Posted on 11/13/2006 10:57:02 PM PST by B4Ranch
FAITH UNDER FIRE
Ten Commandments stunner:
Feds lying at Supreme Court
Government tells modern visitors
it's Bill of Rights being honored
Every argument before the U.S. Supreme Court and every opinion the judges deliver comes in the presence of the Ten Commandments, God's law given to Moses on a fire-scorched mountain, and now represented for the United States in the very artwork embedded in the high court structure.
In today's world of revisionist history, the proof comes through the work of a California pastor who visited the Supreme Court building recently when he was in Washington and was surprised that what the tour guides were telling him wasn't the same thing as what he was seeing.
Todd DuBord, pastor of the Lake Almanor Community Church in California, said he was traveling with his wife, Tracy, and was more than startled during recent visits to the courthouse and two other historic locations to discover that the stories of the nation's heritage had been sterilized of Christian references.
His entire research compilation is available online.
"Having done some research (before the trip), I absolutely was not expecting to hear those remarks," which, he told WND, simply "denied history."
So he's written to the Supreme Court, and several other groups, asking them to restore the historic Christian influences to their information, and he's documented his research to explain to those interested what the history is and how it's been subverted.
"I would like to see the record rectified and the proper Christian and Judeo-Christian depictions taught in these places," he told WND.
He was most disturbed by what appears to be revisionism in the presentations given to visitors at the Supreme Court. There, he said, his tour guide was describing the marble frieze directly above the justices' bench.
"Between the images of the people depicting the Majesty of the Law and Power of Government, there is a tablet with ten Roman numerals, the first five down the left side and the last five down the right. This tablet represents the first ten amendments of the Bill of Rights," she said.
The ten what? was DuBord's thought.
Unwilling to be confrontational, he went home and started some research.
One official Supreme Court document, he found, cited a letter from sculptor Adolph A. Weinman that said the "pylon" carved with Roman numerals I to X "symbolizes the first ten amendments to the Constitution." But the letter was anomalous; it didn't have a number of certifying marks that were typical of others.
So he continued looking and after calling in some assistance in his hunt for evidence, he found a 1975 official U.S. Supreme Court Handbook, prepared under the direction of Mark Cannon, administrative assistant to the chief justice. It said, "Directly above the Bench are two central figures, depicting Majesty of the Law and Power of Government. Between them is a tableau of the Ten Commandments…"
Further research produced information that in 1987 the building was designated a National Historic Landmark, and came under control of the U.S. Department of the Interior, and under the new management the handbook was rewritten in 1988. The Ten Commandments reference was left out of that edition, and nothing replaced it.
The next reference found said only the frieze "symbolizes early written laws" and then in 1999, the reference first appeared to that depiction being the "Ten Amendments to the Bill of Rights."
"The more I got into it (his research), the more I saw Christianity had been abandoned from history," he told WND.
When he asked, his recent tour guide denied there were any Ten Commandments representations in the Supreme Court building, he said.
One who was not surprised by the circumstances, however, was Judge Roy Moore, a WND columnist and the former chief justice of the Alabama Supreme Court. He was removed from office on a federal judge's order because he refused to remove a depiction of the Ten Commandments from the Alabama courthouse.
"They've distorted history to come up with their own version of things," he told WND. What such changes do, he said, "is divorce ourselves from an understanding of where our rights come from."
Without rights coming from God, he noted, government "assumes control over everything, including what you think."
"Why would they say the Ten Commandments weren't there? They had to come up with something. I could see the progressive disappearance of the word 'commandment' from their literature," said DuBord.
He had just returned from a trip to Turkey, where ancient Ephesus is.
"The tour guide was Muslim, and went on to say, with all respect to all of you, I need to say something to you about the Apostle Paul. ... And he went into an apologetic of Paul's teachings."
"He told us, 'These things happened here,'" DuBord said.
But then to return to the U.S. and find Christianity edited from history left him almost speechless.
"I thought, we started as a Christian nation, and we can't even get this here."
DeBord also noted that during his research of the "Weinman letter," he found another memorial in Washington, "The Oscar Solomon Memorial," noting the accomplishments of the first Jew to serve in a president's cabinet. It's on 14th Street between Pennsylvania and Constitution avenues.
It also was designed by Weinman, and like the Supreme Court image, depicts a human figure leaning on the same table with Roman numerals just as the East Wall Frieze.
But this time, an artist's letter confirms the tablets represent the Ten Commandments.
"Would Weinman have sculpted two identical tablets, in the same city, each with the Roman numerals I through V on one side and VI through X on the other, but with totally different identities?" DuBord wondered. "It seems very unlikely."
The current information office at the Supreme Court declined to talk on the record with WND when asked about Ten Commandments representations on the building, referring questioners to the website.
There, a document does indicate "Moses" is one of various lawgivers portrayed in the friezes, but the site doesn't mention "Ten Commandments." It does mention the "Ten Amendments."
DuBord said he knew of other representations, such as the lower part of the inside of each of the oak doors where people enter the inner Court Chamber, where two tablets carry Roman numerals I-V and VI-X.
But DuBord's tour guide said those – too – were the Ten Amendments.
He then asked, "If there are no other depictions of Moses or the Ten Commandments on the building except on the South Wall Frieze in the U.S. Supreme Court, then what about on the east side of the building where Moses is the central figure among others, holding both tablets of the Ten Commandments, one in each arm?"
"Her response shocked me as much as the guide inside the Court chamber. 'There is no depiction of Moses and the Ten Commandments like that on the U.S. Supreme Court,'" DuBord said he was told.
He asked if there were any pictures of the representation, and she pulled one out.
"Her eyes widened in surprise. There was Moses in photo and description as the central figure, holding the Ten Commandments (tablets), one in each hand," DuBord wrote.
Although there are six depictions of Moses and-or the Ten Commandments at the Supreme Court, the tour guides had been trained to admit to only the one on Moses, he said.
One doesn't have to be Christian, or endorse Christianity, to recognize its influence in history, he said.
"I am … respectfully requesting that the complete educational history regarding the depictions of Moses and The Ten Commandments be rediscovered and retaught to U.S. Supreme Court guides and to the public in the U.S. Supreme Court Building," he suggested in a letter to the court.
DuBord grew up without religion, but during seven years of academic study at Bethany University and Fuller Theological Seminary accepted that the claims of Christianity are true.
He's served in various prison, drug and alcohol rehab ministries and worked as a youth pastor and associate pastor before assuming his duties in Lake Almanor.
His messages can be downloaded at www.iTunes.com, by typing in "almanor" or "dubord."
bumping that! happy to find you here!
I just thought I would share a word from the heart, soul, and pen of James Madison (1751~1836), often referred to as the "Chief Architect of the Constitution" He authored 29 of the 85 Federalist Papers:
"We have staked the whole future of American civilization, not upon the power of government, far from it. We have staked the future of all of our political institutions upon the capacity of mankind for self-government; upon the capacity of each and all of us to govern ourselves, to control ourselves, to sustain ourselves according to the Ten Commandments of God."
Nancee
James Madison; 1778 Statement; emphasis is mine.
BUMP!!!
We could use a 1000 more people in our courts who think like Alabama Chief Justice Roy Moore does.
Here is just a sampling of what Thomas Jefferson had to say about the "Supreme Court":
"Nothing in the Constitution has given them [the federal judges] a right to decide for the Executive, more than to the Executive to decide for them...But the opinion which gives to the judges the right to decide what laws are constitutional, and what not, not only for themselves in their own sphere of action, but for the legislature and executive also, in their spheres, would make the judiciary a despotic branch."*1
And this:
"The germ of dissolution of our federal government is in...the federal judiciary; an irresponsible body (for impeachment is scarcely a scare-crow) working like gravity by night and by day, gaining a little today and a little tomorrow, and advancing its noiseless step like a thief, over the field of jurisdiction, until all shall be ursurped from the States."*2
It is my observation and opinion that this is precisely what we are living with today: the Supreme Court is a despotic group which has ursurped enormous power from the States.
Nancee
*1 Letter to Abigail Adams, September 11, 1804.
*2 Letter to Mr. Hammond (1821).
Gunslinger...I see you have stopped discussing this matter. I would like to offer a couple points and a suggestion for reading. First off, please get your hands on a book called "The Myth of Seperation"....WONDERFUL book...In it you'll see that teaching a Judeo-Christian religion was REQUIRED of states when they applied for state-hood!
Secondly, the Declaration of Independence says that we were "endowed by our Creator with certain unalienable right..." "Unalienable" means non-transferable: people can't surrender these rights, even voluntarily. Or Natural rights - rights from birth. If the government "GIVES" us those rights, then the government can TAKE those rights away. It is the fact that those rights were GIVEN TO US BY OUR CREATOR, that MAN CAN NOT TAKE THEM AWAY!
THAT is the difference between the US and every other government up to that point. The King gave rights, and thus took them away when he wanted. Our founders believed that GOD gave us those rights.... . Thanks....
You're welcome to misrepresent what is taking place. I don't particularly mind, because folks are noticing the same thing I am. I'm speaking of programs I have been watching on PBS and other informative channels. My comments stand.
I said history channels, and think you should have been able to think outside the box and understand I wasn't necessarily refering to the History Channels.
Most of the history programs are on the History Channel however, the ones which aren't are quite similiar and I watch quite a few of them now and have for years. None were as you claim.
BUMP!!!
BUMP!!!
On the flip side, it's nothing that hasn't happened before and hopefully the faithful stay strong. It's a shame our country can't realize this is a blessed country and give God his due. I guess we just have to pray and enjoy the ride.
Well said.
For what it's worth, I last visited the Supreme Court building about six months ago, and I took the ten minute "tour." One person specifically asked the question about the Ten Commandments, and the tour guide said exactly what you did: it is represented in the artwork because it is foundational to our system of law and government.
It's noteworthy that I had a different experience than this fellow.
BUMP!!
To what do you attribute this? I find this interesting indeed.
Nancee
I agree with your premise, but we must be able to win arguments on the wisdom of it. Not everyone is a believer. When the Bible states that God loves us and only has our good in mind, a non believer can't "get" that. So, we have to show the argument that going against what God teaches is harmful, even if you don't believe. A homosexual should know how harmful his choice is just by showing the lifestyle will probably shorten his life. You can brow beat him all day with scripture and he will just be more convinced you are the problem, not him. All statistics show they die younger and are more unhappy because of it. The same with stem cells. Adult stem cells work, embryonic don't. The thing is, they want to kill babies,...as many as possible. They want you to believe it is a good thing. When a stem cell triupmh is proclaimed, they don't mention it was an adult stem cell success. When there is a failure, nothing is announced.
Most people would agree that stealing isn't a good thing, but where is the outrage at adultery? We haven't made the case that adultery is a life destroyer. "Everybody does it", even preachers. Ask someone who is about to jump off a bridge because they lost their wife and family how "good" it was.
One humorous epiphany for myself was when the Bible says, I place before you death and life, blessing and cursing.......Choose life!" God has to tell us to choose life, we are so stupid. I had this picture of a guy tapping his foot, thinking with one of those bubbles above his head, "do I really want to live or die?" "Death may be alright, better than this stinking life I have". Some of us are so stupid, we need God to tell us what seems to be obvious.
To a believer, the Bible is God's knowledge passed to His children. To a non believer, it is of no more value than a Harry Potter novel. We should be able to win an argument using the knowledge of God, without just quoting chapter and verse. Satan is a lier and a confuser. That is why he leaves out the facts and uses spin to convince the weak minded. If I showed someone a pile of guts and body parts and told them this is an abortion, how else can they be so stupid to believe it wasn't a child? It had a heartbeat, brainwaves, it's own fingerprints, it's own blood type and DNA. All these "facts" are just as viable in court as saying a child is a gift from God.
If you explain that a homosexual has sex with human feces all over himself, how can they believe they won't get a disease? Try to imagine the smell and cleanup after their "lovemaking". How can they believe that's normal? They have been lied to so long, they don't grasp reality anymore. It makes Christians cringe to hear these things, but the homosexuals aren't going to tell you what they do. Try sending them to some websites that show them cutting themselves with razors after a rubber band was used to kill their sex organs or using Crisco in ways it was never meant to be used. They cannot explain how that isn't an abomination. When you turn the light on, the roaches run to find a hiding place. Right now, darkness prevails.
You can't possibly be this dense.
You started out with an attitude of arrogant condescension riding on a raft of false statements (which I patiently rebutted with facts) and finally you get around to the ad hominem. Sooner or later people show themselves for what they are.
FWIW I did read the article you FINALLY gave a link to, after umpteen verbose and rambling posts, and it far exceeds the WND article in proving the author's contention that Christian influence on our nation's law and founding is being laundered out of history. If you had an ounce of common sense or decency you would have pointed everyone to that link at the beginning of your little jihad on my reading skills.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.
