so only when it suits their personal and secret society interests.
How, then, can one protect government processes from persons involved in the occult, which, by definition, operates with principles contrary to a Biblical government? Biblical folks are commanded to live in the light, to allow themselves to be judged openly by truth, and to judge others only on that basis. We are not allowed to fudge the truth to protect our own interests. Truth is to be sought -- at any cost to ourselves. Without those high standards, freedom has no hope of surviving.
The following is offered as a first attempt to frame a constitutional amendment for that purpose. The basic principle is protection for open, honest, and public discussion of all public policy issues. "You can help make coercive rules for our people only if you are willing to live in the light with them." It would treat membership in a secret society the same as allegiance to a foreign power. This would include, naturally, those with allegiance to a philosophy or religion of a nature contrary to the Biblical principles of the American government.
No person of the following description shall be eligible in the federal [could be state or local] government to engage in the enforcement of law over other citizens, that is, to hold office, to function in law enforcement or in the military, or to vote on matters of legislation or the election of officials:
any person who maintains membership in a secret society, or who takes
an oath to protect himself or another person from due process of law;
any person who espouses a philosophy or religion which undermines the
Biblical foundations of the American Constitution, that is, the creation of an open
level field of discussion in which all views are welcome, but in which the aim is to
find the real truth of the question at issue;
any person who does not agree to the separation of powers inherent to a limited
government and a free people;
any person who does not agree to participate in the American experiment
in self-government under God;
any person who does not understand and assent to the Biblical form of political freedom,
and its moral and spiritual foundations.
Because, in a democratic republic, voters are the primary officers of the state, the amendment would exclude such members from voting in federal elections on the grounds that they are violating the basic conditions for participating in governing a free society.
It will be argued that most secret societies are harmless. The Masons (as was said to me by a parishioner of my church in East Haddam, Connecticut, many years ago), are just having fun, and they do a lot of good things. Why spoil their having a good time?
That skirts the issue -- living in the light and covenant breaking. The problem is that, being secret, there is no way to verify their claims of innocence. Darkness is a breeding ground for evils which cannot stand the light of day.
Forbidding all secret societies resolves, by ignoring, the otherwise insoluble problem of discerning who is and who is not telling the truth. Just as Christians should never allow into communion those who are members of a secret society, so also the same principle should apply to civil government. Every oath of office should include such a public renunciation, with severe penalties for lying under oath.
Secret societies must not be legally forbidden to exist. People should be free to join any society they choose, unless openly subversive. But they and their members must be forbidden from participating in law making and enforcing, the control-mechanisms of society.
Resistance to such an amendment will be fierce, and, as suggested above, not to be pushed until Judeo-Christians are ready for the battle.
It would be tempting for believers to exclude non-believers from the political covenant. But we Christians need an honest opposition, a loyal opposition, to keep us honest. When we allow no such opposition, we tend to become self-satisfied and create our own version of tyranny. So long as any person can show a commitment to open, honest discussion of the issues, and a commitment to honoring opposition to his own views, that person should be welcome into the political covenant.
That principle is not just a nice idea, it is essential for Christians in their reaching out to others. It puts us on the line to show others why Jesus has a rightful claim to being Lord of all, and why freedom can be had only under Him. And that is right where we need to be. If we cannot make that case truthfully and gracefully, we lose our claim to be representing the only One who combines government with truth and freedom.
Islam also figures in this amendment.
As the Pope has so eloquently pointed out, Islam is not bound by reason because their theology says that God does not bind Himself by either reason or morality. Muslims who say such things ought to be gracefully reminded that they are blaspheming God, attributing to Him irrational and criminal qualities.
NOTE: Do not argue about Allah, which is their word for God, just argue with what they believe and attribute to God. Challenge them, not Allah. Ask how they can attribute love to God when they deny that He binds Himself either to logic or justice. Such qualities would make God entirely untrustworthy in any personal relationship, and so could not logically be called loving toward His creatures.
That makes Muslims, who believe in such a deity, untrustworthy of participation in public affairs -- amply demonstrated by Muslim behavior all over the world. They are incapable of honest public discussion to the degree that they believe God to be arbitrary and tyrannical, and to the degree that they attribute to God (and therefore justify for themselves) criminal behavior. That is blasphemy, not honest theology or worship. And it is therefore also betrayal of the public trust, making them unworthy of participation in deciding or enforcing public affairs (laws, policy, etc.).
So the amendment restricts persons from voting or holding office who do not affirm the necessity of honest, candid public debate on public policy issues, and who do not foreswear allegiance to any authority, civil or religious, which undermines such public discussion, i.e., who will not affirm allegiance to the principles of the American Declaration of Independence and Constitution as originally written.
America is not a democracy, America is a democratic republic under God, not just any old God, but specifically the God who has bothered to reveal Himself over time, reasonably, and with relevance to every possible human situation -- the God who challenges us to test Him for His honesty and faithfulness (see Malachi 3:10). That is honest love and relationship. That is the God of the Bible.
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *