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."
"I guess I don't look to the government for instruction about god, maybe that's why I'm not as confused."
Oh, you're confused, nobody is looking to the gov't for instruction about God.
Post #13:"What I see is our government preparing society for a godless communistic society."
He addressed the post to you, I refuse to believe you're that dense, so maybe you just missed it.
It is absurd to take the current event of revisionism and argue its relevance on the basis of when the friezes were made or how they were conceived. That is no more relevant to why Moses is being excised now than why he was included in the '30s is to the founding father's personal religious convictions. Which was overwhelmingly Christian.
It is also absurd to isolate this situation from the dozens of other incidents of attempts to excise Christianity from American history and government institutions and then claim that it's too thin of an argument to show Christian roots in our founding. A strawman too since no one has made that claim.
I don't see anyone trying to hold out the SC frieze and other artworks there as proof of Christian roots in American government. That is a fact that has far greater proofs. It's just another strawman you have put up in order to knock down and claim victory. Try rebutting what has really been said here.
There's a depiction of Mohammad holding the Koran (shown above) in that same frieze that depicts Moses holding something. Why would it not be a violation of the Bill of Rights to admit that Mohammad is holding the Koran, but it would be a violation to admit that it depicts Moses holding the 10 Commandments?
B4Ranch: Post #13:"What I see is our government preparing society for a godless communistic society."
Gunslingr3: He addressed the post to you, I refuse to believe you're that dense, so maybe you just missed it.
Uhm, you haven't made a point here. Your ad hominem hasn't gone unnoticed either. If you can't address the substance of anyone's posts, you can't follow simple logic and you can't resist getting personal then I'm done with you. I have no time for idiots.
I don't think it is. You missed the point. See post #17
Alright, you obviously need more hand holding to reach the point than I realized.
TE: Who said anything about the government giving or not giving instruction on God?
B4Ranch: Post #13:"What I see is our government preparing society for a godless communistic society."
Do you understand the meaning of the verb 'prepare'? If one believes that 'government [is] preparing society for godless communistic society' that person believes 'the government [is] giving or not giving instruction on god'.
I don't consider it the role of the government to advocate religion itself, or in particular. The 1st amendment was proffered and ratified to protect the rights of individuals against that very influence.
The artistic homage to history's lawgivers in the Supreme Court is just that. Efforts to percieve it as a slight to Christians is just puling, and unbecoming. Trying to expand it into some kind of re-education of the masses in preparation for 'godless communism' is, literally, hysterical.
g'night.
"If ALL laws in our country stem from the 10 commandments can you rectify the incongruency of freedom of religion in the Bill of Rights and the commandments expressly forbidding religious freedom?"
The Freedom of Religion clause was a compromise so that none of the sects of Christianity would fear that one sect would dominate the national scene. It guaranteed religious freedom.
In regards to the first commandment of the Decalogue, that you should have "no gods beside Me", it was self-evident at the time of the 1st Ammendment that Christianity was the religion that proclaimed the character of the one true God.
(Try reading De Tocqueville)
There was no incongruency between the 1st Am. and the 1st Commandment at that time.
Islam, Judaism, Wican, Hinduism, Buddism, etc. had no influence or a very neglible one if at all during that time.
There just happens to be a problem today but not yesterday.
"Do you understand the meaning of the verb 'prepare'? If one believes that 'government [is] preparing society for godless communistic society' that person believes 'the government [is] giving or not giving instruction on god'."
Not necessarily so, there are many ways to "prepare". It could mean the gov't is simply ignoring God, neither giving or not giving instruction about God.
Communism took an active role in trying to stomp out any knowledge of God, now it appears they are taking a subtle, dishonest and cowardly approach by simply refusing to acknowledge or mention Him.
Allahu fubar! Now you have done it.
Durka-durka, JIHAD!
F'n Infidels have a DEPICTION of Prophet Mohammad (Pustulent Bacon Upon Him) on their Satanic Court Building!
Riot! Burn! Loot! Shoot guns in the air!
Scream, "I'm a victim," at the press, while waving a Koran!
Call Green Helmet Guy! Photoshop pictures for Reuters!
Moses was a Christian of Jewish decent. He believed a redeemer would come. The shedding of blood for sin started in Eden when God skinned animals to cover the sins of Adam and Eve. To get to heaven, you must believe you have been redeemed by the blood of God. The animal sacrifice from the Jews was to symbolize their Redeemer's blood. The act of cutting the animals throat did nothing. It is your faith that saves you, not the time period you were born. That is why Moses was there at the Transfiguration. You were saved in the OT just like in the New Testament, by faith. The Jews for Jesus is an example today. They prefer to be called "believers". They simply "believe" the scriptures. Non believers are condemned whether Jew or Gentile.
Moses had witnessed the first Passover with the death angel and received the Law at Pentecost. Today's Christians are Jews. We have been "grafted in" or adopted into God's family. That is why it is ridiculous for a "Christian" to hate Jews. They are one. When the Bible states "All Israel will be saved.", it isn't talking about Larry King and his ilk. It is speaking of "believers".
I'll include this with the next batch. Incredible!
If you cut from whole cloth you could read it that way. It doesn't say that to the literate among us it says that we're being prepared for communism which does not tolerate any religion. No instruction or non-instruction allowed.
I don't consider it the role of the government to advocate religion itself, or in particular. The 1st amendment was proffered and ratified to protect the rights of individuals against that very influence.
Most intelligent people consider it a guarantee that government won't ban religion either.
The artistic homage to history's lawgivers in the Supreme Court is just that.
Duh. For about the third time I will note that no one has said otherwise.
Efforts to percieve it as a slight to Christians is just puling, and unbecoming.
Efforts to give the impression that anyone has put forth that POV here are just lies or stupidity.
Trying to expand it into some kind of re-education of the masses in preparation for 'godless communism' is, literally, hysterical.
Yeah, morons say things like that...
Gunslingr3: "With respect to advancing communism, one needs to look no farther than the expansion of federal entitlements by those who call themselves "compassionate conservatives". Communism isn't a tourist guide's spiel at the Supreme Court, it's the government seizing and distributing more and more of what the people in this nation produce. That's coming at you from the White House and the Congress, ..."
I get your drift. "Don't bother me with your petty liberties lost just keep your hands off of my money."
I will bang my head against the brick wall of your intellect one more time and say again, for about the third or fourth time, that the erasure of American history is the problem and America is the target of attack. Let me elucidate that so that even a mental midget won't misunderstand. The specific target of religion (which has obviously been targeted) is just one aspect of the overall attack on individual liberties ALL of which are antithetical (that means in opposition to) communism which is clearly the ideology being advanced in steps by the left and (unfortunately) aided by some on the right.
FWIW your pathetic attempts at ad hominem are puling and unbecoming. Note how much cleverer I am at it and how I weave it into sound logical contructs that lead to real conclusions. That's because I set it all on sound premises and make sharp observations about what the essential subject really is. Pay attention, jerkoff, you might learn something about insulting if nothing else. ; )
"Before Abraham was, I AM."
AMEN BROTHER!!
Recent election results have broken me of the notion that politics is any substitute for the salvation of society. Indeed, the worse government becomes the stronger people of The Way of Jesus become.
Bring it on, Pelosi. Government must be experienced for the evil that it is.
What difference does it make if its the Ten Commandments or the Bill of Rights? Our government is effacing both.
The disturbing aspect of this whole incident is the rewriting of history. (shades of 1984 or airbrushed photos of Stalin omitting an official who fell out of favor.) Of course Moses was holding the first ten amendments to the constitution. If you look closely you will see that he is not holding tablets but two lap tops. That makes sense. People on the left are so clever. These things were common B.C.E. That's Before the Common Era, a dating system which replaces B.C. (Before Christ), it maintains the same start date (the birth of the baby Jesus, our Lord and Savior). Excuse me for using Arabic numerals in the title above. I try to use Roman numerals when possible because I don't want to offend anyone who is offended by Arabic numerals.
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.