Tag Archives: christian revisionism

A “Christian” Refuge of Lies: An Expose of “The Church that Birthed America”

A Publication of Churches Undef Christ Ministry


“Christian” revisionists never tell the true history of America. They never tell you about, for example, Obadiah Holmes, who was viciously beaten by the Puritans, or about the four Quakers who were hanged for returning to Massachusetts after being banned for their religious views, or about the many Baptists whose properties were taken by the establishment, etc.

See, for more proof of the thesis of this article, some of the authorities in the Endnotes below and also List of Scholarly Resources Which Explain and Comprehensively Document the True History of Religious Freedom in America.

For more on Christian Revisionism, see David Barton’s Christian Revisionism, Exposing the dangers of David Barton’s teachings, The Consequences of Christian and Secular Revisionism, The Trail of Blood of the Martyrs of Jesus/A Case of Premeditated Murder: Christian Revisionists on Trial .


Jerald Finney
Copyright © November 27, 2017


“Wherefore hear the word of the LORD, ye scornful men, that rule this people which is in Jerusalem. Because ye have said, We have made a covenant with death, and with hell are we at agreement; when the overflowing scourge shall pass through, it shall not come unto us: for we have made lies our refuge, and under falsehood have we hid ourselves: Therefore thus saith the Lord GOD, Behold, I lay in Zion for a foundation a stone, a tried stone, a precious corner stone, a sure foundation: he that believeth shall not make haste. Judgment also will I lay to the line, and righteousness to the plummet: and the hail shall sweep away the refuge of lies, and the waters shall overflow the hiding place. And your covenant with death shall be disannulled, and your agreement with hell shall not stand; when the overflowing scourge shall pass through, then ye shall be trodden down by it.” Isaiah 28.14-18.


This article was inspired by The church that birthed America which was published in World Magazine and linked to on sermonaudio.com. World Magazine falsely claims that it reports “the news from a Christian worldview—interpreting world events under the reality of the Christian faith.” The magazine actually is a prime example of publishers, for the masses, of “Christian” revisionism. The church that birthed America is another offering, in a continuing stream of deceit, which misleads well-meaning “Christians” in the arena of spiritual warfare. This type of biased and misleading information is constantly served from many directions to mislead “Christians” in America.

The church that birthed America is a short article distributed as propaganda to those “Christians” who do not have time to study CRC (Catholic/Reformed/Calvinists) historical and theological deceit. CRC are strangers and foreigners to truth, fellowcitizens with pseudo-saints, of the household of the god of this world. They are built on the foundation of the Pope and clergy, Augustine being the chief corner stone; in whom their building fitly framed together groweth into an unholy temple, built together an habitation of lies. Prominent CRC include constitutional scholars like Edward S. Corwin,[i] and theologians, pastors and writers such as R.J. Rushdooney, Francis Schaeffer, Gary DeMar, Gary North, Charles Stanley, D. James Kennedy, David Barton, Roger Federrer and many others who tirelessly carry the torch of Christian Revisionism directly to mainline “Christians” in America—soldiers on the battlefield, led by the deceivers, to establish “a city set on a hill” (See Matthew 5.14).

Puritans hung 4 Quakers for returning to Massachusetts after being banished for their religious beliefs.

The problem is that CRC walks in darkness, rather than light. “For every one that doeth evil hateth the light, neither cometh to the light, lest his deeds should be reproved” (John 3.20). That is why they lie about history. True history reveals that they, led by the theology of Augustine and continued by Calvin, Luther, Knox, the Church of England, and other Protestants, have tortured and killed tens of millions of those they labeled to be “heretics.” A study of their theology reveals that they will again kill heretics and those who do not honor, at least outwardly, all Ten of the Commandments and much of the Levitical law if and when they again have power to do so. Secular scholars and writers know this and write about it. See List of Scholarly Resources Which Explain and Comprehensively Document the True History of Religious Freedom in America for verification. Since historic fact can be verified, these CRC “Christians” and their followers, through their lies which they refuse to repent of, cause the world to blaspheme the name of Christ.

Many believers on that lowest level, myself included for a long time, go out from their “churches” and huddle together in the Republican Party seeking to turn America around. They place their hopes, both spiritual and earthly, in politics. Without their support, the whole pyramid of lies would topple. The bottom dwellers idolize and praise the men above them. They follow “Christian” revisionist lies not only in the political arena but also into their churches and church schools through, for example, the Accelerated Christian Education curriculum.

I left that darkness some thirteen years ago when the Lord shined the light of truth into the darkness of the Christian historic and theological revisionism maze I was in. For many years, I had done no independent study. After all, those I depended upon were Christians, were they not? They would not lie, especially about historic fact which can be checked by those who have the time to do so, would they? They have no motive to lie, do they? I found that I had not been correctly answering all these questions.

I had one vital question that none of the “Christian” historical literature I read could answer; and I searched far and wide for many years. Finally, a secular book by a law professor[ii] headed me in the right direction. In reading it, I saw referenced, in the endnotes, works by men like Isaac Backus, Roger Williams, Dr. John Clark, and many others who were influential in a colonial spiritual warfare. Then I came across a Baptist history book with its invaluable bibliography.[iii] I started looking for, buying, and reading the old books cited in those works as well as additional writings cited in the books I continued to study. I kept finding more sources and reading as many as I could. More and more facts I had never been informed of kept coming to my attention. I discovered motives, theological understandings, historical facts, Bible truths which CRC had hidden from me and untold numbers of other Christians. I discovered why CRC lies. CRC theologian R.J. Rushdooney explained the reason, “It is alright to lie to those who have no right to know the truth.”

From Augustine to this very day, CRC have never changed their tactics. Of course, they can no longer kill the dissenters, but that is not their fault. Baptists in the colonies understood how CRC operate. As Isaac Backus[iv] noted, concerning the revisionism and lies of the leaders of the established churches in the American colonies:

  • “[I] appeal to the conscience of every reader, whether he can find three worse things on earth, in the management of controversy, than, first, to secretly take the point disputed for truth without any proof; then, secondly, blending that error with known truths, to make artful addresses to the affections and passions of the audience, to prejudice their minds, before they hear a word that the respondent has to say; and thirdly, if the respondent refuses to yield to such management, then to call in the secular arm to complete the argument?”[v]
The beating of Obadiah Holmes by the Puritans in Massachusetts

Because of the never ending CRC campaign of deceit which always uses these tactics, very few Christians have ever heard the undeniable fact that the Puritans came to America for religious freedom for themselves only; of the Puritan and Anglican establishments in the American colonies; the persecutions of dissenters by the establishments; colonial leaders of the dissent, their writings and monumental achievements—men such as Roger Williams,[vi] Dr. John Clarke, Obadiah Holmes,[vii] Shubal Stearnes, Daniel Marshall, Isaac Backus, and John Leland;[viii] the many dissenters in the colonies persecuted by the CRC; the written debates between Roger Williams and the Puritan John Cotton (writings which are still available); the very insightful and accurate religious histories and writings of men such as Roger Williams, Dr. John Clarke, and Isaac Backus which exposed the lies and persecutions of the Puritans; the Baptist preachers in Virginia who were persecuted for preaching outside the authority of the established Anglican church; the four Quakers hanged by the Puritans in the late 1650s and early 1660s because they returned to the colony after being banished as “heretics” by the established church (after which England ordered Massachusetts to send any alleged “heretics” to England for trial); the actual positions of Thomas Jefferson and James Madison on the issue of separation of church and state; and many more undeniable facts which the CRC do not wish you to know.

Examined in the light of truth, The church that birthed America would be laughable if not for the fact that untold numbers of “Christians” actually believe it. Here is a brief look at the article in light of truth. The Anglicans settled Jamestown in 1607, so, the Pilgrims were not even the first to land in America. The settlers of Jamestown set up an Anglican establishment.

The church that birthed America, does give some truth about the story of the Pilgrims. Truth is fine with CRC when it contributes to the cause. But then, the revisionism to lies begins. The article states: “As we recite our own litany this Thanksgiving, our thoughts will turn to the prosperous nation that grew from Bradford’s ‘desolate wilderness.’” Contrast that statement with some solid facts, some history between their landing in Plymouth and the establishing of the United States of America with the adoption of the United States Constitution in 1790?

The Pilgrims arrived in 1630 and are much admired by Americans for the hardships they endured. As a matter of human compassion, the Pilgrims were hospitable to all; and, at first, grudgingly tolerated those of other creeds. However, they gradually began to close their doors to those of other creeds. “Plymouth was a Church-State ruled by a governor and a small and highly select theological aristocracy, a Church-State with various grades of citizenship and non-citizenship.”[ix] By 1651 the government of Plymouth colony was enforcing the laws of Congregationalist Massachusetts. “By the time Plymouth was united with Massachusetts in 1691 all major differences between the two had disappeared.”[x]

The Puritans, unlike the Pilgrims who wanted to separate from the Church of England, arrived in 1629 and wanted to purify the Church from within. “The State, in their view, had the duty to maintain the true Church; but the State was in every way subordinate to the Church.”[xi] Having suffered long for conscience sake, they came for religious freedom, for themselves only. “They believed [in] the doctrine of John Calvin, with some important modifications, in the church-state ruled on theocratic principles, and in full government regulation of economic life.”[xii] Although they differed from the Church of England and others on some doctrines, “[t]he Puritans brought 2 principles with them from their native country, in which they did not differ from others; which are, that natural birth, and the doings of men, can bring children into the Covenant of Grace; and, that it is right to enforce & support their own sentiments about religion with the magistrate’s sword.”[xiii]

The church that birthed America then connects the Pilgrims and others sent later from English Reformed Church in Amsterdam to the founding of churches and two Great Awakenings, global evangelism, and great missionary movements. To fully explain how totally fabricated this is cannot be done in this short article. Let us just consider one matter: the two Great Awakenings. In America at least, the Puritans and Pilgrims had nothing to do with them, other than trying to stamp out the fires caused by the First Great Awakening.

Here are a few facts concerning the First Great Awakening:

  • “George Whitefield’s first visit to New England during the Great Awakening around 1740 brought revival. Whitefield preached in buildings owned by churches, out of doors (many times church buildings could not contain the crowds seeking to hear him), and at colleges such as Yale. As a result of Whitefield’s preaching, in a brief six weeks period, the religious climate of New England was changed. The churches experienced unprecedented growth. Entire communities flocked to hear the gospel, and hundreds were converted in single localities….
  • “As a result of the offenses of the Great Awakening, Whitefield was not warmly received by many of the establishment when he returned to New England in 1744. In fact, he faced a confused situation. Although multitudes supported him and continued to attend his revival meetings, a formidable body of opposition to him and his methods had developed in his absence of four years. The faculty of Harvard College condemned Whitefield, the Connecticut legislature declared that no minister should preach in the parish of another without the incumbent’s consent, and later the General Court forbade all itinerant preaching with penalty of loss of right to collect one’s legal salary and imprisonment. He found few pulpits open to him, and a barrage of declarations and testimonies was aimed at him. Most of the ministers of the established churches, as well as the faculties of Yale and Harvard Colleges were opposed to him. Nonetheless, he continued to preach, the revival continued, and many, including Shubal Stearns and Daniel Marshall, two men who were to become Baptists and chief instruments for carrying the Great Awakening to the South, were converted as a result of being strongly moved by Whitefield.[xiv]

The church that birthed America then makes some more statements which do not seem to be connected to the rest of the article and then concludes, “[America] has been used to bless the whole world. Let’s pause to consider that blessing this Thanksgiving along with the bounty before us. A blessing we pilgrims again make take to other desolate wildernesses of the world.” ??????

In conclusion, may I inquire, “Is the author 8 years old?” Why would anyone give any serious consideration to this infantile hogwash?  “The night is far spent, the day is at hand: let us therefore cast off the works of darkness, and let us put on the armour of light” (Ro. 13.12).

Endnotes

[i] Edward S. Corwin is the foremost American constitutional scholar of the twentieth century. Even so, he was guilty of using the tactics described by Isaac Backus. Why? Corwin was born in Plymouth, Michigan on January 19, 1878. He received his undergraduate degree from the University of Michigan in 1900; and his Ph.D. from the University of Pennsylvania in 1905. He was invited to join the faculty of Princeton University by Woodrow Wilson in 1905. In 1908 he was appointed the McCormick Professor of Jurisprudence. He authored many books on United States constitutional law, and he remained at Princeton until he retired in 1946. He fought against separation of church and state. He died on April 23, 1963 and was buried in Princeton Cemetery. Princeton University. New Light Presbyterians founded the College of New Jersey in 1746 in order to train ministers.  Following the untimely deaths of Princeton’s first five presidents, John Witherspoon became president in 1768 and remained in that office until his death in 1794.

[ii] McGarvie, Mark Douglas. One Nation Under Law: America’s Early National Struggles to Separate Church and State. DeKalb, Illinois: Northern Illinois University Press, 2005.

[iii] Lumpkin, William L. Baptist History in the South. Shelbyville, Tennessee: Bible and Literature Missionary Foundation.

[iv] Isaac Backus was born in Connecticut in 1723/24, a time when those dissenting from the views of the established church were persecuted. He withdrew from the established Congregational church, became a Separate, and later a Baptist. As a Separate and later a Baptist, he was persecuted and witnessed, researched, and wrote about the persecutions going on in New England. He was a leader in the fight for religious liberty in America. For more information on Isaac Backus see, e.g., William G. McLoughlin, Isaac Backus and the American Piestic Tradition (Boston: Little, Brown and Company, 1967); Isaac Backus on Church, State, and Calvinism, Pamphlets, 1754-1789, Edited by William G. McLoughlin (Cambridge, Mass.: The Belknap Press of Harvard University Press, 1968); Isaac Backus, A History of New England With Particular Reference to the Denomination of Christians Called Baptists, Volumes 1 and 2 (Eugene, Oregon: Wipf & Stock, Previously Published by Backus Historical Society, 1871).

Isaac Backus and others such as Roger Williams, and John Clarke led the fight against the establishment of the church in the early history of America, and to their efforts we owe the First Amendment to the United States Constitution which guarantees religious liberty.

[v] Backus, A History of New England…, Volume 1, p. 150. This comment followed and preceded illustrations of how those in favor of church/state marriage, infant baptism, etc. advance their cause.  On pp. 151-152, Mr. Backus illustrated how those in favor of infant baptism argued their position, pointing out the fallacies of their arguments. Their tactics have not changed, although in America, due to the First Amendment to the United States Constitution, they no longer can call upon civil government to enforce their beliefs and persecute dissenters.

[vi] Roger Williams was the founder of Rhode Island, the first government in history with complete freedom of conscience. Due to the efforts of Mr. Williams, Dr. John Clarke, and others who followed America has the First Amendment to the United States Constitution which gives freedom of conscience.
Roger Williams understood the importance of truth. He wrote a dialogue between truth and peace in which we find these words:

Peace. Dear truth, I know thy birth, thy nature, thy delight. They that know thee will prize thee far above themselves and lives, and sell themselves to buy thee. Well spake that famous Elizabeth to her famous attorney, Sir Edward Coke; ‘Mr. Attorney, go on as thou hast begun, and still plead, not pro Domina Regina, but pro Domina Veritate.
“Truth. It is true, my crown is high; my scepter is strong to break down strongest holds, to throw down highest crowns of all that plead, though but in thought, against me. Some few there are, but oh! how few are valiant for the truth, and dare to plead my cause, as my witnesses in sackcloth, Rev. xi. [3]; while all men’s tongues are bent like bows to shoot out lying words against me?
“Peace. Oh! how could I spend eternal days and endless dates at thy holy feet, in listening to the precious oracles of thy mouth! All the words of thy mouth art truth, and there is no iniquity in them. thy lips drop as the honey-comb.  But oh! since we must part anon, let us, as thou saidst, improve our minutes, and according as thou promisedest, revive me with thy words, which are sweeter than the honey and the honey-comb.”

Honest historians tell his story. Christian revisionists do not. Williams exposed the Puritans for what they were, both theologically and in practice. He published a book in 1644 which effectively destroyed Puritan theology and exposed the persecutions of those the Puritans in the New World labeled to be “heretics.”

[vii] When Dr. John Clarke and two friends went to Massachusetts they were persecuted. In 1651, he, Obadiah Holmes, and John Crandal went to visit a friend in Boston. They were on “an errand of mercy and had traveled all the way from their church in Newport to visit one of their aging and blind members, William Witter.” They stayed over, and held a service on Sunday. During that service, they were arrested and jailed. Before they were brought to trial, they were forced to attend a Congregational Puritan religious meeting. There, they refused to remove their hats, and Dr. Clarke stood and explained why they declared their dissent from them. They were charged with denying infant baptism, holding a public worship, administering the Lord’s Supper to an excommunicated person, to another under admonition, proselytizing the Baptist way and rebaptizing such converts, and failing to post security or bail and other ecclesiastical infractions. He asked for a public debate on his religious views, which the Puritans avoided. “Clarke said they were examined in the morning of July 31 and sentenced that afternoon without producing any accuser or witness against them,” and that “Governor John Endicott even insulted the accused and denounced them as ‘trash.’”[vii]  Dr. Clarke was “fined twenty pounds or to be well whipped;” Mr. Crandal was fined five pounds, only for being with the others; and Mr. Holmes was held in prison, where sentence of a fine of thirty pounds or to be well whipped was entered. A friend paid Mr. Clarke’s fine. Mr. Clarke and Mr. Crandal were released.

Mr. Holmes was beaten mercilessly. His infractions were denying infant baptism, proclaiming that the church was not according to the gospel of Jesus Christ, receiving the sacrament while excommunicated by the church, and other spiritual infractions. Mr. Holmes refused to pay his fine, prepared for the whipping by “communicat[ing] with [his] God, commit[ting] himself to him, and beg[ging] strength from him.”  Holmes was confined over two months before his whipping. He related the experience of being whipped for the Lord as follows, in part:

“And as the man began to lay the strokes upon my back, I said to the people, though my flesh should fail, and my spirit should fail, yet my God would not fail. So it please the Lord to come in, and so to fill my heart and tongue as a vessel full, and with an audible voice I broke forth praying unto the Lord not to lay this sin to their charge; and telling the people, that now I found he did not fail me, and therefore now I should trust him forever who failed me not; for in truth, as the strokes fell upon me, I had such a spiritual manifestation of God’s presence as the like thereof I never had nor felt, nor can with fleshly tongue express; and the outward pain was so removed from me, that indeed I am not able to declare it to you, it was so easy to me, that I could well bear it, yea, and in a manner felt it not although it was grievous as the spectators said, the man striking with all his strength (yea spitting in [on] his hand three times as many affirmed) with a three-corded whip, giving me therewith thirty strokes. When he had loosed me from the post, having joyfulness in my heart, and cheerfulness in my countenance, as the spectators observed, I told the magistrates, You have struck me as with roses; and said moreover, Although the Lord hath made it easy to me, yet I pray God it may not be laid to your charge.”

Mr. Holmes “could take no rest but as he lay upon his knees and elbows, not being able to suffer any part of his body to touch the bed whereupon he lay.” Two men who shook Mr. Holmes’ hand after the beating were, without trial and without being informed of any written law they had broken, sentenced to a fine of forty shillings or to be whipped. Although they refused to pay the fines, others paid their fines and they were released.

[viii] For an excellent discussion of John Leland (and some others), see, e.g. Carl H. Esbeck, Dissent and Disestablishment: The Church-State Settlement in the Early American Republic, 2004 BYU L. Rev. 1385,  (2004).

[ix] William H. Marnell, The First Amendment: Religious Freedom in America from Colonial Days to the School Prayer Controversy (Garden City, New York: Doubleday & Company, Inc., 1964), p. 48.

[x] Leo Pfeffer, Church, State, and Freedom, (Boston: The Beacon Press, 1953), p. 66, citing Sanford H. Cobb, The Rise of Religious Liberty in America (New York: The McMillan Co., 1902), pp. 70-71.

[xi] Marnell, p. 40.

[xii] Marnell, p. 48.

[xiii] Backus, A History of New England, Volume 1, pp. 34-35.

[xiv] Jerald Finney, God Betrayed/Separation of Church and State: The Biblical Principles and the American Application (Austin, Tx.: Kerygma Publishing Co., 2008), pp. xv-xvi; see pp. 249-250, 254, 261, and 265 for more on the First Great Awakening. (The quotes omit the footnotes with authorities. One can go to the book and find the authorities by clicking here to go to online PDF of this book.)

 

Christ’s Truth or Satan’s Folly

Denise Porter
August 24, 2015

This dynamic article by Denise Porter was actually a letter written in response to a facebook posting linking to my online article, “Secular and Christian revisionism.”

Friends & family yet wandering out in sin & under its dominion and the wrath of God, fearing truth and fearing death & under bondage: will you humble yourselves to seek truth & follow it to seeking God in His word as He makes it evident to you? (Romans 1-8; John 1,3 & 8) Following it to freedom through repentance not to be repented of & faith? Christ’s yoke is truly the easier. (Matthew 10)

Why would anyone persist under Lucifer’s hard yoke & false covering in double-mindedness & selective receiving of offensive truth, which is God’s loving & merciful, freeing grace extended toward every soul, to be apprehended of faith? Where will you ultimately anchor your faith? —-Will you persist in loving selfish desire, idolatry & delusion —-even with Christian labels —–to the bitter end? —–I almost did. Or will you surrender to the true Christ by the conviction of the Spirit of truth and the word of God received with repentance & faith as written?

The hope of which unity, which catholicity, which brotherhood —& which power & justification & hope —will you choose? That of the Godhead revealed & evidenced in the word & Creation through the Father, Son and Holy Spirit and sound doctrine as the Rock? or some other doctrine as the sand?

Reality? or virtual reality?

——- Even to the outcome of active or passive participation in the violent persecution of any who dare to point out the vanity & folly of maintaining & clinging to those selective sin-excusing lying idols & false gospels and christs of human and demonic imagination & manufacture which cannot save? Those bringing or evidencing the word & light & blessing of God wrought through obedience, even unto suffering –and not as those proud rebels, those self-transforming & impositional builders seeking glory & self-justification, and fellow builders, fellow members of their craft? fellow masons? seeking initiates & exploitable slaves & dupes to merchandise? 2 Cor 11. Colossians. Galatians. 1 Thess 5. 1 Timothy 4. 2 Timothy 2-4. 2 Peter 2&3. 1-3 John. Jude. Revelation.

1 Corinthians 10 & 2 Corinthians 10. Romans 9-11. The Prophets.

The guttering candles & leaky cisterns of humanism & idolatry, the ‘secret wisdom’, the ‘better wisdom’ of false familiar spirits & human intuition —the false ‘inner light’ of the deceived, the ‘new’ truth & way of the faithless & willfully unbelieving, science falsely so-called, the bloodless sacrifice of the self-righteousness of the proud, or the perverse sacrifice of those who offer the blood of others in the twisted fashion of proud and bitter Cain & those sacrificing children to Molech & Fortune, the many words of philosophy & theosophy, & all false religion —–are not new at all. They are as old as the Fall and the Curse that marred God’s perfect Creation & brought the curse of judgment in the first place, so early on.

They do not stand the current & graciously lingering witness of truth & the conviction of the Holy Spirit of Truth, & they will not stand through the coming judgment of death to eternal life & immunity against the second death. They cannot suffice to assuage God’s wrath against sin, and they will provide no covering in that great and terrible Day of the Lord when His graciously restrained wrath that souls might be saved through His provision of Christ, is finally loosed. They cannot sustain men to sanctification and the keeping of their vessels against that Day. All the nations & all mankind will answer individually for rejecting the unmerited & undeserved covering that God provided through Christ’s blood and atonement and righteousness. John 1,3 & 8. Deuteronomy. Ephesians. 1&2 Thessalonians. Daniel and Revelation.

What is covered in this link & related articles is precisely what I found as I investigated these things myself —in a much more humble & inconsistent, sin-compromised manner. The investigation commenced at first with misguided trust in, & ignorance of the duplicity of, the elitist nicolaitans taking lordship over & wresting scripture through presumption, disobedience to the command to be sober & vigilant, proving all things with the joy of the Lord my strength through the knowledge of new birth salvation going on to Romans 8-Hebrews 5 experience——- & with their higher criticism unquestioned. But the evolution of truth & the word of God are steps that must come before biological evolution, demoralization & accusation of false authority tyranny (Isaiah 14, Ezekiel 28; Romans 1-8, 2 Thess 2, Rev 17-19) can commence & gain ground —-they are the first spiritual enemies we must combat.

I was trusting self & fearing man more than fearing God, but the mercies of God endureth forever & He is faithful to extend grace through truth and His word if we will only apprehend & receive it. Those who cry out for Him to act in truth & justice, without His mediating tender mercies and forgiveness —-are deceived, proud, blind & vain —-neither understanding or knowing God & His revealed nature, or their own.

If we suffer those enemies of God & truth to stand unchallenged & tolerated in willing ignorance of truth & God, and in disobedience ——–then the consequential leaven results in the blindness and self-sufficiency of pride & self-deification, dishonoring & blaspheming God so that He gives us over, with more & more of our individual souls, and the souls of men at large & societally, infected with a lack of goodwill toward our fellow man, & with the poisoned, illegitimate fruit of impure, fornicating love divorced from truth & waxed cold —-growing into corruption & the impositional order of tyranny.

The dialectic. Which Isaac Backus described so well!!

The only stay to this decay, this devolution, this consequential curse —– is the receipt of God’s grace through His word & the faithful preaching of His word with repentance & faith: acknowledging sin and our sin-debt toward God, our false works of Babel-building salvation (the work of God is to believe on the one whom He hath sent —John 6:28-29) & false allegiance to the world’s spirit & kingdom, and placing our faith in Christ’s finished work in our behalf—receiving it as a gift to the new birth of God’s will & power, exchanged citizenship & allegiance & attendant inheritance, and going on to share the promises & way of God revealed in the final, written and preserved testament of His word & in Christ —-sharing the true gospel and Christ with whosoever will receive it. Having freely received, we freely offer.

Revival comes of faith & the word, by grace —-and in God’s sovereign will and perfect timing. It does not come by sorcery & spiritual techniques of mystery or hidden knowledge, or by the will of man. The mystery of God is plainly revealed in Christ and the written, preserved word of God. Revival is preceded by the knowledge of the word & testament of God freely received & freely, faithfully kept in obedience & passed on. It is preceded by the prayers of the saints, & the forewarning of prophets & faithful preachers called & raised up of God before the people, and whose testimony stands proving by the word of God.

This is not what is received or taught today by those godmen & sorcerers involved in fundamentally transforming free American Christianity back towards the Old Word Tyranny & catholicity of the Great Whore.

I stumbled frequently in the pursuit of truth—-the word is true & sin has consequences, but praise God! His mercy extended faithfully through truth still calls, pricking conscience, not willing that any should perish. 2 Peter 3. 1 Timothy 2. John 1,3 & 8.

There were times of comfort in error, times when busy-ness & worldliness crowded & choked the good seed, and times when Satan got the upper hand through accusations of guilt justly deserved, but through it all the grace & mercy of God would speak through the word continued in, some prodding truth upon conscience would prick, & the investigation & conviction & coming out to Christ would continue.

I have decided to follow Jesus….the world behind me, the cross before me….though none go with me, I still will follow. God has no grandchildren. Every generation, every soul, must choose.

The investigation continued, but increasingly with mounting horror as the implications of truth became more and more apparent by the grace of God extended through the true revelation of the Law, Christ’s fulfillment of the Law, & evident truth….the struggle of faith & truth & flesh & sin ongoing until, aided by the grace of God through the word received and apprehended, it thankfully ended in repentance & surrender to God through Christ, bringing peace with God —-and not surrender to Lucifer’s yoke through turning from evident truth & utterly surrendering to selfish desire & godmen to be given over of God.

Knowing both the terror and the faithfulness, the justice and the mercy, the holiness of God — souls have more than just the form of godliness denying the power, and must warn others in love: speaking the truth in love. The saints of God overcome through the blood of the Lamb and the word of their testimony, loving not their lives unto the death. Like Jesus said.

Oh, that the drag of flesh ended there at the new birth! and that obedience & a faithful walk were automatic! —that’s why we groan and say, Come soon, Lord Jesus! Yearning to please Him. Yearning to be with Him. Yearning to be free of this corruptible & clothed in the incorruptible, with faith made sight. But the word of God is true, and the battle is ongoing even for the new creature born of God: sealed & indwelt by the Spirit, until we lay down this corruptible flesh in death, or that last whosoever known of God & elect comes in that the age of the Gentiles be fulfilled & Christ catches away His Bride—-the corruptible being changed in a twinkling —- 1 Corinthians 15, 1 Thessalonians 4&5, Revelation 19.

…And God is worthy of the struggle & suffering, and faithful to accompany & sustain us in & through our sufferings—chastening as necessary, as we enter in through the strait gate to the narrow way, taking up our crosses to follow Christ & warn the perishing amongst whom we all have walked & despising the shame ——all of His grace & will & power, with no merit or work of our own to add to His gift: merely receiving with humility & thanksgiving.

He is good & has preserved & provided us with the grace of His word and the quickening, sustaining Spirit in & through it, indwelling and testifying with our spirit. He still has His remnant though we’re tempted to look out with the eyes of flesh rather than the eyes of faith, walking in the flesh & the old man, rather than in the Spirit, in Christ. It is by grace we are saved to the good works of ambassadors and pilgrims and servants through this perishing field white unto harvest ——until He calls us home or catches us up: His kingdom come, His will be done.

All must be done His way and according to His holiness, will & timing —not the proud, impatient & impure way of the world’s Babel & its spirit —-or else it is all in vain. 1 Thess 5. 2 Thess 2. Romans 9-11. Psalm 127. We have been so deceived & wicked in our proud age!! What a miracle that any can be saved.

I could not figure out why these ‘Christian’ ministers & ministries would pick apart the word of God & refuse to stand upon it, or why they would point out logical inconsistencies and fallacies in the ‘secular’ realm & preach about holiness and service and love —and submission to authority, while committing the same fallacies themselves in regards to the Bible and the faith once delivered the saints, pointedly ignoring huge swaths of God’s definition of holiness, right service and faithful love undivorced from truth & true grace, and presuming to assume illegitimate authority apart from truth & out of the bounds of scripture in regards to the priesthood of believers, the Body of Christ and the polity & ordering of the churches & their relationship to one another & the world’s powers.

Rather than receiving exhortation or critique as among brethren & in the light, as those truly pursuing truth, they would either ignore & stonewall without responding to questions or critique substantially and/or fully, wrest scripture out of context & refuse to acknowledge challenge pointing that fact out, play games of selective censorship to give the appearance of responding and honest discourse without addressing the real points of contention & question, or take refuge in the smoke & shadows of mysticism with demands that all not joining them in their concessions to antichrist were antichrist themselves!

….and continually seeking, with the puffing of vanity & the flattery of intellect, the wooing of vain ambition & seduction of impurity & sin, to initiate & draw men into allegiance & under them in their vain, sin-denying, faithless, idolatrous, bloodless Psalm 2 and 82 ‘offering’ and agenda of ‘gods’ and aspiring equals to God as Lucifer! Do not be deceived. Heed the warning of truth & the Holy Spirit of Truth upon conscience. Flee the City of Destruction. Flee the wrath to come. ——coming ALL the way out.

A Critique of Pastor Steve Anderson’s YouTube Comments on Church Incorporation and Church 501c3 Status

Jerald Finney
Copyright © October 14, 2013

Article follows sermon links

Click here to hear Pastor Sam Adams sermon which reveals other Steven Anderson lies (Steven Anderson ignorantly attacks anti-501c3 church position, falsely claims his church is non-501-c3, makes false accusations, and blatantly lies to his church.)(Click here for Youtube of Pastor Adams’ sermon.)(To see Steven Anderson’s documents proving his church is 501c3 click here.)

Article:

"Pastor" Steven Anderson
“Pastor” Steven Anderson

Someone recently referred me to a YouTube excerpt from one of Pastor Steven Anderson’s sermons dealing with the issue of church Internal Revenue Code Section 501(c)(3): http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=p0l2EkAZwB8&feature=youtu.be. A brief review of his ridiculous tirade is in order since Pastor Anderson’s teaching in that blurb is published for the world and since it deals with the institution which Christ loved and gave Himself for. The author offers a cursory analysis in this article, but one can educate himself biblically, historically, and legally on these matters by going to the Separation of Church and State Law blog. Pastor Anderson’s statements, usually in red and parentheses, are followed by the author’s comments.

The author will address some of Anderson’s points in the order or his presentation:

(1) “I don’t go to church because all the churches are 501c3. You didn’t get that from reading the Bible….”

The Bible is a book of many principles. One such principle is separation of church and state. 501c3 churches have at least partially submitted themselves to a head other than the Lord Jesus Christ who desires to be the only head of the local New Testament church. This is explained in much detail in the materials on the above website. For specific information on 501c3 go to the following articles: Federal government control of churches through 501(c)(3) tax exemption and The church incorporation-501(c)(3) control scheme. By the way, all churches are not 501c3.

(2)  “You got that off the internet, off some website…. ”

How does he know where they got it? The author got it from studying the Bible and 501c3 to see if 501c3 displeases our Lord. That is where the author’s pastor got it. The truth about the matter is undeniable by any knowledgeable believer. Of course, one must first understand the Biblical principles of church, government, and separation of church and state before he can fully understand some more advanced matters, but the above articles will easily be comprehended by the believer who has done some study of the Bible. One can study the Biblical principles of church, government, and separation of church and state by going to sections 1-3 (A-C) of the book God Betrayed/Separation of Church and State: The Biblical Principles and the American Application. The book is available free in both PDF and online form. Or one can order this and other books by Jerald Finney by going to Order information for books by Jerald Finney.

(3) He then swerves into an explanation of the meaning of incorporation.

To understand incorporation, go to Church Corporate-501c3 Status, and especially to the Incorporation of Churches chapter. You will discover that he does not know what he is talking about. He is out of his field of expertise.

He states that the vehicle outside belongs to “the church” and that for the church to own it, the church has to be its own entity.

He is right about that. However, a church can take advantage of the use of a vehicle or the use of a building, for example without owning it. To own anything, a church must become a legal entity, as opposed to a spiritual entity. The Biblical principle is that God desires all His churches to remain spiritual entities only. Study the free materials above to understand this. The book, Separation of Church and State/God’s Churches: Spiritual or Legal Entities, is a short book for a pastor or believer who already has a basic knowledge of Biblical principles. Pastor Anderson does not meet that condition. The book is available in both PDF and online form, or can be ordered (see the link above).

(4)  He then abruptly asks,Who thinks we should get rid of driver’s licenses, … birth certificates, … not carry I.d…“?

That has nothing to do with church incorporation and 501c3. Those things involve the individual, not the church. This author has a driver’s license, birth certificate, and carries an I.D. Anderson, not knowing what he is talking about, resorts to “straw men,” and attacks the straw men. Those who are not studied in these matters may be convinced.

(5)  He says,Running a church legally is really complicated. I spend days….

He is incorrect. His church is run illegally and it takes so much time and effort to run his religious organization that he does not have the time to also pastor a First Amendment (New Testament) church. Maybe that is why he is so ignorant about these matters. He does not have the time to do the studying a pastor is instructed by the Bible to do. He does not have time to be a pastor because his religious organization is a legal entity (not a church or a spiritual entity) and the non-profit corporation law requirements of the sovereign under whose laws that entity was organized (the state)  overwhelm the pastor, the trustees, and the corporate offices in legal red tape. The incorporated religious organization, a legal entity, is illegally organized according to the Highest Law (God’s Law) and man’s law (The First Amendment to the United States Constitution). According to the First Amendment, the civil government may make no law respecting an establishment of religion or preventing the free exercise thereof. Internal Revenue Code Section 501(c)(3) is a law which was made by Congress which, when applied to churches, violates the First Amendment which is a statement of the Biblical principle of separation of church and state (not separation of God and state). Even though many religious organizations run down to get their illegal 501c3 status, the First Amendment guarantees churches the freedom to do things God’s way. Again, see the website for more information on this – the following articles give a quick look at the issues: Does God and/or Civil Government Require Churches to Get 501(c)(3) Status, and Christians Who Call Evil Good and Good Evil.

(6)  Then he says,Same thing with my business. Running a business is even worse than running a church…. [It takes me days and weeks to figure out my taxes].

He runs his church like he runs his business! Exactly. Are you getting the picture? Of course, when one runs a church like he runs a business, he is grieving our Lord, according to the Bible. No wonder this man is so utterly ignorant about these matters. Here he is, running his business and running a church according to the same principles. In addition, he leaves absolutely no significant time to study, prepare his sermons, and serve as a pastor.

(7)  “That is the way you have to do it in America to be legal in America, like you have to drive with a driver’s license…. I know a pastor in town … he has no driver’s license, he has no vehicle registration, he never files taxes, his church is totally off the grid, I mean he doesn’t report anything….. He even says to me, ‘Don’t do this’…. His church is much smaller than ours…. All of these people jumping up and screaming, ‘I don’t want to go to any church that’s incorporated,’ … you’d think he’d have 5000 people in his service this morning…. That’s shows me that these people are all just talk. They just have an excuse for not going to church….

There are plenty of non-incorporated non-501c3 churches. Refer to the author’s comments under (4) and (5) above for more relevant information. No more time will be expended to explain the obvious about these ludicrous remarks.

(8)  “There’s all this disinformation and lies out there claiming that any church that’s incorporated is of the devil, and that it’s worshiping Satan, and the head of the IRS actually runs the church….

See Separation of Church and State Law blog, for biblically, historically, and legally reasoned and reliable teaching on these matters. Perhaps Anderson is offering his spurious diatribe as justification for his own presumptuous, willful, or ignorant sin.

(9)  “None of it’s Biblical, none of it came from studying of the word of God, none of it came from the Holy Spirit.

Those assertions are applicable to his arguments.

(10) “There are different levels of going off the grid against government…. [Gets back into straw men arguments as “Driver’s License.”] I render unto Caesar the things that are Caesars.

He renders unto Caesar the things that are God’s when he incorporates a church. The church the author is a member of (Old Paths Baptist Church of Northfield, Minnesota), the pastor (Pastor Jason Cooley), and the members thereof render unto God the things that are His and unto Caesar the things that are Caesars. See Render unto God the Things that Are His/A Systematic Study or Romans 13 and Related Verses, available in both PDF and online form.

(11) “I’m not going to prison…. If anyone goes to prison because of the way offerings are taken and the way the bank account is, I’m the one that’s gonna go to prison. Pastor Anderson, the money that you make pastoring, I don’t think you should pay taxes on that. You need to be off the grid, our church needs to be totally off the grid. I church needs to do everything in cash. I’m the one that’s gonna go to prison and you’re just gonna disappear off into the sunset.

Anderson speaks like a businessman or the CEO or a corporate religious organization. He speaks in secular, not Biblical terms. A religious organization pays its pastor. The members of a First Amendment (New Testament) church provide for the pastor and his family.

The church the author is a member of is a First Amendment (New Testament) church (Old Paths Baptist Church of Northfield, Minnesota) which means it is non-incorporated and non-501c3. The pastor (Pastor Jason Cooley) pays income tax on the money given by the church body to provide for him and his family. Tithes, offerings, and gifts which are administered through a bank account (which is not in the name of the church but which is held in accordance with the law) are given to God, not to a religious organization or a corporation (as is the case with the incorporated and/or 501c3 religious organization), and used for Biblically acceptable purposes. If any pastor or church member commits a crime and is charged and convicted, he will be punished according to the prescriptions of his state (or the federal) penal code. That is true no matter how one’s church is organized. If one commits a tort, he is subject to suit in civil court, no matter how his church is organized. See Separation of Church and State Law and resources thereon for much more on this. See the website to learn who is more subject to liability – the member of the incorporated and/or 501c3 church or the member of a church which is not a legal entity.

(12) “Most churches are 501c3 and to say they’re wicked, you’re wicked.”

His misleading and false arguments and attacks would be funny if the subject matter were not so important. Sadly, many so called “Doctors” who are pastors, presidents of Bible Colleges, etc. are as lacking in substance and reasoning ability as this man as they argue before their “herd” and before the world, thereby not only hurting the cause of Christ as they mislead the members of their corporation while giving the world a good laugh as they are turned off to what they perceive to be a ridiculous religion. If one is going to invoke the ire of the world, why not do it in a manner which honors God – that is, with knowledge, understanding, and wisdom – the way the apostles did it and the way the Lord instructs us to do it in his word.

The author chooses to stop there with the analysis. The reader has access to enough information in the links above to check the matter out for himself. He can also get the same information by studying the Bible, law, and history. “For I am jealous over you with godly jealousy: for I have espoused you to one husband, that I may present you as a chaste virgin to Christ.” (2 Corinthians 11:2). “Husbands, love your wives, even as Christ also loved the church, and gave himself for it; That he might sanctify and cleanse it with the washing of water by the word, That he might present it to himself a glorious church, not having spot, or wrinkle, or any such thing; but that it should be holy and without blemish.” (Ephesians 5:25-27). The incorporated churches and the 501c3 churches have taken on another lover for worldly approval, help, direction, control, power and financial gain. If a church is both incorporated and 501c3, that church has taken on two other lovers and is doubly the adulteress. These actions grieve our Lord, the Bridegroom, Husband, and Head of the church. Ultimately, these actions result in the death of the adulterous, heretical, and apostate churches.

Secular and Christian revisionism


Jerald Finney
Copyright © December 31, 2012


Click here to go to the entire history of religious liberty in America.


Note. This is a modified version of Section IV, Chapter 2 of God Betrayed: Separation of Church and State/The Biblical Principles and the American Application. Audio Teachings on the History of the First Amendment has links to the audio teaching of Jerald Finney on the history of the First Amendment.


Secular and Christian Revisionism

The tactics of Christian and secular revisionists do not change. As Isaac Backus noted, concerning the revisionism and lies of the leaders of the established churches in the colonies:

“[I] appeal to the conscience of every reader, whether he can find three worse things on earth, in the management of controversy, than, first, to secretly take the point disputed for truth without any proof; then, secondly, blending that error with known truths, to make artful addresses to the affections and passions of the audience, to prejudice their minds, before they hear a word that the respondent has to say; and thirdly, if the respondent refuses to yield to such management, then to call in the secular arm to complete the argument” (Isaac Backus, A History of New England With Particular Reference to the Denomination of Christians called Baptists, Volume 1 (Eugene, Oregon: Wipf & Stock Publishers, Previously published by Backus Historical Society, 1871), p. 150. This comment followed and preceded illustrations of how those in favor of church/state marriage, infant baptism, etc. advance their cause.  On pp. 151-152, Mr. Backus illustrated how those in favor of infant baptism argued their position, pointing out the fallacies of their arguments. Their tactics have not changed, although in America, due to the First Amendment to the United States Constitution, they no longer can call upon civil government to enforce their beliefs.)?

Religious and secular revisionists (including many United States Supreme Court Justices) of our time are using the tactic mentioned by Backus today, absent the third component which is, to their dismay, unavailable to them.

“Christian” revisionists have either reconstructed and lied about our Christian heritage or relied on “Christian” authors who have reconstructed and lied about history. They refer to what the writers of their persuasion in times past wrote and said without placing those assertions in the context of other writings and facts surrounding their sources and in the context of biblical truth. They would have one and all to believe either that all “Christians” who came to this nation worked together for religious freedom and are to be given credit for giving us a “Christian” nation, that the Puritans and other sects which followed their principle of church-state establishment gave us a Christian nation, or that those sects of which they approved, the established churches and their leaders, had the truth and dissenters, such as the Baptists and others, were proponents of dangerous heresies. The result of revisionism has been chaos and an accelerating slide down a slippery slope to destruction as individuals, families, churches, and the nation.

What is their reason for doing this? Some are probably just ignorant of historical facts and rely on what others have written (the author of this book was in this category since he relied upon “Christian” authors and speakers until he began to do an independent study). Perhaps the motive of others who may be more knowledgeable is to influence those Christians who do not share their theology concerning church and state to get involved with helping them in their attempt to unite church and state in order to make possible their ultimate unattainable goal of bringing in the kingdom of heaven prior to the return of Christ. Perhaps they believe, contrary to biblical directives for the Christian, that it is all right for Christians to lie to “those who have no right to know the truth” and that Christians can better advance the cause of Christ by lying about irrefutable historical fact which true history has recorded.

Baptist historian James R. Beller builds a strong case to show that the modern day “catholic Reformed Reconstructionists,” under the leadership of Rousas John Rushdoony, justify lying based upon a perverted interpretation of certain biblical passages (James R. Beller, The Coming Destruction of the Baptist People: The Baptist History of America (St. Louis, Missouri: Prairie Fire Press, 2005), pp. 30-35). Rushdoony believes in “religious establishments in civil government and that it is acceptable to lie” to promote the cause he supports (Ibid., p. 32).

Andrew Sandlin calls Christian Reconstructionism “a version of the Reformed, Postmillennial Theology that emphasizes the concepts of Theonomy and Dominion” (Ibid., p. 33).  The theonomist believes that the magistrate has the duty to enforce the Mosaic law.

  • “Theonomists believe that Matthew 5:13-16 presents the Church with ‘a mandate for complete social transformation of the entire world.’ The Church is to play the key role in this transformation by spreading the gospel throughout the world, taking over the function of government, and enforcing the Mosaic Law. Thus, Chilton stated, ‘Our goal is world dominion under Christ’s Lordship, a ‘world takeover’ if you will; but our strategy begins with reformation, reconstruction of the church. From that will flow social and political reconstruction, indeed a flowering of Christian civilization.’ Again he said, ‘The Christian goal for the world is the universal development of biblical theocratic republics, in which every area of life is redeemed and placed under the Lordship of Jesus Christ and the rule of God’s law.’
  • “Another theonomist declared that ‘the saints must prepare to take over the world’s governments and its courts.’
  • “Theonomists optimistically believe that ‘As the gospel progresses throughout the world it will win, and win, and win, until all the kingdoms become the kingdoms of our Lord and of His Christ.
  • “This optimistic belief makes theonomy a genuine form of Postmillennialism….
  • “[R.J.] Rushdoony wrote: ‘Postmillialism thus believes that man must be saved, and that his generation is the starting point for a mandate to exercise dominion in Christ’s name over every area of life and thought. Postmillennialism in its classic form does not neglect the church and it does not neglect also to work for a Christian state and school, for the sovereignty and crown rights of the King over individuals, families, institutions, arts, scientists, and all things else. More, it holds that God has provided the way for this conquest: His Law’” (Renald E. Showers, There Really Is a Difference: A Comparison of Covenant and Dispensational Theology (Bellmawr, New Jersey: The Friends of Israel Gospel Ministry, 1990), pp. 152-154, citing Meredith G. Kline, “Comments on the Old-New Error,” Westminster Theological Journal, p. 41 (1978), pp. 172-173; David Chilton, Paradise Restored: An Eschatology of dominion (Tyler, Texas: Reconstruction Press, 1985), pp. 12, 214, 226, 192; R. J. Rushdoony, “Government and the Christian,” The Rutherford Institute, 1 (July-August, 1984), p. 7; R.J. Rushdoony, “Postmillennialism versus Impotent Religion,” Journal of Christian Reconstruction, 3 (winter, 1976-77), p. 126).

Postmillennialism teaches that the ultimate progress of history is upward. Led by the church and the spreading of God’s Word by God’s people, eventually the whole world will be brought into subjection by that message. In other words, the church, working with civilization, science, and political agencies will bring in the Kingdom of Heaven before Christ returns.

This movement promotes a strategy of lying which states that Christians have “no obligation to speak truthfully to those who have forfeited the right to hear the truth,” and that the “commandment does not say that ‘thou shalt never tell a lie’” (Beller, The Coming Destruction of the Baptist People, p. 33). “Even the famous Reformed lawyer, John Whitehead, founder of the Rutherford Institute, apparently approves of this strategy: Rahab risked everything in order to follow God, including telling lies” (Ibid., p. 34, citing John Whitehead, “Christian Resistance in the Face of State Interference,” Christianity and Civilization 3: The Theology of Christian Resistance (Tyler, TX: General Divinity School, 1983), p. 8).  Based upon their reasoning, they justify lying about historical facts. Obviously, they do not want an honest debate of American history which would reveal that the theology of the established churches justified persecution to include banishment, taking of property, imprisonment, and murder.

These Christian revisionists lie and continue to lie and also to make their secular arguments, polished with allusions to God and maybe even Jesus Christ, even when the enemy is quoting historical truth. Those who observe what is going on must shake their heads at the ignorance of Christians, especially Christian lawyers. Instead of trying to get out the whole truth, which would aid the cause of Christ (at least if Christians including pastors and Christian lawyers and scholars had stood on truth from the beginning of the nation), they lied and continue to lie.

Even the United States Supreme Court is accurate many times as to historical fact concerning persecution by church-state establishments. For example, the Court wrote in 1947:

“See e. g. the charter of the colony of Carolina which gave the grantees the right of ‘patronage and advowsons of all the churches and chapels … together with licence and power to build and found churches, chapels and oratories … and to cause them to be dedicated and consecrated, according to the ecclesiastical laws of our kingdom of England.’ Poore, Constitutions (1878) II, 1390, 1391. That of Maryland gave to the grantee Lord Baltimore ‘the Patronages, and Advowsons of all Churches which … shall happen to be built, together with Licence and Faculty of erecting and founding Churches, Chapels, and Places of Worship … and of causing the same to be dedicated and consecrated according to the Ecclesiastical Laws of our Kingdom of England, with all, and singular such, and as ample Rights, Jurisdictions, Privileges, … as any Bishop … in our Kingdom of England, ever … hath had….’ MacDonald, Documentary Source Book of American History (1934) 31, 33. The Commission of New Hampshire of 1680, Poore, supra, II, 1277, stated: ‘And above all things We do by these presents will, require and command our said Councill to take all possible care for ye discountenancing of vice and encouraging of virtue and good living; and that by such examples ye infidle may be invited and desire to partake of ye Christian Religion, and for ye greater ease and satisfaction of ye sd loving subjects in matters of religion, We do hereby require and comand yt liberty of conscience shall be allowed unto all protestants; yt such especially as shall be conformable to ye rites of ye Church of Engd shall be particularly countenanced and encouraged.’ See also Pawlet v. Clark, 9 Cranch 292” (Everson v. Board of Education, 330 U.S. 1, fn. 6 at 9; 67 S. Ct. 504, fn. 6 at 508; 91 L. Ed. 711, fn. 6 at 720; 1947 U.S. LEXIS 2959; 168 A.L.R. 1392 (1947)).

The Court in Everson and in other cases also wrote of the persecutions going on in the Old World prior to the settlement of America, the persecutions going on in America, and the religious turmoil out of which our First Amendment emerged. Of course, the Supreme Court placed the above facts in a case which gave a new meaning to “separation of church and state.” Additionally, the Court never addressed the false theology versus the accurate theology that resulted in religious liberty and freedom of conscience in America. They never examined the true biblical principles concerning the sovereignty of God over all governments, religious liberty, and freedom of conscience.  Had the whole truth been argued by Christian lawyers at that time, as well as before and after that time, the downfall of America may have been at least stalled. At the very least, the name of Christ would have been exalted rather than abased.

In addition, true Catholicism still despises separation of church and state. Of course, most Catholics “laymen” have no clue about Catholic theology on the relationship of church and state and Catholic interpretation of end-time biblical teachings. Catholic theology still calls for union of the Catholic “church” and state and believes that the “church,” working with civil government will bring peace and unity to the earth. In the first half of the nineteenth century, Samuel F. B. Morris discovered and publicized a Catholic political conspiracy against the United States of America (Ireneus Prime, The Life of Samuel F. B. Morse (New York: Arno Press, 1974), p. 730; Samuel F. B. Morse, Foreign Conspiracy Against the Liberties of the United States (New York: Arno Press, 1977), pp. 19-20, 28-29, 31; Samuel F. B. Morse, Imminent Dangers to the Free Institutions of the United States Through Foreign Immigration (New York: Arno Press, 1969), pp. 7, 8; cited in Dr. William P. Grady, What Hath God Wrought: A Biblical Interpretation of American History (Knoxville, Tennessee: Grady Publications, Inc., 1999), pp. 221-222)).  “At least 45 fanatically anti-Catholic newspapers and periodicals could be purchased in the … U.S. of A…. There were also well over 500 books and pamphlets written on this anti-popery theme as well” (Grady, What Hath God Wrought!, p. 225).

Dr. Morse [wrote]: “From whom is authority to govern derived? Austria and the United States will agree in answering,—from God. The opposition of opinion occurs in the answers to the next question. To whom on earth is this authority delegated? Austria answers, To the EMPEROR, who is the source of all authority,—‘I the Emperor do ordain,…’ The United States answers, To the PEOPLE, in whom resides the Sovereign power,—‘We the People do ordain, establish, grant,’… In one principle is recognized the necessity of the servitude of the people, the absolute dependence of the subject, unqualified submission to the commands of the rulers without question or examination. The Ruler is Master, the People are Slaves. In the other is recognized the supremacy of the people, the equality of rights themselves; the Ruler is a public servant, receiving wages from the people to perform services agreeable to their pleasure; amenable in all things to them; and holding office at their will. The Ruler is Servant; the People are Master.

“The fact and important nature of the difference in these antagonistic doctrines, leading, as is perceived, to diametrically opposite results, are all that is needful to state in order to proceed at once to the inquiry, which position does the Catholic sect and the Protestant sects severally favor? The Pope, the supreme Head of the Catholic church, claims to be the ‘Vicegerent of God,’ supreme ‘over all mortals;’ ‘over all Emperors, Kings, Princes, Potentates and People;’ King of kings and Lord of lords.’ He calls himself, ‘the divinely appointed dispenser of spiritual and temporal punishments;’ ‘armed with power to depose Emperors and Kings, and absolve subjects from their oath of allegiance:’ ‘from him lies no appeal;’ ‘he is responsible to no one on earth;’ ‘he is judged of no one but God’” (Morse, Foreign Conspiracy, pp. 34-35, cited in Grady, What Hath God Wrought!, pp. 226-227).

The Pope determines what writings are heretical, and reading those writings, according to the “Congregation of the Index”—an essential department of the papal court—shall be regarded as an offense against the church and against God (R. W. Thompson, The Papacy and the Civil Power (New York: Harper & Brothers Publishers, 1876), p. 91, cited in Grady, What Hath God Wrought!, p. 227). In 1832, Pope Gregory XVI referred to “that absurd and erroneous doctrine, or rather raving, in favor and defence of ‘liberty of conscience,’ for which most pestilential error, the course is opened to that entire and wild liberty of opinion, which is every where attempting the overthrow of religious and civil institutions…. Hither tends that worst and never sufficiently to be execrated and detested LIBERTY OF THE PRESS, for the diffusion of all manner or writings…” (Morse, Foreign Conspiracy, pp. 41-42, cited in Grady, What Hath God Wrought, p. 228). Accordingly, the Provincial Council of Baltimore, in order to guard against error, forbade the reading of Scripture “without the advice and permission of the pastors and spiritual guides whom God has appointed to govern his Church” (Thompson, p. 79, cited in Grady, What Hath God Wrought!, p. 228).  If Catholic principles had prevailed in the United States, the First Amendment would never have been adopted because the two are diametrically opposed.

The Vatican planned a Romanized America. The plan was to be expedited through Catholic immigration. Although men such as Samuel F. B. Morse, Secretary of State John Quincy Adams, Thomas Jefferson, and others warned against allowing immigration of those whose principles were contrary to those upon which America was founded, their warnings were not heeded and huge numbers of Catholics came into America, bringing with them their abominable religion as well as their base morality. A lot of money was spent on the significant number of immigrant paupers, and mob violence by immigrants became a new part of the American culture. Catholic mobs disrupted meetings where those of other faiths renounced Catholicism, and Roman shepherds bartered the votes of their flocks to politicians, and fought over the reading of the King James Bible in American’s public schools (What Hath God Wrought!, pp. 229-236, 244-253). Jesuit author F. X. Weninger wrote in 1862, “One of the most glorious enterprises for the Catholic Church to engage in at this day is the conversion of the United States to the Catholic faith” (Thompson, The Papacy and the Civil Power, cited in Grady, What Hath God Wrought!, p. 236). “Vallestigny, a Jesuit priest and deputy of Alva, stated in his address to His Majesty:

“The mass of the human family are born, not to govern, but to be governed. This sublime employment of government has been confided by Providence to the privileged class, whom he has placed upon an eminence to which the multitude cannot rise without being lost in the labyrinth and snares which are therein found” (Morse, Imminent Dangers, cited in Grady, What Hath God Wrought!).

Catholic clergy themselves admitted that there was a conspiracy against the United States and that Catholicism planned to take over America.  For example:

“The Shepherd of the Valley, the official journal of the Bishop of St. Louis …, declared in 1851: The Church is of necessity intolerant. Heresy she endures when and where she must, but she hates it and directs all her energies to destroy it… If Catholics ever gain a sufficient numerical majority in this country, religious freedom is at an end. So our enemies say, so we believe” (Charles Chiniquy, 50 Years in the “Church” of Rome (Chino, Calif.” Chick Publications, 1985), p. 285, cited in Grady, What Hath God Wrought!, p. 254).

Naturally, Catholic spokesmen and writers have attacked the phrase “separation of church and state” since religious liberty and separation of church and state are antithetical to Catholic theology and power. For example:

“Father John Courtney Murray described the phrase ‘separation of church and state’ as a ‘negative, ill-defined, basically un-American [sic] formula….’ After the McCollum decision the Catholic bishops of the United States, in a statement issued through the National Catholic Welfare Conference in November 1948, called the phrase ‘separation of church and state’ the ‘shibboleth of doctrinaire secularism.’ Father Robert I. Gannon, former president of Fordham University, in an address delivered in St. Louis in November 1951, used the phrase ‘the current fraud of separation of church and state.’ James M. O’Neill, a Catholic writer whose interpretation of the First Amendment was adopted by the Catholic bishops termed ‘spurious’ the ‘so-called’ ‘great American principle of complete separation of church and state,’ and affirmed that ‘There is no such great American principle and there never has been.’ Father Thomas F. Coakely, on the front cover of a pamphlet, ‘Separation of Church and State,’ published by the Catholic Truth Society, says unqualifiedly: ‘Church and State have never been separated in America.’ Even the Attorney General of the United States, in an address before the National Catholic Educational Association, charged that the Supreme Court had ‘distorted’ the First Amendment in referring to ‘a wall of separation of Church and State’” (Leo Pfeffer, Church, State, and Freedom (Boston: The Beacon Press, 1953), p. 118).

In publishing a false history, Christian revisionists have done a great deal of damage to the cause of Christ. Their theology concerning separation of church and state in contravening biblical principles resulted in the persecution of large numbers of believers by established churches and hampered the dissemination of the true gospel for over fifteen hundred years.

Satan’s emissaries have revealed to the public that “Christians” have revised history. Even the unregenerate who possess no true understanding and wisdom, although many have been given brilliant minds by God, can look at history and discover true facts when it is to their advantage. The world, or at least the unregenerate who are aware of the facts of history, even though they themselves are the masters of deceit and revisionism when it furthers their cause, must have been turned off to a “religion” which relies on lies.

The knowledgeable Christian is appalled that supposed brothers would lie about historical fact in an attempt to further the cause of the One who was tortured and killed because of His stand for truth. Our Lord never backed off from truth even though He knew that His stand would take Him to the cross. He instructed Christians to be light, not darkness:

  • “No man, when he hath lighted a candle, putteth it in a secret place, neither under a bushel, but on a candlestick, that they which come in may see the light. The light of the body is the eye: therefore when thine eye is single, thy whole body also is full of light; but when thine eye is evil, thy body also is full of darkness. Take heed therefore that the light which is in thee be not darkness. If thy whole body therefore be full of light, having no part dark, the whole shall be full of light, as when the bright shining of a candle doth give thee light” (Lu. 11.33-36).
  • “Ye are the light of the world. A city that is set on an hill cannot be hid. Neither do men light a candle, and put it under a bushel, but on a candlestick; and it giveth light unto all that are in the house.  Let your light so shine before men, that they may see your good works, and glorify your Father which is in heaven” (Mt. 5.14-16).

All the apostles except John were martyred because of their stand for truth. David, who was called a man after God’s own heart, said, “I have hated them that regard lying vanities: but I trust in the LORD” (Ps. 31.6).  Other Bible verses condemn lying. “I hate and abhor lying: but thy law do I love” (Ps. 119.163).  “Deliver my soul, O LORD, from lying lips, and from a deceitful tongue” (Ps. 120.2). God hates lying: “These six things doth the LORD hate: yea, seven are an abomination unto him:  A proud look, a lying tongue, and hands that shed innocent blood,  An heart that deviseth wicked imaginations, feet that be swift in running to mischief, A false witness that speaketh lies, and he that soweth discord among brethren” (Pr. 6.16-19).  Notice that lying is the only sin He mentions twice.

Satan is the father of lies. God, in the person of the Lord Jesus Christ, stands for truth.

Jesus said to the Pharisees, “Ye are of your father the devil, and the lusts of your father ye will do. He was a murderer from the beginning, and abode not in the truth, because there is no truth in him. When he speaketh a lie, he speaketh of his own: for he is a liar, and the father of it. And because I tell you the truth, ye believe me not. Which of you convinceth me of sin? And if I say the truth, why do ye not believe me? He that is of God heareth God’s words: ye therefore hear them not, because ye are not of God” (Jn. 8.44-47).

“Jesus saith unto him, I am the way, the truth, and the life: no man cometh unto the Father, but by me” (Jn. 14.6).

Christian revisionists seem to forget about those verses while taking other verses and perverting them to rationalize lying to promote their cause. For example, they point out the story of the Hebrew midwives in Exodus 1.15-22 who were rewarded by God because they did not obey Pharaoh’s order to kill all the sons born to the Hebrews and also lied to Pharaoh as to the reason they did not kill those babies; and the story of Rahab the harlot whom God commended in Hebrews 11.31 for lying to the authorities of the land in order to help the Jewish spies (Jos. 6.22-25).  The proper interpretation of those Scriptures, taken in the context of the Bible as a whole, is that the Hebrew midwives and Rahab were confronted with a moral dilemma. The midwives could either lie or be a party to murder. They chose to lie in obedience to God and to protect innocent life. Rahab realized that the spies were of God’s chosen people on an errand for God. “And she said unto the men, I know that the LORD hath given you the land, and that your terror is fallen upon us, and that all the inhabitants of the land faint because of you” (Jos. 2.9). Those and other verses do not support lying as defined and practiced by Christian revisionists.

Attempts to hide truth are in vain:

“And he said unto them, Is a candle brought to be put under a bushel, or under a bed? and not to be set on a candlestick? For there is nothing hid, which shall not be manifested; neither was any thing kept secret, but that it should come abroad. If any man have ears to hear, let him hear” (Mk. 4.21-23).

Christian revisionists are obviously not interested in honest debate because that debate would reveal that some of the founders of this nation, such as the Puritans and Anglicans, were deceived and adhered to a theology which, as the world correctly points out, advocated and practiced the union of church and state, enforced all ten of the Ten Commandments, including those having to do with man’s relationship to God, and severely persecuted dissenters such as the Baptists and Quakers whom they labeled as heretics. The author was mislead by Christian revisionism for over twenty years. When he discovered that he had been lied to by other “Christians,” he had to be willing to face the truth. In this book he is publishing what he totally believes to be irrefutable facts and conclusions based upon biblical principles as applied to those facts.

The Consequences of Christian and Secular Revisionism


Jerald Finney
Copyright © December 31, 2012


Click here to go to the entire history of religious liberty in America.


Note. This is a modified version of Section IV, Chapter 3 of God Betrayed: Separation of Church and State/The Biblical Principles and the American Application. Audio Teachings on the History of the First Amendment has links to the audio teaching of Jerald Finney on the history of the First Amendment.


See also, Exposing Catholic/Calvinist/Reformed Historic Revisionism


The Consequences of Christian and Secular Revisionism


“Wherefore hear the word of the LORD, ye scornful men, that rule this people which is in Jerusalem. Because ye have said, We have made a covenant with death, and with hell are we at agreement; when the overflowing scourge shall pass through, it shall not come unto us: for we have made lies our refuge, and under falsehood have we hid ourselves: Therefore thus saith the Lord GOD, Behold, I lay in Zion for a foundation a stone, a tried stone, a precious corner stone, a sure foundation: he that believeth shall not make haste. Judgment also will I lay to the line, and righteousness to the plummet: and the hail shall sweep away the refuge of lies, and the waters shall overflow the hiding place. And your covenant with death shall be disannulled, and your agreement with hell shall not stand; when the overflowing scourge shall pass through, then ye shall be trodden down by it” (Is. 28.14-18).


Neither Christian nor secular revisionism will bring desirable consequences. If the Christian revisionists had their way, the church and state would be working together in America to bring in the kingdom of heaven on earth. There would be no First Amendment to the United States Constitution, no religious liberty, and the persecution would continue.

Sadly, the secularist Frederick Clarkson is right when he writes:

“[T]he Christian nationalist narrative has a fatal flaw: it is based on revisionist history that does not stand up under scrutiny. The bad news is that to true believers, it does not have to stand up to the facts of history to be a powerful and animating part of the once and future Christian nation. Indeed, through a growing cottage industry of Christian revisionist books and lectures now dominating the curricula of home schools and many private Christian academies, Christian nationalism has become a central feature of the political identity of children growing up in the movement. The contest for control of the narrative of American history is well underway” (Frederick Clarkson, “Why the Christian Right Distorts History and Why it Matters,” PublicEye.org (Spring 2007): online at http://www.publiceye.org/magazine/v21n2/history.html.).

He is partially correct in pointing out that:

“We’ve seen how religious beliefs (and other ideologies) inspire people to view others as subhuman, deviant, and deserving of whatever happens to them, including death Ibid. (). It is the stuff of persecution, pogroms, and warfare. The framers of the U.S. Constitution struggled with how to inoculate the new nation against these ills, and in many respects the struggle continues today” (Ibid.).

He is right when those beliefs are based upon certain false theologies. Such religious beliefs led to the murder of millions of Christians who were viewed by the established churches as dangerous heretics. However, his statement cannot be applied correctly to the true Christianity which fought for freedom of religion in America and which has effects opposite those he mentions. Christians who practiced and taught biblical principles concerning separation of church and state have been persecuted since the time of Christ and their stand in the face of persecution ultimately gave America religious liberty. This section of chapters records the history of those Christians.

Mr. Clarkson then goes on to factually tear apart some of the assertions being made by what he calls the Christian nationalists. For example, he asserts:

  • “John Blanchard [a current “Christian” leader] claims that the Jamestown landing signifies that, ‘We were started as a Christian nation and I feel it’s God’s purpose we stay a Christian nation.’ Indeed, to read the Assembly 2007 website, one would think that the King had sent missionaries to Virginia. Far from it. The London Company behind the venture pooled investors interested in making money. For years it floundered badly. Eventually, the company gave up the commercial charter and control reverted to the Crown. The gauzy view of Christians claiming the land for Christ and King is clarified by history.
  • “When news of the Assembly 2007 and Blanchard’s claim reached Joe Conn at Americans United for Separation of Church and State, he pulled out his history books in rebuttal: ‘According to Anson Phelps Stokes’s Church and State in the United States, the London Company’s November 20, 1606 ‘Articles, Instructions, and Orders’ did, indeed, demand that the prospective American colony ‘provide that the true word, and service of God and Christian faith be preached.’ But the charter added that the ‘true word’ must be ‘according to the doctrine, rights, and religion now professed and established within our regime in England’” (Ibid., pp. 2-3).

Christian revisionists Peter Marshall and David Manuel include some truth in their revisionism. They wrote, amidst many historical revisions, that Jamestown was a disaster and that the people who settled the colony were motivated by greed and not the love of the Lord (Peter Marshall and David Manuel, The Light and the Glory, (Old Tappan, New Jersey: Fleming H. Revell Company, 1977), pp. 80-105). As will be seen, although undoubtedly there probably were godly ministers in the established church, much of the clergy of the Anglican church in Virginia prior to the Revolution had loose morals, were mainly concerned about their financial security, and were lacking in biblical and spiritual knowledge. The clergy of that church fought to keep their establishment to the bitter end. By far their most consistent and determined opponents were the Baptists. A publication of a law firm that encourages churches to become corporate 501(c)(3) religious organizations recently led off with an article laughingly entitled (to one who knows the real facts about the settlement) “Jamestown, Where America Became a Christian Nation” (“Jamestown: Where America Became a Christian Nation,” Legal Alert (Monthly Newsletter of the Christian Law Association), April 2007, p. 1).  The author, unnamed, states some truth in the article but also gives a totally distorted view of the early history of Jamestown and fails to mention the depravity of the people who originally settled there. Neither Marshall and Manuel nor the author of the aforementioned article make mention that the theology behind the settlement was ecclesiocratic and against religious liberty: the “Articles, Instructions, and Orders” from the homeland said that the “‘true word’ must be ‘according to the doctrine, rights, and religion now professed and established within our regime in England’” (Marshall and Manuel, pp. 80-105; see Clarkson for this excerpt from “Articles, Instructions, and Orders” from the homeland.).

Some of what Christian revisionists such as Marshall, Manuel, and Rousas John Rushdoony teach is factual, but it is incomplete, intermixed with lies, and slanted to praise and promote their false theology which teaches that God’s principles for the theocracy in Israel are to be applied by the church and that the church, working with the state, will bring peace and unity to the earth. In order to further their cause, the adherents must lie and revise history. They must and do condemn the true theology and its adherents out of which came religious freedom in America.

Since they do not believe in free-will, the Christian revisionist has to attribute everything to the providence of God. Mr. Clarkson is correct when he says:

“Indeed, the general approach [R.J.] Rushdoony outlined has become widely accepted among Christian nationalists, specifically that God actively intervenes in and guides history, and that God’s role can be retroactively discerned, from creation to the predestined Kingdom of God on Earth. Historical events described as ‘God’s providence’ are then interpreted in terms of what God must have been up to. This is how Rushdoony arrives at what he called Christian history, based on ‘Christian revisionism’” (Frederick Clarkson, “Why the Christian Right Distorts History and Why it Matters,” PublicEye.org (Spring 2007): online at http://www.publiceye.org/magazine/v21n2/history.html, p. 2).

Of course there is such a thing as the providence of God. But the Christian revisionist concept of God’s providence is totally unbalanced by an incorrect view of the free will of man. The most that revisionists of the founding era (and probably those of today, if the truth be known) might assert about free will is that if a man has it and uses it wrongly, those with superior insight must step in to correct him, and if he refuses to be enlightened, he must, when the revisionist has the power, be banished, imprisoned, tortured, and/or killed.

Just as the church-state dilemmas of the past and those of the present have not been correctly answered by false theology, even though professed to be from God, neither is the answer supplied by secularists such as Mr. Clarkson. As expected of a secularist, Mr. Clarkson, in trashing the Christian right, adds in some of his own revisionism and inaccuracies, and uses his human reasoning. His proposals cannot and will not work. For example, he says that the rest of society needs not only to

  • “recognize the role of creeping Christian historical revisionism, but also our need to craft a compelling and shared story of American history, particularly as it relates to the role of religion and society. We need it in order to know not how the religious Right is wrong, but to know where we ourselves stand in the light of history, in relation to each other, and how we can better envision a future together free of religious prejudice, and ultimately, religious warfare”(Ibid.).

Mr. Clarkson, who by his own admission is not a Christian, understandably does not comprehend the doctrine of holiness which runs throughout Scripture. In any institution, including any civil government, anytime the unholy is mixed with the holy, the unholy will corrupt the holy. A civil government made up of true Christians who know, teach, and practice truth and lost people will be corrupted because the worldly wisdom of the lost will pollute the Godly wisdom of the Christians. The good will not prevail, at least in the long run. An unsaved person cannot know, understand, and apply truth and the wisdom which is from above. All Mr. Clarkson’s wisdom is of this world, which is “foolishness with God.” (1 Co. 3.19). “The Lord knoweth the thoughts of the wise, that they are vain” (1 Co. 3.20).

Mr. Clarkson is right about religion. But what he says about religion cannot be said about true Christianity.  True Christianity is a man, the God-man, the Lord Jesus Christ. It is the religious perversion of the teachings of Christ that brings all the tragedies referred to by Mr. Clarkson. The greatest tragedy is that many will never come to the One who can give them true liberty, the Lord Jesus Christ. It appears that many who have come to Him have been deceived about, for one thing, the roles of church and state and their relationship to each other and to God because they have not become partakers of the divine nature, having not added to their faith, virtue, to virtue knowledge, to knowledge temperance, to temperance patience, to patience godliness, to godliness brotherly kindness, and to brotherly kindness charity (See 2 Pe. 1.3-9).  Perhaps an individual Christian has added some of these ingredients to his life, but what about the others? What about knowledge?

Only a civil government whose leader or leaders are truly Christian can prevent the decline of a nation. This would require solid Christian churches teaching the principles of the Bible accurately operating freely within that nation and made up of the majority of the people of that nation including the leader or leaders of the nation all of whom are sincerely attempting to understand and apply biblical principles.

When a professed believer substitutes his reasoning for reality, when he revises historical facts and/or lies to and about other believers in order to advance his underlying theology, something is wrong with his theology. The consequences of such a strategy will ultimately backfire, as it is backfiring today in America, because even secularists, when truth about facts will aid them, will reveal that truth. And when it is revealed that Christians, whom the secularist calls the “Christian right,” have seemingly borrowed a page from the secular book of tactics and resorted to revising history and to lying, the effectiveness of Christian spiritual warfare is much weakened.

The existence of Mr. Clarkson’s article and much other secular writing reveal the vulnerability of the Christian right position as it has been promoted in America. It is sad that Clarkson includes pertinent quotes (out of context) from men such as Roger Williams, Isaac Backus, and even Thomas Jefferson who are not usually quoted by Christian revisionists. It is sad that Christian revisionists, in their effort to deceive the entire Christian community and advance their agenda of a united church and state so that the resulting union of church and state can bring in the kingdom of heaven, have belittled, misrepresented, and/or totally ignored great men such as Roger Williams, Dr. John Clarke, Isaac Backus, Shubal Stearns, John Leland and others. Their efforts have done great and irreparable damage to the cause of Christ. The author was led by Christian revisionists for over twenty years. In order to be effective in his efforts in his stand for the Lord, he had to be willing to admit that he had been mislead and that the Lord did not honor professed believers who were taking part in a spiritual battle having their loins girt about with lies. “Wherefore take unto you the whole armour of God, that ye may be able to withstand in the evil day, and having done all, to stand. Stand therefore, having your loins girt about with truth…” (Ep. 6.13-14a). [Emphasis mine.]

Exposing the Dangers of David Barton’s Teachings


A Publication of Old Paths Baptist Church Separation of Church and State Law Ministry


DavidBarton_3
Another one of Barton’s discredited books

Exposing Catholic/Calvinist/Reformed Historic Revisionism (Lists links to further resources which expose David Barton’s blatant revisionism)

See, for more proof of the thesis of this article, some of the authorities in the Endnotes below and also List of Scholarly Resources Which Explain and Comprehensively Document the True History of Religious Freedom in America.

For a complete but concise analysis of Christian (and Secular) Revisionism including that of David Barton plus an accurate history of the First Amendment (a knowledge of which totally discredits David Barton’s revised history) click here:
The Trail of Blood of the Martyrs of Jesus/A Case of Premeditated Murder: Christian Revisionists on Trial 

Suggestion: Read this article in conjunction with:

For much more on David Barton, click: David Barton/Glenn Beck Ecumenical Trojan Horse 

See also the resources in the Endnotes. EN 1: On David Barton and Glen Beck EN 2: On Ted Cruz with David Barton at his side EN3: Other resources

For a complete but concise analysis of Christian (and Secular) Revisionism including that of David Barton plus an accurate history of the First Amendment (a knowledge of which totally discredits David Barton’s revised history) click here: The Trail of Blood of the Martyrs of Jesus/A Case of Premeditated Murder: Christian Revisionists on Trial 


Jerald Finney
Copyright © September, 2009
Edited on November 30, 2017

God chose his children to be soldiers who are involved in a spiritual warfare. They cannot please God should they entangle themselves with the affairs of this world (2 Ti. 2.4). The weapons of their warfare are not carnal, but spiritual; and they are to cast down “imaginations and every high thing that exalteth itself against the knowledge of God” (2 Co. 10.3-5; Ep. 6.10-18). The Christian is to put on spiritual armor, which includes girting his loins with truth and taking the “sword of the Spirit, which is the word of God” (Ep. 6.14, 17).

DavidBarton_4
David Barton, Christian Revisionist

God hates lies and half-truths (see, e.g., Pr. 6.16-19). He will sweep away a refuge of lies (see Is. 28.14-18). Yet this is the tactic of some modern day Christian leaders. David Barton is one of those who is almost deified by many Christians. Millions blindly follow him. Yet some studied Christians and secularists are aware of Barton’s inaccuracies which are apparently intended to promote his false theology of union of church and state. One such Christian is James Beller; one can study his book, The Coming Destruction of the Baptist People, for information on Barton and others of the reformed persuasion.

In this blog, I want to concentrate more on one secular analysis of Barton. In an online article (printed by permission at http://candst.tripod.com/boston1.htm, and originally published in Church and State, Vol. 46, No. 4, April 1993, pp. 8-12)  entitled “Sects, Lies and Videotape/David Barton’s Distorted History,” secularist Rob Boston finds David Barton easy prey.

Of course, a knowledgeable Christian can slice Boston and his secular writings to pieces. Boston has a closed, non-christian mind which is incapable of gaining understanding and wisdom because he cuts God and His principles out of the equation. As is true of all educated secularists, he is a revisionist. However, as a bright secularist, he is also able to seek out and find facts. He is an able researcher who has torn Barton’s works apart. He correctly states, “Although [Barton’s] books and videos are riddled with factual errors, half truths, and distortions, they have become the weapons of  choice for religious right activists in their ongoing war against separation of church and state.”

In the article, Boston then gives many examples of Barton’s bad history. Of course, Boston mixes in some inaccuracies of his own, but the point is, secularists and Christians can check to see if Boston is telling the truth about Barton’s bad history. In the main, Boston is correct. With one fell swoope he completely discredits not only Barton, but also the millions of undereducated Christians who blindly follow him. Are others thereby encouraged to look into the truths of Christianity? After seeing the obvious lies and distortions of a leading Christain, are they more likely to seek the truth of salvation?

Let me briefly say that I was one of those miseducated Christians who blindly followed Barton and others of his ilk for many years. As I worked with millions of other Christians, I simultaneously witnessed the futility of our efforts. America continued and continues to sink deeper and deeper into immorality, humanism, and pluralism before our eyes. American “christianity” continued and continues to increase its heresies and apostasies. More and more American churches were and are obviously seeking the “happiness of man” rather than the “glory of God.” They were and are becoming “social clubs” patterned after worldly and satanic principles rather than “houses of God” formed, organized and operated according to New Testament church doctrine.

Why would Barton and others use anti-biblical lies and methods to further their agenda of union of church and state? I am not sure about Barton, because I am not sure he has any understanding and wisdom. I must note here that he can memorize selected facts, lies, and half-truths and present them more effectively than anyone I have ever seen. But I do know that many of those he quotes, relies on, and recognizes are covenant theologians who want union of church and state (an established church or churches), and also justify lying to achieve their goals. They actually twist Scripture to advocate that Christians should lie in the spiritual warfare we are engaged in. I cover this in much more detail in The Trail of Blood of the Martyrs of Jesus/A Case of Premeditated Murder: Christian Revisionists on Trial and in God Betrayed/Separation of Church and State: The Biblical Principles and the American Application.

God’s Word teaches that He desires every Gentile nation to choose to proceed under Him and His principles. However, the Bible also teaches that God does not desire any Gentile nation to work hand in hand with, over, or under a church or churches.

It’s very simple. A church is not God. Combining church and state violates several biblical principles including the principle of separation. Church and state are so distinct that they are mutually exclusive. Again, see God Betrayed for a thorough study.

God ordained only one theocracy, the theocracy of Israel. He was, until Israel asked for a king as recorded in 1 Samuel 8, directly over the nation and the Jewish religion and state acted hand in hand. However, Gentile nations were to proceed under the original plan which God ordained at the flood. Gentile nations, of course, were given their authority by God and were to exercise their God-given authority under Him. No nation, including Ameria, has ever chosen to proceed under God.

It is one thing to be directly under God and His principles, but it is an entirely different thing to be under a church-state combination. Every such union has resulted in the corruption of individuals, families, the established church, and the nation. In addition and contrary to biblical teachings for Christians and churches, official state churches have always used the arm of the state to horribly persecute those labeled “heretics” by the official “church.” Millions were beheaded, burned alive, drowned, hanged, and put to death in the most unimaginably horrible ways because they refused to bow down to the false theologies of state churches.

Our Baptist forefathers understood this. Many of our founding fathers understood this. James Madison and Thomas Jefferson clearly understood this as is easily seen by reading their words. See The Trail of Blood of the Martyrs of Jesus/A Case of Premeditated Murder: Christian Revisionists on Trial or God Betrayed/Separation of Church and State: The Biblical Principles and the American Application. But reformed leaders like David Barton obviously do not understand this so they cover up the true history of the First Amendment to advance their goals.

Christians have a choice. They can continue to agree with hell and make lies their refuge, or they can choose to walk in the Spirit with knowledge, wisdom, and understanding. Should they choose the former, God will “lay judgment to the line, and righteousness to the plummet; and the hail shall sweep away the refuge of lies, and the waters shall overflow the hiding place. And [their] covenant with death shall be disannulled, and [their] agreement with hell shall not stand; when the over the overflowing scourge shall pass through, then [they] shall be trodden down by it” (see Is. 28.14-18).

Endnotes

EN1. A Christian friend wrote me over the internet:

“What I can’t figure out is why David Barton embraces Glenn Beck.  He knows better.”

My answer to her was:

Good to hear from you, _______________. David Barton knows exactly what he is doing. He is among those “Christians” who believe it is OK to lie for a higher cause. The problem is that his cause is not the cause of the remnant of Bible believing Christians.
At one time, David Barton was a hero of mine. However, when I began to intensely study the Bible (the Bible doctrines of church, state, and separation of church and state), history (the history of the First Amendment), and law (as to the First Amendment, church organization, the relationship between church and state), I found that David Barton was a false teacher (biblically, and especially historically). I had followed his, and other “Christian” writings (starting with The Light and the Glory  in the 1980s). I just believed these writings, the teachings of which are regularly repackaged, published, and sold to unknowledgeable “Christians” who go into the political realm and fight a political battle not according to knowledge.
I always knew that Barton’s writings were sloppy; but the real problems with his teachings and writings are much deeper. David Barton (and other leading “Christian” authors) select historical facts that support their goals, but leave out facts which give the whole truth. They, distort, lie, etc. This was a hard pill for me to swallow, but the truth is there when one studies it out. Once I learned that I had been used, lied to, and misled in order to support religious beliefs that were contrary to Scripture I became angry for a time.
EN 2. The following was my e-mail reply to a question from a friend concerning Ted Cruz:

April 4, 2016 at 10:16 AM

The following is what little I have gleaned from my limited time looking at the matter. He is Pentecostal. He believes the church should control the state – that the state should prop up the church. He is a dominionist. He is part of the establishment; this is no problem for him because he believes the church and state are destined to work together to bring peace and unity. Of course, deceived “Christians” follow him because they have no understanding of history and Bible principles since, if they study at all, they follow the teachings of Christian revisionists such as David Barton. Cruz has David Barton at his side. Barton has done tremendous damage to the cause of Christ, since he is an outright liar and a dominionist. He revises history and lies. Lying is part of the arsenal of dominionists;  according to them, it is right to lie to those (like Christians who do not agree with their theology) who do not have the right to know the truth, especially if lying promotes their vision (which they, as heretics believe to be of God based upon their perverted interpretations of Scripture) for the world. That is why most “Christians” follow a perverted view of history which is more despicable than secular revisionist history. Most “Christians” just proceed ignorantly and follow their heretical and apostate leaders down the road to destruction – to a nation where church controls state and to a one world government where their hope is that church will control the world. So when articles state that Cruz is “deeply Christian” they just fall in line to support him. He is deeply heretical and tied directly to the establishment. Etc. Some things to google:

Ted cruz’s father and religion
Ted cruz’s father youtube
Ted Cruz’s religion
Ted Cruz religion youtube

There are some good youtubes of his father and other Pentecostals with whom Cruz has been associated preaching.

Some good articles and resources to begin:

http://www.religionnews.com/2016/02/04/ted-cruzs-campaign-fueled-dominionist-vision-america-commentary/

https://opbcbibletrust.wordpress.com/2009/08/29/david-bartons-christian-revisionism/

https://opbcbibletrust.wordpress.com/2009/09/04/exposing-the-dangers-of-david-bartons-teachings/

Understanding the history of the First Amendment is a very important (maybe the most important) piece of the puzzle. For the true history of the First Amendment and more on Christian revisionism, see:

https://opbcbibletrust.wordpress.com/contents/online-version-of-the-book-god-betrayed/the-history-of-the-first-amendment/

To understand it all, see:

https://opbcbibletrust.wordpress.com/contents/online-version-of-the-book-god-betrayed/

EN 3. Other resources: