It's 1775, Are You A Loyalist Or A Patriot?

Loyalist or Patriot   13 votes

  1. 1. It's 1775, will you side with the Patriots or the Loyalists?

    • Loyalists
      0
    • Patriots
      13

Please sign in or register to vote in this poll.

78 posts in this topic

Posted (edited)

Please follow up by commenting with Scripture reference(s) for your choice, thanks!

Edited by swathdiver

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

I'm a Canadian....
(sorry, couldn't resist) :hide:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

You can still take a side, I didn't say you'd have to grab your musket! :knuppel:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

The poll is somewhat skewed because the Loyalists considered themselves to be patriots.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

Hard for me to answer too. I'm trying as best as I can to be loyal to my Lord & Savior. My loyalty is 1st to Him. Plus I have notice that some claim, or at least the seem to claim, that no one can be a good Christian unless 1st their a good American, loyal to this United States no matter what stand they may take & or what this country might do, backing them up never questioning them.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted


Hard for me to answer too. I'm trying as best as I can to be loyal to my Lord & Savior. My loyalty is 1st to Him. Plus I have notice that some claim, or at least the seem to claim, that no one can be a good Christian unless 1st their a good American, loyal to this United States no matter what stand they may take & or what this country might do, backing them up never questioning them.

Good point. Bear in mind that many of the English-speaking settlers had been forced out of England by repressive governments, so there was no reason to be loyal to a country that they had had to leave, to live in peace from religious oppression. Either way, it was bad news for both native Americans & slaves. What was achieved peacefully by the British parliament had to be fought for in America 50 years later.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

Don't forget Christians are called upon to be in obedience to those in authority over them. This applies whether or not we like the government, the king/president, or their policies. Christians are called upon to be subject to them, unless they order us to violate the Word of God, to pray for them and trust God.

We can see examples of this rightly displayed in Scripture, such as in the life of Daniel and the Apostles.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)


Don't forget Christians are called upon to be in obedience to those in authority over them.


Romans 13 applies to governments who fear God. When the government does things in opposition to God, we are to obey God rather than men, right?

What are some examples in the OT of un-Godly governments being overthrown by Godly ones?

I contend as our Founders did in the Declaration that there is Biblical authority to start over and throw them off. Edited by swathdiver

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted




Romans 13 applies to governments who fear God. When the government does things in opposition to God, we are to obey God rather than men, right?

What are some examples in the OT of un-Godly governments being overthrown by Godly ones?

I contend as our Founder did in the Declaration that we have Biblical authority to throw off this government and start over.

Where does it say in Scripture to only be subject to governments that fear God? Paul was subject unto Rome yet Rome was a very ungodly government.

Scripture does not tell Christians to fight for anything on this earth. Scripture tells Christians to live for Christ in all circumstances and at all times. The only time a Christian is told to not obey the authority over them is when that authority specifically orders them to disobey God. In such a situation the Christian is to continue obeying God, but there is no call for general rebellion or to disobey the authority in any other area.

Just as Catholicism has always entangled itself in the affairs of government rather than being about the things of God, many professing Christians seek to do the same today.

What is more powerful, a group of Christians armed to the teeth attacking the government God has put over them or a group of Christians in continual, fervent prayer for that government?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

I'm Australian :hide: we've never had civil war and don't want one.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted


I'm Australian :hide: we've never had civil war and don't want one.

We haven't either but one may come someday. This is about the time of the American Revolution.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

Second Timothy 2:3, 4

Thou therefore endure hardness, as a good soldier of Jesus Christ.
No man that warreth entangleth himself with the affairs of this life; that he may please him who hath chosen him to be a soldier.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)



We haven't either but one may come someday. This is about the time of the American Revolution.


True:

A "civil war" is where a group of citizens of a country seek to take control of that country (by force) from the existing government.
Neither the war in the late 1700's nor the one in the mid 1800's fit the definition of a civil war or civil uprising.

.Both properly fall in the category of a war for independence (one successful, one unsuccessful) where a portion of a country does not attack it's government, but instead, petitions and airs it grievances concerning alleged violation of the governmental law by said body and declares its separate sovereignty

Rarely does the original nation respond in capitulation to forfeiture of territory (although the Britian did so with Canada and Australia - perhaps [with Canada] due to the great cost of man and material in the battles (1770's and again in the early 1800's) against the U.S. and [with Australia] due to the different attitude concerning losing just a penal colony?), but will instead seek to force recapture and punishment of its suceeding wards (as happened in the aforementioned entities with different outcomes). Edited by OLD fashioned

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted




Romans 13 applies to governments who fear God. When the government does things in opposition to God, we are to obey God rather than men, right?

What are some examples in the OT of un-Godly governments being overthrown by Godly ones?

I contend as our Founder did in the Declaration that we have Biblical authority to throw off this government and start over.



Jas 4:1 ΒΆ From whence come wars and fightings among you? come they not hence, even of your lusts that war in your members?

Really! From whence comes wars? Of course the answer is in the above verse.

I might add, in Jesus' days they were under an evil goverment, yet I read no teaching whatsoever about overthrowing it, but I do read that we are to pray that things go well with our leaders so that we can live a peaceful life. If you try to overthrow your government, there is nothing peaceful about that.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted




True:

A "civil war" is where a group of citizens of a country seek to take control of that country (by force) from the existing government.
Neither the war in the late 1700's nor the one in the mid 1800's fit the definition of a civil war or civil uprising.

.Both properly fall in the category of a war for independence (one successful, one unsuccessful) where a portion of a country does not attack it's government, but instead, petitions and airs it grievances concerning alleged violation of the governmental law by said body and declares its separate sovereignty

Rarely does the original nation respond in capitulation to forfeiture of territory (although the Britian did so with Canada and Australia - perhaps [with Canada] due to the great cost of man and material in the battles (1770's and again in the early 1800's) against the U.S. and [with Australia] due to the different attitude concerning losing just a penal colony?), but will instead seek to force recapture and punishment of its suceeding wards (as happened in the aforementioned entities with different outcomes).


No, war, even civil war. is all about power, greed, lust, and its not godly.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted



Just as Catholicism has always entangled itself in the affairs of government rather than being about the things of God, many professing Christians seek to do the same today.

What is more powerful, a group of Christians armed to the teeth attacking the government God has put over them or a group of Christians in continual, fervent prayer for that government?


So were the Founders wrong? Did God shed His grace on America during the Revolution? Nothing we can do is more powerful than prayer.

I had the order backwards, a new government must be formed before throwing off the old. Anyway, I see plenty of times in OT times where un-Godly rulers were overthrown by Godly people. Did that change after the church age began? Aren't we to occupy till he comes? What am I missing here?

In case Janet Napolitano is reading this: Nobody here is talking about actually overthrowing the government, you guys have already done that from within. Just talking about biblical authority for and against such from history.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

We were taught in our history class it's a civil war, I'm not going to argue with you as I'm not an expert on the topic.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted


We were taught in our history class it's a civil war, I'm not going to argue with you as I'm not an expert on the topic.

The history taught here is typically wrong, even outright propaganda. Little would surprise me with regards to the falsehoods taught as history today.

The first thing we must consider is what Scripture says the lives of Christians are to be like. What our focus is to be, what we are to separate from, what we are not to become entangled in, where our time, talents and treasures are to be put, and whether we are to be busy building things that last only in this world or that which will last for eternity.

Christians are called to a very high calling. We are called to a life very different from those around us.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted


We were taught in our history class it's a civil war, I'm not going to argue with you as I'm not an expert on the topic.

Murphy's military laws: - Civil war isn't civil.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)




No, war, even civil war. is all about power, greed, lust, and its not godly.



Wow, please read before reacting -- reason, not emotion.

I was neither condoning nor condemning war, I was speaking of definitive vs categorization.

Calling a succession a coup doesn't make it one, Edited by OLD fashioned

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

I just wonder how many Christians will sit by when war comes to this country (and,believe me - it's coming. It's fomenting right now, thanks to the current POTUS) and say, "I'm a Christian, not supposed to fight. So I'll just let whatever happens happen." Probably not many. But it sure sounds good to say it, doesn't it? Too bad precedent is set by God Himself having Israel fight. Pacifism doesn't make one a good Christian (no more than fighting does). (and if that seems to be saying that one has to be a good American in order to be a good Christian, so be it. I've never said or intimated it in the past, nor have I read anyone who has. But I will say this: if a person isn't a good citizen, they aren't a good Christian. Regardless of the country of their residence. That doesn't mean they accept their country's wrongdoings as right.)

Old fashioned, you are right. The term "Civil War" is a misnomer because it was not an uprising of the south, trying to seize control of the government. It was a defense of the south against northern aggression and the attempt to obliterate the 10th amendment...kinda like what's going on now....Stonewall Jackson said it best, that the war was actually "our second war for independence."

Romans 13 is not speaking about any particular form of government, nor is it speaking about a government that was godly or godless. It is speaking of the proper function of government. And that function was awry during our founders' time, which is the reason they did what they did. And it is also the reason that the majority of pastors in that day exhorted their parishioners to join the fight against tyranny and oppression, some pastors even leading their men to battle. It is awry now, also, and I truly fear that something horrible is coming our way.

The Loyalists (Tories) were remaining loyal to the king because they believed it was treason to go against him for any reason. But the founders, and the patriots of that day, knew better. They understood what oppression was, and they knew that mankind didn't HAVE to stay under oppression. They knew, even those who weren't Christians, that the natural rights of man were given to them by God. And they stated so in the Declaration of Independence, a document which so many Americans, even Christians (sad to say, many times it is especially Christians) neither understand or appreciate. I have always found it fascinating how the listing of abuses by King George parallels the warning of abuses listed by Samuel to Israel when they sought for a king.

I would have sided with what Swath has listed as Patriot (Whigs). I probably would have been involved in helping the Sons of Liberty in whatever way women could have helped back then; likely my hubby would have been a member of SoL. (I found out just this weekend that my husband and son, via my MIL, are related to Paul Revere. :biggrin: I know it means nothing in light of eternity, but it's still pretty neat all the same...my son is related to Paul Revere and George Washington...two VIPatriots)

Swath - there were also, in a higher percentage, people who were either neutral or apolitical. That might be a choice to add to your poll. Just so you know, we have had this discussion in the past, if you wanted to search and see what's been said (that doesn't mean we can't have it again...just letting you know so you can read up if you want)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted


I just wonder how many Christians will sit by when war comes to this country (and,believe me - it's coming. It's fomenting right now, thanks to the current POTUS) and say, "I'm a Christian, not supposed to fight. So I'll just let whatever happens happen." Probably not many. But it sure sounds good to say it, doesn't it? Too bad precedent is set by God Himself having Israel fight. Pacifism doesn't make one a good Christian (no more than fighting does). (and if that seems to be saying that one has to be a good American in order to be a good Christian, so be it. I've never said or intimated it in the past, nor have I read anyone who has. But I will say this: if a person isn't a good citizen, they aren't a good Christian. Regardless of the country of their residence. That doesn't mean they accept their country's wrongdoings as right.)

Old fashioned, you are right. The term "Civil War" is a misnomer because it was not an uprising of the south, trying to seize control of the government. It was a defense of the south against northern aggression and the attempt to obliterate the 10th amendment...kinda like what's going on now....Stonewall Jackson said it best, that the war was actually "our second war for independence."

Romans 13 is not speaking about any particular form of government, nor is it speaking about a government that was godly or godless. It is speaking of the proper function of government. And that function was awry during our founders' time, which is the reason they did what they did. And it is also the reason that the majority of pastors in that day exhorted their parishioners to join the fight against tyranny and oppression, some pastors even leading their men to battle. It is awry now, also, and I truly fear that something horrible is coming our way.

The Loyalists (Tories) were remaining loyal to the king because they believed it was treason to go against him for any reason. But the founders, and the patriots of that day, knew better. They understood what oppression was, and they knew that mankind didn't HAVE to stay under oppression. They knew, even those who weren't Christians, that the natural rights of man were given to them by God. And they stated so in the Declaration of Independence, a document which so many Americans, even Christians (sad to say, many times it is especially Christians) neither understand or appreciate. I have always found it fascinating how the listing of abuses by King George parallels the warning of abuses listed by Samuel to Israel when they sought for a king.

I would have sided with what Swath has listed as Patriot (Whigs). I probably would have been involved in helping the Sons of Liberty in whatever way women could have helped back then; likely my hubby would have been a member of SoL. (I found out just this weekend that my husband and son, via my MIL, are related to Paul Revere. :biggrin: I know it means nothing in light of eternity, but it's still pretty neat all the same...my son is related to Paul Revere and George Washington...two VIPatriots)

Swath - there were also, in a higher percentage, people who were either neutral or apolitical. That might be a choice to add to your poll. Just so you know, we have had this discussion in the past, if you wanted to search and see what's been said (that doesn't mean we can't have it again...just letting you know so you can read up if you want)




If I'm living, I want just set by, I hope that I will be trusting Him with all my heart while trying to do the work that God hath ordained those that have been saved to do.

I understand well that those who do this, some, perhaps many will say those people are just setting by doing nothing. The fact is those who have followed Him, kept His commandments, have done everything possible.

Eph 2:10 For we are his workmanship, created in Christ Jesus unto good works, which God hath before ordained that we should walk in them.

In such a time as you speak of we will probably find out there is not as many Christian as many people think they are.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

Jerry8, nowhere does God command the Christian not to defend him/herself. That is what I am speaking of. I agree that there will not be many Christians evident at the beginning of what is coming - because it is due to lack of obedience that we have come to this point. Christians have not been about the job of winning and discipling people as we should have been and should be, nor have Christians truly allowed God to mold them and make them what He wants them to be. And so sin has taken a strong hold of America. Because of that, persecution and war is coming. Trusting God with all your heart doesn't mean not fighting back - especially if a person's family is in immediate danger. (It doesn't mean one has to fight...God leads people individually as well as corporately)

If someone breaks into your home, will you just let it go (the "you" there being generic - not asking anyone specific)? Jesus doesn't expect that. He said: "But know this, that if the goodman of the house had known in what watch the thief would come, he would have watched, and would not have suffered his house to be broken up." That statement was inserted in a talk about His return. I believe it means that the head of a home would do what is necessary to see his family saved, but Jesus used an analogy there about a thief, and about the head of the home not allowing that thief to hurt his home. The head of the home would not allow his home to be broken up, destroyed.

The country is just an extension of our homes. And there are thieves breaking in and stealing - stealing our liberties, which God gave us at the inception of this country. Yes, we need to be about the business of soulwinning and discipling. That is vital. Very vital. And I commend you for taking it so seriously. But that doesn't mean we are to neglect everything else. We are in the world - not of it, as far as the mindset and philosophy. But I do believe that Christians who do not do what they can to see things done right politically will answer for it. Why? Because God has given us much - and we are letting it slip through our hands. I don't believe it will be long til Jesus comes - but He told us to occupy til He comes. Too many of us aren't doing that - spiritually or otherwise.

Allowing the thievery of our liberties to continue simply makes it more and more difficult to be about the business of Christianity...which is why the first amendment was written in the first place. Our forefathers were actually very wise men.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

Hi Happy Christian Just would like to ask and I'm not disputing what you've said, but are you taught in your history classes that it was a civil war or a war. I'm baffled as to why we were taught it was a civil war. I guess it's like the Korean War, many call it a war but it was actually classified as a Police action.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!


Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now