Andrew: I will read this later today. Up front however my inclination is to say that the U.S. - as far as the Const. Conv. in 1787 is concerned - was NOT, NOT, founded on Christian principles. Far from it. Rushdoony, DeMar, David Barton, Wm. Federer et al say it was. My mentor, Ted Weiland, says that it was not. Gary North says that it was not per his Conspiracy in Philadelphia book. And Weiland was definitely influenced by North. I think from Political Polytheism and then "Conspiracy." And why should the document and ultimately the nation have been pro-Bible so to speak? The top conventioneers in 1787 were all "enlightened" deists. GIGO was the only possible outcome. A pity.
No guessing, I had multiple run-ins with Weiland back in the day. He may have (publicly if not privately) distanced himself from his old Christian Identity friends in order to appear more respectable to people who don't know his background, but I've never heard him to fully disavow White Nationalism -- or his baptismal regeneration views that are heretical and anti-Sola Fide/anti-Sola Gratia,
I'm not going a decade back on FB in order to pull up the run-ins I had with him, but it's not too hard to find his associations with Christian Identity (before he disavowed them in order to ingratiate himself with more mainstream folks who didn't know his background). And that's without mentioning his baptismal regeneration views that are about as anti-Protestant Reformation as one can get.
A Turkish naval officer informed me that "An Appeal to Heaven" is a cry for armed insurrection.
Andrew: I will read this later today. Up front however my inclination is to say that the U.S. - as far as the Const. Conv. in 1787 is concerned - was NOT, NOT, founded on Christian principles. Far from it. Rushdoony, DeMar, David Barton, Wm. Federer et al say it was. My mentor, Ted Weiland, says that it was not. Gary North says that it was not per his Conspiracy in Philadelphia book. And Weiland was definitely influenced by North. I think from Political Polytheism and then "Conspiracy." And why should the document and ultimately the nation have been pro-Bible so to speak? The top conventioneers in 1787 were all "enlightened" deists. GIGO was the only possible outcome. A pity.
"My mentor, Ted Weiland"
Find a better mentor than a Christian Identity-lite white nationalist.
"Weiland was definitely influenced by North."
Weiland is much closer to David Duke, Paul Fromm, and Tom Metzgar than Gary North.
The ad hominem approach. Always useful when one is just guessing.
No guessing, I had multiple run-ins with Weiland back in the day. He may have (publicly if not privately) distanced himself from his old Christian Identity friends in order to appear more respectable to people who don't know his background, but I've never heard him to fully disavow White Nationalism -- or his baptismal regeneration views that are heretical and anti-Sola Fide/anti-Sola Gratia,
Unless you can produce evidence to back it up, that is pure slander. 99% of Weilands study and analysis is exceptional on the constitution.
I'm not going a decade back on FB in order to pull up the run-ins I had with him, but it's not too hard to find his associations with Christian Identity (before he disavowed them in order to ingratiate himself with more mainstream folks who didn't know his background). And that's without mentioning his baptismal regeneration views that are about as anti-Protestant Reformation as one can get.