Biblical Examination of the Declaration of Independence
Declaration of Liberty
vs.
Declaration of Independence
Chapter 2
Thomas Jefferson: Patriot, Deist, or Anti-Christ?
The law of Yahweh is perfect, converting the soul: the testimony of Yahweh is sure, making wise the simple. The statutes of Yahweh are right, rejoicing the heart: the commandment of Yahweh is pure, enlightening the eyes. The fear of Yahweh is clean, enduring for ever: the judgments of Yahweh are true and righteous altogether. More to be desired are they than gold, yea, than much fine gold: sweeter also than honey and the honeycomb. Moreover by them is thy servant warned: and in keeping of them there is great reward. (Psalm 19:7-11)
Incredibly, all of the above would be eradicated under the New Covenant if today’s antinomians (those opposed to Yahweh’s moral law under the New Covenant) had their way. In fact, most of this was officially eliminated here in America in 1787 (and incrementally thereafter) when the constitutional framers replaced the Bible’s perfect law of liberty with the biblically seditious Constitution10 as the supreme law of the land.11
The Declaration of Independence and the Constitution are inseparable—two peas in the same Isaiah 5:20 pod. The Declaration is what is sometimes correctly depicted as the United States of America’s* birth certificate.
This book is dedicated to biblically examining the Declaration of Independence line by line, paragraph by paragraph, in much the same way I did the United States Constitution in Bible Law vs. the United States Constitution: The Christian Perspective.13 However, before getting to the Declaration itself, it’s important we first discuss both the author and purpose of the Declaration of Independence.
Thomas Jefferson:
The Declaration’s Chief Architect
To many Christians and patriots, Thomas Jefferson is an American icon, based upon legend, lore, and his renowned quotations. But there’s more to Thomas Jefferson than what most people have been told, some of which has serious scriptural implications not only for Jefferson himself but also for those who laud and endorse him. As the principal author of the Declaration of Independence, Jefferson also speaks to the Declaration and its alleged biblical affinity.
Let me, however, first address what amounts to a false accusation concerning Thomas Jefferson—that Jefferson was a Deist. With the exception of Benjamin Franklin, who appears to have left his earlier Deism behind him by the time of the Constitutional Convention, none of the key founding fathers were Deists in the purest sense of the word. Neither were they Christians in the biblical sense of the Word. They are best depicted as theistic rationalists, an oxymoronic mixture of both.14
No, Thomas Jefferson was not a Deist. Thomas Jefferson was an anti-Christ, per 1 Timothy 3:16 and 2 John 1:7-9:
And without controversy great is the mystery of godliness: God was manifest in the flesh.... (1 Timothy 3:16)
According to the Apostle Paul in 1 Corinthians 8:4-6, there’s only one God. And because there is only one God, there is likewise only one Yahweh:
Unto thee it was shewed, that thou mightest know that Yahweh he is God; there is none else beside him.... Know therefore this day, and consider it in thine heart, that Yahweh he is God in heaven above, and upon the earth beneath: there is none else. (Deuteronomy 4:35, 39)
Hear, O Israel: Yahweh our God is one Yahweh. (Deuteronomy 6:4)
According to 1 Timothy 3:16, Yahweh God was manifest in the flesh. As who? As Yeshua Immanuel.
Yeshua**—which means “Yah*** who saves”—is the English transliteration of our Savior’s given Hebrew name, with which He introduced Himself to the Apostle Paul in Acts 26:14-15. His secondary name Immanuel means God with us:
[T]he angel of the Lord appeared unto ... Joseph [saying], ... fear not to take unto thee Mary thy wife: for that which is conceived in her is of the Holy Ghost. And she shall bring forth a son, and thou shalt call his name Jesus [Yeshua, i.e., Yah Who Saves]: for he shall save his people from their sins. Now all this was done, that it might be fulfilled which was spoken of the Lord by the prophet [Isaiah], saying,
Behold, a virgin shall be with child, and shall bring forth a son, and they shall call his name Immanuel, which being interpreted is, God with us. (Matthew 1:20-23)
Yeshua’s virgin birth is integral to who He is—that is, to the One whom the Apostle Paul depicts in Philippians 2:5-9 as having poured out Himself to become flesh and die on our behalf. With this in mind, consider the serious implications for anyone who rejects Yahweh’s incarnation via the virgin birth of Yah Who Saves:
For many [plural] deceivers are entered into the world, who confess not that Jesus Christ is come in the flesh. This is a deceiver and an antichrist.
(2 John 1:7)
The Apostle John is the only New Testament author to employ the term “antichrist.” Thus, to biblically understand the term “antichrist,” we must look to John’s writings to understand who it is John depicts as anti-Christ.
It’s evident from 2 John 1:7 alone that the teaching about a future, individual, one-man Antichrist did not originate with John. Such a man is found nowhere in the Bible. He is the figment of the fertile imaginations of a group of eschatological**** false prophets.***** According to John and because there’s only one Yahweh God, anyone who denies that Yah Who Saves (that is, God With Us) was manifest in the flesh is anti-Christ:
For many [plural] deceivers are entered into the world, who confess not that Jesus Christ is come in the flesh. This is a deceiver and an antichrist. Look to yourselves, that we lose not those things which we have wrought, but that we receive a full reward. Whosoever transgresseth, and abideth not in the doctrine of Christ, hath not God. He that abideth in the doctrine of Christ, he hath both the Father and the Son. If there come any unto you, and bring not this doctrine, receive him not into your house, neither bid him God speed: For he that biddeth him God speed is partaker of his evil deeds. (2 John 1:7-11)
To bid someone “God speed” was tantamount to blessing them in his endeavors. As it concerns Thomas Jefferson, those endeavors amounted to a proliferation of an anti-Christ world view. This prohibition would certainly include electing an anti-Christ into a position of civil leadership.
John’s commandment not to bring an anti-Christ into our house does not specify the house. Thus, we’re not to bring any anti-Christ into any of our houses—into our personal house, State House, White House, Senate House, or House of Representatives.
Hopefully, you haven’t invited any anti-Christs into your personal house. But how many anti-Christs do you think America has today in the Constitutional Republic’s political houses? This, thanks to Article 6’s Christian test ban by which mandatory biblical qualifications for civil leaders (including what’s found in 2 John 1:7-9) were eliminated,16 and also thanks to Christians participating in the Constitutional Republic’s unbiblical election process by which they have assisted in electing biblically unqualified candidates17 into biblically egregious positions of civil “leadership.”18
I don’t know the exact number, but there are thousands of anti-Christs not only inhabiting but ruling from America’s political houses today. Consequently, when you consider the atheists, agnostics, Jews, Muslims, Hindus, etc.—all anti-Christs per 2 John 1:7-9—that have been invited into nearly every political house in America, is it any wonder America finds herself teetering on the precipice of moral depravity and destruction?
While today’s false prophets are pathetically all worked up over a nonexistent, never-going-to-exist, singular, one-person Antichrist, the real anti-Christs are left to destroy America and our posterity’s future. Many alleged Christians have helped elect anti-Christs, making them complicit in their wicked deeds while in office:
Do not lay hands upon anyone [unbiblically elect in contemporary America’s case] too hastily and thus share responsibility for the sins of others.... (1 Timothy 5:22, NASB)
Thomas Jefferson: An Anti-Christ
Although I don’t know the exact number of anti-Christs in public office today, I do know of one unapologetic anti-Christ who made it into the White House.
Because Christ’s virgin birth, resurrection, and ascension are intrinsic and therefore essential to the belief that Jesus is God manifest in the flesh, anyone who repudiates the same must therefore be an anti-Christ.
What’s this say about a man who not only cut the virgin birth, miracles, resurrection, and ascension of Christ out of his cut-and-paste New Testament but who, in a letter to John Adams in 1814, depicted those same attributes as a “dunghill”?19
This would be none other than Thomas Jefferson, the chief architect of the Declaration of Independence, later to be invited to rule over America from the Unites States of America’s highest political house.
Today, you’ll win no popularity contests identifying Thomas Jefferson as an anti-Christ, but what else would you call a man who identified Christ as a “dunghill”? If this doesn’t give you pause, not only regarding Jefferson but also the Declaration of Independence he authored, it may say something about your relationship with the One whom Thomas Jefferson blasphemed.
According to 2 John 1:7-9, Jefferson’s God was not the God of the Bible. Consequently, neither was the generic God and Creator of Jefferson’s Declaration of Independence, and therefore that god cannot be used to make the Constitution a biblically compatible document.
New Testament For Indians
But wait! The Bible out of which Thomas Jefferson cut the virgin birth, miracles, resurrection, and ascension of Christ was a New Testament allegedly meant only for missionary work among the Indians. This makes it okay—at least according to those determined to make the 18th-century founding fathers Christians and their Declaration and Constitution biblically compatible:
Now therefore hearken, O Israel, unto the statutes and unto the judgments, which I teach you, for to do them, that ye may live, and go in and possess the land which Yahweh God of your fathers giveth you. Ye shall not add unto the word which I command you, neither shall ye diminish ought from it, that ye may keep the commandments of Yahweh your God which I command you. (Deuteronomy 4:1-2)
This is true unless, of course, you’re crafting a New Testament meant for missionary work among the Indians. If this were the case, God would have included this exception with His instructions in Deuteronomy 4. Oh, the lengths some men will go to in order to protect their idols!
The Purpose of the Declaration of Independence
Idols die hard, including the icon known as the Declaration of Independence, composed by an anti-Christ. And for what purpose did he compose it?
It’s common knowledge that the Declaration of Independence was written as the American colonials’ declaration of independence from Great Britain. It was written as a declaration of independence, not as a declaration of liberty—by which it would have created a government of, by, and for God20—a government expressly established upon His triune and integral moral law as the supreme law of the land,21 otherwise known as the perfect law of liberty.
That this is true is perhaps best demonstrated by the striking theological differences between the worldviews of the early 17th-century Puritans and that of the late 18th-century theistic rationalists:
The idea that the state was beyond the reach of the claims of the Bible was … abhorrent to the Puritan…. In the Scriptures they found the origin, the form, the functions and the power of the state.... In the Puritan view of life man could no more create the government under which he would live and endow it with its just powers than he could effect his own salvation….
Basic in Puritan political thought is the doctrine of divine sovereignty. The earthly magistrate … was a minister of God ... for the execution of the laws of God…. In Puritan political theory the magistrate derived his powers from God and not from the people….22
The whole conception of government that would later be proclaimed by John Locke and others [e.g., Thomas Jefferson, James Madison, Alexander Hamilton, John Adams, etc.], which placed the sovereignty in the hands of the people and which found the origin of government in a human compact was utterly unknown to the Puritans. They did not believe in a government [of,] by [and for] the people ….23
[Richard] Mosier has well observed that this [late 18th-century] revolutionary age demanded that both the absolute God and the absolute king must “henceforth rule by the consent of the governed. The God of Puritanism, stripped of His antique powers, had no recourse but to enter as a weakened prince into the temple of the individualism [individual salvation] and there to seek refuge.” This sovereignty which he once claimed, and was accorded by the Puritans, was now claimed by man himself. This was the philosophical and theological outlook of many of the leaders of the [American] Revolution.24
That’s what the 18th-century founding fathers were looking to establish with their Declaration of Independence, as evident in the document it birthed a mere eleven years later, which instead created just another government of, by, and for the people.
All governments that are not governments of, by, and for God are merely different expressions of governments of, by, and for the people. This is true even of Great Britain’s 18th-century monarchy. Government of, by, and for the people is not unique to the Constitutional Republic. Some governments are of, by, and for the many. Some are of, by, and for the few. And some are of, by, and for one—such as King George III.
Regardless the number, all governments of, by, and for the people are merely humanistic manifestations of man doing what is right in his own eyes, per Judges 21:25. Judges 21:25 is what is commonly known as humanism, aka We the Peopleism.
Conclusion
It should be beginning to become apparent that there’s more to the Declaration of Independence than initially meets the eye, just as there is with the biblically seditious Constitution it birthed eleven years later.
* America and the United States of America are not the same thing. America existed long before the creation of the United States of America, aka the Constitutional Republic. The former was colonized by the Pilgrims and Puritans using the Bible’s immutable/unchanging moral law as their government’s foundational standard. The latter was created by Enlightenment and Masonic theistic rationalists based upon capricious manmade traditions.12
** Jesus is a twice-removed transliteration: the English transliteration of the Greek Iesous, which is the Greek transliteration of the Hebrew Yeshua.15
*** Yah is the abbreviation of Yahweh, found forty-eight times in the Old Testament. This does not account for the plethora of times it is found in Old Testament names such as Isaiah—that is, YeshaYah, meaning “Yah has saved.”15
**** Eschatology: The study of end-time events.
***** Whenever you hear people speaking of a future, individual, one-man Antichrist, you should run for your eschatological life. Not only is their Antichrist a fabrication of their own making, so is everything else prophetically associated with their bogus Antichrist.
Source Notes
10. Bible Law vs. the United States Constitution: The Christian Perspective, in which every Article and Amendment is examined by the Bible,
bibleversusconstitution.org/BlvcOnline/blvc-index.html
See also audio series “Bible Law vs. Constitutionalism,” beginning at bibleversusconstitution.org/tapelist.html#T742.
11. Chapter 9 “Article 6: The Supreme Law of the Land” of Bible Law vs. the United States Constitution: The Christian Perspective,
bibleversusconstitution.org/BlvcOnline/biblelaw-constitutionalism-pt9.html
12. For more regarding these two polar opposite forms of government, see Chapter 3 “The Preamble: We the People vs. Yahweh” of Bible Law vs. the United States Constitution: The Christian Perspective at
bibleversusconstitution.org/BlvcOnline/biblelaw-constitutionalism-pt3.html.
13. Bible Law vs. the United States Constitution: The Christian Perspective, in which every Article and Amendment is examined by the Bible,
bibleversusconstitution.org/BlvcOnline/blvc-index.html
See also audio series “Bible Law vs. Constitutional- ism,” beginning at bibleversusconstitution.org/tapelist.html#T742.
14. Gregg L. Frazer, The Religious Beliefs of America’s Founders: Reason, Revelation, and Revolution (University Press of Kansas, 2012)
15. For a more thorough explanation concerning important reasons for using the sacred names of God, see Thou shalt not take the name of YHWH thy God in vain, the third in a series of ten online books on each of the Ten Commandments and their respective statutes and judgments, at bibleversusconstitution.org/onlineBooks/third-commandment.html.
16. For more regarding Article 6’s Christian test ban, see Chapter 9 “Article 6: The Supreme Law of the Land” of Bible Law vs. the United States Constitution: The Christian Perspective at bibleversusconstitution.org/BlvcOnline/biblelaw-constitutionalism-pt9.html.
17. “Constitutional Elections: Dining at the ‘Devil’s Table’,” constitutionmythbusters.org/constitutional-elections-dining-at-the-devils-table/
For an explanation regarding the Bible’s election process, see “Salvation by Election” at constitutionmythbusters.org/salvation-by-election/.
18. Chapter 4 “Article 1: Legislative Usurpation” of Bible Law vs. the United States Constitution: The Christian Perspective at
bibleversusconstitution.org/BlvcOnline/biblelaw-constitutionalism-pt4.html
Chapter 5 “Article 2: Executive Usurpation”
Chapter 6 “Article 3: Judicial Usurpation”
19. Thomas Jefferson, letter to John Adams, 24 January 1814, Lester J. Cappon, ed., The Adams-Jefferson Letters: The Complete Correspondence Between Thomas Jefferson and Abigail and John Adams (Williamsburg, VA: Institute of Early American History and Culture, 1988) p. 384
20. Chapter 3 “The Preamble: We the People vs. Yahweh” of Bible Law vs. the United States Constitution: The Christian Perspective,
bibleversusconstitution.org/BlvcOnline/biblelaw-constitutionalism-pt3.html
A Biblical Constitution: A Scriptural Replacement for Secular Government, bibleversusconstitution.org/biblicalConstitution.html
21. For more regarding how the Bible’s immutable/unchanging moral law (the Ten Commandments and their respective statutes and judgments) applies today and should be implemented as the law of the land, see Law and Kingdom: Their Relevance Under the New Covenant at
bibleversus constitution.org/law-kingdomFrame.html.
See also Chapter 9 “Article 6: The Supreme Law of the Land” of Bible Law vs. the United States Constitution: The Christian Perspective at
bibleversusconstitution.org/BlvcOnline/biblelaw-constitutionalism-pt9.html.
22. C. Gregg Singer, A Theological Interpretation of American History (Phillipsburg, NJ: Presbyterian and Reformed Publishing Co., 1964) pp. 13-14
23. Ibid., pp. 18-19
24. Ibid., p. 35
Click Here to Read Chapter 3
