The third is of special interest. Louis XIV, the French tyrant, was trying to fill the pews in the local Roman Catholic churches by sending armed soldiers into the houses of Protestants ("Huguenots"). The soldiers could stay there and eat all they wished, and rape all the women and girls in the house, unless and until the head of the household began attending an RC church.
The Brits had generally not violated the "no quartering" standards for a very long time, and then the only quartering they did involved wartime and then only with otherwise empty houses.
The second amendment gives you personally the right and ability to make sure you can go to whatever church you want, or protect yourself on the streets at night, or keep people from crawling through your windows to rob and kill you. It's about both having guns and self-defense, and your right to your own conscience regarding life and death.
The first amendment is then clearly seen to be nothing more than a restatement of rights that already existed in America.
That third amendment is a hum dinger - it's the Protestant Amendment - the one that says that no matter what the government is into, whether it be Roman Catholicism, Hinduism, Buddhism or Islam, they have no right to intrude on your family with coercion and you can be any kind of Protestant you wish to be.
You're welcome to view the world through religious lenses if you wish, but those Amendments are about far more than what myth you choose to pledge your fealty to. Yes, they most certainly are directed at tyrants and tyrannies. Furthermore, they define the limitations necessary to prevent our "normal" government from become that very thing. As we tear them down, piece by piece, our government leaves the realm of normal and descends into the hell of tyranny.