Episode 441: Treachery in Treaties – Better To Liken To Jehoshaphat

See the link for the video of ‘Treachery in Treaties – Better To Liken To Jehoshaphat’ at Rumble or YouTube

treachery in treatiesTreachery in Treaties is evidenced in reading through the State Departments ‘Treaties In Force.’ Just consider the ‘2021 – 2023 — SUPPLEMENT,’ which is made up of 86 pages of treaties and agreements either renewed or new. Not withstanding the 570 pages of the first document.

This week I don’t have the time to write a long posting so you are going to have to listen or watch the program to get the full content.

Why are the links in the intro paragraph important?

Because, they are the law of the land. You scream… WHAT? Obviously you do not understand the Federal Constitution and its effects fully enforced. Yes, Here you will see treachery in treaties being set up.

Article 6, Clause 2 – The Founders Constitution

This Constitution, and the Laws of the United States which shall be made in Pursuance thereof; and all Treaties made, or which shall be made, under the Authority of the United States, shall be the supreme Law of the Land; and the Judges in every State shall be bound thereby, any Thing in the Constitution or Laws of any State to the Contrary notwithstanding.

Now, the ‘Treaties In Force’ do not include all the United Nations (UN) treaties and agreements wrapped into one larger agreement, and there are other specific UN treaties we are subjects to. Yes, I use subjects as in Webster’s dictionary definition:

Noun: One that owes allegiance to a sovereign and is governed by his laws.

Verb: To bring under the power or dominion of.

Therefore, The shoe fits according to Article 6, Clause 2 … these treaties are ‘supreme law of the land’ and we are subject to them through ‘the Judges in every State shall be bound thereby, any Thing in the Constitution or Laws of any State to the Contrary notwithstanding.’ I have much more to say on this on the podcast.

For that, the reference is Joseph Story, Commentaries on the Constitution 3:§§ 1831–33, 1835–36

Do ponder on the use of ‘notwithstanding’ as used here and the Webster 1828 definition.

Anti-federalists response to Art. 6, Sec 2: Federal Farmer, no. 4

George Mason, Virginia Ratifying Convention

St. George Tucker, Blackstone’s Commentaries 1:App. 369–70

It may seem very extraordinary, that a people jealous of their liberty, and not insensible of the allurements of power, should have entrusted the federal government with such extensive authority as this article conveys: controlling not only the acts of their ordinary legislatures, but their very constitutions, also.

CONSPIRACY IN PHILADELPHIA

I came across a very interesting book written in 2004 by Dr. Gary North ‘Conspiracy In Philadelphia.’ He explains that: ‘This book is an update of Part 3 of Political Polytheism: The Myth of Neutrality (Tyler, Texas: Institute for Christian Economics, 1989).’ My purpose in bringing this to you is that I have been on the track of discussing ‘covenant’ in the last few programs. Both of these books are a deep dive into Covenantal relationship and governance with the former being specific to the U. S. Constitution.

More specifics in the podcast or video with a short quote here to force some thought. The following taken from pages 255 – 257:

Warren Burger, who served as Chief Justice of the U.S. SupremeCourt in the 1970’s and half of the 1980’s, says that “We the People”(2)1 are the Constitution’s most important words. On September 26, 1988, he sent me a one-sentence reply when I questioned him about the meaning of his statement. “They are the key words conceptually.” This gets right to the point.

At the time that I read his reply, I did not fully understand the reason why his statement is correct. I had not yet recognized the extraordinary construction of the Preamble: it precisely follows the biblical covenant structure. The (1) sovereign creating agency, “We the People” (2) acts in history (historical prologue) to establish a union that will (3) establish justice and insure the common defense (boundaries) to secure (4) the blessings of liberty for ourselves and (5) our posterity.

When I finally recognized this five-point structure, as I was writing this chapter, I immediately went to my library to get a copy of Meredith G. Kline’s The Structure of Biblical Authority. I wanted to be sure I had part two correct – what he, following George Mendenhall, calls the historical prologue. Lo and behold, Kline even uses the word preamble in describing the Ten Commandments section of Exodus 20: “I am the Lord thy God,” the opening words of the Sinaitic proclamation (Exod. 20:2a), correspond to the preamble of the suzerainty treaties, which identified the suzerain or “great king” and that in terms calculated to inspire awe and fear.(3)2

There is no historical prologue in the Preamble to the Constitution. Why not? Because the Constitution literally was announcing the advent of a new covenantal divinity whose prior existence had no independent legal status in American jurisprudence. The People had been referred to time and again in colonial political theory, but the People had no independent legal status. The unitarian god of Locke’s theory of government and Newton’s cosmos had previously always been mentioned in close association with the god of the People. The People had heretofore always been under a god of some kind. This was about to change.

We the People”: From Vassal to Suzerain to Serf

This new independently sovereign divinity, the People, would formally announce its advent as the sole covenantal agent of national incorporation by means of public ratification. The People, the Pre- amble states, “do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America.” The new god of the Constitution was both suzerain and vassal – something covenantally unique in the history of man prior to 1787. The Constitution’s Preamble elevated the People from point two in the covenant structure – representation – to point one: the creator. Warren Burger is correct: “We the People” are the key words conceptually.

Treachery in Treaties

As I mention on the podcast / video, we need a God greater than government and the concept of ‘We The People.’ Consider what happened in treachery in treaties from 2 Chronicles 16 through 20 starting with:

2. Then Asa brought silver and gold from the treasuries of the house of the Lord and of the king’s house, and sent to Ben-Hadad king of Syria, who dwelt in Damascus, saying, 3 “Let there be a treaty between you and me, as there was between my father and your father. See, I have sent you silver and gold; come, break your treaty with Baasha king of Israel, so that he will withdraw from me.”

4 So Ben-Hadad heeded King Asa, and sent the captains of his armies against the cities of Israel. They attacked Ijon, Dan, Abel Maim, and all the storage cities of Naphtali.

Now look at what happened:

7 And at that time Hanani the seer came to Asa king of Judah, and said to him: “Because you have relied on the king of Syria, and have not relied on the Lord your God, therefore the army of the king of Syria has escaped from your hand. 8 Were the Ethiopians and the Lubim not a huge army with very many chariots and horsemen? Yet, because you relied on the Lord, He delivered them into your hand. 9 For the eyes of the Lord run to and fro throughout the whole earth, to show Himself strong on behalf of those whose heart is loyal to Him. In this you have done foolishly; therefore from now on you shall have wars.”

So what about Jehoshaphat? Where does he come in? Things wrap up for him in the following ways that I detail on the podcast / video:

1. He sends out leaders and teacher ‘9So they taught in Judah, and had the Book of the Law of the Lord with them; they went throughout all the cities of Judah and taught the people.’ 2 Chronicles 17: 7-9

2. Results were: ‘ 10And the fear of the Lord fell on all the kingdoms of the lands that were around Judah, so that they did not make war against Jehoshaphat.’ 2 Chronicles17:10-12

3. He did something dumb in treaty with Ahab: 3So Ahab king of Israel said to Jehoshaphat king of Judah, “Will you go with me against Ramoth Gilead?” And he answered him, “I am as you are, and my people as your people; we will be with you in the war.”

4. Treachery in Treaties: ‘29And the king of Israel said to Jehoshaphat, “I will disguise myself and go into battle; but you put on your robes.” So the king of Israel disguised himself, and they went into battle. 30Now the king of Syria had commanded the captains of the chariots who were with him, saying, “Fight with no one small or great, but only with the king of Israel.” 31So it was, when the captains of the chariots saw Jehoshaphat, that they said, “It is the king of Israel!” Therefore they surrounded him to attack; but Jehoshaphat cried out, and the Lord helped him, and God diverted them from him. 32For so it was, when the captains of the chariots saw that it was not the king of Israel, that they turned back from pursuing him.’

What’s All That About

First off: we are a false, or I should say, never have been a true Christian nation as one follows The Conspiracy In Philadelphia.

Second: We have made so many treaties, notwithstanding that which is notwithstanding, that we are slaves under ‘the supreme law of the land.’

Third: as we are living now, treaties do have consequences. Especially when evil leaders are in control. They make even more enslaving agreements and treaties for further enslavement of the individual citizenry.

Final Point…For Now

We need Reformation of the churches and pray then for revival as with Jehoshaphat:

9 So they taught in Judah, and had the Book of the Law of the Lord with them; they went throughout all the cities of Judah and taught the people.

10 And the fear of the Lord fell on all the kingdoms of the lands that were around Judah, so that they did not make war against Jehoshaphat. 11 Also some of the Philistines brought Jehoshaphat presents and silver as tribute; and the Arabians brought him flocks, seven thousand seven hundred rams and seven thousand seven hundred male goats.

12 So Jehoshaphat became increasingly powerful, and he built fortresses and storage cities in Judah. 13 He had much property in the cities of Judah; and the men of war, mighty men of valor, were in Jerusalem.

Sam Adams Wisdom

TO RICHARD HENRY LEE

BOSTON December 3, 1787

MY DEAR SIR

I am to acknowledge your several Favours of the 5th and 27 of October, the one by the Post and the other by our worthy Friend Mr Gerry. The Session of our General Court which lasted six Weeks, and my Station there requiring my punctual & constant Attendance, prevented my considering the new Constitution as it is already called, so closely as was necessary for me before I should venture an Opinion. I confess, as I enter the Building I stumble at the Threshold. I meet with a National Government, instead of a Federal Union of Sovereign States. I am not able to conceive why the Wisdom of the Convention led them to give the Preference to the former before the latter. If the several States in the Union are to become one entire Nation, under one Legislature, the Powers of which shall extend to every Subject of Legislation, and its Laws be supreme & controul the whole, the Idea of Sovereignty in these States must be lost. Indeed I think, upon such a Supposition, those Sovereignties ought to be eradicated from the Mind; for they would be Imperia in Imperio3 justly deemed a Solecism (Impropriety in language, or a gross deviation from the rules of syntax; incongruity of words) in Politicks, & they would be highly dangerous, and destructive of the Peace Union and Safety of the Nation. And can this National Legislature be competent to make Laws for the free internal Government of one People, living in Climates so remote and whose “Habits & particular Interests” are and probably always will be so different. Is it to be expected that General Laws can be adapted to the Feelings of the more Eastern and the more Southern Parts of so extensive a Nation? It appears to me difficult if practicable. Hence then may we not look for Discontent, Mistrust, Disaffection to Government and frequent Insurrections, which will require standing Armies to suppress them in one Place & another where they may happen to arise. Or if Laws could be made, adapted to the local Habits, Feelings, Views & Interests of those distant Parts, would they not cause Jealousies of Partiality in Government which would excite Envy and other malignant Passions productive of Wars and fighting. But should we continue distinct sovereign States, confederated for the Purposes of mutual Safety and Happiness, each contributing to the federal Head such a Part of its Sovereignty as would render the Government fully adequate to those Purposes and no more, the People would govern themselves more easily, the Laws of each State being well adapted to its own Genius & Circumstances, and the Liberties of the United States would be more secure than they can be, as I humbly conceive, under the proposed new Constitution. You are sensible, Sir, that the Seeds of Aristocracy began to spring even before the Conclusion of our Struggle for the natural Rights of Men, Seeds which like a Canker Worm lie at the Root of free Governments. So great is the Wickedness of some Men, & the stupid Servility of others, that one would be almost inclined to conclude that Communities cannot be free. The few haughty Families, think They must govern. The Body of the People tamely consent & submit to be their Slaves. This unravels the Mystery of Millions being enslaved by the few! But I must desist—My weak hand prevents my proceeding further at present. I will send you my poor Opinion of the political Structure at another Time. In the Interim oblige me with your Letters; & present mine and Mrs A’s best Regards to your Lady & Family, Colo Francis, Mr A. L. if with you, & other Friends, & be assured that I am

very affectionately yours

As I thought it a Piece of Justice I have ventured to say that I had often heard from the best Patriots from Virginia that Mr G Mason was an early active & able Advocate for the Liberties of America.

Thank you to all who are subscribers to the program. Please share the newsletter and subscribe to the Rumble or YouTube channel.

References:

1. None Dare Call It Treason; 25 Years Later by John Stormer

2. Definitions From Webster 1826 Dictionary

Other references embedded in the content.

12. Orlando Sentinel (Sept. 8, 1988), p. A–2.

23. Meredith G. Kline, The Structure of Biblical Authority, rev. ed. (Grand Rapids, Mich- igan: Eerdmans, 1972), p. 114.

3A state within a state, inclusive of deep states or other forces which operate with sovereign-like impunity within a polity. – https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/imperium_in_imperio

Interested in Historical Truth?

Sign up to receive awesome content, every week.

Comments Off on Episode 441: Treachery in Treaties – Better To Liken To Jehoshaphat

Filed under Radio Program Archives

Comments are closed.