The Age of Reason is a free Bible study/Christian history that shows how and why modern Christianity became apostate. |
View/save chapter in PDF format. |
Samuel Adams (1722-1803) is famous for being the “Father of
the American Revolution” and a signer of the Declaration of Independence. He
was much more.
Sam Adams graduated from Harvard College
and studied law until he got bored with it. He started several business
ventures, lost interest, and they failed. He also failed as a tax collector.
When the Great Awakening evangelist George Whitfield made a big impression on
Adams, he considered becoming a preacher – but lost interest in that as well.
It was not until he involved himself with Enlightened
politics in order to resist the government that Adams became passionate about
something.
He formed a secret political action group
to harass the royal government in the early 1750s that would foment a
revolution twenty-five years later. He published a radical newspaper, and in
his anti-monarchy campaigns he called upon Christians to “dare to read, think,
speak, and write. Read the histories of the ancient sages; contemplate the
great examples of Greece and Rome.” Adams understood men, what motivates them,
and how to manipulate them. Using various tactics he coaxed, cultivated, and
recruited men for the cause of Freedom such as Joseph Warren, Dr. Benjamin Church,
and his young but ambitious second cousin, John Adams.
Sam Adams was extremely successful at
driving a wedge between the colonists and their government. In time the various
accusations about taxes and other unimportant issues, together with the
Enlightenment doctrines about the rights and authority of the people, succeeded
in heating up a degree of colonial suspicion and discontent. But the reality
was that most people in the thirteen colonies were loyal to their government,
and another large segment of the population didn’t care. That’s why it took the
small group of underground rebel activists in Boston twenty-five years to start
a revolution.
In order to improve the odds through
terrorism, Adams secretly recruited a large group of thugs and called them the
“Sons of Liberty.” They were to do his bidding for financial and material
reward. Prominent influential colonists and their families who were loyal to
the government were labeled “Tories” and systematically terrorized. In the
middle of the night they were awakened by the sounds of the Sons of Liberty
breaking into and vandalizing their homes – and stealing whatever they wanted.
The heads of households were beaten and tarred and feathered while their bound
families watched. Actual deaths during the commission of these violent crimes
were rare but did happen.
Ebenezer Richardson, a law abiding Tory
and family man, was besieged by a group of men and boys of the Sons of Liberty
who were throwing rocks through his windows and shouting threats and curses –
just like Palestinian men and boys do to Jews in Israel today. When Richardson
saw his wife struck by a rock his terror turned to rage. He fired his musket
out the window at the mob. An eleven-year-old boy learning vandalism from his
father was struck by the musket ball and killed as he stooped to pick up
another rock. A delighted Sam Adams, realizing the propaganda potential,
organized the largest funeral North America had ever seen.
These kinds of incidents were highly
publicized by Adams. He told all the colonies these “brave patriots” were
defending themselves against “tyranny.” The other colonies, not knowing they
were being fed lies by Adam’s propaganda machine, were shocked at the
“outrageous” conduct of government officials and Tories, and began to think the
radical revolutionaries in Boston just might be right after all.
Meanwhile, the vandalism and terrorism by
the Sons of Liberty got so bad that families who lived in the countryside and
were loyal to the government became so afraid for their safety they abandoned
their homes and farms and moved to Boston to live as refugees where the
government could protect them. They still had to be on the lookout for roving
bands of the Sons of Liberty in Boston, but at least the British army offered
some protection. (There was no police force; in a Christian society none was
thought necessary.)
By the time the revolution started, Sam
Adams and his Sons of Liberty had terrorized 100,000 of their fellow Christians
(with no regard for Mt 25:40) into fleeing to Canada or Britain where,
without their accumulated property in America, and without any real social
position, many lived the rest of their lives in poverty.
John Adams said later that at the start
of the revolution (after the above 100,000 had been forced to flee) one
third of the colonists supported rebellion, one third favored remaining a part
of Great Britain, and one third didn’t care and just wanted to mind their own
business. It is believed he invented the figures to make the rebellion look
more popular, but no other figures exist.
John Hancock graduated from Harvard College and was the
biggest crime boss and the second wealthiest man in the thirteen colonies. He
was a professional smuggler with a fleet of ships, captains, and crews. (Many
of the Sons of Liberty – there were hundreds of them in Massachusetts alone –
were his sailors/smugglers.) Hancock was young, unscrupulous, and bored. He was
wooed and recruited by Sam Adams, who needed his money. Hancock,
flattered by the attention and impressed with the organization and
sophistication of Sam Adams’ underground crime syndicate, which included
communications links with the other colonies, was delighted to be counted among
those in the inner circle. Thinking was not one of Hancock’s strengths; he was
pretty dumb. He did not join with Adams for ideological reasons; he didn’t know
the first thing about Enlightened political issues and
didn’t care to. He was a crook, and that made him anti-government.
Sam Adams organized the Boston Tea
Party for three reasons: First and foremost was money. Many colonists
bought Hancock’s smuggled tea on the black market because they could get it
cheaper than if they bought regular tea and paid the sales tax. But when the
government lowered the tax on tea the difference in price was no longer
enough to warrant the risk of dealing on the black market. And if Hancock’s
income dropped, so did the money available to the rebels. The solution was to
make a big show of dumping the British tea and claim the issue wasn’t the amount
of the tax, but the fact that the people had no say in the tax. The second reason for the Tea Party was propaganda.
It would be presented to the other colonies as a spectacular and inspiring
story in order to help get them motivated to join the anti-government fun. Third,
Adams was always looking for ways to provoke a reaction from the government so
he could publicize it as heavy-handed British brutality.
History records that as the Sons of
Liberty poured out of their meeting in the Old South Church to go dump tea into
Boston harbor, John Hancock called out to them, “Let every man do what is right
in his own eyes!” On an ideological level that quote sums up the purpose of the
American Revolution, democracy, the Age of Reason, the British Civil War, the
Protestant Reformation, freedom of religion, Greek philosophy, Satan’s
rebellion, carnality, and equality. On a practical level, the fact that
Hancock’s quote is from a well-known Bible passage (Ju
21:25 among other places) and is quoted almost exactly, can mean only one of
two things: First, Hancock was deliberately giving anti-Scriptural advice to
men who already didn’t care about the word of God because they were heading out
to sin anyway. I consider that to be unlikely. Second, it is probable – based
on how we have already seen a popular Enlightened pro-rebellion Protestant
preacher take a verse that says you’ll be damned if you rebel and make it say
you’ll be damned if you don’t – that Hancock was taught in sermons that the
verse means it is good to use Reason by doing what we think is right. In
that case, Hancock, his preachers, and their fellow Christians had no interest
in the Bible because the negative meaning of the verse is even clear to “the
grazing multitude”, and because the Boston Tea Party was unquestionably the sin
of clamoring in Ep 4:31.
---------- page 2 ----------
The Scriptures show how truly evil basing
our thoughts and actions on self –
carnality – is. When God had Jeremiah prophecy to His people that He was going
to punish them with death, destruction, and the Babylonian captivity, He told
Jeremiah what to answer when indignant Christians demanded to know what their
great sin was (Je 16:10). God said
their fathers forsook Him and walked after, served, and worshipped other
gods (Je 16:11). And then God
said something quite revealing (and shocking to today’s Enlightened
Christians): He said Jeremiah’s generation did worse than their fathers by living according to their carnal minds
in order to avoid hearkening to the word of God (Je 16:12)! How could God say being carnal is worse than
worshipping and serving false gods? Because a person who serves false gods is
still a servant; but a person who
lives carnally, who lives according to that which is right in his own eyes, has
risen up from servitude by ascending to the seat of The Most High by becoming
another head like God – which is exactly what Satan did (Is 14:13,14; Ezek 28:2,6,8).
Early one fine Boston evening the Sons of
Liberty were out roaming the streets on one of their missions. This time they
were supposed to see if they could provoke a fight with some of their fellow
countrymen who served in the armed forces. Because they knew the Redcoats were
under strict orders not to do anything to further inflame the colonists, these
gang members would stick their noses in a soldier’s face or hold his bayonet
against the gangster’s own throat, and dare him to do something – all while
jeering and cursing him: “Damn your eyes you rascally scoundrel lobster son of
a bitch! You dare not fire! Fire and be damned!” They’d walk into the bayonets
hoping a prick would draw blood so they could prove “government brutality” to
the other colonies.
This night they found a lone, young
sentry and began provoking him. Redcoat reinforcements arrived to control the
mob. When the Sons of Liberty began throwing rocks, clubbing the soldiers, and
knocking some down, they still wouldn’t shoot. At the height of tension and
confusion an authoritative voice shouted an order: “Fire!” Five of the
attacking rioters were killed. One of them was Crispus
Attucks, a runaway half-breed slave and violent felon who worked for Hancock as
a sailor/smuggler/wharf rat. He was leading the gang of the Sons of Liberty
that night.
It could not be proven that Sam Adams
shouted “Fire!” but a man wearing a gentleman’s scarlet cape – for which Adams
was famous – was seen running from the scene. Delighted that he had a perfect
propaganda opportunity with which to manipulate the Christian masses, Adams
himself coined the term “Boston Massacre” and had a fellow conspirator
(Paul Revere, who idolized Sam Adams) deceitfully engrave a picture depicting
innocent unarmed men and women being coolly mowed down by their own military.
Adams had it published in every colony together with a fictitious description
of events. Today it is considered the most successful piece of propaganda in
American history. The following year on the anniversary of the Boston Massacre,
Sam Adams wrote a speech designed to inflame the masses, and he had James
Warren recite it in Boston Common while dressed up in a Roman toga to impress
the people. This ritual was repeated every year as a propaganda measure. The
Christian masses loved it.
Sam Adams was interested in only one
thing – a revolution. He did not want fair representation in Parliament and,
like Oliver Cromwell and Martin Luther before him, only used the love of money
as an issue because it appeals to the masses without the need for intellectual
participation. (That’s why politicians always clamor about taxes during
election campaigns.) And, since “No pope and no wooden shoes!” had already been
used to fight taxes in England, on this side of the Atlantic “No taxation
without representation!” was thrown out to the masses as a rallying cry and as
a snappy little comeback. The following famous quote, issued under the rubric
of “no taxation without representation” is interesting for two reasons: First,
it reveals that revolution and democracy are founded on nothing but philosophy
and its imaginary Principles and Laws of Nature. Second, it mentions one of the
early “proofs” that the Bible contains
errors and therefore cannot be the inspired, inerrant word of God: Since
taxation by a king without the representation and consent of his subjects is
contrary to the “principles of government” in God’s Eternal Natural Laws, 1 Sa 8:10-19 (especially verses 15 and
17) had to be an error because it claims God Himself authorized kings to
tax and to take things from their subjects even
if their subjects didn’t like it. The famous and popular quote said: “My
position is this – I repeat it – I will maintain it to my last hour: taxation
and representation are inseparable. This position is founded on the Laws of
Nature; it is more, it is itself an Eternal Law of Nature…you will find
that taxation and representation were always united; so true are the words of
the consummate Reasoner and politician, Mr. Locke. I
before alluded to his book – I have again consulted
him – and find that he writes…so much in favor of my own sentiments. The words
of this great man are well worth your serious attention. His Principles are
drawn from the Heart…I know not to what, under Providence, the
revolution and all its happy effects are more owing, than to the Principles of
government laid down by Mr. Locke.”
The British position against rebellion,
although hypocritical because of that Christian nation’s own history of
rebellion and adherence to the Laws of Nature, was this time correctly based on
authority. When the colonies claimed that their charters made them
self-governing, sovereign states, the representative of the king replied, “The
King did not grant away his sovereignty over you when he made you a
corporation. When His Majesty gave you power to make wholesome laws, and to
administer justice by them, he parted not with his right of judging whether
justice was administered accordingly or not. When His Majesty gave you
authority over such subjects as live within your jurisdiction, he made them not
your subjects, nor you their supreme authority. The colonies are
part of the British kingdom because two independent authorities cannot exist
within the same state. [That’s the reason for Ro 8:7.] There is and can
be but one authority, and it must be obeyed. This doctrine is not new, but the
denial of it is.”
---------- page 3 ----------
The f-ing
fathers knew they (like Luther at the Diet of Worms) could not possibly win an
intellectual argument with Britain. They also knew cerebral debates about the theorized
Principles of Natural Law were not going to garner the necessary support among
the colonists for a revolution. Because most people’s God is their belly, the
f-ing fathers needed to appeal to the gut instincts
of the masses with things like taxes, Boston Massacres, Boston Tea Parties,
snappy little comebacks, British “brutality”, a “tyrant” of a king, etc.
(Stupid and inconsequential things that are still popular with the masses
today.) Two of the most influential of the propagandists for the rebels
(besides Sam Adams who had no peer) were Ben Franklin and Thomas Paine.
Benjamin Franklin (1706-1790) was clever, quick-witted, and
intellectually curious. There was, however, no depth to either his thinking or
his character. His weight and his age lent him an appearance of dignity he did
not possess. His curiosity led him to dabble, with some success, in philosophy
and its offspring, science. But his lack of mental depth kept him from having
anything to contribute to the debates in the Continental Congress, so he slept
and drooled during most of the sessions. His quick wit, his sexual innuendos,
his bawdy humor (including his famous masturbation stories), and his humorous
Rational irreverence towards the Bible kept those around him doubled up with
laughter. His popularity and his newspaper made him a valuable propagandist for
the secret and unlawful organization of rebels. Why he joined the rebels is
unknown because he was not motivated by principle, did not want a revolution,
and – unlike many of his prominent co-conspirators – had no real grudge against
the government.
Franklin could not even convince his
adult illegitimate son, William Franklin, to rebel against the government. In
fact, when William successfully argued from a legal and moral standpoint that
the Boston Tea Party was wrong, the mentally out-maneuvered father, filled with
impotent frustration, reacted with immature, defensive anger and denounced his
bastard son as a Tory “courtier” (a derogatory epithet used by the rebels) and
screamed that William saw “everything with government eyes!” – an argument neither penetrating nor convincing. However,
when he calmed down, Ben had the good sense to send word to his boss in Boston
that the Tea Party was criminal vandalism and a disgrace, and recommended that
restitution be made. When the message was read to Sam Adams he looked at the
other f-ing fathers and sneered, “Franklin may be a
good philosopher, but he is a bungling politician.”
Historians have found Adam’s remark
revealing. It is known that throughout the buildup to the revolution the f-ing fathers continually lied, broke the law, had people
beaten, encouraged vandalism and theft, ruined the lives of innocent
Christians, were in effect crime bosses who allied themselves with and made use
of other outlaws, and deceitfully manipulated the viewpoints of naïve,
unsuspecting Christian families – all of which have dispelled any illusions
among historians that these were men of character and integrity wearing white
hats while standing up for truth, justice, and the American way. And, while a
few writers have chosen to ignore the fact that evil fruit does not come from
good trees, and have chosen to assume the founding fathers were merely reacting
to events as they were swept along by them (like Martin Luther), it is well
known that these f-ing conspirators actually planned,
orchestrated, and executed the events that resulted in war. Ben Franklin’s
comments and suggestion about the Tea Party to his bosses in Boston were true,
were just, and were the right thing to do (and they
show that Franklin was not a member of the inner circle). Sam Adam’s response
to Franklin has in its contempt a dark and cynical amorality that is revealing
because even unsaved men of only average character, integrity, and compassion
do not respond that way about innocent victims. As a group, therefore, the f-ing fathers were men of below average character, integrity,
and compassion.
London, in an honest attempt to find a
solution agreeable to both sides, invited American representatives to come
confer with Parliament, a Parliament that – as we saw from Edmund Burke’s
report – was willing to be impartial with the rebels. Franklin was sent to
London with strict orders to accept no colonial representation in Parliament
under any circumstances. Some members of Parliament, therefore, frustrated with
Franklin’s obvious stalling, correctly accused him of not being forthright.
Franklin put on an insulted act, indignantly broke off the talks, and returned
to the colonies – bringing with him an Enlightened
agitator and rabble rouser who is called “The Mouthpiece of Revolution”, Thomas
Paine.
Thomas Paine (1737-1809) was an Enlightened Protestant
preacher and political philosopher. He was a deep thinker of shallow character,
a drunkard, an opportunist, and an infidel who claimed to believe in a “supreme
being” only because of the religious climate of his day. He advocated a
constitutional republic with a strong central government and a progressive
income tax to support socialized welfare. He was hard-line Enlightenment but
was too bright and too bold for most people. He had a 20th century
mind in an 18th century body. He understood back then – and had the
backbone to proclaim – that the secular principles of the Enlightenment –
Equality and Liberty – demanded rights for women and an end to slavery. The f-ing fathers couldn’t handle that; it was too much too soon.
It is easy for us to see today that Paine was right (based on the values of the
Age of Reason), but back then it required not only the acceptance of a
principle, but the ability to apply it to other things in order to build
an Enlightened society. Thomas Paine had that ability. The fact that the f-ing fathers could not or would not seriously consider
Paine’s ideas teaches us something about them: Their rejection of what the
Bible says, their rejection of apostasy-revealing Biblical sermons of men like
Rev. Jonathan Boucher, and their rejection of the correct (according to the
principles of the Age of Reason) counsel of Thomas Paine about slavery and the
rights of women, reveal the American f-ing fathers to
be true and faithful adherents of neither the principles of the Bible nor the
principles of the Enlightenment – their overriding motivation was Self;
they merely did what they thought was right and good no matter what
the Bible or the Greek philosophers said.
In a way you could call Thomas Paine the
father of modern doctrineless Christianity. Augustine
opened the door by saying the Greek philosophers uncovered God’s truths by
using “Natural Theology” – which is truth derived from self-based contemplative
Reason rather than the Bible. Thomas Aquinas then formally incorporated Natural
Theology into Christianity, which is why all “theology” courses now utilize
Reason to explain the Bible (two things that are mutually exclusive and cause
modern Christianity to have so many contradictory doctrines and traditions).
When Natural Reason became equal to the Bible, Christianity polarized into two
groups: The first utilized both Reason and the Bible – while claiming the Bible to be the “sole
authority”, and is represented by the conservative evangelicals and
fundamentalists today. The second group almost completely ignored the Bible –
even while giving it lip service – and deteriorated into apostates whose Reason
said God would be pleased as long as they were “good people.” The liberal
churches today represent this second group. Many of the U.S. founding fathers
practiced this Natural Theology – although it was often called “deism” back
then because they weren’t sure what the true deity’s name might be. After
Thomas Paine jump-started the American Revolution with his famous pamphlet, Common
Sense, he returned to Europe where his Enlightened
political and religious agitating so offended French authorities that he was
locked in a French prison and sentenced to death. After the U.S. founding
father, James Monroe (whose close friendship with Thomas Jefferson, the 3rd
president of the U.S., would help him become the 5th president),
used political influence to have him released, Paine wrote (while living in
Monroe’s home) his infamous anti-Christianity/pro-modern-deism book, which he
appropriately titled, The Age of Reason. His book used examples from
Scripture (using Monroe’s Bible) to “prove” how unnatural, untrue, and
unreliable the Bible is, and it became – and remains – one of the most popular
Bible-bashing books among those who worship deities whose doctrines are based
on feelings. Paine wrote: “I sincerely detest it, the Bible – as I detest
everything that is cruel…Of all the systems of religion that were ever
invented, there is none more derogatory to the Almighty [because it makes Him
appear to be a tyrannical despot], more unedifying to man [too harsh and
unloving], more repugnant to Reason [miracles, spirit beings, everlasting
torment in hell], and more contradictory in itself [on the one hand it says He
is a God of love and mercy, and on the other it says He is vengeful], than this
thing called Christianity. Too absurd for belief, too impossible to convince…it
produces only atheists and fanatics…and leads to nothing here or hereafter.” In
the early 1800s Paine’s deism morphed into “Transcendental Meditation” among
the literary elite, and is why people sat in pretty settings – like Walden Pond
– to commune with Nature: it was religiously more informative than studying the
Bible! TM and Natural Theology went out of vogue in the mid 1800s when Natural
Law was exposed as a pagan myth, but Paine’s love of Reason remains.
---------- page 4 ----------
Thomas Paine wrote his famous tract, Common
Sense, with one objective in mind: to passionately motivate the American
colonists to support the idea of war against their king. Today, not swept up in
the events of those days, we are able to read it analytically, noting the
trite, inflammatory rhetoric, but looking deeper to see if the tract contained
any concrete, authoritative, convincing arguments – because the tract was
wildly popular and did in fact convince the masses that rebellion was right.
However, because Paine’s sole objective was to sway the grazing masses, rather
than expecting to find sound and authoritative arguments, we should brace
ourselves for still more emotionally-charged sophistry that says nothing
because the democratic masses for whom it was written
were not capable of discernment. In fact, that’s why the title of Paine’s tract
was Common Sense rather than A Biblical Analysis of Rebellion.
The sad fact is very few Christians know the Bible, but all people – even the
basest and most ignorant – proudly claim to have Common Sense, which happens to
be the very thing good Christians should guard against! Let’s look at an
excerpt from Paine’s popular and influential pamphlet:
The
Cause of America is the Cause of all mankind…the simple voice of Nature and of
Reason will say it is right…I draw my idea of the form of government from a
Principle in Nature…the king is not to be trusted…there is something
exceedingly ridiculous in the composition of monarchy. How came the king by a
power which the people fear and are obliged to check? Such a power could not be
from God…we have been wise enough to shut and lock a door against absolute
monarchy…for the fate of Charles I hath only made kings more subtle – not more
just…No truly Natural or religious reason can be assigned to the distinction of
men into kings and Subjects…The Almighty hath entered His protest against
monarchical government…To the evil of monarchy we have added that of hereditary
succession [kings David and Solomon are examples not mentioned by Paine], and
this is an insult…One of the strongest Natural proofs of the folly of
hereditary right in kings is: Nature disapproves of it, otherwise She would not
so frequently turn it into ridicule by giving mankind an Ass for a Lion [King
George for a king]…The blood of the slain, the weeping Voice of Nature cries ‘Tis time to part…for God’s sake let us come to a final
separation…securing Freedom and Property to all men, and above all things the
free exercise of religion according to the dictates of conscience…But where,
say some, is the King of America? I’ll tell you, Friend, He reigns above and
doth not make havoc of mankind like the royal Brute of Britain…I rejected the
hardened, sullen-tempered Pharaoh of England forever…the wretch, with that
pretended title of Father of the People, who can unfeelingly hear of their
slaughter [the “Boston Massacre”], and still composedly sleep with their blood
upon his soul…let the world know that in America The Law is King…For myself, I
fully and conscientiously believe that it is the will of the Almighty that
there should be a diversity of religious opinions among us…A situation similar
to the present hath not happened since the days of Noah. The birthday of a new
world is at hand…men are to receive Freedom.
Common Sense was an instant success. Tens of thousands
sold out as soon as they were printed. It was read from pulpits, posted
everywhere, reprinted in newspapers, and read at family dinner tables. It is an
important historical document because it is the longest and most comprehensive
argument for revolution most colonists ever read. The fact that it was a
best-seller and a successful argument gives us insight into the caliber of the
colonial mind and what appealed to it, as well as showing us how little they
consulted the Bible – even when deciding momentous issues such as this.
When the British government found out
what was going on behind the scenes it put Sam Adams and John Hancock’s names
on a list of criminals who were to be arrested and tried, something that actually
increased the motivation and unity of the f-ing
fathers. As Franklin said, “We must indeed all hang together, or most assuredly
we shall all hang separately.”
Hancock and Adams were now fugitives from
the law. Adams organized a warning system and a militia of “Minute Men” to
protect him and keep him advised of the whereabouts of the British troops – who
were now keeping cadence as they marched through Boston by chanting, “As for
their king – John Hancock and Adams; (repeat); if they’re taken their heads for
signs; (repeat); shall hang up high on that hill called Beacon; (repeat).” It
wasn’t John Philip Sousa quality but it worked.
The two wanted men living on the lam
began staying in “safe houses” outside of Boston. One of these houses was up
near Concord and Lexington where the rebels were also storing arms and
ammunition. The government suddenly and unexpectedly sent
troops up to arrest Hancock and Adams and confiscate the weapons. The
rebels later learned how the British knew so much about their activities, their
safe houses, and the location of their weapons stores: Sam Adams had recruited
one person too many: Dr. Benjamin Church was working undercover for the
government. That is why, when Britain offered amnesty to the rebels, it
excluded the brains behind the rebellion, Sam Adams, and the smuggling crime
boss, John Hancock. And that’s why only the two of them were on the run;
Britain thought it was a two-man revolution.
Paul Revere and Billy Dawes (a street
ruffian and sometime-tanner who joined the rebels merely because he’d gotten
into a fight with a British soldier who’d made a snide remark about Billy’s
wife) set off on horseback to warn the two most notorious criminals in the
colonies the law was coming.
At Lexington the Minute Men, who were local
farmers and laborers, nervously assembled. Many of them were related to either
their captain, John Parker, or to his wife. Parker was a fifty-five year old
farmer with seven children. (The man who had trained the Lexington area men to
fight their government was their own Enlightened Protestant pastor, Jonas
Clark.) Early the morning of the fight Parker discussed the tactical situation
with his men, and they unanimously voted to disband and go home. When Adams
found out about it he furiously ordered them to assemble again.
---------- page 5 ----------
And so the Minute Men and the Redcoats
found themselves nervously facing each other…all hoping the other side wouldn’t
start anything. Crouched in a thicket watching were Hancock and Adams. When told
to fire his pistol into the air by Adams, Hancock reluctantly did so, for both
men could see it would probably start a war. That was the mysterious “shot
heard ‘round the world”, and the battle and the war were on. (It is theorized
that Adams was responsible for that shot because it fits the way he operated.
He was there and he certainly had motive, but it cannot be established with
certainty.)
Sam Adams believed there are three types
of men. First, there are the thinkers, the planners, who manipulate people and
events. Second, there are the leaders, who are selected by the thinkers in
order to implement the plan. Third, there are the masses who
are easily manipulated into having predictable responses – also called
“democratic action.” Adams thought the colony of Virginia, because it was
neither north nor south and because it linked the two regions, was the key to
getting both New England and the South to go along with the revolution. Key
Virginians included Patrick Henry, Richard Henry Lee, George Washington, and
Thomas Jefferson. All of them were recruited for the cause by Adams.
Richard Henry Lee, signer of the Declaration of Independence, was a very close confidant of Sam Adams. Lee had a huge and influential family in Virginia, and he served as its link to Adams’ underground headquarters in Boston. At least five Lees served the cause of the rebellion. Adams had Lee, because he was a Virginian, stand up at the Continental Congress and formally propose that they declare independence from Britain.
George Washington was an Enlightened gentleman without the required education. He was
very outgoing when among his friends but was unsure of himself and reserved
when in a crowd or when among gentlemen because of his lack of education and
very bad teeth. His bad habit of using his mouth as a nutcracker eventually
broke all his teeth, so he bought uncomfortable dentures. They were made of
ivory, cow teeth, and gold, and were held in place by strong metal springs that
constantly pushed the uppers and lowers away from each other so they’d stay in
place on his gums.
Washington
was very ambitious and married for money. He went to church regularly as a
gentleman should, but had no interest in doctrine or in the Bible, “being no
bigot myself to any mode of worship.” Not surprisingly, therefore, he even
occasionally attended Roman Catholic churches. He was careful to never mention
Jesus Christ, preferring vague terms such as “the great disposer of human
events”, but Washington did not have the passionate dislike for Christianity
that Jefferson had. Washington’s written correspondence reveals a deceitful and
shallow man with no real convictions or passion about anything – except his
hatred for Britain.
Washington’s
consuming hatred for his country was the typical reaction of people of low
intellect who suffer public humiliation. In Washington’s case the source of his
humiliation was his terrible record of military service as a British officer
during the French and Indian War. In fact, Major Washington’s ambition started
the war: France and England were at peace when Washington, without
authorization, ordered a surprise attack on a camp of innocent Frenchmen and
Iroquois (this tribe was friendly with both England and France) who were
getting dressed and cooking breakfast. The French party was on a peaceful diplomatic
mission when Washington attacked them and started the war. The British, who
distrusted France and were itching for war anyway, overlooked Washington’s
blunder and promoted him to colonel. The Indians realized within a month of
fighting with Washington that he was an impulsive, inept fool who was going to
get them all killed. Washington was oblivious to how bad he was and immaturely
promoted himself as a brave hero: “I heard the bullets whistle, and believe me,
there is something charming in the sound.” The disgusted Indians gave a full
report about Washington to the British high command, discontinued their
alliance with Britain, and variously remained neutral or sided with the French.
The British press publicized Washington’s exploits and his name became a byword
for military incompetence just as Benedict Arnold’s name was to become a byword
for traitor. When Washington was demoted all the way down to captain, he was
filled with resentful hatred and resigned from the military. Presto! Up popped
Sam Adams, who shared Washington’s hatred and pampered his wounded pride by
asking Washington if he would like to be a general and have a chance to get
back at his old comrades. So Captain Washington, as suggested by Adams, began
wearing his old colonel’s uniform to meetings of the Continental Congress to
demonstrate his availability and willingness to fight if independence were
declared. Washington had nothing intellectually to contribute to the debates
and discussions so he just sat there in his old colonel’s uniform hoping for
revenge. When he was chosen by a panel to be the general of the Continental
army, the members sat and watched with concealed amusement as Washington stood
before them awkwardly reading an acceptance speech he’d asked one of them to write
for him.
Thomas Jefferson, with the exception
of Thomas Paine, was the best example of an Enlightened Christian gentleman.
His heroes were Locke, Newton, and Bacon. Jefferson was not an original thinker
but he had an excellent mind, was an avid reader, and possessed the writing
ability of Sir William Blackstone, whom he admired. And he was vindictive. He
got his start in pagan philosophy when he, together with James Madison and
James Monroe, lived in the fashionable boarding school, Classical School for Boys, which was run by the Enlightened and
influential preacher and teacher, James Maury. Maury was so impressed with
pagan Reason he named his slaves after the ancients. The courses he taught
included Greek philosophy, manners, morals, mathematics, Latin, and Greek.
---------- page 6 ----------
Because
Jefferson so fervently believed in Natural Law, he tried to apply it to
Christianity and to government. And because Reason rejects things that are not
natural, Jefferson logically rejected the deity of Christ, His miracles, the
existence of angels and devils, and all supernatural events of the Bible. In
fact, he went so far as to edit all of that stuff out of the New Testament,
producing what is known as the “Jefferson Bible.” He said he removed those parts
in order “to pick out the diamonds from the dunghills.” The “Jefferson Bible”
is still sold today. Jefferson also wrote a booklet on the “morals” of Christ.
In it President Jefferson used antiquarian Reasoning
to uncover the Natural Law “morals” that Christ unconsciously revealed in His
speech. Jefferson thought it necessary to use Reason to uncover Christ’s
“morality” because when our Lord was crucified He was still so young that His
actual words were “defective” because “He hadn’t yet reached His peak development
as a thinker” as had Jefferson and the ancient pagan philosophers. Even though
he described himself as a deist, his letters to his nephew in 1787 show that
Jefferson was really an agnostic. Because he was a Virginian and a good writer
he was asked to prepare a declaration of independence. He was neither asked nor
expected to write something original, and he didn’t. He merely drew upon the
prevailing philosophy of the Age of Reason, borrowing heavily from Locke – a
man Jefferson thought had reached his peak development as a thinker.
In
addition to the above men, Sam Adams also recruited Benedict Arnold and Ethan
Allen.
Benedict Arnold was a low-life outlaw
with venereal disease whose primary “occupation” was smuggling. He was once
arrested for beating a law-abiding man who’d told the authorities about
smuggling activities. Arnold turned out to be an excellent military officer.
Like most of the others who joined the rebel cause, he didn’t care if he was
ruled by a parliament in London or a congress in Philadelphia. He joined
because he was an outlaw; he stood to gain if the rebels won. During the war he
decided the British were going to win and accepted their offer of an
appointment as a British general. Enlightened democratic principles had nothing
to do with his actions. He was not very popular in England, however, because
his crude colonial manners were too boorish for refined society.
Ethan Allen was the leader of a
“militia”, which was nothing but a large group of thugs (whose “headquarters”
was a local tavern) in Vermont who called themselves the “Green Mountain Boys.”
Allen was fairly intelligent and studied enough Enlightenment doctrine to brag
that he was smart enough to see through Christianity. In fact, he wrote a text
called, Reason: The only Oracle of Man. He was
a pompous, swaggering bully of low character who was involved in a border
dispute with the colony of New York, and told several families to move off
their farms because he claimed the land as his – and his Green Mountain Boys
backed him up. A sheriff from New York went to speak with Allen about the
affair and the talk didn’t go well, so Allen had him brutally beaten. The land
dispute ended up in court, with Allen brashly presenting his own case. He lost,
and was filled with bitterness. Presto! Up popped John Brown, sent by Sam Adams
to recruit this disgruntled young man and his thugs. These “dedicated patriots”
(as the American history books call them) “quickly joined to fight for the
noble cause of Liberty.”
The
fact is most of our f-ing fathers fought against
their government not because they were dedicated to democracy or any other
ideal, but because they were disgruntled opportunists. Take John Paul Jones
for example. American history makes much of his “idealistic fight for democracy”
when he was an American naval officer, but tends to ignore the fact that he
later went and waged an “idealistic fight for tyranny” as a naval officer in
the service of the Russian dictator Catherine the Great. He cared nothing for
either monarchy or democracy; he was in it for the fighting and the plundering
– hoping to get rich from the spoil.
In
addition to Ben Franklin and Thomas Paine, Sam Adams used James Otis and
his sister for propaganda purposes. James Otis is revered by historians because
he was boldly Enlightened. Otis wondered why people
still thought the authority to govern had to come from God and said rule by
kings and nobles (2 Ch 30:12; Pv 8:15,16) was “so absurd,
and the world has paid so very dearly for embracing it…that mankind seem at this
day to be in a great measure cured of their madness in this particular; and the
notion is pretty generally exploded, and hissed off the stage.” He authored
some popular revolutionary propaganda material and helped Sam Adams distort
history for the good of the cause. Today much of the information we have about
those times is believed to be some of this propaganda. But because nothing else
exists, it is accepted as “history.”
James
Otis believed, like most of the intellectuals of his day, that Christianity had
no place in government. But he went further and thought that because Reason had
exposed enthusiastic Christianity as false – just as it had discredited
monarchy – it was time not only to depose monarchs but also to pass a law
making it treason for a man to believe in “certain imaginary beings called
devils.” Make no mistake about it: Our f-ing fathers
did not want a government founded on Christianity, and, as you can see, some of
them even wanted it outlawed.
James
Otis’ sister, Mercy Otis Warren, was also a prolific reviser of history
for the cause. And one area of history that badly needed “sanitizing” was the
war effort. For example, since very few people actually supported the
revolution, the rebel leaders couldn’t find enough soldiers to raise the banner
of Freedom in the face of brutal British tyranny. It was a serious problem.
Therefore, when the Continental Congress, in an effort to solve the shortage,
imposed enlistment quotas on the thirteen colonies, those colonies, unable to
coerce enough men to join The Cause of Freedom, literally emptied their jails
and insane asylums in order to supply the men needed by the army. George
Washington was extremely disgusted with his troops because they were the lowest
of the dregs of society. In fact, the American soldiers only stayed in the army
because: 1) They were promised free land. 2) They got
more and better food than they could get anywhere else. 3) They got more free
alcohol than they could drink. Sam Adams and the Continental Congress realized
it was the booze that kept these opportunistic “patriots” in the “fight for
Freedom”, and that is why drunkenness and prostitution were always permitted in
the army, and why when Washington (who was no slouch at bedding women himself)
wrote letters complaining about the situation, he was always ignored. During
the war some military campaigns actually had to be postponed because the
“soldiers” were too drunk to do anything. Not to worry: The propagandists
invented heart-warming stories about family men sacrificing and enduring
hardships for The Cause of Liberty. One of the most enduring myths is soldiers
clad in rags suffering through a terrible winter at Valley Forge: History not
only records it as a mild winter fairly typical of southern Pennsylvannia,
but the men were well-clothed, full of booze, and were
kept very warm in bed at night, if you know what I mean. Mercy Otis Warren was
so used to distorting and exaggerating history she didn’t know when to quit: In
1805 when she published the first history of the American Revolution, it
contained so many embarrassingly obvious glorifications and pure inventions
that her comrades who were still alive, like John Adams, publicly denounced
her. She, in return, thought they were hypocrites because during the war they
had applauded her fabrications. There is no honor or loyalty among liars and
thieves because their only real motivation is Self.
---------- page 7 ----------
When Richard
Henry Lee proposed that the delegates declare independence it was voted down by
some of the wiser heads such as Joseph Galloway and John Jay. The debate over
independence is boring and repetitious after tracing its Enlightened
principles from the Greek philosophers to Alexander, Augustine, Aquinas,
Luther, Grotius, Locke, Blackstone, etc., but those pagan ideas are exactly
what the f-ing fathers debated in Philadelphia. It
wasn’t glorious or glamorous; they just sat in a stuffy room with the windows
closed in summer so no one outside would hear what went on, and debated how
they should act on the philosophy that they’d been taught in school, in church,
and in the popular books of the day. In fact, if you were there and knew what
you now know you’d be shocked when you saw how these “Christians” ignored the
Bible, and you’d be disgusted with their blind reliance on the secular humanism
of philosophy for all matters of “faith” and practice.
Two
of Sam Adams’ boys from Virginia pressed for independence: Patrick Henry insisted
the colonies were “in a state of Nature”, and Richard Henry Lee insisted
“Natural Law” gave them the right to rebel. But Joseph Galloway rebutted that
he had looked for Laws in nature and had never found any there. Galloway then
outlined an impressive plan that would ensure fair representation for every
colony by a local “American Grand Council” saying, “we must come to terms with
Great Britain.” Richard Henry Lee, unprepared for the generally favorable
reaction to the Galloway Plan, tried to stall by saying he’d have to consult
Sam Ad- er, his constituents back in Virginia.
Patrick Henry idiotically opposed the Galloway Plan on the grounds that Britain
“might” try to “bribe” the new American legislature in order to “continue
oppressing” the colonies. The delegates voted to consider Galloway’s plan and
adjourned. Sam Adams sent some of his Sons of Liberty to pay Galloway and a
couple of other delegates a little visit. The next time the Congress convened,
nobody – including the suddenly quiet Galloway – even mentioned the Galloway
Plan. And one of the propagandist revisers of history later erased from the
minutes any mention of the Plan and all of the discussion about it.
The
next time the delegates were scheduled to vote on independence they were again
so closely divided it could go either way – in spite of Sam Adams’ bully
tactics. However, as the delegates prepared to vote an “important” and hasty
message from their new “general” in New York, George Washington, “just
happened” to arrive at that critical moment. (Adams had Washington write the
note earlier so he could use it just as the delegates prepared to vote.) In
retrospect, the message really said nothing and was absurd. It said the British
troops “seemed prepared” to attack, and the note conveyed a sense of urgency.
The British, in fact, had done nothing to even suggest they were going to
attack – and they didn’t! They had no authority to attack British subjects, and
did not do so until two months after the colonists seceded from the
union. But Washington’s “urgent” message had the desired effect in
Philadelphia. The delegates assumed any vote was now moot because they thought
Washington was probably already defending himself from “British aggression.”
The mood was somber, and the vote was a quick and unanimous “what have we got
to lose” affair.
General
Washington spent the war retreating because his “soldiers” were no match for
British Redcoats, and he actually developed into an outstanding defensive
tactician. His Christmas battle at Trenton (“Crossing the Delaware”), which was
one of his rare offensive moves, was brilliant. When the teen-aged marquis,
Lafayette, (who was dazzled by the noble bearing of General Washington) showed
up with French troops the odds improved considerably. But it was ultimately
finances that ended the war. Britain simply couldn’t afford the expense and the
manpower to continue waging a North American campaign, especially with
Britain’s relationship with France again deteriorating towards war. (That’s why
the French were helping the American rebels – they wanted to hurt Britain any
way they could.) British General Cornwallis, out of food and supplies and badly
needing reinforcements, retreated to Yorktown to be re-supplied by the British
fleet. Alas, the fleet never showed up because it was busily defending itself
in a battle with the French fleet, so Cornwallis had no choice but to
surrender.
The rebels had
won. They were no longer outlaws; they were now f-ing
fathers, statesmen, heroes, and Christian role models. And they were about to
change the world.