His Holy Church

Media > Publications > Book, Thy Kingdom Comes

URL:

Preaching
the Good News


Peace be to this house,

The Prologue to the book "Thy Kingdom Comes"

In the beginning God created the heaven and the earth. Genesis 1:1

My children were and are home taught. We were not perfect nor professional teachers. Our methods were constantly being modified as we learned to overcome our own frailties, failings, and faults as parents and pedagogues to our children. We learned from our children as our children learned from us. We have been growing up together for years.

We realized that educating our children is a right and, therefore, a responsibility. The reason education is so important in the rearing of children is because, “If a nation expects to be ignorant and free, in a state of civilization, it expects what never was and never will be.”1

Only take heed to thyself, and keep thy soul diligently, lest thou forget the things which thine eyes have seen, and lest they depart from thy heart all the days of thy life: but teach them thy sons, and thy sons’ sons; De 4:9

Home teaching may have been a freedom enjoyed by us, but it may not be by our children because many believe as Peter Hoagland, the Nebraska State Senator, who stated that, “Fundamental, Bible believing people do not have the right to indoctrinate their children in their religious beliefs, because we, the state, are preparing them for the year 2000, when America will be part of a one-world global society and their children will not fit in.”2

That aforementioned global society is here now because of treaties, alliances, trade agreements, borrowing and debt, to say nothing of the applications and contracts of the people. There are virtually no wholly sovereign nations left in the world today.

Because we educated our children and took the time to do so, we may see the world differently than many of our publicly educated peers. Yes, we molded the minds of our children as we molded also their bodies, but the experience clearly changed us as well. We discovered many things about ourselves, the nature of freedom and the responsibility of liberty. We also, being out of the mainstream of life in the Americas, discovered much about the world and its history, as well as its sophistries and changing consciousness.

Some think that, by teaching your children at home, you narrow their thinking. This can be true. But teaching children modern mass-produced curriculum in a national educational system can also have a decidedly constricting result.

In our efforts to educate our children, we became collectors of school books of the past and present. We began to discover an explicit difference between the books used today and the older text books we found in second-hand stores.

Besides a clear ‘dumbing down’, there seemed to be a conscious distortion of history, both by the progressive omission of certain facts and the all too frequent misrepresentations and untruths. We have seen history steadily change over the last 100 years in the modern published textbooks.

To tell deliberate lies while genuinely believing in them, to forget any fact that has become inconvenient, and then, when it becomes necessary again, to draw it back from oblivion for just so long as it is needed, to deny the existence of objective reality and all the while to take account of the reality which one denies… It systematically undermines the solidarity of the family…”3

The mention of this Orwellian, modern reality brings me to mention that the undermining solidarity of the family by the canards of contemporary education has subverted the nations, even the whole world and its perception.

Who owns the youth owns the future.”4

Could “…our schools have been scientifically designed to prevent over education from happening?”5 Surely we would notice the changes. If we did notice the changes, would we find the energy and method to act in preventing the malignant mental malformation of our youth in public society or would we just complacently croak a complaint in our morning coffee and continue to submerge our children in a scorching mediocrity of adroit prevarications?

Throughout history, rulers and court intellectuals have aspired to use the educational system to shape their nations… One can see how irresistible a vehicle the schools would be to … mold future citizens early in life, to instill in them the proper reverence for the ruling culture, and to prepare them to be obedient and obeisant taxpayers and soldiers.”6

Socrates offered advice to kings in Plato’s Republic: “take all the children from their parents and rid the city of adults.” Modern schools have become closed cities where only the “qualified” are allowed to instruct. Divergent or socially unacceptable opinions are checked at the door or suppressed altogether.

I believe there are more instances of the abridgment of the freedom of the people by gradual and silent encroachment of those powers than by violent and sudden usurpations.”7

Socrates again instructs men who would be the ruling elite, “The young can’t distinguish what is allegorical from what isn’t, and the opinions they absorb at that age are hard to erase and apt to become unalterable”.

Train up a child in the way he should go: and when he is old, he will not depart from it. Pr. 22:6

There were many other ideas that came down to us through fatuous, but extolled, philosophers. Plato also described a simple economic policy whereby no gold or silver shall be owned by any citizen. It was not unlike the corvee’ system of bondage used in Egypt where all the money of substance was held in government treasuries or like the Israelites who built their golden calf from the substance of the people. Such systems were designed to control, bind, and subject the people.

Socrates reasoned for a form of equality between the sexes. Women were to take part in the military, performing tasks that are suited for them. Some of the other “liberating” ideas included that wives and children should be held in common and women will be permitted to have sex with whomever they choose and vice versa. Men will have ‘no private women, children, or servants.’ Land and property was to be communized and the citizens' individual farm plot would be worked for the good of the state. The State would be your new family and father.

The citizen does not own the “beneficial use” of his property. If the use tax, tribute, for the property is not paid annually, the one who has the “legal title” can be punished with impunity by that civil power. The property can be taken from him and given to someone who will pay. The Lawgivers must assign magistrates and pass appropriate laws to govern and control the enfranchised polis.

In the early American society, men braved danger and death to obtain unencumbered land, free from the dominion of tribute, with true and actual title:

The ordinary citizen, living on his farm, owned in fee simple, untroubled by any relics of Feudalism, untaxed save by himself, saying his say to all the world in townmeetings, had gained a new self-reliance. Wrestling with his soul and plow on week days, and the innumerable points of the minister’s sermon on Sundays and meeting days, he was becoming a tough nut for any imperial system to crack.”8

Today, the plans of Socrates and Plato rule the earth. Because of the comfort of their chains and their own personal and national pride, many nations tenaciously cling to the idea that they live in a free country. Nothing could be farther from the truth.

Freedom is not synonymous with the appearance of affluence or comfort. Affluence is an illusion when debt is pervasive. The farther that men go from God, the more that comfort becomes the god of men. Today, a new idea of ownership is dictated more by Greek philosophers than by those early pioneers or ancient prophets of God. Is no longer the land where the milk and honey is our own.

The ultimate ownership of all property is in the State: individual so-called ‘ownership” is only by virtue of Government, i.e. law amounting to mere user; and use must be in accordance with law and subordinate to the necessities of the State.” Senate Document No. 43 73rd Congress 1st Session. (Brown v. Welch supra).

Plato’s Republic was decidedly different from other Republics. A pure Republic is a threat to the ruling elite of the world. Functioning within the perfect law of liberty it cannot be taught in schools.

In ancient times and these, there has always been another group of inspired philosophers who preached a different kind of government. Unlike Plato’s Republic, there was a system preached where people were “free from things public”, Libera Res Publica.

In such systems, there was no central government ruling over the people and making laws for them and forcing them to pay tribute or labor for an administration who ruled rather than served. There were leaders who served, but no ruling elite. Such noble men were titular in their office.

Republic. “A state or nation in which the supreme power rests in all the citizens… A state or nation with a president as its titular head; distinguished from monarchy.”9

Titular is defined as, “existing in title or name only; nominal…” In a pure republic, the leaders do not exercise authority by making laws and extracting tribute and should not be confused with an indirect democracy, whereby the majority of the leaders can take away the rights of the people with an exercising authority.

In such a pure republic where the people remained free, they also trained their children in their ways so that, when they were older, they would not depart from them. On the other hand, the rulers of the world trained the children of the state for their own purposes.

Only take heed to thyself, and keep thy soul diligently, lest thou forget the things which thine eyes have seen, and lest they depart from thy heart all the days of thy life: but teach them thy sons, and thy sons’ sons;” De 4:9

They also taught that ‘every man should possess the land’10 and live under ‘the perfect law of liberty’11. In that nation, ‘there was no king’12 or ruling elite. Matrimony and the family was so sacred that transgressing it was one of the most grievous violations of law. Instead of a ruling elite regulating the people, there was a ministerial group who had no personal estate. They were not guaranteed a wage, but could only hope to receive compensation in the form of tithing, according to their service.13

One of the purpose of these ministers of the people was to proclaim liberty throughout the land unto all the inhabitants and return every man unto his possession, and return every man unto his family14.

Those who assume that philosophers like Socrates and Plato were enlightened men may also assume that, “It is the unquestioned right and imperative duty of every enlightened government, in its character of parens patriae, to protect and provide for the comfort and well-being of its citizens.... The performance of this duty is justly regarded as one of the most important governmental functions, and all constitutional limitations must be so understood and construed so as not to interfere with its proper and legitimate exercise.”15 But such assumption opens another Greek paradigm, a Pandora’s box of power and confusion.

Governments have nothing to give or provide to the people unless they first receive it from the people. How the government obtains the contributions of the people is the difference between a free state under liberty or one of tyranny by mobs or despots.

The power to impose a tribute or an excise tax on the people, is a patrimonial right of government under Parens Patriae. “Parens patriae literally means ‘parent of the country’ and refers to the traditional role of the state as sovereign and guardian of persons under legal disability.”16 The state and its ruling leaders become the Father of the people as the people relinquish rights and responsibilities, once enjoyed by the individual free man. “Parens patriae originates from the English common law where the King had a royal prerogative to act as guardian for persons under a legal disability such as infants and those mentally ill. In the United States, the parens patriae function belongs with the states.”17

In essence a legal disability is one where the individual as a person is no longer in a whole and natural state or status. With the relinquishment or assignment of rights and responsibilities, an individual becomes a person under “legal disabilities” with incumbent duties and limitations. They are no longer whole. A more detailed examination has been extensively addressed in the book, The Covenants of the gods.

The words, parens patriae, are Latin terms that reach back into the time of Christ when the Emperor was the Patronus or Our Father, the Senators were addressed Patri, Father, and the new order of the Pax Romana was desiring to rule the world. With greater and greater influence from those Greeks, the power of the Roman world soon came in conflict with the teachings of the prophets of the Old Testament and their government. This was a time when everyone knew that tribute, excise tax, and income tax was based on the patrimonial right of the king or government as benefactor was standing in the position of Father. They expanded their power through the offer of benefits and maintained it with the sword.

Then came a man called Jesus, who said, “And call no [man] your father upon the earth: for one is your Father, which is in heaven.” Matthew 23:9

This Jesus, this Christ, this Messiah, or Anointed King, had another plan other than that of Socrates and Plato. The government of Israel, which had been the kingdom of God for centuries, had changed and corrupted the ancient way. The Jews had become Hellenized by the influence of the Greeks and the Romans. John the Baptist, Jesus, and His apostles preached a kingdom at hand that was decidedly different in form and policy than that of the dominant forms of government of its day. The people applied to Rome and the citizens of Judea began to apply to Herod for benefits. Many governments , including the United States (U.S.C. 15 Chapt. 1, Sec. 15), rely heavily upon the authority of parens patria. “The real destroyers of the liberties of the people is he who spreads among them bounties, donations and benefits.”18 The people have forgotten that, “He who receives the benefit should also bear the disadvantage.”19 They have forgotten the meaning of Exodus 20:17, 23:32, Psalms 69:22, 119:36, Proverbs 23, 28:16, Matthew 5:34, Matthew 19:17, John 14:15, James 5:12, Romans 11:9, Hebrews 13:5, 2 Peter 2:3.... and much more being deceived.

John preached a kingdom where benefits came from the members by way of charity and choice not by entitlements and coercion. He told men that, if you have two coats and your neighbor has none, then share with him your extra coat. He preached a different government.

When the people asked Jesus how to apply for benefits in His kingdom, He said that they were to pray to Our Father, Who art in Heaven,20 not the Father in Rome or Herod in Jerusalem.

Israel was a kingdom, a form of government instituted by God. It was to have no central ruler elected by the voice of the people, but was very effective for centuries until the people rejected God and strayed from His precepts.

The Pharisees and Sadducee, at the time of Christ, rejected the ways of the original kingdom According to large groups at that time those ministers of the kingdom had mistranslated, misunderstood, and misinterpreted the ancient text. The mysteries of that kingdom had been hidden, twisted, and even stamped out from the mind and memory of men throughout the ages.

Jesus preached that kingdom which was different than other governments. It was a kingdom of faith, not force; charity, not control; hope, not entitlements. It operated in liberty for and by the people under God.

From the fall of mankind until today, there has been two kinds of government on earth. One is established by temptation and force and the other by love and charity.

I must agree with one thing stated by Plato, “And the one man that dares to tell the truth is called at once a lunatic and a fool.”

Today, we are dealing with the education or reeducation of children in public and private schools. That practice did not begin with your children, but with your parents and grand parents. If centuries of misrepresentations have been taught, then the very foundation of our understanding is subverted. Each generation is moved farther and farther from the truth until all are lost in a labyrinth of lies and cauldron of deception. The whole world lives under the clouds of a strong delusion. There are scales that must be removed and light that must be revealed for the truth to awaken in us all.

We must look at all things anew.


 

 

Thy Kingdom comes

Order the book

Thy Kingdom Comes
http://www.hisholychurch.org/order/materialskingdom.html

 

 

 

You Can Publish the Gospel

We have a number of booklets in PDF format that you can down load, take to a local printer and have printed up for less than we can print them and mail to you. You cannot resell any of this material, nor change or add to or take away from its contents. Each file must be printed and distributed in their entirety.

Printable 5" X 8 1/2" Pamphlets that are presently available:

Romans 13 and the Higher Liberty
http://www.hisholychurch.org/study/bklt/romans1307.pdf

What was Paul trying to tell us when he wrote Romans 13?
07-Aug-2007 19:52 328k

Call no man on earth Father
http://www.hisholychurch.org/study/bklt/father.pdf

Why did Jesus tell us not to call any man on earth Father?
07-Aug-2007 19:49 309k

Law vs. Legal
http://www.hisholychurch.org/study/bklt/law.pdf

What is the difference between lawful and legal when it comes to tender, title and ownership?
07-Aug-2007 19:50 245k

Mark of the Beast
http://www.hisholychurch.org/study/bklt/markofthebeast.pdf

This is a detail study of what the Mark of the Beast is and what the Mark of God is.
07-Aug-2007 21:18 403k

The International Acceptance and Validy of Holy Matrimony
http://www.hisholychurch.org/study/bklt/marriagevalid.pdf

Is Holy Matrimony a Valid Union of a Man and a woman?
07-Aug-2007 20:06 236k

Holy Matrimony vs. Marriage
http://www.hisholychurch.org/study/bklt/matrimony.pdf

What is the difference between Matrimony by the authority of God and Marriage as it is defined in a legal system?
07-Aug-2007 21:19 257k

Rome vs. US
http://www.hisholychurch.org/study/bklt/romevus.pdf

What was the Roman government and how does it relate to us today?
07-Aug-2007 19:52 238k

 
 
Associated Links:
Full size 8½x11 printout of the same booklets is available at:
http://www.hisholychurch.org/study/in8x11st.html
   
 
Google
WWW hisholychurch.org
Searching HisHolyChurch websites
 
   
 

Footnotes:

1Thomas Jefferson.

2Peter Hoagland, Nebraska State Senator and Humanist said in 1983:

3On Doublethink in Book Two Section IX of 1984 by George Orwell

4Nazi leaders, used the slogan of the Wandervögel (a 19th century youth movement in Germany )

5William Harris, 1899 U.S. Commissioner of Education 1889-1906

6Sheldon Richman in his book Separating School and State.

7James Madison

8History of the U.S. Vol.1 James Truslow Adams, p. 176.

9Webster’s New Dictionary unabridged 2nd Ed. 1965.

10Jud 2:6 And when Joshua had let the people go, the children of Israel went every man unto his inheritance to possess the land. [inheritance is the possession of property as an estate.]

11James 1:25 “looketh into the perfect law of liberty, and continueth [therein], he being ... a doer ...”

12Jud 17:6 In those days [there was] no king in Israel, [but] every man did [that which was] right in his own eyes.

13Nu 7:5 Take [it] of them, that they may be to do the service of the tabernacle of the congregation; and thou shalt give them unto the Levites, to every man according to his service.

14Le 25:10 And ye shall hallow the fiftieth year, and proclaim liberty throughout [all] the land unto all the inhabitants thereof: it shall be a jubile unto you; and ye shall return every man unto his possession, and ye shall return every man unto his family.

15Illinois Supreme Court 1882.

16Black’s Law Dict. 1114 (6th ed. 1990). .

17Black’s Law Dict. 1114 (6th ed. 1990).

18Plutarch, 2000 years ago.

19“Cujus est commodum ejus debet esse incommodum.” Also , “Que sentit commodum, sentire debet et onus.” He who derives a benefit from a thing, ought to feel the disadvantages attending it.

20 “After this manner therefore pray ye: Our Father which art in heaven, Hallowed be thy name.” Matthew 6:9

 

   
Seal    


©2008 His Church

last modified: