Shoulder To Shoulder #1299 -- 7/11/22 ---- "Seeking The Ancient Paths (Pt 7 -- Roadmap For A Nation, B)"
Posted by: rtolliver49 <rtolliver49@...>
SHOULDER TO SHOULDER is a weekly letter of encouragement Bob has written since 1997, covering many topics selected to
motivate people to be strong students of the Word and courageous witnesses of Jesus Christ. It is a personal letter of
encouragement to you, written solely to help "lift up hands that hang down".
"The world will not be destroyed by those who do evil, but by those who watch them without doing anything." -- Albert Einstein
“There is a common, worldly kind of Christianity in this day, which many have, and think they have -- a cheap Christianity which offends nobody,
and requires no sacrifice, which costs nothing, -- and is worth nothing.” – J. C. Ryle
Shoulder To Shoulder #1299 -- 7/11/22
Title: "Seeking The Ancient Paths (Pt 7 -- Roadmap For A Nation, B)"
My Dear Friend and Pilgrim Partner:
Greetings today from a very hot Yuma, AZ! Jo Ann and I both had doctors' appointments this week, so we made the 400 mile trek down from the cool White Mountains and Greer to the incredibly hot Sonoran Desert. The high Sunday in Greer was 81, and the high Monday in Yuma was 115. Needless to say, even though we are truly enjoying four days is mostly relaxing, we are already looking forward to being back in the mountains by Friday evening.
We found our home to still be intact, with only routine tasks to be undertaken. This time last year everytime we took a trip to Yuma, we had major projects before us as we tried to get settled in to our new residence.
My doctor's appointment -- for consultation regarding a major blood work up a month ago -- was not just routine. It was actually a far better report that alleviated some potential concerns. The doctor was very happy over more weight loss, stable kidney function, lower cholesterol readings, great liver function, and generally better report each time for the past two years. There was nothing of significant concern anymore; all numbers were "better than average" for someone my age. I asked him if that meant I was getting younger, and he said it appears so. Neither of us really believe it, though.
Jo Ann's consultation was most encouraging. Going to a hematologist is always a little disconcerting. After looking at her medical records, he was almost completely certain there are no issues, but in order to "satisfy protocol" ordered a blood test that he will examine in the next several weeks. So, we're both happy campers set to enjoy the last couple of days we have in Yuma before returning to Greer.
A number of people have asked me to go into more detail regarding the development of the Judeo-Christian roots of our U.S. Constitution and form of government. This is a very busy time just now as we juggle those medical appointments and also try to arrange for a substantial amount of funds to be sent to several of our ministry friends in Ukraine, so in order to expedite everything, I'm going to garner some information from some earlier writings I have done on the subject. I hope you won't mind. I'll certainly be adding some new information to that as well.
So, let's get to it, right after you peruse . . . .
QUOTES FOR THE WEEK:
"When the French monarch proposed the persecution of the Christians in his dominion, an old statesman and warrior said to him, ‘Sire, the Word of God is an anvil that has worn out many hammers.’ So the hammers of infidels have been pecking away at this book for ages, but the hammers are worn out, and the anvil still endures. If this book had not been the book of God, men would have destroyed it long ago. Emperors and popes, kings and priests, princes and rulers have all tried their hand at it; they die and the book still lives." -- H.L. Hastings, The Great Controversy between God and Man, its Origin, Progress, and End (1858)
> "If we choose to sin, we choose to suffer." -- Jack Wellman
> "
When the righteous increase, the people rejoice, but when the wicked rule, the people groan." -- King Solomon (Prov 29:2).> "You cannot break God’s moral laws without them breaking you, and it doesn’t matter if it relates to one person or an entire nation. If we choose to sin, we choose to suffer, . . . and since God is sovereign, He will hold each nation and individual responsible." -- Jack Wellman
> "Here is a law which is above the King and which even he must not break. This reaffirmation of a supreme law and its expression in a general charter is the great work of Magna Carta; and this alone justifies the respect in which men have held it." -- Sir Winston Churchill
> "The Bible has been the Magna Carta of the poor and of the oppressed." -- Thomas Huxley
> "[Magna Carta is] the Bible of the English Constitution." -- William Pitt (the elder) (Prime Minister of England, 1766-1768)
> " “The fundamentals of the constitution of this province are stipulated in the Charter [Magna Carta],” -- John Adams
> "The church therefore was central to the production, preservation and proclamation of the Magna Carta. The cathedrals were like a beacon from which the light of the charter shone around the country, thus beginning the process by which it became central to national life.” --David Carpenter (Kings College Professor of Medieval History)
> "Magna Carta assumes that the nation’s laws and rulers should be subject to God’s law. The Bible teaches there is a law written on the heart (Romans 2:15) – the conscience – which acts as a restraint on human conduct, though it cannot save and is subject to the influence of sin." -- Christian Institute, Wilberforce House, UK (June, 2015)
> "A failure to acknowledge the Christian theological context within which the Magna Carta arose is to miss out on an understanding of some of the most important roots of our political and intellectual heritage." -- Thomas Andrew (Researcher for http://www.theosthinktank.co.uk)
> The Anvil of God's Word
“Last eve I paused beside the blacksmith’s door,
And heard the anvil ring the vesper chime;
Then looking in, I saw upon the floor,
Old hammers, worn with beating years of time.
“‘How many anvils have you had,’ said I,
‘To wear and batter all these hammers so?’
‘Just one,’ said he, and then with twinkling eye,
‘The anvil wears the hammers out, you know.’
“And so, I thought, the Anvil of God’s Word
For ages skeptic blows have beat upon;
Yet, though the noise of falling blows was heard,
The Anvil is unharmed, the hammers gone.”
—attributed to John Clifford
EARLIEST CHRISTIAN INFLUENCE ON OUR FOUNDING DOCUMENTS:
While in my previous letter I didn't go into as much detail as I would have liked, I did try to lay out something of a chronology of how the most ancient Sumerian law codes from the earliest known codes (the codex of King Urukagina, cir 2300 B.C., and the Codex of Ur-Nammu king of Ur ,cir 2050 B.C., up to and including Roman law created a trail -- or "path", if you please -- of law and politic based on a anti-god or non-god philosophy of governance. It apparently reached one of its highest and most visible profiles under the rule of the tyrant, Nimrod, grandson to the Noah of the Bible. (I am currently doing some in-depth research of ancient Babylon itself. Hopefully I will be able to share some insight from that research in my next letter -- because, as one writer indicated, Babylon makes up the two book-ends of Bible prophecy.
It seems to be clear that Babylon plays an important role not only to the development of human governance soon after the flood (Gen 11), but also in future developments of global governance somewhere in the future (Rev 17-18). So, it's important that we examine that particular "ancient path" alternative as part of this series. So, until then, though, . . .
In an attempt to validate the undeniable influence of Judeo-Christian thought on the founding of our country, let's do a few quick thumbnails of some of those early British pioneers of righteous government. The purpose of this letter is not necessarily to provide the history of Christianity in England, but rather to show how the message of the Gospel was so influential in the development of our form of government.
Almost everyone agrees that our form of government, and our U.S. Constitution were based, not on a secular non-ethical value system, but instead to a great extent on the Magna Carta of 1215 CE, the chief legal document of governance for Great Britain. Those historians who are intellectually honest also agree that our founding documents have been deeply ingrained with principles of Judeo-Christian thought as found in the Bible, just as the Magna Carta was also influenced -- perhaps to a lesser degree -- by those same Judeo Christian principles.
But, how did it get from the Ten Commandments and the teachings of Jesus to our Declaration of Independence, our Constitution, and our current form of government.? In an article entitled, "Influence of the Church on Civil Law" the Catholic Encyclopedia states, . . .
"Christianity is essentially an ethical religion; and, although its moral principles were meant directly for the elevation of the individual, still they could not fail to exercise a powerful influence on such a public institution as law, the crystallized rule of human conduct. The law of Rome escaped this influence to a large extent, because much of it was compiled before Christianity was recognized by the public authorities. But the leges barbarorum were more completely interpenetrated, as it were, by Christian influences; they received their definite form only after the several nations had submitted to the gentle yoke of Christ."
There is an exceptional article on the Creation Ministries International website that powerfully makes the point that it is virtually impossible to have good civil government without the influence of Judeo-Christian thought. I commend it to your consideration -- https://creation.com/the-christian-foundations-of-the-rule-of-law-in-the-west-a-legacy-of-liberty-and-resistance-against-tyranny. In other words, from the earliest days of Christianity, the Judeo-Christian teachings of the Bible had extraordinary influence not only on society in general, but especially on both those who ruled over lands and kingdoms, and those who created codes of law and civil conduct. For example, . . .
THE FIRST MISSIONARY -- WHO?
+ The First Missionary: Who was the very first person to bring the Gospel to the land from which our own founding documents and form of government ultimately developed? Have you ever wondered about that? If our Constitution was so greatly influenced by the Magna Carta, then what was it that influenced the Magna Carta in such a profound way? Who first brought the idea to the land where those values incubated and were born?
Theories and legends about who first brought the Gospel to Britain swirl around like a northern winter snowstorm, and there is simply no way to know for certain. Some think that Paul went there on his trip to Spain, but there is no evidence to factually substantiate that. Geoffrey of Monmouth, who was notorious for filling in blank spots and turning vague memories into what appeared to be facts, claimed that it was the Celts who were descendants of Indo-European tribes from Troy. Others claim that it was Joseph of Aramathea, who was really James, the half-brother of Jesus in disguise. (You can find some interesting reading about these theories at http://www.celticchristianity.infinitesoulutions.com/First_Britain_Christianity.html .)
Another theory is that after going to Egypt, Cyrene, Africa, Mauritania, and Libya, Simon Zelotus (Simon the Zealot) then went to Britain and was crucified and buried there. Numerous writers claim he went there, but doubt that he was martyred there. All in all, . . . and there are other Apostles who are said to have gone to Britain . . . there is strong indication that Britain was quickly saturated with the Gospel and the Church there grew rapidly.
Of one thing we can be pretty certain, and it is that it happened very early in the spread of the Gospel, and most likely involved Christians who had first heard the Gospel from believers in Rome. The Church in Rome had grown exponentially under Paul and Peter, due to a large extent to the increased persecution that not only scattered Christians, but also gave them a sense of urgency to share the Gospel and carry out Christ's Commission (Mt 28:18-20) while there was still time. The overwhelming evidence affirms that Britain was in all likelihood the very first European country outside the Mediterranean to receive the gospel. The British historian Gildas (AD 516-570) -- we'll get to him momentarily, -- wrote that Christianity was introduced into Britain in AD 38, during the last year of the reign of Tiberius Caesar (63-69 A.D.).
Tertullian in the Second Century A.D. wrote that areas of Britain that had never been impacted by Roman armies had heard the Gospel and embraced Christianity. That was also the case for the outlying areas of Spain and parts of Gaul (France). The church historian Eusebius (AD 265-340) indicated that unnamed Apostles themselves went to Britain. He wrote, . . .
“The Apostles passed beyond the ocean to the isles called the Britannic Isles.”
So, while we won't know this side of heaven who first shared the Gospel in Britain, we can thank whoever it was, because that person became the fountainhead that began to flow through the lives of others for over 1,000 years, establishing values and faith the set the stage for the eventual writing of the Magna Carta. Thus, the Judeo-Christian teachings of the Bible and the Magna Carta become the foundation for our own Constitution.
Now, about . . .THE FIRST CHRISTIAN KING -- WHO?
+ Gildas the Monk -- We have been told for decades that the Gospel had spread throughout the entire Roman Empire by the end of the First Century. Medieval British historian Gildas, the Monk, (516-570 CE) claimed that the message of the Gospel had reached northern Britannia by 38 CE.
Gildas founded a monastery in Brittany, St. Gildas de Rhuys. Both a theologian, historian, and political thinker, his manuscript, The Overthrow and Conquest of Britain (De excidio et conquestu Britanniae) , is actually one of the few historical sources of the country’s post-Roman history. Few other histories cover the period of First through Sixth Century British history as does his.
The reliability of his historical records is strengthened by the fact that, while very little is known about his personal life, many canonical and historical writings by others refer to his accounts of historical events. So, we can be pretty certain that his claim of Christianity coming by 38 CE is reliably accurate.
One o the European kings to embrace Christianity was . . .
+ Lucius, King of Briton (c. 156 A.D.) -- How, then, did Britain first hear about Jesus and the Christian faith less than 100 years after His resurrection? Historians are not certain, but England's first church historian, the Venerable Bede reports in his History of the English Church and People that, when Marcus Antoninus was Roman emperor, the British king Lucius (also known by his full name, Lles map Coel) wrote to Pope Eleutherus in Rome asking to know about the Christian faith. Historians debate the actual date because the earliest possible date Eleutherus could have become pope was 171 A.D. He is mentioned in some detail in the Liber Pontificalis, a book of biographies from St. Peter to the 15th Century.
According to Alan Smith and his 1979 book, Lucius of Britain: Alleged King and Church Founder, the story became widespread after it was repeated in the 8th century by Bede, who added the detail that after Eleutherius granted Lucius' request, the Britons followed their king in conversion and maintained the Christian faith until the Diocletianic Persecution of 303. Almost all legends and historical accounts identify Lucius as the very first European king to become a Christian.
Bede wrote, . . .
"This pious request was quickly granted, and the Britons received the Faith and held it peacefully in all its purity and fullness until the time of the Emperor Diocletian."
Diocletian was Rome's 33rd Emperor and he unleashed horrendous persecution of Christians in 303 A.D., most of which was in eastern Europe where Christianity was the strongest. But, the northwest of Europe was not spared either.
Later writers expanded the story, giving accounts of actual missionary activity under Lucius and attributing to him the foundation of certain churches.Bede also wrote that Lucius had great success in propagating Christianity throughout southwestern Britain. Throughout his reign, missionaries converted old pagan temples to churches and cathedrals and dioceses were established ---- York became the center for Albany and Deira, London became the center for Loegria and Cornwall, and the City of Legions was the center for Kambria. Lucius gave lands to the church and helped convert the people. In fact, his "evangelizing" efforts were so significant that some writers believe Lucius became a missionary himself and may have traveled as far as Switzerland to preach to the Grissons.
In writing about Lucius, Felicity Heal in her What can King Lucius do for you? The Reformation and the Early British Church, said, . . .
". . . for centuries the story of this 'first Christian king' was widely believed, especially in Britain, where it was considered an accurate account of Christianity among the early Britons. During the English Reformation, the Lucius story was used in polemics by both Catholics and Protestants; Catholics considered it evidence of papal supremacy from a very early date, while Protestants used it to bolster claims of the primacy of a British national church founded by the crown."
So, whatever else we can conclude, we can at least say that the Gospel had come to northern Europe by 38 CE just four or five years following the Resurrection of Christ, that Lucius, "the king of Britons" embraced Christian teachings as opposed to pagan worship, and that he enthusiastically promoted Christianity with great intensity throughout his realm of influence. Clearly the teachings of Christianity had serious impact on the populace and those teachings greatly influenced the authority and reign of Lucius, King of Briton until his death in 180 CE.
Continuing on, the next law code we look at is . . .
+ St. Patrick's Celtic 'Senchus Mor' Laws (c.438 AD) -- This law code was a collection of various sets of law, the most significant of which were the Senchus Mor and the Book of Acaill. According to the ancient introduction to the Senchus Mor, it was a collection of at least 47 separate legal tracts compiled into a single group of pagan laws. St. Patrick actually requested to the High King of Ireland in 438 CE.to create a law code of their own, compatible to Christian teachings and values. Many of those early codes "smelled to high heaven" of pagan practices.
In response, the High King, Laegaire (Laery) appointed a committee of "nine learned and eminent persons", including St. Patrick and himself. Others included Core, Dairi the Hardy, Benen, Cirnech the just, Rossa, Dubhthach, and Fergus with science. The group consisted of three kings, three bishops, and three professors of literature, poetry, and law. They became known as "the nine pillars of the Senchus Mor."
One of the primary contributors from the academic field was Dubthach who was to give a historical retrospect, exhibiting, "..all the judgments of true nature which the Holy Ghost had spoken from the first occupation of this island down to the reception of the faith. What did not clash with the word of God in the written law and in the New Testament and with the consciences of believers was confirmed in the laws of Brehons by Patrick and by the ecclesiastics and chieftains of Ireland."
After three years of research, debate, and revision, they produced a new code, from which everything that clashed with the doctrines of Christianity was carefully excluded. The end result was the Senchus Mor. The current existing manuscript copies (the original has been long gone) consist of the original text, an introduction to the text, commentaries on the text, and an explanation of certain words and phrases found in the text.
This set of laws centered around four major areas ---- the law of fosterage, the laws of free and base tenants, the law of social relationships, and the binding of all laws by verbal contracts. Its compilation took place during the era of Theodosius II, and it was completed under St. Patrick's supervision. Once again, this was one of the early sources the authors of the Magna Carta used in creating that powerful document that served as a template for our own Constitution. As you can see there is little doubt as to the significance of Judeo-Christian biblical influence on this document.
Progressively later by some 150 years, we come across the . . .
+
Aldeberge, Queen of Kent (539 – c. 612 CE) -- The native Britons had converted to Christianity under Roman rule. The Anglo-Saxon invasions had isolated the British church from European Christianity for centuries. Not only did the church in Rome not have any authority in Britain, but neither did Rome have any real knowledge about the British church, nor any divisions or controversies in its customs. King Æthelberht, however, most certainly knew about the Roman church since his Frankish wife, Bertha, who had brought a bishop, Liudhard, with her across the Channel to Britain.Bertha or Aldeberge (539 – c. 612 CE), the daughter of Charibert, king of Paris, was the Queen of Kent whose influence led to the introduction of Christianity to Anglo-Saxon England. She was the daughter of Charibert I, Merovingian King of Paris. When she married King Æthelberht of Kent, he was a godless pagan. But, she brought her chaplain, Liudhard, with her to England. One of her more significant acts as queen was that she restored a Christian church in Canterbury dating from Roman times, and dedicated it to Saint Martin of Tours. Even the popularity of St. Augustine of Canterbury, whose mission was sent by Pope Gregory I to preach the Gospel in England in 596, was due to the influence of Bertha. Had it not been for her influence, the law codes of
Æthelberht of Kent might have been very different, and likely totally void of Christian influence.That being said, then it is appropriate to consider her persuasive influence on the . . .
+ Laws of Æthelberht of Kent (c.602 AD) -- Æthelberht (c. 550 – 24 February 616 CE) was the King of Kent from about 589 CE. until his death. He was the very first openly Christian king of Kent. The code is the first piece of English law and also the earliest datable work that was composed in English. It is in a single manuscript and is part of a compilation of laws and documents in Latin and Old English made at Rochester. That compilation was carried out five hundred years after Æthelberht’s death, under the episcopate of Bishop Ernulf, who reigned between 1115 and 1124 CE).
Called Textus Roffensis (‘The Rochester Book’), the manuscript demonstrates the importance of ancient English precedent to the Norman conquerors of England. Its contents range in date from the early 7th century to the coronation charter of King Henry I, who reigned between 1100 and1135 CE).
It preserves the only manuscript copy of many texts written in English, including three Kentish law codes from before 725, records of serfs, and two items from the 10th century: the will of a layman, Byrhtric, and his wife, Ælfswith, and an English account of a property dispute precipitated by the theft of a title-deed.
Bede, in his Ecclesiastical History, stated that King Æthelberht had made a law-code similar to that of the Romans, but established on Christian teachings. It was written in English. This is usually interpreted to mean that Æthelberht, to whom Pope Gregory had held up the model of the Emperor Constantine (306 - 337CE), codified existing customary law to display his new identity as a Christian monarch.
There is no known record as to when Æthelberht actually became a Christian, but it was most likely before 601, because that was the year that Gregory wrote to him identifying as a Christian king. An old tradition indicates that it was in the summer of the year that Augustine arrived. He was tolerant of St. Augustine and other missionaries sent by Pope Gregory I the Great in 597 CE, and even gave them a place to live at Canterbury. Æthelberht was apparently not hesitant about sharing his conversion because it was through his influence that Sæberht, king of Essex, also was converted. In fact, Æthelberht, his wife, and his daughter were all later canonized for their roles in establishing Christianity among the Anglo-Saxons.
In the kingdoms of early England, uniquely in post-Roman Western Europe, law was not committed to writing in Latin, but in the vernacular of Old English. The laws
Æthelberht issued remain today as the very first code of Anglo-Saxon laws that is still in existence and on display . The code, incidentally, established the legal position of the clergy, and also instituted many secular regulations.Few historians were as thorough in identifying the influence of Christianity on these kings and others as was the . . .
+ Venerable Bede ( 673-735 AD) -- When I first learned if "The Venerable Bede" during my high school Medieval Literature class, I had no idea Bede was a monk. Bede was so articulate and thorough in his historical writings that he was recognized as "The Father of English History". One German writer called him "The Father of all the Middle Ages". In his Introduction to The Age of Bede, D.H. Farmer stated that Bede could "bring to lie...the rich and contrasting age" that was 8th Century England better than any other figure in Anglo-Saxon England.
An Anglo-Saxon theologian, historian, and chronologist. St. Bede is best known for his classic, the Ecclesiastical History of the English People (Historia ecclesiastica gentis Anglorum),. To a large extent, this writing was a critical influence in the history of the Ango-Saxon tribes' conversion to Christianity. Some would compare Bede's reputation in his day to that of Billy Graham in ours, though very different in terms of occupation. Bede's influence and reputation were due mainly to his scriptural commentaries and became valuable resources not only for theological studies, but also in history, philosophy, and law. Copies of his writings were common fin many of the monastic libraries of western Europe.
While Bede was a theologian and historian, he was certainly not a person directly involved in royalty and legal decrees, his high view of classic history and religion that could be seen in his writings lent great influence on those who did hold positions in governing, current kings and those who followed, influenced by his insights. Therefore, Bede had incredible influence in helping shape the legal, moral, and spiritual content of numerous legal codes written after his classical Ecclesiastical History of the English People and other writings.
Among others, Bede listed King Lucias (see above) in the Ecclesiastical History of the English People, as the third king to sovereignly rule over other Anglo-Saxon kingdoms. He is called a bretwalda, or "Britain-ruler" in the late ninth century Anglo-Saxon Chronicle and Bede went out of his way to identify Lucias as the first English king to convert to Christianity, and also the first Saxon king in England to be baptized, by St. Augustine of Canterbury. His rule was clearly carried out, as were his laws, under the strong influence of Christianity.
While Bede wrote no law codes and was not a king, yet his influence on all levels of culture -- including law -- is undeniable. As a man of influence, Bede clearly had influence on one of his contemporaries and what he produced, the . . .
+ Laws of Christian King Ine of Wessex (c.694 AD) -- In a 2014 blog on the "Intriguing History" website, entitled "The First Anglo-Saxon Laws", the following statement sums up something of the Christian influence that still impacts modern cultures and forms of government. The statement reads, . . .
"The most ancient of assemblies, the House of Commons, represents assemblies far older, back to the courts of Anglo Saxon England. England, as we know it today, a land made up of units of land called shires, where fair laws allow for the administration of a democratic government and a judicial system in which your peers decide your fate, has it’s roots in the Anglo Saxon. The first Anglo Saxon laws would give England the roots of the law of the land as we know it today."
Following the former king, Caedwalla, a cousin who was a powerful military leader, the kingdom broke apart following his abdication of the throne, and his return to Rome. This resulted in each territory being ruled by underlings. King Ine was likely one of those kings, but he soon demonstrated his leadership and power and brought the territories back together into one rule. He was king of Wessex from 688 A.D. to 726 A.D.and developed it into a true kingdom by introducing his code of laws, the first of its kind. He strengthened the position of the Church in Wessex. His long reign was the most successful and powerful of any West Saxon king until Alfred the Great (see below).
During the forty years of his reign, King Ine clearly had a change of heart as he moved from his initial position of governance by war and confrontation to that of creating a series of laws that gave the ordinary man and woman more stability and confidence in their lives. Due to those laws, the kingdom of Wessex not only became more prosperous and powerful, but the Christian church became an integral part of Wessex.
King Ine's code of laws were so effective that it became an important source for the structure of early English society. The laws initiated great honor and respect for the Church, prohibited slaves from working on Sundays, and the payment of church dues is enforced. The status of Welsh subjects was fixed, by contemporary standards, but in very lenient terms.Ine's laws were later preserved as an appendix to Alfred the Great's laws (see below) and dealt mainly with judicial procedures, listing the punishments to be inflicted for various offenses.
To make the point, consider this statement found in the law code itself: -- "I have taken counsel concerning the welfare of our souls and the state of our realm, in order that just laws and just royal laws should be established and assured to all our people, and so that no alderman or subject of ours should henceforth pervert these our dooms." "Dooms" was a word used to describe just punishment for breaking one of the laws. Every law had a consequence (a "doom") when broken.
Under King Ine and his law codes, a turbulent and often violent society had steadily changed into one that longed for order, peace, and a stable rule. It was at this point that, "King Ines Anglo Saxon law codes and Christianity came together at this time to provide just that."
As law codes continued to develop, it seems that in most cases each succeeding law code was more refined. Such was the case of the . . .
+ Laws of Christian King Offa of Mercia --
Offa came to the throne after a period of civil war following the assassination of King Offa came to the throne after a period of civil war following the assassination of Æthelbald. Offa was one of the most powerful and also ruthless kings in early Anglo-Saxon England, and most people saw him to be second only to King Alfred. A contemporary to Charlemagne, he ruled Mercia from 757 A.D. to 796 A.D. and led southern England into the highest level of political unification it had experienced up to that point.One historian of Medieval literature said this about Offa because, after all, he broke the mold of being a righteous and religious king set to unify by law rather than by brute force. He wrote, "Offa was driven by a lust for power, not a vision of English unity; and what he left was a reputation, not a legacy."
We basically know nothing of the laws issued in his name because no details of them have survived. There is no known copy to exist. The only way we know about them is because of Alfred the Great's mention of them in the preface to his own law code. He explained his including by saying he found them and those of Ine of Wessex and Æthelberht of Kent to be "most just". So, for that reason only I feel it is significant to include his law codes, even though totally ignorant of their tone or content. It is on the basis of the witness of Alfred the Great that King Offa is known as a law giver.
And that brings us to the . . .
THE MOST COMPREHENSIVE LAW CODE -- WHICH?
+ Law-code of Alfred the Great --The law-code of King Alfred the Great (871 A.D. -899 A.D.) is one of the largest and most ambitious legislative enactments to survive from Anglo-Saxon England. It came to be known as sea domboc (the law or judgement book) and was commonly called the "Doom Book". The title Doom Book (originally dom-boc or dom-boke) comes from dōm (pronounced "dome") which is the Anglo-Saxon word meaning judgment or law. The title comes from Alfred's own admonishment to, "Doom [judge] very evenly! Do not doom one doom to the rich; another to the poor! Nor doom one doom to your friend; another to your foe!"
More than any other law code, Alfred's code represents the Mosaic Law, which says "You shall do no injustice in judgment! You shall not be partial to the poor; nor defer to the great! But you are to judge your neighbour fairly!" (Lev 19:15), better than any code written until that time. As noted in my last letter, King Alfred used ideas and policies from the earlier laws and codes mentioned above, ultimately creating what subsequently became the "gold standard" of laws for many of Alfred's Tenth-Century successors. And, as I also mentioned earlier, in addition to the above codes, he prefixed the Ten Commandments of Moses and incorporated rules of life from the Mosaic Code and the Christian code of ethics.
Probably no researcher documented this work that incorporated the law codes from those Christian Saxon kingdoms and compiled them into his Doom Book than Christian theologian F. N. Lee. After detailing how Alfred incorporated the principles of the Mosaic law into his Code, and how it became the foundation for the Common Law. Dr Michael Treschow, UBC Faculty of Creative and Critical Studies, stated that the last section of the Prologue not only describes "a tradition of Christian law from which the law code draws but also it grounds secular law upon Scripture, especially upon the principle of mercy".
Alfred the Great's Law Code, incorporating the Mosaic Law, thus became the primary legal document to which the troubled barons and Archbishop of Canterbury looked as they confronted the tyrannical dictatorship of King John (1166 A.D. – 1216 A.D.). Ruling as King of England from 1199 A.D. until his death in 1216 A.D., John lost the Duchy of Normandy and most of his other French lands to King Philip II of France. This led to the collapse of the Angevin Empire and sparked the subsequent growth in power of the French Capetian dynasty during the 13th century.]
Historian William Federer traced the development of our Constitution back through the centuries in illustrating how those Judeo-Christian principles influenced cultures and nations as key leaders chose to implement them into their respective reigns. I wrote about this several years ago when I first discovered, to my amazement, that the seed-bed of our Constitution could be traced back not just to the teachings of scripture, but also to royal documents decreed by kings and princes as far back as the Ninth Century. It happened as one document became the framework for a succeeding document which, in turn, contributed to the development of the next. Federer connects the dots all the way from a very young King Alfred in 878 A.D. to the development and enactment of the Magna Carta.
Here's the chronology of law codes and royal , according to William Federer in an article he posted on June 22, 2020, to which Alfred the Great, credited with beginning the University of Oxford, went as he established his law code. He consulted . . .
– the conversion of Lucius King of Britons (c.156 AD) who, “prayed and entreated … he might be made a Christian”;
– St. Patrick’s Celtic “Senchus Mor” Laws (c.438 AD);
– Laws of Æthelberht of Kent (c.602 AD), the first Saxon king in England to be baptized, by St. Augustine of Canterbury;
– Laws of Christian King Ine of Wessex (c.694 AD), and
– Laws of Christian King Offa of Mercia (c.755 AD).
King Alfred actually included the Ten Commandments passage of the Book of Exodus, Christ's Sermon on the Mount, and the Book of the Acts of the Apostles in the preface of his Law Code -- something unheard of these days. Alfred wrote, . . .
“These are judgments which Almighty God Himself spoke to Moses and commanded him to keep. Now, since the Lord’s only begotten Son our God and healing Christ has come to Middle Earth [the Mediterranean World] He said that He did not come to break nor to forbid these commandments but to approve them well, and to teach them with all mild-heartedness and lowly-mindedness.”
Up to this time in world history, King Alfred’s Law was the most comprehensive law code to have ever been assembled since the Roman Empire -- and perhaps longer. It is considered the basis for English Common Law as it contained concepts such as liberty of the individual family and church, a decentralized government and equal justice for all.
Perhaps nothing other than his law code itself better portrays King Alfred's view of law than his "Battle Song" that written after England had been invaded by Dane Vikings from Scandinavia, and Alfred was forced into the swampy areas from where he initiated a resistance. Following a season of fierce and bloody fighting, Alfred drove the Danes back to England's coastal area of East Anglia, and defeated the Vikings. Instead of killing, imprisoning, or banishing the Viking King Guthrum, he gave him the choice of sailing back to Scandinavia or converting to Christianity. He chose the latter. Alfred and his soldiers defeated the Vikings. In victory the king penned, . . .
King Alfred's battle song:
When the enemy comes in a'roarin' like a flood,
Coveting the kingdom and hungering for blood,
The Lord will raise a standard up and lead His people ,
The Lord of Hosts will go before defeating every foe; defeating every foe.
For the Lord is our defense, Jesus defend us,
For the Lord is our defense, Jesu defend.
Some men trust in chariots, some trust in the horse,
But we will depend upon the Name of Christ our Lord,
The Lord has made my hands to war and my fingers to fight.
The Lord lays low our enemies, but He raises us upright; He raises us upright.
For the Lord is our defense, Jesus defend us,
For the lord is our defense, Jesu defend.
A thousand fall on my left hand, ten thousand to the right,
But He will defend us from the arrow in the night.
Protect us from the terrors of the teeth of the devourer,
Embue us with your Spirit, Lord, encompass us with power; encompass us with power.
For the Lord is our defense, Jesus defend us,
For the Lord is our defense, Jesu defend.
G.K. Chesterton's narrative poem about Alfred, called "The Ballad of the White Horse" (1910), is said to have influenced J.R.R. Tolkien in his writing of The Lord of the Rings.
All of this led to the baronial revolt that we'll examine shortly. And, just a year before his death, that revolt led to the sealing of Magna Carta. Not only did the Magna Carta play a major role in the development of the Constitution of the United Kingdom, but it was also one of the primary documents our founding fathers examined as they began creating the Constitution of the United States.
So, here we are, finally at the end of the trail -- or perhaps the beginning, to consider . . .
THE MAGNA CARTA:
I won't belabor you unnecessarily with all the details that led up to the adoption of the Magna Carta. but I do think it's essential to realize how so many concepts in the Magna Carta were derived from many of the Judeo-Christian principles found in the Bible and expressed in the law codes of the Magna Carta's predecessors.
Obviously one cannot judge the full origin, meaning, or intent of a legal document by the words that are used, but in recently reading the Magna Carta again, I was impressed by the number of words used that are related to biblical principles and the Christian faith. For example . . .> "Church" or other edifices -- nine times
> Church officials -- twenty-three times
> "God" -- five times
> "Cross" -- four times
> "Crusades" and participants -- seven times
Whatever else may be said, the presence of these words clearly reveals the environment and culture in which it was written; and the strong Judeo-Christian influence placed on it by the Arch Bishop of Canterbury, Stephen Langton, and other ministers involved in its creation ---- clearly a Judeo-Christian culture. So, what could possibly be any reason for such a document to NOT have at its core the Judeo-Christian disposition of its authors and the environment in which it was constructed?
Few modern legal authorities have the credentials that Australian law professor Augusto Zimmermann (Llb (Hon.), Llm _cum Laude_, Phd (Monash) has. He is an internationally known legal scholar, a prolific writer and author of numerous articles and academic books, is currently Professor Of Law at Sheridan College in Perth, Western Australia, and also Professor Of Law (Adjunct) at The University Of Notre Dame Australia, Sydney Campus.
He is a former law reform commissioner with the Law Reform Commission Of Western Australia (2012-2017), a former Associate Dean (Research) at Murdoch University’s School Of Law (2009-2013), founder and President of The Western Australian Legal Theory Association (Walta), and a host of other notable qualifications. Professor Zimmermann explained the Christian roots of the Magna Carta in this way:
"Common law means a legal system based upon the English legal system; a mixture of customary law, judge-made law and parliamentary law. At least until the early 19th century, the common law was heavily influenced by Christian philosophy. This philosophy argues that there is a divine reason for the existence of fundamental laws, and that such laws are superior to human-made legislation, thus reflecting universal and unchangeable principles by which everyone should live.
"This assumption was expressed, among other things, in the Magna Carta of 1215, a charter which guaranteed the basic rights and privileges to the English barons against the king. Professor [Nicolas] Aroney explains Christianity’s ideological influence upon the Magna Carta: 'From [the time of Alfred] the kings of England have traditionally recognised their submission to God. At their coronations they take an oath before the Archbishop acknowledging the Law of God as the standard of justice, and the rights of the church. They are also urged to do justice under God and to govern God’s people fairly. Magna Carta was a development of these themes.'
In another important but related article, Zimmermann wrote, . . .
"At the time of Magna Carta (1215), a royal judge called Henry de Bracton (d. 1268) wrote a massive treatise on principles of law and justice. Bracton is broadly regarded as ‘the father of the common law’, because his book De legibus et consuetudinibus Anglia is one of the most important works on the constitution of medieval England. For Bracton, the application of law implies ‘a just sanction ordering virtue and prohibiting its opposite’, which means that the state law can never depart from God’s higher laws. As Bracton explains, jurisprudence was ‘the science of the just and unjust’. And he also declared that the state is under God and the law, ‘because the law makes the king. For there is no king where will rules rather then the law.’
"The Christian faith provided to the people of England a status libertatis (state of liberty) which rested on the Christian presumption that God’s law always works for the good of society. With their conversion to Christianity, the kings of England would no longer possess an arbitrary power over the life and property of individuals, changing the basic laws of the kingdom at pleasure. Rather, they were told about God’s promise in the book Isaiah, to deal with civil authorities who enact unjust laws (Isaiah 10:1). In fact, the Bible contains many passages condemning the perversion of justice by them (Prov 17:15, 24:23; Exo 23:7; Deut 16:18; Hab 1:4; Isa 60:14; Lam 3:34).
Originally written in Latin, the Magna Carta made four distinct references to God, and its very first clause minced no words regarding the status of the church and government control ----"In the first place we grant to God and confirm by this our present charter for ourselves and our heirs in perpetuity that the English Church is to be free and to have all its rights fully and its liberties entirely. We furthermore grant and give to all the freemen of our realm for ourselves and our heirs in perpetuity the liberties written below to have and to hold to them and their heirs from us and our heirs in perpetuity."
Dr. Alan Snyder is Professor of History at Southeastern University in Lakeland, Florida. In a paper entitled Magna Carta: The Biblical Basis, written in 2015, he identified five key rights found in the Magna Carta and then posed the question as to where the founders came up with the idea that these were basic human rights. They are:
+ No tax can be imposed except by common council of the kingdom
+ Fines are to be according to the degree of the offense
+ Personal property cannot be taken without the consent of the owner
+ Witnesses are needed for indictments against individuals
+ No death sentence, imprisonment, dispossession, or banishment without due process of law
Known as "The First Lady of American Law", Polish-born Helen Silving-Ryu (1906-1993), was the first female professor of law in the United States and taught in Harvard University's Law School. In 1965 she wrote an article in the Harvard Journal on Legislation that identified the foundational basis for the Magna Carta. Here is what she wrote:
"An old document such as the Magna Carta is not only that which it 'was' at the time of its conception, but also that which it 'becomes' in the course of history. In this sense, undoubtedly, the Magna Carta stands for the idea . . . of subjection of the King not to man, but to God and the law, an idea rooted in the Bible which has dominated Anglo-American thought.
"At this time it may be sufficient to point out the strong possibility that historically controversial old documents of the Western world, as well as some quite modern constitutional ideas, have their origin in the Bible. It is remarkable, indeed, and has an interesting bearing on the nature of our reactions to the Bible, that this has passed unnoticed, while efforts have been made to connect our constitutional documents with Greek and Roman ideas."
Well, those "Greek and Roman ideas" that secularists assume are the foundation of our democratic form of government and its ideals are nothing other than modified variations of the ancient Sumerian codes of which I wrote in my last letter. What we do know, in fact, is that whatever influence Greece and Rome may have had on the development of Western civilization, it was the Judeo-Christian values as found in scripture that had invaded the Greek and Roman cultures that was actually the greater influence. As Dr. Snyder concluded, it was . . .
". . . the Biblical foundation laid for centuries after Greece and Rome had disappeared as empires. It was this foundation, primarily, that guided the thinking of the American colonists as they fought the battle of ideas that led ultimately to a break with the Mother Country."
Here's how it played out ----
All of these law codes and others, based largely on principles found in the Bible, influenced those who created the Magna Carta (1215 AD). So, without question, the Magna Carta was profoundly influenced by all those earlier law codes -- and specifically that of Alfred the Great - - and the undergirding governing principles found in both the Old and New Testaments. Anyone who doubts that is uninformed, and anyone who denies it is dishonest. The evidence is simply too overwhelming for it to be otherwise. So, since the Magna Carta was such a profound model for our own founding documents, we should at least take note of it.
Granted, we must unequivocally acknowledge that just because all of this may be true and accurate, that doesn't mean that these law givers and/or all their constituents were professing followers of Christ. Many were probably not -- most, in fact. But that is not the point of this letter. I am simply trying to point out the fact that most of the law codes written during pre-Medieval and Medieval times were based solidly on the Judeo-Christian teachings of the Bible. And they were the documents to which future leaders would go in research and example, ultimately creating The Magna Carta.
The impact of the Mosaic Law and the teachings of Christ on western European law codes is absolutely undeniable. That impact is without question.
Signed under duress and threat by tyrant King John, decades of unrest and monarchical abuse had preceded the event until the 25 or so Barons of the kingdom had endured enough. A question that continues to probe my curiosity is this -- "How did the Judeo-Christian values of the Bible instead of the Greek-Roman-Sumerian values become so prominent as to impact the creation of the Magna Carta?" Try to imagine what our nation might look like if it had not been for the Judeo-Christian influence behind the writing of the Magna Carta. Would we even have had a democratic republic? Would we even have had a country? Would the United States even have existed in the first place if the Magna Carta had not been written from the influence of those earliest legal codes we just examined?
Often referred to as "The Great Charter of the Liberties of England", what almost nobody remembers is that it was created by the Church of England and is based on Judeo-Christian principles found in the Bible. Secularists . . . and we have far too many in our educational, economic, and governmental institutions . . . won't admit it, they hide it from you, and it drives them batty when someone who knows the truth brings the matter up. The Magna Carta has its roots in the same strain of law that its predecessors had that are traced all the way back to the Law of Moses (the Pentateuch) and the New Testament (mainly the teachings of Christ in the New Testament).
OUR FOUNDING DOCUMENTS -- WHAT INFLUENCED THEM?
Called “the foundation of the freedom of the individual against the arbitrary authority of the despot.”, the Magna Carta was one of two primary sources to which our founding fathers went in formulating our U.S. Constitution. As Eric Metaxas said in a 2015 Breakpoint (Chuck Colson's Prison Fellowship) program, . . .
"The Magna Carta, Latin for 'Great Charter,' was a product of one of the most turbulent periods in English history. Forty-five years earlier, King Henry II was implicated in the murder of the Archbishop of Canterbury, Thomas Becket. And now, in 1215, rebellious barons were objecting to what they saw as King John’s infringement on their traditional rights, including unlawful imprisonment and excessive taxation. With the disagreement threatening to turn into a civil war, the Archbishop of Canterbury, working as an intermediary between the King and the barons, helped to draft a proposed charter that would settle the dispute."
In his paper, The Church and the Charter: The Forgotten Roots of Magna Carta, "Theos" think tank writer Thomas Andrew wrote, . . .
"While doubts remain as to whether the King John made famous by Robin Hood is an entirely justified caricature, the general scholarly consensus is that he was neither a nice man nor a particularly effective ruler. As vindictive and licentious as his brother and father before him, John also proved to be untrustworthy and arrogant. Lacking both the military instincts of his brother Richard and the political tact of his father Henry, he eventually brought England to civil war and the brink of financial ruin." This, then, led to the formation of the Magna Carta.
Even though King John was not pleased with the adoption of the Magna Carta, and a war ensued the following year, his successors to the throne committed themselves to the spirit and laws of the Magna Carta, and it became part of the laws of England in 1289 A.D. It has been a primary source of both inspiration and law for just about every opponent of tyranny since then including our Founding Fathers.
Since it declared, “To no one will we sell, to no one will we deny or delay, right or justice”, this was the law to which the Founding Fathers referred when they complained about “taxation without representation.” Alfred Thompson “Tom” Denning (Baron Denning, OM, PC, DL) was an English lawyer and judge who joined the English bar in 1923 as a barrister, and later became a King's Counsel in 1938. He called The Magna Carta, . . .
". . . the greatest constitutional document of all times – the foundation of the freedom of the individual against the arbitrary authority of the despot."
When England celebrated the 800th anniversary of its adoption in 2015, the Church of England’s Synod of Bishops went on record stating, . . .
“It is important that the Church’s crucial role in Magna Carta and its rights is not air-brushed out in 2015 -- as was the role of Christians in the anti-slave trade celebrations. . . . The Church in England was central to the development of legal and human rights centuries before the French Revolution . . . the first parties to the charter were the bishops -- led by Stephen Langton of Canterbury, who was a major drafter and mediator between the king and the barons; and its first and last clauses state that ‘the Church in England shall be free'.”
If you understand what these Church leaders were saying, you know that, based on the Magna Carta and the laws and codes that preceded it, they understood that there could absolutely be no human rights without religious freedom. They believed exactly the same thing our founding fathers believed, both deriving those convictions from the same two documents -- the Magna Carta, and the Holy Bible. It was from the influence of the Church of England and its "new Becket", Archbishop Stephen Langton, that certain specific limits were placed on the powers of the British Monarchy. One author I read said the following about Langton:
"On English history no document has been as much of a foundation to civil rights as the Magna Carta. Archbishop Stephen Langdon, a man so holy it was said he put all Rome to shame, was the document's main architect. At stake were issues of importance to both church and nobles. It might be beneficial to know just exactly what led up to the "Great Charter" as it was commonly known. Lord Denning described it as “…the foundation of the freedom of the individual against the arbitrary authority of the despot.”
One of the greatest contributions of the Magna Carta was the ideological connection between the teachings of scripture and certain legal issues such as due process, arbitration requirements with the executive branch (i.e. Congress and presidency in our form of government), and human rights to all free men. The Magna Carta asserted that these issues were NOT rooted in secular thought, as some would have you believe today, but they emanated instead from a medieval theology that had been shaped by the Judeo-Christian views found in the earlier law codes to which I referred two letters ago.
In fact, a report published in The Medievalist revealed some surprising connections of how the Church played such an important role in the document's drafting, but also the influence of the Church in its actual adoption and subsequent distribution. Not only does the first and last line of the charter state, "the Church in England shall be free", but at least eleven bishops were present at its signing.
According to King's College Professor of Medieval History David Carpenter, four of the original copies of the Magna Carta went to cathedrals, -- and instead of copies being distributed through law enforcement (the corrupt sheriffs), they were instead distributed directly through the churches. Carpenter wrote, "The church therefore was central to the production, preservation and proclamation of the Magna Carta. The cathedrals were like a beacon from which the light of the charter shone around the country, thus beginning the process by which it became central to national life.”
It seems they were like the churches and pastors in America once were.
Rev. Alan Smith, the Archbishop of the Diocese of St. Albans wrote at the 800th anniversary of the Magna Carta's signing, "It is interesting that in so many of the discussions about Magna Carta, the central role of the church and in particular that of the Archbishop of Canterbury, Stephen Langton, is almost completely missing. The bishops had an important role in the difficult and complex process whereby King John was forced to make a number of concessions and commitments."
This was also the sentiment of our founding fathers ---- they found absolutely no disconnect between Judeo-Christian values and teachings, and the laws of the land. In fact, as we have already repeatedly shown, just the opposite was true.
REINFORCING MATERIAL -- ADDING TO ALL THIS . . .
If all our founders had was this vast and proven history of Judeo-Christian principles for governing with righteousness and justice, the Magna Carta and its predecessors were more than sufficient. But, our founders didn't stop there. Contrary to what many would have you believe to the contrary, our founders -- all of them -- were well educated, reading most of the Roman and Greek philosophers. Many of them could read and speak multiple languages. Some of them -- such as John Quincy Adams -- served in behalf of the government in foreign posts.
Almost all of our founders were avid readers. One of George Washington's favorite books was The Law of Nations by Emerich de Vattel. Many of the founders were deeply impacted by John Locke's Two Treatises of Government, which affected the the outcome of our Constitution. Today I discovered a list of the "Top 40" authors our founders preferred. Here are the "Top 10" as chosen by our founders:
1. St. Paul -- How about that!!!!
2. Montesquieu
3. Sir William Blackstone
4. John Locke
5. David Hume
6. Plutarch
7. Cesare Beccaria
8. John Trenchard and Thomas Gordon
9. De Lolme
10. Samuel Pufendorf
f you want the entire list of their 40 favorite authors, you can go to https://oll.libertyfund.org/page/founding-father-s-library. In addition to the Magna Carta, our founders looked to to the Bible, and particularly to the writings of Montesquieu, Blackstone, Locke, and Hume in shaping their views of a democratic governance. It is undeniable -- beyond undeniable -- that you can look at our national history without concluding that there is probably no other nation in world history that has been more impacted by Judeo-Christian principles.
FINALLY:
Well, there you have it ---- far more, I'm sure, than you probably wanted to know. Have you considered recently what our country would be like today if we had been founded under the secular principles of ancient codes of the Middle East instead of Judeo-Christian values? Sadly, we may find out soon -- if something doesn't change quickly.
It is important for us to both remember, remember, remember -- because otherwise we could easily see our Constitution as being nothing particularly special other than having 54 men figure out an orderly way to govern another infant nation. Apart from the tiny Republic of San Marino, a nation of only 24 square miles and less than 50,000 citizens, that has a constitution that dates back to October,1600 A.D., the United States has the oldest surviving Constitution in the entire world (June,1788).
No other nation (other than San Marino) has had only one single constitution for as long a period of time, 244 years. France has had 16 constitutions between 1789 and 1858! an average of a new constitution about every 12 years. One of them, 'Acte Additionnel' (1835), lasted only 21 days. It's even worse in the Americas. The Dominican Republic declared independence in 1844, and since then has had a total of 32 constitutions, the largest number of constitutions of any country. Three other countries have also had 20 or more constitutions throughout their history. All of them are in Latin America ---- Venezuela (26), Haiti (24) and Ecuador (20).
Other than San Marino, the ten oldest Constitutions in the world are as follows:
10th -- Australia, 1901
9th -- Tonga, 1875
8th -- Luxembourg, 1868
7th -- Canada, 1867
6th -- Argentina, 1853
5th -- Denmark, 1849
4th -- Belgium, 1831
3rd -- The Netherlands, 1815
2nd -- Norway, 1814
1st -- United States, 1788
So, what is it that has caused God to bless us with such a strong and sustained Constitution? There are a number of reasons, but none is probably more significant than the source from which it was formed . . . our Judeo-Christian teachings expressed in the Bible, and in the Magna Carta of the United Kingdom.
The more I study the history, character, and freedoms of nations, the more convinced I am that the most free and blessed nations are those whose founding documents and laws are based on the Judeo-Christian values, morals, and models found in the Bible.Those that are based on the godless, secular, socialistic values, moral, and models of Sumerian-Graeco-Roman values tend to have more dictatorial, tyrannical, enslaving documents and governing forms. While there may be rare exceptions, I believe I can safely make that assertion. We really don't know the blessing we have for such roots. We may have lots of serious problems in our nation today, but it should never hide the fact of our Judeo-Christian roots.
We should thank God daily for God raising up Moses to record and explain the core truths of it all. Clearly we must always thank Him for sending us His Son not only to save us and give us eternal life, but also to establish spiritual and moral values that work for both believer and unbeliever alike. We are an incredibly blessed nation. Try living in such freedom in Russia -- or Colombia -- or in Cuba -- or in Germany -- or in China.
That should tell us something profound. Thank you, founding fathers, for having the wisdom, historic knowledge, and discernment to give us this constitution instead of something else. Let's pray, friend, that we can find enough political leaders now in our day to protect it from the constant onslaught to disregard it, change it, and destroy it. There are many in our midst doing just that this moment.
In His Bond, By His Grace, and for His Kingdom,
Bob Tolliver -- Romans 1:11
"Now these were more noble-minded than those in Thessalonica, for they received the word with great eagerness,
examining the Scriptures daily to see whether these things were so." -- Dr. Luke (Acts 17:11)
"A fire kept burning on the hearthstone of my heart, and I took up the burden of the day with fresh courage and hope." -- Charles F. McKoy
Life Unlimited Ministries
LUMglobal
[email protected]
Copyright July, 2022
"If Jesus had preached the same message that many ministers preach today, He would never have been crucified." -- Leonard Ravenhill
"The time will come when instead of shepherds feeding the sheep, the Church will have clowns entertaining the goats." -- Charles H. Spurgeon
If this letter has blessed you, feel free to forward it or copy from it, with proper credits, to any and all you wish.
Please do NOT hit reply to this letter. This is an automated unmanned system.
If you want to write Bob, send directly to [email protected].
Replying to "Shoulder To Shoulder" mailer gets you nowhere.
--
To subscribe, send ANY message to: [email protected]> To unsubscribe, send ANY message to: [email protected]