ABRAHAM LINCOLN'S AMERICA

[John81]

ABRAHAM LINCOLN'S AMERICA


By Chuck Baldwin
February 18, 2009
NewsWithViews.com

America just celebrated Presidents Day this past Monday. What first began as an observance for President George Washington has (since the 1980s) morphed into the generic "Presidents Day," which is a politically correct celebration of mediocrity that forces our nation's greatest President to be lumped together with incompetents such as Ulysses S. Grant, Woodrow Wilson, and Jimmy Carter.

On the occasion of Presidents Day, a USA Today/Gallup poll asked the American people to select the greatest President. The top five Presidents, according to the Gallup poll, are (in order): Ronald Reagan, John Kennedy, Abraham Lincoln, Franklin Roosevelt, and George Washington.

Can you believe it? George Washington was rated fifth. Fifth. With a vote total of only 9 percent, no less.

George Washington is positively the greatest American to ever live--bar none! It is no hyperbole to say that without Washington, there would be no United States of America. George Washington almost single-handedly kept a struggling colonial army (along with a fledgling nation, for that matter) together. Take away George Washington and there are no stories of Valley Forge, the crossing of the Delaware River, or Yorktown. Take away George Washington and there is no office of President of the United States. A lesser man (which would include almost everyone else in his generation) would doubtless have succumbed to the call of the multitude to institute a monarchy in America. A lesser man could not have delivered the greatest-of-all-Presidential-addresses that we find in his "Farewell Address."

Washington's Farewell Address became the guiding light and compass for American policy and philosophy for many generations. In fact, it is the abandonment of the principles of that address that is systematically destroying this country. Therefore, a return to the wisdom of that address would doubtless return our country to its former greatness.

There is only one "Father of His Country," and it is George Washington. Yet, in the minds of today's Americans, Washington is inferior to the likes of F.D.R. and Abraham Lincoln. Furthermore, the Gallup survey concludes that both Democrats and Republicans (and conservatives and liberals) share special infatuation with Lincoln.

I have witnessed the veracity of Gallup's findings. Go to just about any private Christian school and one will find Abraham Lincoln idolized almost to the point of deification. The same is also true in state schools, of course.

Now, virtually everyone is saying that the election of Barack Obama is the fulfillment of Lincoln's vision. They might be right. But just exactly what does that mean?

According to the current edition of Newsweek magazine, "We are all socialists now." The article states, "The U.S. government has already--under a conservative Republican administration--effectively nationalized the banking and mortgage industries." It continued, "Whether we want to admit it or not . . . the America of 2009 is moving toward a modern European state."

Again quoting Newsweek, "The architect of this new era of big government? History has a sense of humor, for the man who laid the foundations for the world Obama now rules is George W. Bush, who moved to bail out the financial sector last autumn with $700 billion.

"Bush brought the Age of Reagan to a close; now Obama has gone further, reversing Bill Clinton's end of big government."

Unfortunately, Newsweek is dead right.

By the end of two G.W. Bush terms and one Obama term, the United States will resemble socialist France far more than the independent nation envisioned--and created--by George Washington. Yes, in a very real and practical sense, this really is Abraham Lincoln's America.

More than any other single person, Abraham Lincoln shaped and formed modern America. It was Abraham Lincoln who was the first President to flagrantly and deliberately violate his oath to preserve, protect, and defend the Constitution of the United States. His disregard and contempt for the Constitution cannot be overstated.

In order to "preserve the Union," Lincoln destroyed the very principles upon which the Union was created. His audacity is without equal. For example, to prevent a possible vote of secession by the Maryland legislature, Lincoln ordered federal troops to seize and arrest the Maryland congressional delegation. And of course, he was more than willing to sacrifice hundreds of thousands of America's finest and best to destroy Jefferson's declaration that the states of our Union are "Free and Independent States."

I invite all those pro-Lincoln apologists out there to seriously answer this question: Does an abusive husband who beats and batters his wife have the right to force her (at the point of gun) to remain married to him? (Even the God of the Bible, Who cast marriage in the most sacred terms, recognizes the right of lawful separation.) If you answer no, how can you continue to justify Abraham Lincoln's actions? In a political and governmental sense, that is exactly what Lincoln did. Forced union, of any kind, is slavery. In the name of emancipating slaves, Lincoln enslaved an entire nation.

It was Abraham Lincoln who, for all intents and purposes, destroyed federalism and limited government in America. In fact, on December 15, 1866, renowned British historian, Lord Acton, wrote a letter to General Robert E. Lee. In the letter, Acton said, "I deemed that you were fighting the battles of our liberty, our progress, and our civilization; and I mourn for the stake which was lost at Richmond more deeply than I rejoice over that which was saved at Waterloo."

It was Abraham Lincoln who first established the Nanny State, Big Government, Big Brother, etc. Everything that Big-Government Presidents such as Woodrow Wilson, Franklin D. Roosevelt, Lyndon Johnson, George W. Bush, and Barack Obama learned, they learned from Abraham Lincoln. That is why these men love to quote Lincoln so much.

What is appalling is the manner in which the American people (including professed conservatives and Christians) have allowed the politically correct propaganda machine to brainwash their reasoning. Conservatives and liberals, and Democrats and Republicans, now embrace Abraham Lincoln's America. As Newsweek said, "We are all socialists now."



On what could prove to be a very interesting and even promising note, however, is the fact that more than twenty states have recently proposed (or are in the process of drafting) resolutions advancing their individual state sovereignty. What do these states see coming? Do they see Socialism's twin sister, Oppression, lurking around the corner? Are these states looking into the future and preparing to take a stand for freedom and independence? What an exciting prospect! Perhaps the great country that George Washington birthed is not dead after all.

http://www.newswithviews.com/baldwin/baldwin492.htm

[JerryNumbers]

Americans turn past leaders into legends and heroes. We just love to put our trust in men and talk about how great they were.

But of course what is best for mankind in the sight of God deferens completely from what any man thinks it is. That is why most Americans want to throw God out of America and its been going in that direction from the beginning of this country.

The only answer to our trouble is Jesus Christ.

[John81]

It's very true, the saying that if one forgets their history they are doomed to repeat it. There is a very good reason so much of the Bible is history. As Scripture tells us, there is nothing new under the sun. Scripture is full of examples of corrupt government, corrupt leaders, and of course the fallen nature of man and the depths of sin the lost can and do work in.

The world loves its own and they build up those most like them in order to help make themselves look better and to get their way. It's very telling that both Repubs and Dems idolize Lincoln and FDR.

The world builds up the likes of Lincoln and FDR as virtual saints and it heralds Obama as a messiah. Their humanist, socialist agenda is promoted at the expense of the one true help that America needs, and that is Christ.

Unless American Christians obey Scripture and turn from complacency, humble themselves and submit themselves to the Lord, there is no hope that America will do anything but plunge further into socialism, wickedness and ungodliness.

[Hambone]

(Even the God of the Bible, Who cast marriage in the most sacred terms, recognizes the right of lawful separation.)

He does? Do tell...

[JerryNumbers]

How accurate are history books? They're just a man's opinion. In history we can find both good and bad written about the very same man.

The best history we can go by is that which is in the Bible, anything outside of it cannot be trusted.

[irishman]

"How accurate are history books? They're just a man's opinion. In history we can find both good and bad written about the very same man.

The best history we can go by is that which is in the Bible, anything outside of it cannot be trusted."

Amen to that!

Even much of "church history" is inaccurate; take Josephus for instance; a contemporary of Christ, but very contradictory to scripture. I think we need to be aware of that as we quote other men. They were not there, but they also had to learn from others. A professor at the University of Michigan told me one time that "history is biased"; every man has his personal slant when describing and researching history. He went on to say "Read a book about Napolean at Waterloo that is written by an Englishman, and then one written by a Frenchman, and you will see a different slant fronm each of them."
The same is true of the Civil war, a "reb" will tell it differently than "yank" will.

We see no profit in belittling dead "heroes", yet we do it all the time. Aren't we a smart bunch?

[JerryNumbers]

"How accurate are history books? They're just a man's opinion. In history we can find both good and bad written about the very same man.

The best history we can go by is that which is in the Bible, anything outside of it cannot be trusted."

Amen to that!

Even much of "church history" is inaccurate; take Josephus for instance; a contemporary of Christ, but very contradictory to scripture. I think we need to be aware of that as we quote other men. They were not there, but they also had to learn from others. A professor at the University of Michigan told me one time that "history is biased"; every man has his personal slant when describing and researching history. He went on to say "Read a book about Napolean at Waterloo that is written by an Englishman, and then one written by a Frenchman, and you will see a different slant fronm each of them."
The same is true of the Civil war, a "reb" will tell it differently than "yank" will.

We see no profit in belittling dead "heroes", yet we do it all the time. Aren't we a smart bunch?

Doesn't the Bible tell both good and bad things about people? Doesn't it even tell the true bad things people did in their life even after their death?

If a man has lived his life, why is it we are suppose to only speak of good things he did? Are we suppose to make dead people who have died into good people they were not?

I know many preachers seem to do this at funeral services, as if they're trying to preach them into heaven.

Once I had a pastor friend who had been asked to preach the man's brothers funeral service. The pastor asked him having not known his brother, 'Would they be something you would like me to say?'

The brother replied, "Just don't talk about how good of a person my brother was, if you do none of his friends will think its my brother laying in the coffin and or think you knew nothing about him, and will get the idea anyone can go to heaven, even bad people like my brother. He was and always has been a thief, drunk, and never thought about anyone but him self and his sorry friends. He deserted his wife and children when his children were quite young, never spending a cent on them. He declared there was no God and it was fine for him to do what ever he chose to do that felt good to him. His neighbors hated him because he would walk off with anything they had that was not tied down. Brother, preach the truth, only the truth, that such people as my brother will go straight to hell, there will be lost people here who have never heard the Gospel of Jesus Christ and what you say may just save a soul from hell."

[John81]

Doesn't the Bible tell both good and bad things about people? Doesn't it even tell the true bad things people did in their life even after their death?

If a man has lived his life, why is it we are suppose to only speak of good things he did? Are we suppose to make dead people who have died into good people they were not?

I know many preachers seem to do this at funeral services, as if they're trying to preach them into heaven.

Once I had a pastor friend who had been asked to preach the man's brothers funeral service. The pastor asked him having not known his brother, 'Would they be something you would like me to say?'

The brother replied, "Just don't talk about how good of a person my brother was, if you do none of his friends will think its my brother laying in the coffin and or think you knew nothing about him, and will get the idea anyone can go to heaven, even bad people like my brother. He was and always has been a thief, drunk, and never thought about anyone but him self and his sorry friends. He deserted his wife and children when his children were quite young, never spending a cent on them. He declared there was no God and it was fine for him to do what ever he chose to do that felt good to him. His neighbors hated him because he would walk off with anything they had that was not tied down. Brother, preach the truth, only the truth, that such people as my brother will go straight to hell, there will be lost people here who have never heard the Gospel of Jesus Christ and what you say may just save a soul from hell."

:thumb

[JerryNumbers]

John, People keep saying, if you can't say nothing good about a dead person don't say nothing. I know that did not come from the Bible, so it must be of man.

But of course, if we are going to say something we need to be sure its true and not gossip, we surely don't need to deal in gossip. Plus there is a time to say things and a time to be quite, we just need to wisdom to discern when to speak up, I probably fail miserably on this, sometimes talking when I should not, but also failing to speak up when I should.

I know to, many of the people we studied in history was nothing like what they taught about them, really only a legend, building them up to be what they were not, making many of them seemingly to be, say superhuman, to me that is bad wrong.

10 Take, my brethren, the prophets, who have spoken in the name of the Lord, for an example of suffering affliction, and of patience.

James 5:10 (KJV)

7 Even as Sodom and Gomorrha, and the cities about them in like manner, giving themselves over to fornication, and going after strange flesh, are set forth for an example, suffering the vengeance of eternal fire.

Jude 1:7 (KJV)

Seems like all the Bible characters, what they did good, what they did bad, was given to us for an example of what not to do as well as what we should do, seems it also shows us they were men just like us, that they had their strengths and weakness, just as we do.

Reminds me once again of God's amazing mercy and grace he has shown mankind.

[Annie]

Americans turn past leaders into legends and heroes. We just love to put our trust in men and talk about how great they were.

You're right. I think people have done this with George Washington as well as with Lincoln and the rest. Washington was indeed a man of great character and bravery, but he was human like the rest of 'em.

[HappyChristian]

You're right. I think people have done this with George Washington as well as with Lincoln and the rest. Washington was indeed a man of great character and bravery, but he was human like the rest of 'em.

Heroes are important to us, though. Having a hero doesn't mean one puts their trust in them. And, really, there is nothing wrong with talking about their greatness - after all, God did that in His Word. Yes, Geo. Wn. was human like the rest of 'em. But it's really too bad we don't have more men like him around. This country would be a much better place.

[JerryNumbers]

Heroes are important to us, though. Having a hero doesn't mean one puts their trust in them. And, really, there is nothing wrong with talking about their greatness - after all, God did that in His Word. Yes, Geo. Wn. was human like the rest of 'em. But it's really too bad we don't have more men like him around. This country would be a much better place.

God never stretched the truth when He inspired the writing about the deeds done by the Bible characters, and we can trust every word of it, the same cannot be said about the written word of man.

Its sad that man is so prejudice and loves to promote his agenda as he writes. That being one cause for not liking the modern versions of the Bible and many of the commentaries.

[Annie]

Sure, I understand. My only point was that much of what is said about G. Washington falls into the category of "legend." He was a legend in his own time; think about how much more of a legend he is today. No matter who one is talking about, it is often difficult to separate fact from fiction. This thread got my attention because my kids and I are actually studying G. Washington in detail right now. He was a great man and an inspiring leader--no doubt about it. But it is obvious that some of the material written about him falls into the category of "legend," such as the story about the cherry tree.

[anime4christ]

I heard George Washington was a mason and have seen portraits of him in masonic clothing. Is it true?

[JerryNumbers]

I heard George Washington was a mason and have seen portraits of him in masonic clothing. Is it true?

Didn't know that, but it may well be true. I did a quick search and they seem to think he was.

http://www.ismellarat.com/masonry.htm

I'm quite shocked at the number of pastors & Christians that are members of lodges.