The American Founding -- nothing but Masonic curses and pagan imagery?

Listening to an attack on the American Founders, a lot of it about the Masonic influence on the architecture of Washington D.C. which does raise questions about how such apparently precisely designed symbolic relationships got conceived and built, meaning who exactly had the vision and was able to bring it off like that? Wild accusations of the Founders themselves as complicit in this really need to be toned down. The fact of the buildings themselves isn't evidence, you need evidence in the form of quotes at the very least. So far I haven't heard it. In any case there seems to be evidence enough that Masonic influence WAS driving the design. Beyond that I'm not yet prepared to go.

Those who get into this kind of information unfortunately tend to keep themselves as ignorant as possible of the other side of the story. You can't tell them anything about the Christian beliefs of the Founders for instance, because they always answer with the Masonic "evidence" against them. They seem to think that externals prove conscious intention. Big leap there. There's a Proverb about the foolishness of hearing only one side of a story. They rely on just a few of the same sources, all with an axe to grind. I'm not doubting that there was all that Masonic influence in the founding of America -- or the pagan themes either. What I'm doubting is that the whole story is getting told and that these influences are being understood in the right context and within the mentality of the times. You can't assume that what you know about the inner workings of Masonry is what was in the minds of participants in another culture and time. You have to study what they themselves had to say.

Of course I'm in the other position, having heard and read quite a bit that demonstrates the Christian mentality in the founding generation, very recently having heard an excerpt of a book being read on local Christian radio that seemed to do a very thorough job of showing that George Washington was a true Christian despite his Masonic membership. Sounded like a book I'd like to read if I could fit it in somewhere.

It's interesting now to have to contemplate the meaning of all this Masonic occultic stuff which does appear to be amazingly present in government architecture. But those who know only about the Masonic occultic stuff could use a good dose of the other side and do some reading in the evidence for the Christian basis of the nation because it's very strong and if they ignore it they compromise their credibility. As it stands, it all comes off as a jumping to conclusions based only on external appearances and a completely one-sided version of history.

Not to mention that the Christian nature of America is not dependent on the beliefs of the Founders but on principles that had been imbibed by them from the previous centuries of Christianization of Law and Culture. Our institutions were originally shot through with a Christian worldview no matter what the Founders' personal beliefs might have been. And the population of America at that time was deeply Christian.

I still have more to listen to on this subject and I'm not prepared to get much further into it at this point.

WHY ALL THE PAGAN ARCHITECTURE?
It is somewhat unnerving to find out how many pagan images inspired American buildings, but I think that could mostly have been the result of the fact that architects and sculptors, same as most artists in those days, had a reverence for classical (Greek) forms as particularly beautiful and significant, and that was a legacy from the Renaissance, not from pagan religion itself. To know how it was inspired would take more reading than those on the Masonic-conspiracy side of the story seem willing to do.

I don't know what artistic sensibility came up with the Egyptian obelisk for Washington's monument, but if you read the account at Wikipedia of the building of the monument it's hard to see any concerted pagan or Masonic intentions in it. It wasn't one smooth project. Its original plan was changed and its construction was interrupted which shows that 666 feet of height wasn't the original objective. If some such intentional symbolism ended up in it then we have to look for its author for the later stages. There doesn't seem to be such an intention in the early stages at least.

Also, there is no goddess named Columbia and it's plain foolishness that goes on and on about this supposed pagan "goddess." It wouldn't have taken much research to straighten out this nonsense either, just a reading of the Wikipedia entry ought to clear it up. There you find out that "Columbia" is a made-up name that appeared first in 1738 in Britain as a way to refer to America without doing it directly. It is based on the name Christopher Columbus! You know, the discoverer of America. It's an INVENTION for the purpose of SYMBOLIZING the country of America. A PERSONIFIED invention. And again, since artists liked Greek art one of them dressed her in a Greek chiton. (I guess because it suggests antiquity and dignity. You want a Hollywood style side-slit strapless gown? A bikini?) She never existed as a Greek Goddess!! She's a SYMBOL for pete's sake.

For the same reason we also don't need to get worked up over the Statue of Liberty as if it were a demonic curse based on a real goddess. She is a personification of the abstract concept of Liberty. Yes, there were goddesses of liberty in Rome and Greece, but the statue is intended for a different purpose: to represent the freedom for which the United States is known, for which it fought against a despotic king and which its institutions enshrine. Again, she is a PERSONIFICATION of a concept. How would YOU try to depict the concept of freedom in a statue? A woman holding a torch is a very effective image. And again at Wikipedia read how her headdress was arrived at. There is no particular goddess she is based on, many ways of depicting her were considered. She is not worshipped as a goddess, she functions as a touching tribute to American history. It's absurd to try to make more out of it than that.

It is not a good idea to impute to demons what is really just the idealistic work of an artist.

Again, it seems clear enough that there was Masonic influence in much of the architecture, and there certainly are pagan images as well. The one that bothers me the most is the image of Mohammed as a lawgiver alongside Moses on I guess the Supreme Court building. And the Masonic symbolism is pretty thick in some of them.

But I feel a need for a better historical account of these things than the Masonic-conspiracy people give us. My main question is Who had that kind of mentality and the power to influence those buildings?

A GENERAL POSITION STATEMENT ON THESE SUPPOSED REVELATIONS:

I've listened to some more on this subject and although there's plenty more to go I have come to one clear conclusion in my own mind that I want to state here:

IT DOES NOT MATTER as far as Christians go, or as far as the business of the U.S. government goes either, that somehow Masonic and pagan imagery and symbolism apparently got established here and there in the architecture of government buildings. What matters is the intentions of the people, what's in the heart, not what's plastered on the wall of a building.

Of course it may matter for SOME purposes, and if even half of it's true it's certainly a startling fact that needs to be thought about, but it isn't something WE need to be spending a lot of time concerned about, and IT'S WRONG FOR THESE TEACHERS TO TRY TO ENGAGE A PERSON'S CONSCIENCE AGAINST THIS.

What did Paul teach about idols? That they are NOTHING! We do not need to concern ourselves about them. Even eating food sacrificed to them is not to be made a big deal conscience-wise for believers who are to "[ask] no question for conscience' sake." If it IS a big deal for some with a weak conscience, as I understand it they should not eat it because it will defile them in that state of mind, and others should refrain from eating it as well for that brother's sake, but otherwise Paul teaches NOT TO BE CONCERNED ABOUT IT FOR CONSCIENCE' sake.

27 If one of them that believe not biddeth you to a feast, and ye are disposed to go; whatsoever is set before you, eat, asking no question for conscience' sake. 28 But if any man say unto you, This hath been offered in sacrifice, eat not, for his sake that showed it, and for conscience sake: 29 conscience, I say, not thine own, but the other's;

The point is that there is no need to get stirred up about gods and goddesses in mere imagery. It is quite possible for Christian proceedings to go on within pagan walls without any effect from them if they are treated as the NOTHINGS that Paul says they are, just nice paintings and sculptures that remind us of the noble history of the nation. If you make a big deal out of any supposed pagan influence THEN you might expect an effect because you will have introduced anxiety and guilt where you should have left well enough alone.

ALSO, this idea that imagery that exalts George Washington to some kind of deified status IN THE MINDS OF OCCULTISTS proves that HE HIMSELF shared in their point of view is irresponsible. WHAT THE OCCULTISTS THINK ABOUT WASHINGTON PROVES ABSOLUTELY NOTHING ABOUT WHAT HE HIMSELF THOUGHT!!

And making his image on the one-dollar bill into proof of anything other than that he was the first President of the U.S., and one much revered by his own generation for many achievements and virtues, including his role as leader of the American Revolution, is, may I say, STUPID! HE WAS AN IMPORTANT MAN IN AMERICAN HISTORY. Good grief!

Such overwrought thinking really needs the correction of a good solid trustworthy biography of his life. Good grief!

I'm in fact VERY interested to understand the pagan and Masonic imagery and how it got there and what purpose it might have besides possibly making pagans titter at the recognition of some of their favorite symbols and the naivete of the rest of us, but again, I do not trust this kind of presentation.

Another Rant on the Perversion of the First Amendment

According to the ACLU, profanity is supposedly a right granted by the Constitution.

The ACLU sued the police in May 2010 on behalf of a woman ticketed for yelling "asshole" at a motorcyclist who swerved close to her.

The civil liberties group said such profanity is protected speech under the Constitution

...Officers will receive mandatory training in free speech, and will be told that "obscene" does not mean profanity, indecent speech, or gestures, the ACLU said.

This is pathetic, this is sad, this is unbelievable deceit. How far out of touch with the minds of the Founding Fathers can you get and still claim the title of defender of the Constitution? They should really be called something like the (Anti) American Constitution Demolition Union. It's criminal that they are allowed to go on their destructive course as they do. What's the matter with our justice system that the ACLU wins cases on the basis of their misuse of the Constitution?

Oh I don't want the woman prosecuted for such a word, that isn't the thing that matters. What matters is the perversion of the First Amendment. THAT matters! If you want to change the profanity laws, fine, but leave the First Amendment alone! Such laws do not violate it!

Doesn't it ever occur to anyone that the US had anti-profanity laws going back to the Founders and THEY didn't consider it a violation of the Amendment that THEY wrote?

We also had religious expressions in public and on government property going back to the Founders and they didn't consider THOSE a violation of the Amendment that THEY wrote either.

So we're liberating all the evils of Pandora's box and claiming they are protected by our Constitution. America is taking a long time to go down but down it will go in the end, and perhaps the very end will be quite the noisy crash.

Ps 11:3 If the foundations be destroyed, what can the righteous do?

Pr 14:34 Righteousness exalteth a nation: but sin is a reproach to any people.

MELTDOWN OVER IDIOTIC AND DANGEROUS MISAPPLICATIONS OF THE FIRST AMENDMENT.

It could make a person sick, actually it should, and probably does, anyone with any sensitivity who is paying attention.

I just listened to a few seconds' worth of a video news report on the legal question of Amazon's "right" to publish an e-book for pedophiles, because I couldn't stand to hear another word.

AGH, YUCK, BLECH, RETCH.

WHAT IS THE MATTER WITH PEOPLE THAT THEY HAVE SO LOST TRACK OF WHAT THE FIRST AMENDMENT TO THE CONSTITUTION WAS ALL ABOUT? IT WAS ABOUT POLITICAL AND RELIGIOUS RIGHTS, THE RIGHT TO FREEDOM FROM GOVERNMENT TYRANNY AGAINST POLITICAL OPINIONS IN PARTICULAR, THE RIGHT TO HAVE PUBLIC POLITICAL OPINIONS WITHOUT FEAR OF CENSORSHIP AND PERSECUTION FROM GOVERNMENT, THE RIGHT TO PRACTICE ONE'S RELIGION WITHOUT GOVERNMENT INTERFERENCE.

IT WAS NOT INTENDED TO SUPPORT PERSONAL TASTES OR SEXUAL HABITS (OR "RELIGIOUS" PRACTICES THAT VIOLATE OUR CRIMINAL AND CIVIL LAWS EITHER FOR THAT MATTER -- AT LEAST OUR SANE LAWS, THE ONES THAT ARE IN KEEPING WITH OUR WESTERN CHRISIAN HERITAGE). THE IDEA IS AGAINST THE WHOLE SPIRIT OF THE FOUNDING OF AMERICA, THE VERY THOUGHT IS SO NAUSEATINGLY INAPPROPRIATE IT HAS TO BE A SIGN THAT THE END OF THE WORLD IS COMING SOON -- OR I HOPE IT IS. I CAN'T STAND THE THOUGHT THAT THIS SORT OF INSANITY COULD GET WORSE.

"FREEDOM" WAS NEVER EVER MEANT TO GRANT A "RIGHT" TO PUBLIC OBSCENITY OR VULGARITY OR TO FEEDING HUMAN PERVERSIONS, ESPECIALLY THOSE THAT CAN ENDANGER OTHERS, IN THIS CASE CHILDREN, AND WE USED TO HAVE LAWS AGAINST THAT SORT OF THING WHICH OUGHT TO HAVE SHOWN ANYONE WITH ANY INTELLIGENCE THAT IT COULDN'T HAVE MEANT THAT. FREEDOM NEVER MEANT FREEDOM TO COMMIT CRIMES OR OFFENSES AGAINST OTHERS OR AGAINST SOCIETY, BUT THEY'VE TWISTED THE WORD TO MEAN THAT -- SINCE ABOUT THE 60S.

THOSE WHO SUPPORT SUCH THINGS ARE SICK SICK SICK. AND THAT'S THE WHOLE LEFT, THE JUDICIARY AND MOST OF THE POWERS THAT BE THESE DAYS, THE WHOLE MARXIST-INFECTED LOT OF THEM.

THIS MAKES ME SO SICK ALL I CAN DO IS RANT.

Please, Lord God, Save Us From Leftist Delusional Do-Goodism that Kills the Best-Possible for an Unrealizable Perfection

I somehow lost the Yahoo link but this is the title: Obama acknowledges his message didn't get through:

WASHINGTON – President Barack Obama is acknowledging in the wake of this week's election rout that he hasn't been able to successfully promote his economic-rescue message to anxious Americans.

It is hard to believe that Obama and the left really believe this stuff, though I suppose I'd rather believe they mean it and are simply wrong than that they are lying.

Puhleeze, as Dr. Laura is wont to say (Haven't heard her in years, though. Is she still saying that?). It is certainly not that the Tea Partiers and the rest of the country don't understand your message, Mr. Obama, it's that we HATE your message. Your message is ANTI-AMERICAN, your message is MARXIST / COMMUNIST, your message is the destruction of what America was meant to be, AND APPARENTLY YOU DON'T KNOW IT. Your healthcare bill means the destruction of the greatest medical system the world has ever known (and government programs have already done damage to it), and a recipe for national bankruptcy. Again, I'd rather believe you are ignorant of the true nature of America and what's good for the nation, depressing though that is in itself, than that you are consciously out to destroy America as the Communist Party always has been, and so many suspect is true of you as well.

Obama says in an interview with CBS's "60 Minutes" that he "stopped paying attention" to the leadership style he displayed during his run for the presidency.

Obama also said he recognizes now that "leadership is not just legislation," and that "it's a matter of persuading people. And giving them confidence and bringing them together. And setting a tone. And making an argument that people can understand."

"And I think that - we haven't always been successful at that," he said. "And I take personal responsibility for that. And it's something that I've got to examine closely as I go forward."

Right, "take responsibility" for a problem that isn't the real problem.

We UNDERSTAND the argument, Mr. President, boy do I wish YOU understood the Right's objections to it, and that the Left in general understood. I think we need a massive education program in what America was meant to be and why Leftist policies are destructive of what it was meant to be, which is why the Tea Parties have been able to have as much success as they have had in this election.

Yes, the nation needs better solutions to the health insurance problems. But let's be clear, a LOT of the problem of the uninsured started with the government programs Medicare and Medicaid, which cost more than we can afford and are vulnerable to all kinds of fraud. Without those more citizens would have been able to afford private insurance over all the decades they have been in force.

Sure, it would be nice if the private sector could find ways to extend coverage to those who are still outside the system and still unable to afford coverage, but government interference has made that increasingly hard to accomplish.

The Left seems to think that if they steal enough from the citizenry to cover the poorest of the poor then it's just fine if millions of the middle classes go without adequate coverage. They have no sense of reality so they've been systematically destroying a pretty good system because they are deluded that their idealism can be translated into practical reality. It can't. Private charity is still the best way to take care of the poorest of the poor.

=====
P.S. Here's a great letter from Senator DeMint of South Carolina to the newly elected conservatives, on how to avoid being co-opted and de-fanged by the establishment they are entering.

More Election Ebullience

Thank You Lord for this reprieve. I just hope it isn't too short-lived. I hope we can follow through and get America on the right track again. I hope we can have a revival too, as that is the surest way to get the nation on track.

I'm feeling optimistic enough to post a video about leftist thinking, hoping maybe finally it's on its way to being exposed and destroyed:



Found that at Front Page Mag . They are ecstatic too of course. I think I'll just put up links to some of their articles: Lame Duck Season , A Turn to the Right , Return of the Right , The November 3rd Contract with America, and David Horowitz's own essay, A Historic Election, an Early Thanksgiving.

I've been SO depressed over where this country has been going, WHAT good news for a change.

Election night results so far. In spite of all attempts to destroy the system, elections still work (Thank You Lord)

I've been pulling back from politics for some time but this election couldn't be ignored, thanks to the Tea Party movement, so I've been following it fairly closely. Some great wins for my team, some really good guys getting into the Senate, and governorships and the House. And Nancy Pelosi is out because the Republicans won so many seats in the House. All to be happy for. Bad news of course is that Sharron Angle wasn't able to oust Harry Reid -- and that there is a strong likelihood of fraud in that contest too. That's maybe the worst part, the suspicion of fraud. And California got Jerry Brown back, that's really sad. But overall a loud objection to Obama's policies has been heard across the country.

I heard two conservatives give reasons why they decided not to vote, and I can only hope they don't represent greater numbers. One, on a political call-in, said it was because the REAL issues aren't being raised in this election, by which he meant internet neutrality, which to his mind trumps all the other issues. I have to admit to being completely boggled by that reason. The other was because he believes the whole thing is rigged so what's the point. Well, clearly the WHOLE thing isn't rigged, though some important races may unfortunately have been tampered with, and I hope that all comes to light very soon. It's illegal of course so if it does come to light then it ought to be prosecuted.

There are sometimes good reasons not to vote in a particular election but neither of these reasons is a good reason. In this election I didn't have a good reason not to vote, and many good reasons TO vote. I won't vote sometimes when I can't in good conscience support any of the candidates. I can't vote for someone who is for abortion for instance. But a violation of conscience is to my mind the only legitimate reason not to vote. Thinking your vote might not count because of fraud is discouraging of course, but it's hard to see how someone believes that every election across the country is rigged. There's still a good chance your vote WILL be counted.

Overall I think God is having mercy on us so far.

Listening to the comments that came into the talk programs from time to time I'd hear Democrats registering their disgust with the way the election was going. What stands out in their comments is their demonizing of their opponents, their attitude of sheer disdain and self-righteous moral indignation. Conservatives are evil people, according to them, there's not even a pretense of an attitude of graciousness toward the opponent, as in "may the best man win." Such civilities apparently no longer influence some on the Left. I was glad to see some Democrat candidates graciously conceding the election to their opponents in speeches at least. That was hopeful.

But that anyone could express such disdain for the other half of the country is still a very discouraging sign. The arrogance is breathtaking for one thing. It's not possible in their minds that the other side has even a shred of a legitimate concern. Terms they used were "selfish," "don't care about people" and so on.

===================================
Nov 4 got an email from a conservative political website I frequent:

Our country just took a step back from the brink.

That says it! A step back from the brink, yes. And what a relief! (Wonder how long it will last).

Exercising the common sense that has always been at the heart of our national character, Americans used the ballot to repudiate Barack Obama's efforts over the past two years to radically transform our society.

I had just about lost all hope that it was possible 1) for the American people to rise to the occasion, and 2) if they did, for the ballot boxes to be honest enough to register it.

(Whew! The system actually works? -- I'm afraid to say it above a whisper)

Got to be answer to all those prayers we've been sending up.

Now if only we could succeed at showing so many who have been duped by the Left what's wrong with that way of thinking.

Islamization of Paris -- the US to follow shortly

How can this be happening?

.

It's a policy of Islam of course, to take over the world by moving into countries one by one and gradually overwhelming them with greater population. Leftist policies, otherwise known as Political Correctness, have facilitated their aims over the last few decades, accelerating madly in just a few years it seems.

In this video we see some French protests against Islam finally, but is this going to have much effect in the end?

Not if Islamization is part of God's judgment on the West, as I believe it is.

We've lost our Christian character, so a satanic religion is going to move in and take over. Europe lost their Christian roots well before the US did, so judgment started there sooner and will catch up here later, although clearly it has already started here as well.

Since I've been doing some studies on the End Times recently, it just naturally popped into my mind that Islam is like the Abomination of Desolation standing in the holy place as it moves in where Christianity used to thrive but has been falling away.

We need a Christian take on this. Our God is the true God and Allah is a satanic invention who enslaves all who come under his spell. The Muslims need the true God but so does the dying West. So we should regard the Muslims as a mission field, but even before that we need to recognize that Europe as a whole is the mission field. Where are the missionaries equipped to go to them? Lord, send workers into the harvest.

Again I come back to the need for revival, the recovery of Christian spiritual power. I don't see it happening. And I keep discovering that I don't have the energy to pursue it myself either. How sad.