Created  July 4, 2013                              green 005,000  brown 720,000                       Truth 1's Related Info site

The Declaration of Independence Re-Evaluated

The Premise
The Declaration Itself
Who Governs Who?
The Grievances
Irony Today
Nationalism & Patriotism

Related Articles

The Premise
Back to Top

What few actually read the USA Declaration of Independence, do not really think about what it actually means or could mean (be intended). Is it correct, even? I also read an article the other day about Nationalism vs. Patriotism. More BS! I'll discuss those, too. So I thought it appropriate on this day to display the Declaration here and comment on it. Then you can decide as you want.

I bring this up, not so much to find fault with the present regimes, but to highlight the far greater superiority of God's ways, compared to various national constitutions, supposedly beneficial to their subjects/citizens. There is no real way to separate religion, philosophy, political theory, which is just another form of philosophy, as well morals and ethics. All are totally connected to each other.

My goal throughout is to recommend God's ways, rather than man's. As well, I want to help others of a Christian profession/persuasion to have a much better insight into the lies and deceit, ultimately deriving from the devil. Most Christians remain veiled/blind to date, evidence that they have been deceived by the great deceiver.

The founding documents of the USA may or may not be well-intentioned, but regardless, they are failures, all the same. I will  show you why and what is the solution, if they are failed. God has the solution. I can only give you what He gives me and you.

The Declaration Itself
Back to Top

        The Unanimous Declaration of the Thirteen United States of America

When, in the course of human events, it becomes necessary for one people to dissolve the political bands which have connected them with another, and to assume among the powers of the earth, the separate and equal station to which the laws of nature and of nature's God entitle them, a decent respect to the opinions of mankind requires that they should declare the causes which impel them to the separation.

>> Simpler said, we should explain why we no longer want to be a part of a government or nation and its people.<<

We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable rights, that among these are life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness.

>> That one statement above deserves a lot of words so that I am switching to regular black text, which is so much more readable and printable.<<

Its me! You should know that this Declaration was largely based in the ideas of John Locke, a well known philosopher of the "Enlightenment."

“He expressed the radical view that government is morally obliged to serve people, namely by protecting life, liberty, and property. He explained the principle of checks and balances to limit government power. He favored representative government and a rule of law. He denounced tyranny. He insisted that when government violates individual rights, people may legitimately rebel.”

  AUGUST 01, 1996 by JIM POWELL
                                                                                    John Locke to the right

To go one further, Locke actually suggested that we had rights to property. The God (Jehovah/Yahuweh) of the Bible, Jews, and Christians, made land an inherited right for His people of the time following Moses.

Owning Farm Land Is Vital

Jefferson changed it, because "someone" wanted it changed. Jefferson had it in, originally. Jefferson obediently changed it. Property was changed to a vague ambiguous "pursuit of happiness." Owning land was not something the secret wealthy men of power had in mind, when they initiated the revolution in the minds of their "servants," whose names are signed to this Declaration.

This is, to my mind and thinking, is prima-facie (uncontestable) evidence of what those behind the revolution intended for us all along. To deprive us of land ownership and prerogatives over that land as well. Land, that is, substantial land, enough to grow food to support our families, was a right and also a necessity, by which we could remain independent from most oversight by others, acting or trying to act as our bosses and controllers. This was our true means of independence.

By denying us enough land to sustain ourselves with food, and even denying owning enough land for a house without paying continual rent, and dictating to us what we can and can not do with our land and house, and forcing us to pay "taxes" (another name for rent) in order to be allowed to continue living at that house lot; we have become tenants of the land, rather than owners and without any real rights or ownership. Even after paying off the house, we still  have to pay steep taxes in order to be allowed to keep it.

Now I am not against any taxes. We obviously have needs in our day to day life in cities that require shared expenses. Taxes pay for those things we enjoy in common and benefit in common such as trash removal, roads and plowing, and related things like that. But such taxes should only be applied to or base on, our income generated, above normal living expenses incurred. So if we were unemployed, we pay no taxes and still get to keep our houses.

So now I want to pose a question to you. If land is to be a right of life, to keep and sustain us, then we have no rights as long as we have no land. Our ability to sustain ourselves requires land that produces food. This means it has to be a fair amount of land, a farm really. But if we have to buy it and buy it with a loan, then it is not ours till it is paid for. As long as we are in debt by the loan, then we are not independent and self-sustaining. we are in financial bondage and slavery. And being in serious debt as is the case for most now, with 30-40 year mortgages, and not guaranteed income because not no guaranteed job, then we live in constant peril and no rights at work, either.

Our bosses can be as nasty, mean, and unfair as they want. they do not have to treat us with dignity or respect. They can fire almost at will. In Maine, they can fire at will, with virtually no rights to employees. They call it "Employment at Will." Having your own land and ability to produce your own food are the only rights that can secure your protection from abuse, maltreatment and protect you from bondage and servitude to harsh unfair loans where you end up paying at least 3 times the amount you paid for your home, that you may never pay off, anyway, and may lose when you get unemployed, due to no fault of your own.

I want to highlight the superiority of God's way in the Bible. The people of Israel had a right to land. It was a right of inheritance. Large land grants were reserved by Moses for the tribes and families of Israel. So when you become of age to marry, land was GIVEN to you, as a right of inheritance, by your father, it having been delivered to him by his father.

In this way, you had a means of independence, self-sustenance, and freedom from the control of others. Autonomy! This is vital for every human being ever to have been born. We do not want to live under the control and authority of others. Our lives are our own, for us to do as we wish, while respecting the rights of others to do the same, within reason.

But in our times, we have no such rights or protections and none were ever granted in the Declaration, Constitution, or Bill of Rights. So while there is much talk in our nation and its history, the truth is that we have never had any rights that were meaningful or truthful. We were always left at the mercy of others more wealthy and power than we were.

The Bible sought to protect God's people as much as possible from dominators, controllers, and financial abusers; from within and from far away.

So you have to recognize that the founders of the Declaration did not secure any rights for us, but did lead us to believe or tied to lead us to believe we had some rights to live (without securing a means of living), liberty (without protections from those who steal liberty with bondage), and pursuit if happiness while not giving us the means to support our independence and self-sufficiency.

We can not have life, liberty, and happiness if we have no source and means of sustenance independent from anyone else. This is the harsh biter truth. We never had any rights granted to us by other men. It was a lie from the very beginning for the father of the lie motivated these men to lie to us. Our while foundation of government is a fraud. What we have is a deceptive illusion designed to enslave us and keep us enslaved for as long as we live. I just wanted to get the record straight.

Only God can give you the life, liberty, and happiness that you seek. ONLY God! The devil is not interested in giving you any of that nor are his followers, both the knowing and the unknowing, if there are any unknowing. 

To spell it out further, God created a certain life style to serve humans in a good healthy way. It was agrarian, self-supporting and self-sustaining, and free from the undo meddling of others, unless you violated laws of the community or fell into hardship, whether your fault or not.

That is to say, city life and working for others in a non-agrarian manner, was never really God's idea of a good way of life. Some manufacturing was  necessary, but not mass production in harsh reckless conditions and contrary to the human spirit and dignity. So our entire way of life to day in cities is contrary to God's will. I just want to make that clear.

God intended life to be somewhat basic, maybe frugal, not depriving us of decent palatable food to reach reasonable satisfaction, but not to get right, either. Riches and extreme variances in living styles were never intended. Though not with out any variance in lifestyle, the differences were negligible. Each had to work to sustain their lives. No one was a slave to others unless they fell into hard times and then, it was only limited to at most, 7 years.

Wealth was a real danger in God's eyes. Wealth is usually gained from slavery or unfairly low wages, and through merchant activities that lacked any restraint or sense of fairness and decency. So God created a system, an entire way of life that would sustain proper human living. That way is far different from what we have in our modern time, the 21st century.

Now lets look at the next verses of the Declaration.

Who Governs Who?
Back to Top

The Declaration continues:
That to secure these rights, governments are instituted among men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed. That whenever any form of government becomes destructive to these ends, it is the right of the people to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their safety and happiness.

Truth 1 now speaking:
 I am going to dispute this one in a big way. Governments are in instituted by negotiation and deliberation, for the most part. They are brutally enforced upon the subjugated. Greeks called kings Tyrants. In fact, those who supported the American Revolution also turned to calling the king a Tyrant, observing the Greek custom as it served their interests. Kings do not ask permission from the people for anything. Kings only answer to very powerful people within their kingdoms who maintain a union with each other so as to keep the king in relative control. It is an uneasy truce that exists between the 2 parties.

It was always this way in Rome during the reigns of the emperors. there was a constant tension between Emperors opposed the Senate and Patricians to some degree. It is always the wealthy and powerful who rule in some manner or another. Any king that gets too far out of line, ends up deposed or dead. Note that Julius Caesar was assassinated, as was Caligula, Claudius, Nero, and Domitian, all within about 100 years time. So kings clearly had rules to follow if they wanted to live a full natural life span.

Most revolutions are not started by common people or a group of common people. They are started by influential powerful people pretending to be in favor of the cause of the "people," meaning the common people, supposedly. The revolt is carefully organized by other  cooperating influential and powerful people. Note the signers of the Declaration. They are all significant, well to do, men who had connections with other similar men. They were among the most prosperous living in the colonies, save a few loyalists.

The common little people are then pursued and talked into believing it is in their interest to help these "well meaning" fellows promoting revolt, when really, it is only the interests of the wealthy that are being sought in their revolt.

That is how all revolts are formed, whether you want to believe that or not. Once a new regime obtains to power, the revolt of the people will never be allowed or tolerated. When King George III was rejected, he sought to take it back by brutal military force. That is the standard procedure for all tyrants. But once the "rebel" leaders got into power, the people would be revolting no more. It would never be allowed.

There were 2 major put downs soon after the USA gained independence (in theory) from England. Shay's Rebellion, and the Whiskey Rebellion. Washington got armies together and put those down. Both were good just protests and rebellions, far more justified than the American Independence Revolution was. but they were put down by bullies who now wanted to steal farmland and stop us from producing liquors from what we grew, and taxing them to death, so that the producers got very little for their production.

This was a matter of over charging income. Taxes were not applied evenly. Those items most sought and paid for were taxed in far higher proportions that items that did not sell for anywhere near as much. Everyone should have been taxes by the very same percentage, regardless of what sold better or not. But those in power wanted all the money they could get and had no respect for how they got it or for justice, fairness, balance, equity, equality, and reasonableness.

So the former colonists of the now USA, switched one tyrant for another. That is the bottom line truth, no matter how hard that is to swallow.

It is precisely the fact that we do not recognize all governments for what they truly are, that we are completely unaware of the state of slavery we live in. All governments serve the very wealthy and powerful of the world. Its always been that way. The words of Jefferson are just smoke and mirrors designed to deceive us into believing we have it good or better than anyone else. Its all non-sense and deceit.

New KJV) James 5:
1  Come now, you rich, weep and howl for your miseries that are coming upon you!
2  Your riches are corrupted, and your garments are moth-eaten.
3  Your gold and silver are corroded, and their corrosion will be a witness against you and will eat your flesh like fire. You have heaped up treasure in the last days.
4  Indeed the wages of the laborers who mowed your fields, which you kept back by fraud, cry out; and the cries of the reapers have reached the ears of the Lord of Sabaoth.
5  You have lived on the earth in pleasure and luxury; you have fattened your hearts as in a day of slaughter.
6  You have condemned, you have murdered the just; he does not resist you.
7  Therefore be patient, brethren, until the coming of the Lord. See how the farmer waits for the precious fruit of the earth, waiting patiently for it until it receives the early and latter rain.
8  You also be patient. Establish your hearts, for the coming of the Lord is at hand.
9  Do not grumble against one another, brethren, lest you be condemned. Behold, the Judge is standing at the door!

It is vital that Christians do not get involved in any revolutions or revolts. See my article, Neutrality and War, on my other site,

The Declaration continues:
Prudence, indeed, will dictate that governments long established should not be changed for light and transient causes; and accordingly all experience hath shown that mankind are more disposed to suffer, while evils are sufferable, than to right themselves by abolishing the forms to which they are accustomed.

But when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same object evinces a design to reduce them under absolute despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such government, and to provide new guards for their future security. --Such has been the patient sufferance of these colonies; and such is now the necessity which constrains them to alter their former systems of government. The history of the present King of Great Britain is a history of repeated injuries and usurpations, all having in direct object the establishment of an absolute tyranny over these states. To prove this, let facts be submitted to a candid world.

Truth 1 now speaking:
The 1st part above will be interesting to explore. Were the grievances raised in this Declaration truly outrageous, or where they making a lot out of nothing unusual and nothing that the new rulers to follow would not do worse themselves. But to Christians, I repeat again, you should not join any revolt, ever. Yet, take note that Christians throughout all ages, beginning near to the days of Emperor Constantine, began serving Emperors and rebels and overthrowing governments when they had been instructed in the Bible not to do such. Indeed, Christians bloodied their hands in aiding Cromwell in his overthrow and beheading of Charles I of Great Britain.

Christians are not smart enough or informed enough to make the right decision on such matters. They must allow God to do as He sees fit. He is the one and only who had the right to appoint kings and remove kings. We anger God and jeopardize our relationship with Him when we disobey Him.

So when Jefferson says it is our duty to resist and rebel, he is wrong in regards to Christians. But he was speaking in behalf of his buddies in power, who had another sinister goal to achieve in ridding the colonies of King George III. This was the 1st of many revolts to follow, overthrowing kings in behalf of various secretive groups who ultimately sought power for the very super wealthy, who in turn, sought it for the benefit of their god, the devil, who long ago won them over with his lies and misrepresentations of what was really going on between him and God/Jehovah.

I might point out that many of the British soldiers were themselves, professed Christians. When the Colonists fought the British, they were killing many professed Christians and the British soldiers who were Christians were doing the same to the Colonists. They placed their countries above their brethren and above God Almighty. In effect, they rejected God in favor of the king or rebels. What madness!

We then went on to another blood shed, this one called the Civil War to abolish slavery, but all it really did was abolish 650,000 men, soldiers, almost all of which claimed to be Christian. Christians killing Christians. The devil had to be delighted with what he accomplished. But John warned us in a letter that he who does not love his brother whom he can see, can not claim to love God, who he can not see. 1 John.

The USA is not God's country. It belongs to the devil till the 7 years prophesied in Revelation are fulfilled and that has not happened yet. We only serve the devil when we fight in behalf of this country or any country. We only serve God and His orders are that we do not fight at all for anyone. If you do not obey God, He will not protect you or resurrect you. You will lose out on everlasting life eternal.

The Grievances
Back to Top

He has refused his assent to laws, the most wholesome and necessary for the public good.

He has forbidden his governors to pass laws of immediate and pressing importance, unless suspended in their operation till his assent should be obtained; and when so suspended, he has utterly neglected to attend to them.

He has refused to pass other laws for the accommodation of large districts of people, unless those people would relinquish the right of representation in the legislature, a right inestimable to them and formidable to tyrants only.

>> Indeed, representation in the legislature is reasonable, but the colonies were not that big, either. The king certainly pushed his authority and defended "his perceived territory" prerogatives. But these could hardly justify a revolution. When one contemplates the despots we have seen since then, George III looks more like a restrained saint.<<

He has called together legislative bodies at places unusual, uncomfortable, and distant from the depository of their public records, for the sole purpose of fatiguing them into compliance with his measures.

He has dissolved representative houses repeatedly, for opposing with manly firmness his invasions on the rights of the people.

>> Rights of the people? Such as? Jefferson says a lot, but yet describes nothing specific at all. Do you smell a rat? I do!<<

He has refused for a long time, after such dissolutions, to cause others to be elected; whereby the legislative powers, incapable of annihilation, have returned to the people at large for their exercise; the state remaining in the meantime exposed to all the dangers of invasion from without, and convulsions within.

>> He is saying that the king had placed Great Britain in grave danger of being attacked or collapsing. This is BS. First, Jefferson and company would have been delighted had this been so. It was not. That is why they wanted to try and overthrow George III.<<

He has endeavored to prevent the population of these states; for that purpose obstructing the laws for naturalization of foreigners; refusing to pass others to encourage their migration hither, and raising the conditions of new appropriations of lands.

>> They were begging for immigration from anywhere and everywhere so that labor would not be so expensive. Sound familiar? George knew many reasons why this was not so advantageous. But business interests in the colonies wanted to weaken British loyalty among colonists, so inviting other nations' peoples to emigrate to the colonies would help that. The kind also was slow and hard to appropriate new lands. Why not? Indians protesting had and was still a problem. The king showed restrain. Good for him! I'm all for the king on this one.<<

He has obstructed the administration of justice, by refusing his assent to laws for establishing judiciary powers.

He has made judges dependent on his will alone, for the tenure of their offices, and the amount and payment of their salaries.

He has erected a multitude of new offices, and sent hither swarms of officers to harass our people, and eat out their substance.

He has kept among us, in times of peace, standing armies without the consent of our legislature.

He has affected to render the military independent of and superior to civil power.

>> The king was no fool. He knew full well who was over here and that they wanted the colonies for themselves and not Britain. So he kept all powers and prerogatives under his control. Our government today has done the very same thing. They control the judiciary and judges to do their will and not that of the people. New offices and oversight are standard in our day as they were with George. George stood ready to put down rebellion by having troops stationed in the colonies. Again, the USA today has their police look more like Storm Troopers or military units. They have bases all over the world. George looks benevolent by comparison. I side with George here, too.<<

He has combined with others to subject us to a jurisdiction foreign to our constitution, and unacknowledged by our laws; giving his assent to their acts of pretended legislation:

For quartering large bodies of armed troops among us:

>> We have police in very city and town. We have the National Guard as well. They stand ever ready to put any rebellion down, should a group decide to do that. They have secret spy programs of surveillance throughout, so that they can detect rebellion before it even gets started. George was a sweetheart by comparison.<<

For protecting them, by mock trial, from punishment for any murders which they should commit on the inhabitants of these states:

>> Our military does the same today. Soldiers rape female soldiers and it all gets covered up. commit crimes in secret bases or openly? It gets covered up. Torture and war crimes are routine activities. Again, George was an angel by today's standards.<<

For cutting off our trade with all parts of the world:

>> Worse today. They took all our jobs away from us and moved them overseas or  let companies do so without punishment or prohibition. Ah, if only we belonged to Britain, we might still have jobs if George was in power. Maybe we can clone him, huh? Wha da ya say?<<

For imposing taxes on us without our consent:

>> Have we ever consented to the taxes forced on us? Could we have stopped them? No! Legislators do as they please. They even vote themselves raises without our consent.<<

For depriving us in many cases, of the benefits of trial by jury:

>> Our trial by jury has been rigged, in essence, denying us a trail by a legitimate jury. They pick jury members and can throw out so many per each side, prosecution and defense, making sure that most members of the jury are handpicked to do their bidding and control discussions in the jury room. Juries should be picked randomly. Juries are told what to listen to and what not to listen to. Many cases are judge without a jury and judge a judge present. Average citizens have been so dumbed down that we don't have a chance in hell of getting a skillful competent discussion and vote. In essence, along with many other problems, justice has been totally polluted and corrupted. George had nothing on us.<<

For transporting us beyond seas to be tried for pretended offenses:

For abolishing the free system of English laws in a neighboring province, establishing therein an arbitrary government, and enlarging its boundaries so as to render it at once an example and fit instrument for introducing the same absolute rule in these colonies:

For taking away our charters, abolishing our most valuable laws, and altering fundamentally the forms of our governments:

>> The colonies originally were founded in charters belonging to merchants, the Plymouth Company and the Virginia Company. King James later revoked the agreements and things went back and forth from there. These are the charters complained about. Big Business wanted the colonies for themselves from the beginning. Kings knew this from the beginning. Both played games with each other all the time. I fear business far more than kings. I find in favor of George.<<

For suspending our own legislatures, and declaring themselves invested with power to legislate for us in all cases whatsoever.

He has abdicated government here, by declaring us out of his protection and waging war against us.

He has plundered our seas, ravaged our coasts, burned our towns, and destroyed the lives of our people.

He is at this time transporting large armies of foreign mercenaries to complete the works of death, desolation and tyranny, already begun with circumstances of cruelty and perfidy scarcely paralleled in the most barbarous ages, and totally unworthy the head of a civilized nation.

He has constrained our fellow citizens taken captive on the high seas to bear arms against their country, to become the executioners of their friends and brethren, or to fall themselves by their hands.

He has excited domestic insurrections amongst us, and has endeavored to bring on the inhabitants of our frontiers, the merciless Indian savages, whose known rule of warfare, is undistinguished destruction of all ages, sexes and conditions.

>> All these charges are fairly accurate. But the king did it because he knew the colonists were plotting rebellion, begin led by business and those who were behind that business, over in Europe. So George hunted down all traitor and insurgents. The USA today will do the same thing. Anyone not going along with their program will be call an insurgent, rebel, terrorist or some other nasty name. But George had far more justification for his actions than the current regime does.<<

In every stage of these oppressions we have petitioned for redress in the most humble terms: our repeated petitions have been answered only by repeated injury. A prince, whose character is thus marked by every act which may define a tyrant, is unfit to be the ruler of a free people.

Nor have we been wanting in attention to our British brethren. We have warned them from time to time of attempts by their legislature to extend an unwarrantable jurisdiction over us. We have reminded them of the circumstances of our emigration and settlement here. We have appealed to their native justice and magnanimity, and we have conjured them by the ties of our common kindred to disavow these usurpations, which, would inevitably interrupt our connections and correspondence. They too have been deaf to the voice of justice and of consanguinity. We must, therefore, acquiesce in the necessity, which denounces our separation, and hold them, as we hold the rest of mankind, enemies in war, in peace friends.

>> Note the word "warned." Another way of saying threatened, to which George gladly accepted the challenge with his own force, not threatened so much as delivered. The Colonies got what they had asked for and were delighted. This gave them the excuse to declare independence.

It must be admitted that George might have been foolish in retrospect, but consider that he did relent on most taxes, reserving the petty token tax on tea as token of their pledged loyalty. But they were not loyal or grateful for abolition of taxes. Such taxes breaks were not even mentioned. Instead, the rabble rousers objected even to the one small tax, saying it was a matter of principle, as if they ever had any principles or honor. They were businessmen. When has business ever been moral or restrained?

But after the British surrender in 1789, taxes in the USA became far greater than they had ever paid under George III. So George really was not so bad at all. The abolition of kings in Europe was not for the better. Big Business and Finance were far more ruthless than kings were. God save us form money interests!<<

We, therefore, the representatives of the United States of America, in General Congress, assembled, appealing to the Supreme Judge of the world for the rectitude of our intentions, do, in the name, and by the authority of the good people of these colonies, solemnly publish and declare, that these united colonies are, and of right ought to be free and independent states; that they are absolved from all allegiance to the British Crown, and that all political connection between them and the state of Great Britain, is and ought to be totally dissolved; and that as free and independent states, they have full power to levy war, conclude peace, contract alliances, establish commerce, and to do all other acts and things which independent states may of right do. And for the support of this declaration, with a firm reliance on the protection of Divine Providence, we mutually pledge to each other our lives, our fortunes and our sacred honor.

End of Declaration of Independence body text. Signature to follow in the next section.<<<

Truth 1 again: this last part was at least honest. The gov reps of the USA give notice that the colonies were now completely free from Britain. Big Business Interests had wanted this from the beginning. There is nothing under heaven George could have done to win them over. They would have made any excuse they had to, to break away. They had ships and support from the Freemasons and surrounding nations like France. They had spies throughout the British military and government, as well as business. The British never had a chance.

France would fall next, and then Russia. Soon, all nations were urges to become "Democracies," so called bastions of freedom, liberty, and equality. but global enslavement has been the real result.

My conclusion? The American Revolution was a fraud and average American citizens got tricked and screwed royal. Yet they never figured it out and they ran to support any war offered to them to fight. Damn fools are what they are. global conquest would never have been possible if we did not have so many stupid Christians (so called) eager to fight and kill, in service to the devil.

Back to Top

New Hampshire: Josiah Bartlett, William Whipple, Matthew Thornton

Massachusetts: John Hancock, Samual Adams, John Adams, Robert Treat Paine, Elbridge Gerry

Rhode Island: Stephen Hopkins, William Ellery

Connecticut: Roger Sherman, Samuel Huntington, William Williams, Oliver Wolcott

New York: William Floyd, Philip Livingston, Francis Lewis, Lewis Morris

New Jersey: Richard Stockton, John Witherspoon, Francis Hopkinson, John Hart, Abraham Clark

Pennsylvania: Robert Morris, Benjamin Rush, Benjamin Franklin, John Morton, George Clymer, James Smith, George Taylor, James Wilson, George Ross

Delaware: Caesar Rodney, George Read, Thomas McKean

Maryland: Samuel Chase, William Paca, Thomas Stone, Charles Carroll of Carrollton

Virginia: George Wythe, Richard Henry Lee, Thomas Jefferson, Benjamin Harrison, Thomas Nelson, Jr., Francis Lightfoot Lee, Carter Braxton

North Carolina: William Hooper, Joseph Hewes, John Penn

South Carolina: Edward Rutledge, Thomas Heyward, Jr., Thomas Lynch, Jr., Arthur Middleton

Georgia: Button Gwinnett, Lyman Hall, George Walton

Source: The Pennsylvania Packet, July 8, 1776

End of Declaration of Independence in full <<<

These are the names of all the officials representing much higher interests than those of Britain or the people of the colonies. Many of these names are prominent to this day.

Irony Today
Back to Top

Christians helped the devil complete his takeover of the world and they enslaved themselves in the process. They deserve what they got and much more, perhaps. They need to wake up soon and fast or they will lose out on eternal life under God, rather than men. But from these lessons, we can see that everything is running wrong and God tried to show us how to run it right but we would rather not listen.

We have been lied to and deceived. but we have another consideration now. Lots of names and labels have been thrown around without real definition. Its time to clear up the muddy water. What is the Difference, if any, between Nationalism and Patriotism and what do they mean? so I want to discuss them both and help you to arrive at a verdict, if you want one.

But before we move on, I just want to say that it is ironic that what was justified in 1776, would be abhorred today. That is because those who encouraged revolt back then are now in power today. It is good to rebel when the bad guys want to get into power. But it is very very bad to rebel in the bad guys have all the power. What turn around, huh?

But Christians must never rebel. God will decide who stands and who falls and when that will happen. But our enslavement should be obvious. We who are real legitimate Christians are the real and true object of Satan's wrath. It is we who he comes looking for. The world is already lost and going to die on a mass scale at the hands of the devil. But real Christians will have to be tested and prove what they are or are not.

Nationalism & Patriotism
Back to Top


Related Articles

Back to Home/Index       Truth 1's Related Info site - The 2nd best site on the internet!

Back to Top