Genesis: Abraham, Covenant, and Promise

The Pledge-History & Problems-2

Transcript: AI Transcript

Professor: John Weaver

Subject: Old Testament Studies

Genre: Sermon

Dictation Name:

Date: 2006-04-16

Synopsis: John Weaver continues his analysis of the Pledge of Allegiance, examining its wording phrase by phrase. He argues that the pledge, authored by socialist Francis Bellamy, binds the reciter to an express oath of allegiance to a centralized government rather than to the original constitutional republic. Weaver contends that key terms like 'republic,' 'nation,' and 'indivisible' have been redefined to support a statist agenda, and that the phrase 'under God' was added later against Bellamy's wishes. He emphasizes that a Christian's ultimate allegiance belongs to Jesus Christ alone.

[John Weaver] If you have not opened your Bibles into Exodus chapter 20, and if you have not heard the message from last Sunday, I would encourage that you do so because today is the second part on the Pledge of Allegiance. I just simply entitle it, The Pledge, Its History and Its Problems. And we begin by reading Exodus 20, verses 1 through 3, and God spake all these words, saying, I am the Lord thy God who hath brought thee up out of the land of Egypt, out of the house of bondage.

[John Weaver] Thou shalt have no other gods before me. And certainly we're going to understand one application of verse 3 before we close today. Let me just simply review A few minutes of what I covered last Sunday. I simply said in the introduction that usually speaking, since most people have grown up with the pledge, that our feathers are very easily and quickly ruffled when someone will not recite the pledge or at least would not stand reverently while the pledge is being recited. And I said that the average attitude is simply that someone who would not do that is in the least unpatriotic and at the very most Marxist or communist.

[John Weaver] And then I also pointed out in my introduction that I hesitated tackling this subject only because it is controversial and I'm not trying to start a fight, I'm not trying to start a debate, I'm not trying to create problems, but I'm rather trying to resolve problems by showing you some reasoning and some rationalism and also some biblical common sense as well.

[John Weaver] Now, last week we covered two points. We first of all looked at the author of the pledge. And we discovered that Francis Bellamy was an ousted Baptist pastor, he was a Freemason, and above all, he was a socialist to the nth degree. He advocated a centralized government with autocratic power, and he wanted government to control all the means of production. That means government would either own and or control land, labor, and capital. He was also the head of the Christian Socialist Society, and he taught that government schools were the key to establishing the socialistic utopia in America. So he was indeed the author of the Pledge. And then secondly, we looked at the aim, and very quickly I'm going to tell you what he said when he began to contemplate writing the Pledge.

[John Weaver] In August of 1892, he said, it began as an intensive communing with salient points of our national history, from the Declaration of Independence onwards, with the making of the Constitution, with the meaning of the Civil War, with the aspiration of the people. And I know he said that when he sat down to write the pledge, he thought about not just simply the national history, the Declaration, the Constitution, but he also thought about the meaning of the Civil War. And then he goes on and he says this, and I'm quoting his words, the true reason for allegiance to the flag is the republic for which it stands. And what does that vast thing, the republic, mean? It is the concise political word for the nation, the one nation that the Civil War was thought to prove.

[John Weaver] To make that one nation idea clear, we must specify that it is indivisible as Webster and Lincoln used to repeat in their great speeches. So here he is saying once again that his philosophy is the same as Abraham Lincoln and is the same as Daniel Webster. And he says the republic to him is the concise political word for the nation. I'm going to explain that just a little bit later. But let me give you one other quote that I gave you last week, just to show you his socialism.

[John Weaver] In his speech, The Meaning of Four Centuries, he was advocating a strong position for government schools, and he says this, We assemble here today that we too may exalt the free school of the government school that embodies the American principle of universal enlightenment and equality, the most characteristic product of our four centuries of American life. One institution more than any other has wrought out the achievements of the past and is today the most trusted for the future. Our fathers in their wisdom knew that the foundations of liberty, fraternity, and equality, the slogan of the French Revolution, must be universal education. The free school, therefore, was conceived as the cornerstone of the republic. Washington and Jefferson recognized that the education of citizens is not the prerogative of the church or of other private interests, that while religious training belongs to the church and while technical and higher culture may be given by private institutions, the training of citizens in the common knowledge and the common duties of citizenship belongs irrevocably to the state."

[John Weaver] Now, here's what he said very clearly, that the state has the right to educate the children. He said, it is not the prerogative of the church, nor is it the prerogative of other private interests, and you ask yourself, who other would private interests refer to other than the parents? It's the parents that have the private interest in the children. So he says it's not the church that has the interest, it's not the parents that have the interest, it is the state. And so he was looking then at government schools as the way to bring up our children as good little statists. So his aim then was basically to elevate the state to the position of godhood, almost, in the fact that it controlled every aspect of our lives.

[John Weaver] Now, I told you that the pledge had gone through at least four revisions. And the pledge that we have today, or that we recite today, is codified in the United States Code. And it did not basically even become recognized by Congress until 1942. And of course, the phrase, under God, was not added until 1954. So today I want to come to the third point, the analysis, and let you and I try to analyze the Pledge of Allegiance. Now, before I begin analyzing the Pledge of Allegiance, I want to give you a quote from Dr. Clyde Wilson.

[John Weaver] Listen to what he says. He has a very excellent point. Dr. Clyde Wilson has graphically pointed out this simple fact. There were in antebellum America no loyalty oaths or pledges of allegiance to the flag of the nation. Free-born American citizens would have considered such to be an insult to their patriotism, as well as an invasion of the rights of their states. Americans did not pledge allegiance to the flag.

[John Weaver] They swore to uphold and defend the Constitution. the swearing having definite overtones of Christianity and the Anglo-American tradition, unlike the secularistic imperial pledge of allegiance."

[John Weaver] Now you just stop and think about what Dr. Wilson has said. In antebellum South, before the War of Northern Aggression, there were no loyalty oaths. There were no pledges of allegiance. The only thing men swore to do was to uphold and to defend the Constitution. With that in mind, I want you to follow with me as I try to analyze the pledge. I'm going to take a phrase or even a word at the time and let's break it down and see what is actually being said when someone says, I pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States of America, and to the republic for which it stands, one nation under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all." So, let's take the first words, I pledge. Do you realize that a pledge is a promise or an oath of allegiance? A pledge is a promise or an oath of allegiance. Webster in his 1828 dictionary defines a pledge as a promise or an agreement by which one binds himself to do something or forbear doing something.

[John Weaver] Now, the word pledge is found 22 times in our Bible. It usually refers to something given temporarily as a promise for the performance of a duty or something that would be considered as collateral for a loan. In fact, if you'll look in your Bibles very quickly to Genesis 38, You will find where Judah used a pledge to commit fornication with his daughter-in-law. He did not know that it was his daughter-in-law, but look in Genesis 38, beginning there in verse 13. The Bible says this, and it was told, Tamar saying, Behold, thy father-in-law woke up the Timnath, the sheer sheep. And she put her widow's garments off from her, and covered her with a veil, and wrapped herself, and sat in an open place, which is by the way of Timnath. For she saw that Shelah was drawn, and she was not given unto him to wife. When Judah saw her, he thought her to be a harlot, because she had covered her face. And he turned unto her, by the way, and said, Go to, I pray thee, let me come into thee, for he knew not that she was his daughter-in-law.

[John Weaver] And she said, What wilt thou give me, that thou mayest come in unto me? And he said, I will send thee a kid from the flock. And she said, Wilt thou give me a pledge till thou send it? And he said, What pledge shall I give thee? And she said, Thy signet, and thy bracelets, and thy staff that is in mine hand. And he gave it her, and came in at her, and she conceived by him.

[John Weaver] And she arose, and went away, and laid by her veil from her, and put on the garments of her widowhood. And Judah sent the kid by the hand of his friend the Adelamite to receive his pledge from a woman's hand, but he found her not. Then he asked the men of that place, saying, Where is the harlot that was openly by the way? And they said, There is no harlot in this place. And he returned to Judah and said, I cannot find her. And also the men of the place said there was no harlot in this place. And Judah said, let her take it to her, lest we be shamed. Behold, I sent this kid and thou hast not found her.

[John Weaver] Well, I'm not preaching on this text today, but the point I'm trying to make is she took his ring. She took his staff as a pledge, something that she was going to hold until he gave her the fulfillment of his promise which was a young kid of the flock. Now let me show you how important a pledge is. Many of you understand that the Septuagint is the Greek translation of the Hebrew Old Testament.

[John Weaver] It was a very prominent book. Our Lord and the disciples used it and quoted from it. And the word pledge used in Genesis chapter 38 and I want you to turn in your Bibles to 2nd Corinthians 1 and then Ephesians chapter 1 2nd Corinthians 1 verse 22 and then Ephesians chapter 1 and I'm going to show you the word pledge that is used in Genesis chapter 38 is also used in the New Testament notice if you would please 2nd Corinthians chapter 1 And look, if you would please, at verse 22. Here we will find the word earnest. The Bible talks about Christ and our salvation, and the Bible says, who also has sealed us and given the earnest of the Spirit in our hearts. Now, the word pledge and the word earnest are the same in the Greek. If you would look in your Bibles to the book of Ephesians, chapter 1 and verse 14, Ephesians 1 in verse 14, the Bible in referring to the Holy Spirit. In fact, look in the latter part of verse 13.

[John Weaver] The Bible says in Ephesians 1 in verse 13, the latter part, you were sealed with that Holy Spirit of promise, who is the earnest or who is the pledge of our inheritance until the redemption of the purchased possession under the praise of his glory. Now, those of us who have been regenerated and converted by the grace of God have been sealed with the Holy Spirit. Well, what is the Holy Spirit? The Holy Spirit is our pledge. It is our guarantee that Jesus Christ is going to return and complete and finish our redemption in the sense that we will be ultimately glorified and live with Him. So that Holy Spirit is our pledge. Now, when Christ gave us the Holy Spirit, what was he doing? He was binding himself to return and complete our salvation by saving us not only out of our sin and from the penalty of sin, but from the very presence of sin itself. So the Holy Spirit is our pledge, it's the guarantee. that Jesus Christ is going to return. Now, when you pledge, when you say, I pledge, you are binding yourself.

[John Weaver] You are agreeing and promising something. And just like Christ promised to come back and redeem his own, so when you say, I pledge, you are now beginning to bind yourself to something. Let's go further. I pledge allegiance. Allegiance is the obligation of fidelity and obedience to a government in consideration for the protection that the government gives. Now Webster goes further in defining allegiance and he says this, he defines allegiance as the tie or obligation of a subject to his prince or government The duty of fidelity to a king, government, or state. Now let me just tell you there is a difference between express allegiance and what you and I would call a natural allegiance. Express allegiance is that obligation which proceeds from an express promise or an oath of obligation. So when you say I pledge allegiance You are now expressing allegiance, you are expressing an oath, you are tying and binding yourself to something over and above and beyond natural allegiance. And as Lampster is correct, if you are going to swap allegiance for protection, governmental protection, If you swap allegiance for a governmental protection day, I can assure you, you're going to be the loser.

[John Weaver] It is our highest governmental officials who are declaring that we must give up our rights for protection. Is it not absolutely strange and mind-boggling that in the 21st century, with all the technological advances that we have, that our government cannot protect its own people without causing us to give up or lose or waive our rights? Isn't that absolutely amazing? You see, the truth of the matter is this. I'd rather have my rights and governmental protection. Thank you. I'll protect myself. The amazing thing is this.

[John Weaver] When Bellamy was writing the Pledge of Allegiance and he chose the word pledge, I pledge allegiance. He did so very carefully and very deliberately. You know why? Because he knew that the word oath, or the phrase oath of allegiance, would be very distasteful and uncomfortable for Southerners. Let me tell you why. Because during and after the War of Northern Aggression, many Southerners were forced to take an oath of allegiance. They were either forced to take it, or they would be shot.

[John Weaver] It would be that simple. Here is an oath, or at least a portion of the oath, that Abraham Lincoln recommended. Here it is. I blank, fill in your name, do solemnly swear in the presence of Almighty God that I will henceforth faithfully support protect and defend the Constitution of the United States and the union of the states there under, and that I will in like manner abide by and faithfully support all acts of Congress passed

[John Weaver] during the existing rebellion with reference to slaves." Now it goes on. So what Lincoln wanted us to do was not only to bind ourselves to the Constitution, which by the way all Southerners wanted anyhow was the Constitution, and it Applied the way it should be applied to North and South equally. But he not only wanted that, he wanted us also to swear allegiance to every act that Congress passed. You've got to remember that during those four years of the war, we had no representatives in Congress. And for several years afterwards, we still had no representatives in Congress. And although the 14th Amendment was passed unlawfully, Yet he said, now you've got to swear allegiance that you're going to uphold it. Well, there were other oaths as well that would bind Southerners and would effectually lock them out of any governmental office or position of authority.

[John Weaver] One of those oaths I've mentioned earlier when I was dealing with Jesse James was the ironclad oath. And here's a portion of that oath. It went as follows, I blank, do solemnly swear or affirm that I have never voluntarily borne arms against the United States since I have been a citizen thereof, that I have voluntarily given no aid, countenance, counsel, or encouragement to persons engaged in armed hostility thereto, and if Southerners did not take this oath,

[John Weaver] They could either be shot or cut out of all political offices or offices of authority. You couldn't even preach. You couldn't teach. You couldn't do anything unless you took this ironclad oath in Missouri and in Kansas and in those areas like that.

[John Weaver] Now, when you and I think about allegiance, and we say I pledge allegiance, when we think about allegiance, we have to admit there is a natural allegiance that is owed to your own country. But a natural allegiance is different from an express allegiance. A natural allegiance just simply comes from the fact that you're born in a country with a people, with a community, with traditions, with a language. But an express allegiance is not demanded. You put yourself under express allegiance by making a promise or making an oath or an obligation. That is what you do when you say, I pledge allegiance. And by the way, there is a difference between allegiance to one's country and allegiance to one's government.

[John Weaver] Now, it is wonderful when both are possible at the same time. It is wonderful when you can have allegiance to your country and your government, however, When your government becomes unlawful and unconstitutional and seeks to destroy the country, your first allegiance, naturally, is to your country and not your government. John Locke, in his second treatise on government, chapter 19, paragraph 222, said this, listen carefully, whenever the legislators endeavor to take away and destroy the property of the people, or to reduce them to slavery under arbitrary power, they put themselves into a state of war with the people who are thereupon absolved from any further obedience." So John Locke, in his treatise on government, says that when government then becomes tyrannical and oppressive and begins to steal from the people then the government is putting itself in a state of war against the people. And the people are thereby absolved from any allegiance to that government or any obedience to that government.

[John Weaver] To show you how times have changed, in 1918 President Theodore Roosevelt said this, To announce that there must be no criticism of the President or that we're to stand by the President, right or wrong, is not only unpatriotic and servile, but is morally treasonous to the American public." Can you imagine George Bush saying that today? To announce that there must be no criticism of the President, or that we're to stand by the President, right or wrong?

[John Weaver] Remember what he said about the war in Iraq? for us or against us? To stand by the President right or wrong is not only unpatriotic and servile, but is morally treasonable to the American public." That was the President of the United States who said that in 1918. And if you have difficulty with this, I would suggest that you take my book on Romans 13, and especially read the second chapter on the covenantal nature of government, because I make this point exceedingly clear. Our allegiance is not due to a government that is reducing its citizens to slavery and subjecting them to tyranny. Let's go further. I pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States of America.

[John Weaver] Let me ask a question. What is a flag? Well, you say, Pastor, it's a symbol. I would agree with that, but the question must be asked, what does it symbolize? Another legitimate question is this, has the symbolization changed?

[John Weaver] Now, the word flag does not occur in our Bibles, but the words banner, standard, and enzyme do. And a banner and a standard and an ensign is the same as a flag. Psalm 60 and verse 4 says to God, thou hast given a banner to them that fear thee that it may be displayed because of thy truth. So what has God done? God has given us a banner to those of us who fear him. He's given us a flag that that flag may be displayed because of the truth. One of my favorite verses is found in Isaiah 59 and verse 19. It has reference to the Holy Spirit and it says this, so shall they fear the name of the Lord from the West and his glory from the rising of the sun when the enemy shall come in like a flood. The spirit of the Lord shall lift up a standard against him. What is the spirit of the Lord doing? He's lifting up a standard. He's lifting up a battle flag against the enemy.

[John Weaver] What is our flag really supposed to represent, biblically speaking? Well, it's really supposed to represent truth, righteousness, and a willingness to fight against ungodliness and wickedness.

[John Weaver] Now, I'm going to go a little bit further in just a moment, but let's consider this phrase. I pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States of America. Another important question that must be asked is this. If you're going to pledge allegiance to the United States of America, which United States are you pledging allegiance to? Now, that's a legitimate question. Are we pledging allegiance to the original United States that were formed under the Articles of Confederation and later on the Constitution, or are we referring to the corporate United States that resides in the District of Columbia?

[John Weaver] And believe me, there's a difference. Now prior to the War of Northern Aggression, Americans usually referred to these United States. After the war, it became THE United States. Whereas before it was plural, now it became singular in one sense of the word. And whereas before it was little u and little s, now it becomes capital U and capital S. Now ask yourself, if you say, I pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States of America, Are you pledging allegiance to a symbol of freedom and to the organic states that were brought together under the Constitution? Or are you pledging allegiance to a centralized bureaucracy that resides in the District of Columbia? Which United States do you mean? Now, I can assure you I know which United States Francis Bellamy meant when he wrote it.

[John Weaver] Because I'm going to give you the quote again in just a moment. But I asked another question earlier, and that was this. Can a symbol change its meaning? And the answer is yes. The symbol may remain the same. But the principles which the symbol represents may change. I know most of you have never heard of Pastor Isaac Handy. He was a Baptist pastor. And he spent 15 months in Fort Delaware, New Jersey prison for a statement that he made concerning the symbolism of the flag. Pastor Isaac Handy was a Southerner who had married a woman from New Jersey.

[John Weaver] But her parents were Southern sympathizers. Pastor Handy and his wife went to New Jersey to visit her family. And they had a number of family members there and some friends around. One of the men who was invited was Reverend Mr. Gaylord, who was the pastor of the Port Penn Church. Well, since he was in the home of Handy's in-laws, and most people there were Southern sympathizers, and everything was spoken rather freely there, something came up regarding the flag. And Pastor Handy said that he could no longer venerate that flag now as he had once, but now it was nothing more than an old rag, no longer representing the union or the principles which he believed in. Well, Pastor Gaylord then challenged Pastor Handy concerning his statement. And Pastor Handy said this. Listen carefully. Here's what he said concerning the flag of the United States of America.

[John Weaver] He said, and I quote, I venerated that flag too, sir, when it represented the Constitution and proclaimed equal rights protecting alike the North and the South. But that, sir, is no longer the flag of the Union. It is not the old flag. The symbols are the same, but the principles have changed. What is the flag irrespective of its principles? It is simply a painted rag. That flag once represented high and noble principles. I venerated those principles, and I love the old Ensign because of the principles.

[John Weaver] But what means those stars and stripes today? Not certainly what they once meant.

[John Weaver] Now when I look upon a United States flag, I think I see written upon its broad folds, abolition. coercion, downtrodden constitution, oppression, tyranny. Those are not my principles and I have no respect for any flag representing such enormities." Pastor Gaylord went and reported Pastor Handy, testified against him, and on July 20, 1863, He was sentenced to 15 months in a federal prison. Because he would not venerate. The flag. Why would he not venerate it? He said the symbol is the same, but the principles have changed. Do you realize we have the same symbol today? We've had that same symbol for many, many years. But the symbol no longer stands for what it used to stand. Symbols may remain the same while the principles change. The principles that symbol represent may change dramatically. I will guarantee that most of you that hear my voice do not even know the original meaning of the United States flag. I'm going to tell you the real nature of the United States flag in the words of General and President George Washington.

[John Weaver] Here's what George Washington said, we take the stars from heaven, the red from our mother country, separating it by white stripes, thus showing that we have separated from her And the white stripes shall go down in prosperity, representing liberty." So according to George Washington, thus the flag really and truly represents liberty under God. The stars from heaven, the red from our mother country, the white separating it, meaning liberty, meaning we've separated from them under the stars, under heaven, under God, we have liberty.

[John Weaver] Let me put it out very pointedly. The flag did not represent, nor has it ever represented, a sovereign government that simply took the place of the king and ruled over the states. When you pledge allegiance to the flag, you've got to ask yourself, what are the principles for which that symbol now stands? Let me go further. I pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States of America and to the republic for which it stands. Most of you know the story that when Ben Franklin stepped out of the Constitutional Convention, someone asked him, what kind of government have you given unto us? And his answer was, a republic if you can keep it. A republic if you can keep it.

[John Weaver] Now, there's a difference between the principle or between the republic that our founding fathers created and the republic that motivated and inspired and moved Bellamy to write the pledge. Now, our founding fathers established a republic. And Francis Bellamy used the word republic, but he does not mean by the word republic what our founding fathers meant. The French Republic, achieved by and through the French Revolution, has absolutely nothing in common with the American Republic that is guaranteed to us in the United States Constitution. The United States Constitution, Article 4, Section 4, Paragraph 1 states this, the United States shall guarantee to every state in this Union a Republican form of government. That's in our Constitution. The United States shall guarantee to every state in this union a republican form of government. Now, if you look up the word republic in most dictionaries, you're most likely to find this definition. A republic is a government of elected representatives.

[John Weaver] That may be true, but it is not all the truth and it is a deliberate deception. A republic in a governmental sense is a government which the sovereignly held authority is held by and granted by the people and the rule of government is according to law.

[John Weaver] Now let me go further, listen carefully. The Declaration of Independence states that the purpose of government is to protect the rights of the people, and that government does what? It derives its just powers from whom? The consent of the governed. Now, the first element in a republican form of government is that the power is derived from the people. The second element is that government itself operates within and under the control of law. In other words, a republic, an inner republic, the people are the masters and the government is the servant. The people are on top and the government is on the bottom. To put it another way, the people are the head and the government is the tale. The Constitution, listen carefully now, the Constitution of the United States is a grant of authority from we the people to form a government. And the government that was thus formed by the Constitution was a limited government operating on authority granted from we the people. In every sense it meets the earlier historical definition of republic The Constitution is the grant of authority from we the people for the government to act.

[John Weaver] The Constitution then, listen carefully, the Constitution is the law of the people for the control of government. The Constitution was never meant to bind the states nor to bind the people. It was meant to bind the federal government. When we say a republic, what our founding fathers meant is this, that in a republic the power is derived from the people, and when the people give the government that law, the only thing the government can do is act according to that law and under that law. Period.

[John Weaver] I got news for you folks. There is a difference as well between a republic and a democracy, and our politicians need to know that. They apparently do not understand the distinction. There's a vast difference. Listen to what James Madison, by the way, James Madison is known as the father of the Constitution because he was secretary at the Constitutional Convention. So if anybody should know, it should be James Madison who took all the notes.

[John Weaver] Here's what he said in the Federalist Paper number 10. Hence, it is such that democracies have ever been spectacles of turbulence and contention, have ever been found incompatible with personal security or the rights of property, have been in general as short in their lives as they've been as violent in their deaths." Did James Madison say that we have given Americans a democracy? No. He said democracies are known for stealing the rights and the property of the people. What's happening in our democracy today? See, we've changed our Constitutional Republic to a democracy.

[John Weaver] That's why the Supreme Court judges can rule in an imminent domain. The cities and towns can do whatever they want to do. We have no property. It's all theirs. That's why you pay a tax to use their property. You pay the rent. James Madison says you cannot have freedom in a democracy. This may shock you, but I'm going to read it to you. This is directly from the United States Army Training Manual from 1928. Democracy. Quote, a democracy of the masses.

[John Weaver] Authority derived through mass meetings or any form of direct expression. Results in mobocracy. Attitude toward property is communistic, negating property rights. Attitude toward law is that the will of the majority shall regulate, whether it be based upon deliberation or governed by passion, prejudice, and impulse, without restraint or regard to consequences. Results in demagoguism, license, agitation, discontent, and anarchy." That's from the United States Army Manual in 1928.

[John Weaver] Our constitutional fathers certainly were familiar with the differences between a republic and a democracy. And they were understandably knowledgeable in the difference between an autocracy and a democracy. And when they gave us a republic, they did so with certain fixed principles in mind. And they defined a republic, as I've already given it to you, and it's very marked from a democracy. And repeatedly they said they had given us a republic.

[John Weaver] Now we could go further and say this, because remember now, the Constitution of the United States guarantees to every state a republican form of government. How can the United States, how can the federal government guarantee to every state a Republican form of government? Here's why. Because each state in the Union that met at the Constitutional Convention and agreed to form the federal government was a sovereign, independent state, and listen, The federal government, therefore, is an association of small republics, and therefore it was to guarantee that each one would continue as a republican form of government. Do you remember when Robert E. Lee refused command of the Union Army and resigned his commission in 1861? He told the commanding general of the army, Winfield Scott, that he was refusing command of the Union Army and he was resigning his commission. Why? Here's why.

[John Weaver] Because he said, I cannot raise my sword against my own country. What was his country? Virginia. What was his state? Virginia. And Linfield Scott understood. He understood because Virginia was his country, it was his state, it was his republic. They understood what was meant by then and the United States government or the federal government was set up to mirror the republican form of government in the states. that every state would be ruled by the consent of the people, by a law, by a constitution, and that constitution would even bind down the state governments, and that's why we did it to the federal government, to bind them down. Let's go further. I pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States and to the public for which it stands, one nation under God. One nation.

[John Weaver] Now, the truth is we do not understand terms the way our forefathers did. One of the first things we need to learn to do is to define our terms. Think of the word nation. And what do you think about when you hear the word nation? What does it mean? If you're going to swear allegiance to the nation, what are you swearing allegiance to? Let me give you two definitions. You will find these two definitions in Black's Law Dictionary. They're probably Bouvier's as well, but I just took them out of Black's. Listen to Black's definition of nation. Here it is. Here's the first definition.

[John Weaver] A people or aggregation of men existing in the form of an organized rural society, usually inhabiting a distinct portion of the earth speaking the same language, using the same customs, possessing historic continuity, and distinguished from other like groups by their racial origin and characteristics, and generally, but not necessarily, living under the same government and sovereignty.

[John Weaver] Now let's just stop there. I want you to think about that definition. That's not a bad definition. What did he say is the first definition of a nation. It's a group of people living under an organized, dual society. That is, you have a law, usually inhabiting a certain distinct portion of the earth. You speak the same language, not 40. You have the same customs, not 40. You have a historic continuity, and you're distinct from other racial groups. And you normally live under the same government. We understand that.

[John Weaver] We have no problem with that. But listen to the second definition. In American constitutional law, the word state is applied to the several members of the American Union while the word nation is applied to the whole body of people embraced within the jurisdiction of the federal government. Did you hear that? Embraced within the jurisdiction of the federal government. All I can say is my, how times have changed. Do you remember that originally the government which was created by the states was to be the servant of the states? The states were the masters and the government was the servant. Now the bottom rail is on top and our nation is described as the whole body of people within the jurisdiction of the federal government.

[John Weaver] Let me ask you one question. Is it right to pledge allegiance to usurped or stolen authority? How did the federal government get where it is today? I will tell you, it stole authority that was never given to it by the states or by the people. Certainly, we should be loyal to our country. We should be loyal to our people. We should be loyal to our way of life. But not to a usurped authority that denies everything for which the people stand.

[John Weaver] Kirk Tofte, who is a financial manager in Des Moines, Iowa, wrote this. Listen carefully. He hit the nail on the head. He said, nationalism is the worship of a nation state. As a civil religion, it is a false faith. It represents chasing after idols. When nationalism is used to mask militarism and imperialism, it is worse than a false faith. It is the gravest of sins. that can only be forgiven by a truly loving God.

[John Weaver] So what is he saying about today? Nationalism is a mask for militarism and imperialism. One does not need to bow down to a raven idol in order to be an idolater. You've got to remember that idolatry begins in the mind and it often stays there. Unbiblical and ungodly thinking and wrong attitudes are just as idolatrous as bowing down to raven images. Let's go further. He said, one nation under God. What is meant by that phrase under God? Remember now, that phrase was not put in until 1954. If the phrase, under God, means under God's sovereign authority and law, I would concede that's exactly where we need to be as people, as a country.

[John Weaver] But let me read to you an article. This article was from the Commercial Appeal in Memphis, Tennessee. and it's on Francis Bellamy and his great grandson. Here's what it says. Descendants of the man who authored the Pledge of Allegiance says he probably wouldn't mind the removal of the words under God because he wouldn't have wanted them added in the first place. Scott Bellamy, 49, who owns a sandwich shop in Memphis suburb, says his great-grandfather, Francis Bellamy, a socialist editor and Baptist minister, had clear reasons behind every word of the original pledge he wrote in 1892. Francis Bellamy protested even the addition of the United States of America on Flag Day in 1924, believing the pledge as he wrote it did not need changing. If he didn't want the United States of America in the pledge, he wouldn't have wanted under God either, said Scott Bellamy, who told the Commercial Appeal of Memphis.

[John Weaver] Wednesday, the Federal Appeals Court in California found reciting the pledge at public schools was unconstitutional because the words under God, inserted by Congress in 1954, amounted to a government endorsement of religion. The ruling ignited a storm of criticism and was put on hold. Shortly before his death in 1931, Francis Bellamy wrote a letter to his 10-year-old grandson, Scott Bellamy's father, explaining how he wrote the pledge originally for school children.

[John Weaver] He said that in 1892 he was an associate editor of the Youth Companion Magazine and was chosen to prepare an official program to celebrate the 400th anniversary of Columbus's arrival in America." So the descendants of Francis Bellamy said they don't want under God in there either, because their father wanted it under God in there.

[John Weaver] Now, John Behr, and I told you his book was very significant because Behr is the one who wrote the centennial history of the Pledge of Allegiance from 1892 to 1992. He has some question and answers. And I want you to listen to the question and the answer. Get ready for this now. The question is to Mr. Behr. What would have been the opinions of Rev. Francis Bellamy, the author of the Pledge, and James Madison, father of the United States Constitution, about the June 26, 2002 9th U.S.

[John Weaver] Circuit Court ruling, that is Michael Newdow v. the United States Congress, when they said the words, Under God Run Constitutional. So, I'm not concerned about James Madison right now, I am concerned about the response to Francis Bellamy. Here is his answer. And I would say that John bears probably the foremost authority on the pledge that is alive today. But here's his answer to that question. What would Francis Bellamy think of a Ninth Circuit Court's ruling that under God is unconstitutional? Here's his answer. Reverend Francis Bellamy, 1855 to 1931, probably would be happy with this decision. When Bellamy wrote the pledge in August 1892, he never considered placing the words under God in his original version of the Pledge of Allegiance. In 1954, David Bellamy, the son, sent a message to Congress politely stating that his father would not like the addition by Congress.

[John Weaver] His granddaughter and his great-granddaughter have made similar statements. Francis Bellamy was probably a Christian deist He did not believe in the virgin birth, the resurrection, or the ascension of Jesus Christ. He stopped attending church during his retirement in Florida. His father, Rev. David Bellamy, was more orthodox. In 1847, David Bellamy founded the Calvary Baptist Church, now located at 123rd West 57th Street in New York City, next door to the New York Bible School, John Verre.

[John Weaver] Did you hear what he said? Francis Bellamy would not want under God under them. Why? He did not believe in the virgin birth. He did not believe in the resurrection. He did not believe in the ascension of Jesus Christ. He was a deist. He was an unbeliever. He thought that, yeah, there may be a God somewhere up there, but he's just kind of wound up the clock of the universe and let everything run down. There's no intervention of God. There's no miracles. There's no concern. Wow.

[John Weaver] Certainly no Christian and hopefully no Southerner. would ever have any problem with acknowledging the sovereignty and the supremacy and the ultimacy of the one true and living God who has revealed himself in Jesus Christ. But the problem that you have with this statement, I pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States of America and to the Republic for which it stands, one nation under God. Here's my question. Which God? Who's God? If we are indeed under God, the one true and living God, as a people, what does that mean?

[John Weaver] It means we're to obey His law, we're to keep His word, we're to honor His statutes. However, what we've done is we've become so accustomed to saying words, we do not even understand what they mean. And I've got news for you, every Muslim, could repeat that phrase under God and there'd be no problem. My Hindu, there'd be no problem. If I'm going to acknowledge that I'm under God, I want everyone to know the God that I'm talking about is the God and Father of Jesus Christ, the only true and living God.

[John Weaver] Listen to what he says. Now listen, we're just analyzing the pledge. I pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States of America, and to the Republic for which it stands, one nation under God, indivisible." Indivisible. One of my main contingents with the pledge is this word, indivisible. Because the word indivisible is a denial of history, of fact, and of plain truth. Listen to what Francis Bellamy said, here are his own words, that phrase encompassed our struggle for independence and for indivisibility, which the Civil War was required to fully prove.

[John Weaver] Might does not make right. and the simple fact that the South lost the war of northern aggression does not change the truth, it does not change history, and it does not change facts. The truth is every state acceded to the Constitution, and every state reserved to itself and kept to itself the right to secede from the Constitution. You see, when George III made peace with the American colonies in 1783 at the Treaty of Paris, He did not make peace with just a United States government, no. Here's what it says, the opening words, His Britannic Majesty acknowledges the said United States this, and then names the thirteen states to be free and independent states. George III made peace with thirteen independent sovereign states. The second article in the Articles of Confederation clearly state this, each state retains its sovereignty, freedom, and independence, and every power, jurisdiction, and right which is not by this Confederation expressly delegated to the United States. So when the Articles of Confederation was written, every state was free, sovereign, and independent. Virginia, when she acceded to the Constitution on June 25, 1788, said this, They said, we're going to ratify the Constitution, but here's the reservation.

[John Weaver] Listen carefully. The powers granted under the Constitution being derived from the people of the United States may be resumed by them, whensoever the same shall be perverted to their injury or oppression, that every power not granted thereby remains with them at their will. What did Virginia say? We're going to ratify the Constitution, but we want everybody to understand that when tyranny and oppression comes along, we have the absolute right to take back what we gave the federal government. By the way, it wasn't just Virginia, because New York, on July 26, 1788, when she ratified the Constitution, said this, that the powers of government may be resumed by the people, whensoever it shall become necessary to their happiness. New York also said, we're going to take it back whenever we want it. Do you realize when the Constitution was being ratified, only 11 of the original 13 states ratified it? North Carolina and Rhode Island did not ratify the Constitution right away. In fact, it was over a year later before they ever ratified the Constitution.

[John Weaver] By the way, there was no war fought against Rhode Island and North Carolina to save the Union. And I want you to note something, what the majority of states did, did not affect the other states. We couldn't come along and say, well, 11 out of 13 voted for it, that means the other two have got to take it. No, no, no, no. Every state was free, sovereign, and independent. And when over a year later, both North Carolina and Rhode Island did ratify the Constitution, Rhode Island came out with this reservation. They said, we, the delegates of the people of Rhode Island and plantations duly elected, do declare and make known that the powers of government may be resumed by the people whensoever it shall become necessary to their happiness. Now here are three states that dogmatically asserted the right to secede, every state Had that right, every state believed they had that right, or they would have never ratified the Constitution to begin with.

[John Weaver] Thus, when one says, I pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States of America, to the public for which it stands, one nation, under God, indivisible, you're pledging allegiance to a lie, because the plain fact of history is Originally, it was divisible. If you have the right to accede, you also have the right to secede.

[John Weaver] Now, it's not my intention to deal today with the biblical doctrine of secession. I've done that before. But let me tell you something. You can say indivisible all you want to today. But the truth of the matter is our nation is divided in a multitude of ways today. Economically, politically, culturally, linguistically, ethnically, all kinds of ways. There is no way in the world that we have an indivisible nation today. It's not true historically and it's certainly not true practically.

[John Weaver] And then the pledge says with liberty and justice for all. Now Bellamy's idea of liberty and justice for all is found in the 14th, 15th, and 16th Amendments of the Constitution, which were really, when he said, with liberty and justice of all, he really wanted to use his French Revolution slogan, liberty, equality, and fraternity, which he was unable to do so. But I've got news for you folks. If you depend on the 14th Amendment for your justice, Excuse my English, but you ain't got any. Same thing with the 15th and same thing with the 16th.

[John Weaver] Francis Bellamy, as a Christian socialist, that's what he called himself, in conjunction with many other liberal thinkers and writers of his day, favored a socialistic centralized federal government as opposed to the traditional conservative Christianity and the local government concepts of the South. He, along with his cousins, and especially Edward Bellamy, became the heroes of John Dewey and others who advocated progressive revelation or progressive education, which in a hundred years has produced in our country a morally corrupt, anti-Christian, multicultural, secular public school system which now openly opposes Christianity, parents, and morality. That's a fact.

[John Weaver] And by the way, when you say with liberty and justice for all, may I point out, there is no liberty and there is no justice apart from God and His law. What does the Bible say in 2 Corinthians 3 and verse 17?

[John Weaver] Now the Lord is that spirit. And where the spirit of the Lord is, there is liberty. And what did our Lord say in John 8, verse 36? If the Son therefore shall set you free, you shall be free indeed. But without Him, there is no liberty, there is no freedom, there is no justice. You cannot have justice apart from God and His law. You want to know another thing wrong with our country? The judicial system.

[John Weaver] And let me tell you something, when you let murderers go, and rapists go, and kidnappers go, and when you do not execute those whom God demands to be put to death, let me tell you, God has it fixed up where either the murderer is put to death or society dies, one or the other. You cannot have justice apart from God and his law.

[John Weaver] Now, let me just make some very quick applications. The first one is this. Am I going to get mad with you because you recite the pledge? No, I'm not going to get mad at you. But I think this, I think if you're going to recite the pledge, you ought to know what you mean And you ought to know what Francis Bellamy meant. And you better determine what meaning you're going to give to those words and what concepts you're going to give to those words. You may exercise your liberty to say the pledge, or you may exercise your liberty not to say the pledge. But I'm going to tell you one thing. You flat better understand the aim and the intent of that pledge. And Francis Bellamy did not hide it.

[John Weaver] He said point blank he was going to elevate, he wanted to elevate the state, he wanted a socialistic fascist controlled government that dictated every area of our lives. Our founding fathers never ever envisioned the kind of republic that Francis Bellamy envisioned. Their definition of republic And his definition of republic are two totally different things. And may I point out, this was one of the issues of the War of Northern Aggression. The South had one interpretation of republic and one interpretation of the Constitution. And the North had a completely different interpretation of a republican constitution. Do you realize the problem that we're having today with a gargantuan government is the same problem? Because we have different ideas as to what a republic really, truly is. And certainly, I hope you can see that government can become a god.

[John Weaver] Not in truth and reality. But when you and I begin to ascribe to government power and authority over and above that and beyond that which the Word of God gives, that is indeed idolatry. And God said, Thou shalt have no other gods before me. And when you look to government instead of God, you are an idolater, pure and simple. You know what our Lord said? And by the way, I hope you know that as Christians, our first, our full and our final allegiance must be to Jesus Christ. Our Lord said in Matthew 10, verse 37, he that loveth father, mother more than me is not worthy of me. And he that loveth son or daughter more than me is not worthy of me. We may owe a duty to man and to government, but first. And full and final allegiance. Is only owed to the one true, the living God. Ray Bolts. wrote these words.

[John Weaver] Many of you have heard this song many times. I pledge allegiance to the Lamb. Here are the words. I have heard how Christians long ago were brought before a tyrant's throne, and they were told that he would spare their lives if they would renounce the name of Christ. But one by one they chose to die. The Son of God they would not deny, like a great angelic choir sings.

[John Weaver] I can almost hear their voices ring. I pledge allegiance to the Lamb with all my strength, with all I am. I will seek to honor His commands. I pledge allegiance to the Lamb.

[John Weaver] Now the years have come and the years have gone, but the cause of Jesus still goes on. And now our time has come to count the cost, to reject this world, to embrace the cross, and one by one let us live our lives for the One who died to give us life. Till the trumpet sounds on the final day, let us proudly stand and boldly say, I pledge allegiance to the Lamb with all my strength, with all I am.

[John Weaver] I will seek to honor His commands. I pledge allegiance to the Lamb, to the Lamb who bore my pain, who took my place, who wore my shame. I will seek to honor His commands I pledge allegiance to the Lamb. If we give our allegiance to Christ, I can assure you we will not be wrong. If you have your duty to God down first, your duty to man will automatically fall in place. But if you put man first, you're going to be wrong.

[John Weaver] every which way you turn. We must remember, as Christians, our first, full, and final allegiance is to Jesus Christ. Why? He's God of gods and King of kings and Lord of lords, and as Scripture says, He only is worthy of all honor and all praise and all glory. Let's pray. Father, we ask today that you help us, give us understanding, quicken our minds. May we be able to think things through and to think them through biblically and scripturally. Give us grace, Lord, to serve Thee acceptably with reverence and godly fear and to put Thee first in every area of our lives. In the name of Jesus Christ, we ask and pray, Amen.

The Pledge-History & Problems-2

John Weaver | SermonAudio

Lecture Metadata	Details
Speaker	John Weaver
Source	SermonAudio
Media ID	730611024
Subject	Old Testament Studies
Course	Genesis: Abraham, Covenant, and Promise
Genre	Sermon
Date	2006-04-16
Dictation Name
Book	Book 091: The Pledge-History & Problems — Chapter 2
Source Timed Segments	87

Formatted Transcript

Review of Previous Week

Weaver recaps the introduction and first two points: the author Francis Bellamy was a socialist, Freemason, and ousted Baptist pastor; his aim was to elevate the state and use government schools to create a socialist utopia.

If you have not opened your Bibles to Exodus chapter 20, and if you have not heard the message from last Sunday, I would encourage that you do so because today is the second part on the Pledge of Allegiance. I just simply entitle it, "The Pledge, Its History and Its Problems." And we begin by reading Exodus 20, verses 1 through 3:

Scripture Reading — Exodus 20:1-3

"And God spake all these words, saying, I am the Lord thy God who hath brought thee up out of the land of Egypt, out of the house of bondage." "Thou shalt have no other gods before me."

And certainly we're going to understand one application of verse 3 before we close today. Let me just simply review a few minutes of what I covered last Sunday. I simply said in the introduction that usually speaking, since most people have grown up with the pledge, that our feathers are very easily and quickly ruffled when someone will not recite the pledge or at least would not stand reverently while the pledge is being recited. And I said that the average attitude is simply that someone who would not do that is in the least unpatriotic and at the very most Marxist or communist.

And then I also pointed out in my introduction that I hesitated tackling this subject only because it is controversial and I'm not trying to start a fight, I'm not trying to start a debate, I'm not trying to create problems, but I'm rather trying to resolve problems by showing you some reasoning and some rationalism and also some biblical common sense as well. Now, last week we covered two points. We first of all looked at the author of the pledge. And we discovered that Francis Bellamy was an ousted Baptist pastor, he was a Freemason, and above all, he was a socialist to the nth degree. He advocated a centralized government with autocratic power, and he wanted government to control all the means of production. That means government would either own and/or control land, labor, and capital. He was also the head of the Christian Socialist Society, and he taught that government schools were the key to establishing the socialistic utopia in America. So he was indeed the author of the Pledge. And then secondly, we looked at the aim, and very quickly I'm going to tell you what he said when he began to contemplate writing the Pledge.

In August of 1892, he said, "It began as an intensive communing with salient points of our national history, from the Declaration of Independence onwards, with the making of the Constitution, with the meaning of the Civil War, with the aspiration of the people." And I know he said that when he sat down to write the pledge, he thought about not just simply the national history, the Declaration, the Constitution, but he also thought about the meaning of the Civil War. And then he goes on and he says this, and I'm quoting his words, "The true reason for allegiance to the flag is the republic for which it stands. And what does that vast thing, the republic, mean? It is the concise political word for the nation, the one nation that the Civil War was thought to prove."

"To make that one nation idea clear, we must specify that it is indivisible as Webster and Lincoln used to repeat in their great speeches." So here he is saying once again that his philosophy is the same as Abraham Lincoln and is the same as Daniel Webster. And he says the republic to him is the concise political word for the nation. I'm going to explain that just a little bit later. But let me give you one other quote that I gave you last week, just to show you his socialism. In his speech, "The Meaning of Four Centuries," he was advocating a strong position for government schools, and he says this: "We assemble here today that we too may exalt the free school of the government school that embodies the American principle of universal enlightenment and equality, the most characteristic product of our four centuries of American life. One institution more than any other has wrought out the achievements of the past and is today the most trusted for the future. Our fathers in their wisdom knew that the foundations of liberty, fraternity, and equality, the slogan of the French Revolution, must be universal education. The free school, therefore, was conceived as the cornerstone of the republic. Washington and Jefferson recognized that the education of citizens is not the prerogative of the church or of other private interests, that while religious training belongs to the church and while technical and higher culture may be given by private institutions, the training of citizens in the common knowledge and the common duties of citizenship belongs irrevocably to the state."

Now, here's what he said very clearly, that the state has the right to educate the children. He said, it is not the prerogative of the church, nor is it the prerogative of other private interests, and you ask yourself, who other would private interests refer to other than the parents? It's the parents that have the private interest in the children. So he says it's not the church that has the interest, it's not the parents that have the interest, it is the state. And so he was looking then at government schools as the way to bring up our children as good little statists. So his aim then was basically to elevate the state to the position of godhood, almost, in the fact that it controlled every aspect of our lives.

Historical Context of Loyalty Oaths

Dr. Clyde Wilson notes that antebellum Americans had no loyalty oaths or pledges to the flag; they swore to uphold the Constitution. This contrasts with the secular imperial pledge.

Listen to what he says. He has a very excellent point. Dr. Clyde Wilson has graphically pointed out this simple fact: There were in antebellum America no loyalty oaths or pledges of allegiance to the flag of the nation. Free-born American citizens would have considered such to be an insult to their patriotism, as well as an invasion of the rights of their states. Americans did not pledge allegiance to the flag. They swore to uphold and defend the Constitution, the swearing having definite overtones of Christianity and the Anglo-American tradition, unlike the secularistic imperial pledge of allegiance."

Now you just stop and think about what Dr. Wilson has said. In antebellum South, before the War of Northern Aggression, there were no loyalty oaths. There were no pledges of allegiance. The only thing men swore to do was to uphold and to defend the Constitution. With that in mind, I want you to follow with me as I try to analyze the pledge. I'm going to take a phrase or even a word at a time and let's break it down and see what is actually being said when someone says, "I pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States of America, and to the republic for which it stands, one nation under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all." So, let's take the first words, "I pledge." Do you realize that a pledge is a promise or an oath of allegiance? A pledge is a promise or an oath of allegiance. Webster in his 1828 dictionary defines a pledge as a promise or an agreement by which one binds himself to do something or forbear doing something.

Analysis of 'I Pledge'

A pledge is a binding promise or oath. Biblical examples (Genesis 38, 2 Corinthians 1:22, Ephesians 1:13-14) show a pledge as a guarantee, like the Holy Spirit as the earnest of our inheritance.

Now, the word pledge is found 22 times in our Bible. It usually refers to something given temporarily as a promise for the performance of a duty or something that would be considered as collateral for a loan. In fact, if you'll look in your Bibles very quickly to Genesis 38, you will find where Judah used a pledge to commit fornication with his daughter-in-law. He did not know that it was his daughter-in-law, but look in Genesis 38, beginning there in verse 13. The Bible says this: "And it was told Tamar, saying, Behold, thy father-in-law goeth up to Timnath to shear his sheep. And she put her widow's garments off from her, and covered her with a veil, and wrapped herself, and sat in an open place, which is by the way to Timnath; for she saw that Shelah was grown, and she was not given unto him to wife. When Judah saw her, he thought her to be an harlot; because she had covered her face. And he turned unto her by the way, and said, Go to, I pray thee, let me come in unto thee; for he knew not that she was his daughter-in-law."

"And she said, What wilt thou give me, that thou mayest come in unto me? And he said, I will send thee a kid from the flock. And she said, Wilt thou give me a pledge, till thou send it? And he said, What pledge shall I give thee? And she said, Thy signet, and thy bracelets, and thy staff that is in thine hand. And he gave it her, and came in unto her, and she conceived by him." "And she arose, and went away, and laid by her veil from her, and put on the garments of her widowhood. And Judah sent the kid by the hand of his friend the Adullamite, to receive his pledge from the woman's hand: but he found her not. Then he asked the men of that place, saying, Where is the harlot, that was openly by the way side? And they said, There is no harlot in this place. And he returned to Judah, and said, I cannot find her; and also the men of the place said, that there was no harlot in this place. And Judah said, Let her take it to her, lest we be shamed: behold, I sent this kid, and thou hast not found her."

Well, I'm not preaching on this text today, but the point I'm trying to make is she took his ring. She took his staff as a pledge, something that she was going to hold until he gave her the fulfillment of his promise which was a young kid of the flock. Now let me show you how important a pledge is. Many of you understand that the Septuagint is the Greek translation of the Hebrew Old Testament. It was a very prominent book. Our Lord and the disciples used it and quoted from it. And the word pledge used in Genesis chapter 38—and I want you to turn in your Bibles to 2 Corinthians 1 and then Ephesians chapter 1—2 Corinthians 1 verse 22 and then Ephesians chapter 1—and I'm going to show you the word pledge that is used in Genesis chapter 38 is also used in the New Testament. Notice, if you would please, 2 Corinthians chapter 1, and look, if you would please, at verse 22. Here we will find the word "earnest." The Bible talks about Christ and our salvation, and the Bible says, "who also hath sealed us, and given the earnest of the Spirit in our hearts." Now, the word pledge and the word earnest are the same in the Greek. If you would look in your Bibles to the book of Ephesians, chapter 1 and verse 14, Ephesians 1 and verse 14, the Bible in referring to the Holy Spirit—in fact, look in the latter part of verse 13.

The Bible says in Ephesians 1 and verse 13, the latter part, "ye were sealed with that holy Spirit of promise, which is the earnest"—or which is the pledge—"of our inheritance until the redemption of the purchased possession, unto the praise of his glory." Now, those of us who have been regenerated and converted by the grace of God have been sealed with the Holy Spirit. Well, what is the Holy Spirit? The Holy Spirit is our pledge. It is our guarantee that Jesus Christ is going to return and complete and finish our redemption in the sense that we will be ultimately glorified and live with Him. So that Holy Spirit is our pledge. Now, when Christ gave us the Holy Spirit, what was He doing? He was binding Himself to return and complete our salvation by saving us not only out of our sin and from the penalty of sin, but from the very presence of sin itself. So the Holy Spirit is our pledge, it's the guarantee that Jesus Christ is going to return. Now, when you pledge, when you say, "I pledge," you are binding yourself.

You are agreeing and promising something. And just like Christ promised to come back and redeem His own, so when you say, "I pledge," you are now beginning to bind yourself to something. Let's go further. "I pledge allegiance." Allegiance is the obligation of fidelity and obedience to a government in consideration for the protection that the government gives. Now Webster goes further in defining allegiance and he says this, he defines allegiance as the tie or obligation of a subject to his prince or government; the duty of fidelity to a king, government, or state. Now let me just tell you there is a difference between express allegiance and what you and I would call a natural allegiance. Express allegiance is that obligation which proceeds from an express promise or an oath of obligation. So when you say "I pledge allegiance," you are now expressing allegiance, you are expressing an oath, you are tying and binding yourself to something over and above and beyond natural allegiance. And as Lampster is correct, if you are going to swap allegiance for protection, governmental protection, if you swap allegiance for a governmental protection day, I can assure you, you're going to be the loser.

Analysis of 'Allegiance'

Allegiance is an obligation of fidelity to a government. Express allegiance via an oath goes beyond natural allegiance. Southerners were forced to take oaths after the Civil War, making 'pledge' a deliberate word choice by Bellamy.

It is our highest governmental officials who are declaring that we must give up our rights for protection. Is it not absolutely strange and mind-boggling that in the 21st century, with all the technological advances that we have, that our government cannot protect its own people without causing us to give up or lose or waive our rights? Isn't that absolutely amazing? You see, the truth of the matter is this. I'd rather have my rights and governmental protection. Thank you. I'll protect myself. The amazing thing is this.

When Bellamy was writing the Pledge of Allegiance and he chose the word pledge, "I pledge allegiance," he did so very carefully and very deliberately. You know why? Because he knew that the word oath, or the phrase "oath of allegiance," would be very distasteful and uncomfortable for Southerners. Let me tell you why. Because during and after the War of Northern Aggression, many Southerners were forced to take an oath of allegiance. They were either forced to take it, or they would be shot. It would be that simple. Here is an oath, or at least a portion of the oath, that Abraham Lincoln recommended. Here it is: "I, [blank], fill in your name, do solemnly swear in the presence of Almighty God that I will henceforth faithfully support, protect, and defend the Constitution of the United States and the union of the states thereunder, and that I will in like manner abide by and faithfully support all acts of Congress passed

during the existing rebellion with reference to slaves." Now it goes on. So what Lincoln wanted us to do was not only to bind ourselves to the Constitution, which by the way all Southerners wanted anyhow was the Constitution, and it applied the way it should be applied to North and South equally. But he not only wanted that, he wanted us also to swear allegiance to every act that Congress passed. You've got to remember that during those four years of the war, we had no representatives in Congress. And for several years afterwards, we still had no representatives in Congress. And although the 14th Amendment was passed unlawfully, yet he said, now you've got to swear allegiance that you're going to uphold it. Well, there were other oaths as well that would bind Southerners and would effectually lock them out of any governmental office or position of authority.

One of those oaths I've mentioned earlier when I was dealing with Jesse James was the ironclad oath. And here's a portion of that oath. It went as follows: "I, [blank], do solemnly swear or affirm that I have never voluntarily borne arms against the United States since I have been a citizen thereof; that I have voluntarily given no aid, countenance, counsel, or encouragement to persons engaged in armed hostility thereto." And if Southerners did not take this oath, they could either be shot or cut out of all political offices or offices of authority. You couldn't even preach. You couldn't teach. You couldn't do anything unless you took this ironclad oath in Missouri and in Kansas and in those areas like that.

Now, when you and I think about allegiance, and we say "I pledge allegiance," when we think about allegiance, we have to admit there is a natural allegiance that is owed to your own country. But a natural allegiance is different from an express allegiance. A natural allegiance just simply comes from the fact that you're born in a country with a people, with a community, with traditions, with a language. But an express allegiance is not demanded. You put yourself under express allegiance by making a promise or making an oath or an obligation. That is what you do when you say, "I pledge allegiance." And by the way, there is a difference between allegiance to one's country and allegiance to one's government.

Allegiance to Country vs. Government

When government becomes tyrannical, allegiance is owed to country, not government. John Locke and Theodore Roosevelt affirmed that blind allegiance to a president is morally treasonous.

Now, it is wonderful when both are possible at the same time. It is wonderful when you can have allegiance to your country and your government. However, when your government becomes unlawful and unconstitutional and seeks to destroy the country, your first allegiance, naturally, is to your country and not your government. John Locke, in his second treatise on government, chapter 19, paragraph 222, said this, listen carefully: "Whenever the legislators endeavor to take away and destroy the property of the people, or to reduce them to slavery under arbitrary power, they put themselves into a state of war with the people who are thereupon absolved from any further obedience." So John Locke, in his treatise on government, says that when government then becomes tyrannical and oppressive and begins to steal from the people, then the government is putting itself in a state of war against the people. And the people are thereby absolved from any allegiance to that government or any obedience to that government.

To show you how times have changed, in 1918 President Theodore Roosevelt said this: "To announce that there must be no criticism of the President or that we're to stand by the President, right or wrong, is not only unpatriotic and servile, but is morally treasonous to the American public." Can you imagine George Bush saying that today? "To announce that there must be no criticism of the President, or that we're to stand by the President, right or wrong?" Remember what he said about the war in Iraq? "For us or against us?" "To stand by the President right or wrong is not only unpatriotic and servile, but is morally treasonable to the American public." That was the President of the United States who said that in 1918. And if you have difficulty with this, I would suggest that you take my book on Romans 13, and especially read the second chapter on the covenantal nature of government, because I make this point exceedingly clear. Our allegiance is not due to a government that is reducing its citizens to slavery and subjecting them to tyranny. Let's go further. "I pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States of America."

Analysis of 'the Flag'

A flag is a symbol, but its meaning can change. Pastor Isaac Handy was imprisoned for saying the flag no longer represented the Constitution but rather oppression. George Washington said the flag represents liberty under God.

Let me ask a question. What is a flag? Well, you say, "Pastor, it's a symbol." I would agree with that, but the question must be asked, what does it symbolize? Another legitimate question is this: has the symbolization changed?

Now, the word flag does not occur in our Bibles, but the words banner, standard, and ensign do. And a banner and a standard and an ensign is the same as a flag. Psalm 60 and verse 4 says to God,

Scripture Reading — Psalm 60:4

"Thou hast given a banner to them that fear thee, that it may be displayed because of thy truth."

So what has God done? God has given us a banner to those of us who fear Him. He's given us a flag that that flag may be displayed because of the truth. One of my favorite verses is found in Isaiah 59 and verse 19. It has reference to the Holy Spirit and it says this: "So shall they fear the name of the Lord from the west, and his glory from the rising of the sun. When the enemy shall come in like a flood, the Spirit of the Lord shall lift up a standard against him." What is the Spirit of the Lord doing? He's lifting up a standard. He's lifting up a battle flag against the enemy.

What is our flag really supposed to represent, biblically speaking? Well, it's really supposed to represent truth, righteousness, and a willingness to fight against ungodliness and wickedness. Now, I'm going to go a little bit further in just a moment, but let's consider this phrase: "I pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States of America." Another important question that must be asked is this: If you're going to pledge allegiance to the United States of America, which United States are you pledging allegiance to? Now, that's a legitimate question. Are we pledging allegiance to the original United States that were formed under the Articles of Confederation and later on the Constitution, or are we referring to the corporate United States that resides in the District of Columbia? And believe me, there's a difference. Now prior to the War of Northern Aggression, Americans usually referred to "these United States." After the war, it became "the United States." Whereas before it was plural, now it became singular in one sense of the word. And whereas before it was little "u" and little "s," now it becomes capital "U" and capital "S." Now ask yourself, if you say, "I pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States of America," are you pledging allegiance to a symbol of freedom and to the organic states that were brought together under the Constitution? Or are you pledging allegiance to a centralized bureaucracy that resides in the District of Columbia? Which United States do you mean? Now, I can assure you I know which United States Francis Bellamy meant when he wrote it.

Because I'm going to give you the quote again in just a moment. But I asked another question earlier, and that was this: Can a symbol change its meaning? And the answer is yes. The symbol may remain the same. But the principles which the symbol represents may change. I know most of you have never heard of Pastor Isaac Handy. He was a Baptist pastor. And he spent 15 months in Fort Delaware, New Jersey prison for a statement that he made concerning the symbolism of the flag. Pastor Isaac Handy was a Southerner who had married a woman from New Jersey.

But her parents were Southern sympathizers. Pastor Handy and his wife went to New Jersey to visit her family. And they had a number of family members there and some friends around. One of the men who was invited was Reverend Mr. Gaylord, who was the pastor of the Port Penn Church. Well, since he was in the home of Handy's in-laws, and most people there were Southern sympathizers, and everything was spoken rather freely there, something came up regarding the flag. And Pastor Handy said that he could no longer venerate that flag now as he had once, but now it was nothing more than an old rag, no longer representing the union or the principles which he believed in. Well, Pastor Gaylord then challenged Pastor Handy concerning his statement. And Pastor Handy said this. Listen carefully. Here's what he said concerning the flag of the United States of America.

He said, and I quote, "I venerated that flag too, sir, when it represented the Constitution and proclaimed equal rights protecting alike the North and the South. But that, sir, is no longer the flag of the Union. It is not the old flag. The symbols are the same, but the principles have changed. What is the flag irrespective of its principles? It is simply a painted rag. That flag once represented high and noble principles. I venerated those principles, and I love the old Ensign because of the principles."

"But what means those stars and stripes today? Not certainly what they once meant." "Now when I look upon a United States flag, I think I see written upon its broad folds, abolition, coercion, downtrodden constitution, oppression, tyranny. Those are not my principles and I have no respect for any flag representing such enormities." Pastor Gaylord went and reported Pastor Handy, testified against him, and on July 20, 1863, he was sentenced to 15 months in a federal prison. Because he would not venerate the flag. Why would he not venerate it? He said the symbol is the same, but the principles have changed. Do you realize we have the same symbol today? We've had that same symbol for many, many years. But the symbol no longer stands for what it used to stand. Symbols may remain the same while the principles change. The principles that symbol represent may change dramatically. I will guarantee that most of you that hear my voice do not even know the original meaning of the United States flag. I'm going to tell you the real nature of the United States flag in the words of General and President George Washington.

Here's what George Washington said: "We take the stars from heaven, the red from our mother country, separating it by white stripes, thus showing that we have separated from her. And the white stripes shall go down in prosperity, representing liberty." So according to George Washington, thus the flag really and truly represents liberty under God. The stars from heaven, the red from our mother country, the white separating it, meaning liberty, meaning we've separated from them under the stars, under heaven, under God, we have liberty. Let me put it out very pointedly. The flag did not represent, nor has it ever represented, a sovereign government that simply took the place of the king and ruled over the states. When you pledge allegiance to the flag, you've got to ask yourself, what are the principles for which that symbol now stands? Let me go further. "I pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States of America and to the republic for which it stands." Most of you know the story that when Ben Franklin stepped out of the Constitutional Convention, someone asked him, "What kind of government have you given unto us?" And his answer was, "A republic, if you can keep it." A republic, if you can keep it.

Analysis of 'the Republic'

Bellamy's 'republic' differs from the founders' constitutional republic. A true republic derives power from the people and operates under law. The founders warned against democracy as mob rule.

Now, there's a difference between the principle or between the republic that our founding fathers created and the republic that motivated and inspired and moved Bellamy to write the pledge. Now, our founding fathers established a republic. And Francis Bellamy used the word republic, but he does not mean by the word republic what our founding fathers meant. The French Republic, achieved by and through the French Revolution, has absolutely nothing in common with the American Republic that is guaranteed to us in the United States Constitution. The United States Constitution, Article 4, Section 4, Paragraph 1 states this: "The United States shall guarantee to every state in this Union a Republican form of government." That's in our Constitution. The United States shall guarantee to every state in this union a republican form of government. Now, if you look up the word republic in most dictionaries, you're most likely to find this definition: A republic is a government of elected representatives.

That may be true, but it is not all the truth and it is a deliberate deception. A republic in a governmental sense is a government which the sovereignly held authority is held by and granted by the people and the rule of government is according to law. Now let me go further, listen carefully. The Declaration of Independence states that the purpose of government is to protect the rights of the people, and that government does what? It derives its just powers from whom? The consent of the governed. Now, the first element in a republican form of government is that the power is derived from the people. The second element is that government itself operates within and under the control of law. In other words, a republic, an inner republic, the people are the masters and the government is the servant. The people are on top and the government is on the bottom. To put it another way, the people are the head and the government is the tail. The Constitution, listen carefully now, the Constitution of the United States is a grant of authority from we the people to form a government. And the government that was thus formed by the Constitution was a limited government operating on authority granted from we the people. In every sense it meets the earlier historical definition of republic. The Constitution is the grant of authority from we the people for the government to act.

The Constitution then, listen carefully, the Constitution is the law of the people for the control of government. The Constitution was never meant to bind the states nor to bind the people. It was meant to bind the federal government. When we say a republic, what our founding fathers meant is this, that in a republic the power is derived from the people, and when the people give the government that law, the only thing the government can do is act according to that law and under that law. Period. I got news for you folks. There is a difference as well between a republic and a democracy, and our politicians need to know that. They apparently do not understand the distinction. There's a vast difference. Listen to what James Madison—by the way, James Madison is known as the father of the Constitution because he was secretary at the Constitutional Convention. So if anybody should know, it should be James Madison who took all the notes.

Here's what he said in the Federalist Paper number 10: "Hence, it is such that democracies have ever been spectacles of turbulence and contention, have ever been found incompatible with personal security or the rights of property, have been in general as short in their lives as they've been as violent in their deaths." Did James Madison say that we have given Americans a democracy? No. He said democracies are known for stealing the rights and the property of the people. What's happening in our democracy today? See, we've changed our Constitutional Republic to a democracy. That's why the Supreme Court judges can rule in an eminent domain. The cities and towns can do whatever they want to do. We have no property. It's all theirs. That's why you pay a tax to use their property. You pay the rent. James Madison says you cannot have freedom in a democracy. This may shock you, but I'm going to read it to you. This is directly from the United States Army Training Manual from 1928. Democracy. Quote: "A democracy of the masses.

Authority derived through mass meetings or any form of direct expression. Results in mobocracy. Attitude toward property is communistic, negating property rights. Attitude toward law is that the will of the majority shall regulate, whether it be based upon deliberation or governed by passion, prejudice, and impulse, without restraint or regard to consequences. Results in demagoguism, license, agitation, discontent, and anarchy." That's from the United States Army Manual in 1928. Our constitutional fathers certainly were familiar with the differences between a republic and a democracy. And they were understandably knowledgeable in the difference between an autocracy and a democracy. And when they gave us a republic, they did so with certain fixed principles in mind. And they defined a republic, as I've already given it to you, and it's very marked from a democracy. And repeatedly they said they had given us a republic.

Now we could go further and say this, because remember now, the Constitution of the United States guarantees to every state a republican form of government. How can the United States, how can the federal government guarantee to every state a Republican form of government? Here's why. Because each state in the Union that met at the Constitutional Convention and agreed to form the federal government was a sovereign, independent state, and listen, the federal government, therefore, is an association of small republics, and therefore it was to guarantee that each one would continue as a republican form of government. Do you remember when Robert E. Lee refused command of the Union Army and resigned his commission in 1861? He told the commanding general of the army, Winfield Scott, that he was refusing command of the Union Army and he was resigning his commission. Why? Here's why.

Because he said, "I cannot raise my sword against my own country." What was his country? Virginia. What was his state? Virginia. And Winfield Scott understood. He understood because Virginia was his country, it was his state, it was his republic. They understood what was meant by then and the United States government or the federal government was set up to mirror the republican form of government in the states. That every state would be ruled by the consent of the people, by a law, by a constitution, and that constitution would even bind down the state governments, and that's why we did it to the federal government, to bind them down. Let's go further. "I pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States and to the republic for which it stands, one nation under God." One nation.

Analysis of 'One Nation' and 'Under God'

The definition of 'nation' has shifted to mean those under federal jurisdiction. 'Under God' was added in 1954; Bellamy's descendants and historian John Behr say Bellamy would have opposed it as a deist who denied core Christian doctrines.

Now, the truth is we do not understand terms the way our forefathers did. One of the first things we need to learn to do is to define our terms. Think of the word nation. And what do you think about when you hear the word nation? What does it mean? If you're going to swear allegiance to the nation, what are you swearing allegiance to? Let me give you two definitions. You will find these two definitions in Black's Law Dictionary. They're probably Bouvier's as well, but I just took them out of Black's. Listen to Black's definition of nation. Here it is. Here's the first definition.

"A people or aggregation of men existing in the form of an organized jural society, usually inhabiting a distinct portion of the earth, speaking the same language, using the same customs, possessing historic continuity, and distinguished from other like groups by their racial origin and characteristics, and generally, but not necessarily, living under the same government and sovereignty." Now let's just stop there. I want you to think about that definition. That's not a bad definition. What did he say is the first definition of a nation? It's a group of people living under an organized jural society. That is, you have a law, usually inhabiting a certain distinct portion of the earth. You speak the same language, not 40. You have the same customs, not 40. You have a historic continuity, and you're distinct from other racial groups. And you normally live under the same government. We understand that.

We have no problem with that. But listen to the second definition. "In American constitutional law, the word state is applied to the several members of the American Union while the word nation is applied to the whole body of people embraced within the jurisdiction of the federal government." Did you hear that? Embraced within the jurisdiction of the federal government. All I can say is my, how times have changed. Do you remember that originally the government which was created by the states was to be the servant of the states? The states were the masters and the government was the servant. Now the bottom rail is on top and our nation is described as the whole body of people within the jurisdiction of the federal government.

Let me ask you one question. Is it right to pledge allegiance to usurped or stolen authority? How did the federal government get where it is today? I will tell you, it stole authority that was never given to it by the states or by the people. Certainly, we should be loyal to our country. We should be loyal to our people. We should be loyal to our way of life. But not to a usurped authority that denies everything for which the people stand.

Kirk Tofte, who is a financial manager in Des Moines, Iowa, wrote this. Listen carefully. He hit the nail on the head. He said, "Nationalism is the worship of a nation state. As a civil religion, it is a false faith. It represents chasing after idols. When nationalism is used to mask militarism and imperialism, it is worse than a false faith. It is the gravest of sins that can only be forgiven by a truly loving God."

So what is he saying about today? Nationalism is a mask for militarism and imperialism. One does not need to bow down to a graven idol in order to be an idolater. You've got to remember that idolatry begins in the mind and it often stays there. Unbiblical and ungodly thinking and wrong attitudes are just as idolatrous as bowing down to graven images. Let's go further. He said, "one nation under God." What is meant by that phrase "under God"? Remember now, that phrase was not put in until 1954. If the phrase "under God" means under God's sovereign authority and law, I would concede that's exactly where we need to be as people, as a country.

But let me read to you an article. This article was from the Commercial Appeal in Memphis, Tennessee, and it's on Francis Bellamy and his great grandson. Here's what it says: "Descendants of the man who authored the Pledge of Allegiance says he probably wouldn't mind the removal of the words 'under God' because he wouldn't have wanted them added in the first place. Scott Bellamy, 49, who owns a sandwich shop in Memphis suburb, says his great-grandfather, Francis Bellamy, a socialist editor and Baptist minister, had clear reasons behind every word of the original pledge he wrote in 1892. Francis Bellamy protested even the addition of 'the United States of America' on Flag Day in 1924, believing the pledge as he wrote it did not need changing. 'If he didn't want the United States of America in the pledge, he wouldn't have wanted under God either,' said Scott Bellamy, who told the Commercial Appeal of Memphis.

Wednesday, the Federal Appeals Court in California found reciting the pledge at public schools was unconstitutional because the words 'under God,' inserted by Congress in 1954, amounted to a government endorsement of religion. The ruling ignited a storm of criticism and was put on hold. Shortly before his death in 1931, Francis Bellamy wrote a letter to his 10-year-old grandson, Scott Bellamy's father, explaining how he wrote the pledge originally for school children. He said that in 1892 he was an associate editor of the Youth's Companion Magazine and was chosen to prepare an official program to celebrate the 400th anniversary of Columbus's arrival in America." So the descendants of Francis Bellamy said they don't want "under God" in there either, because their father didn't want it in there.

Now, John Behr, and I told you his book was very significant because Behr is the one who wrote the centennial history of the Pledge of Allegiance from 1892 to 1992. He has some question and answers. And I want you to listen to the question and the answer. Get ready for this now. The question is to Mr. Behr: "What would have been the opinions of Rev. Francis Bellamy, the author of the Pledge, and James Madison, father of the United States Constitution, about the June 26, 2002 9th U.S.

Circuit Court ruling, that is Michael Newdow v. the United States Congress, when they said the words 'under God' are unconstitutional." So, I'm not concerned about James Madison right now, I am concerned about the response to Francis Bellamy. Here is his answer. And I would say that John Behr is probably the foremost authority on the pledge that is alive today. But here's his answer to that question. What would Francis Bellamy think of a Ninth Circuit Court's ruling that "under God" is unconstitutional? Here's his answer: "Reverend Francis Bellamy, 1855 to 1931, probably would be happy with this decision. When Bellamy wrote the pledge in August 1892, he never considered placing the words 'under God' in his original version of the Pledge of Allegiance. In 1954, David Bellamy, the son, sent a message to Congress politely stating that his father would not like the addition by Congress.

His granddaughter and his great-granddaughter have made similar statements. Francis Bellamy was probably a Christian deist. He did not believe in the virgin birth, the resurrection, or the ascension of Jesus Christ. He stopped attending church during his retirement in Florida. His father, Rev. David Bellamy, was more orthodox. In 1847, David Bellamy founded the Calvary Baptist Church, now located at 123rd West 57th Street in New York City, next door to the New York Bible School, John Behr."

Did you hear what he said? Francis Bellamy would not want "under God" in there. Why? He did not believe in the virgin birth. He did not believe in the resurrection. He did not believe in the ascension of Jesus Christ. He was a deist. He was an unbeliever. He thought that, yeah, there may be a God somewhere up there, but he's just kind of wound up the clock of the universe and let everything run down. There's no intervention of God. There's no miracles. There's no concern. Wow.

Certainly no Christian and hopefully no Southerner would ever have any problem with acknowledging the sovereignty and the supremacy and the ultimacy of the one true and living God who has revealed himself in Jesus Christ. But the problem that you have with this statement, "I pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States of America and to the Republic for which it stands, one nation under God." Here's my question. Which God? Who's God? If we are indeed under God, the one true and living God, as a people, what does that mean?

Analysis of 'Indivisible'

The claim of indivisibility denies historical fact: states acceded to the Constitution with the reserved right to secede. Virginia, New York, and Rhode Island explicitly asserted this right.

Listen to what he says. Now listen, we're just analyzing the pledge. "I pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States of America, and to the Republic for which it stands, one nation under God, indivisible." Indivisible. One of my main contentions with the pledge is this word, indivisible. Because the word indivisible is a denial of history, of fact, and of plain truth. Listen to what Francis Bellamy said, here are his own words: "That phrase encompassed our struggle for independence and for indivisibility, which the Civil War was required to fully prove." Might does not make right. And the simple fact that the South lost the war of northern aggression does not change the truth, it does not change history, and it does not change facts. The truth is every state acceded to the Constitution, and every state reserved to itself and kept to itself the right to secede from the Constitution. You see, when George III made peace with the American colonies in 1783 at the Treaty of Paris, he did not make peace with just a United States government, no. Here's what it says, the opening words: "His Britannic Majesty acknowledges the said United States"—this, and then names the thirteen states—"to be free and independent states." George III made peace with thirteen independent sovereign states. The second article in the Articles of Confederation clearly state this: "Each state retains its sovereignty, freedom, and independence, and every power, jurisdiction, and right which is not by this Confederation expressly delegated to the United States." So when the Articles of Confederation was written, every state was free, sovereign, and independent. Virginia, when she acceded to the Constitution on June 25, 1788, said this: They said, "We're going to ratify the Constitution, but here's the reservation."

Listen carefully: "The powers granted under the Constitution being derived from the people of the United States may be resumed by them, whensoever the same shall be perverted to their injury or oppression, that every power not granted thereby remains with them at their will." What did Virginia say? We're going to ratify the Constitution, but we want everybody to understand that when tyranny and oppression comes along, we have the absolute right to take back what we gave the federal government. By the way, it wasn't just Virginia, because New York, on July 26, 1788, when she ratified the Constitution, said this: "That the powers of government may be resumed by the people, whensoever it shall become necessary to their happiness." New York also said, we're going to take it back whenever we want it. Do you realize when the Constitution was being ratified, only 11 of the original 13 states ratified it? North Carolina and Rhode Island did not ratify the Constitution right away. In fact, it was over a year later before they ever ratified the Constitution.

By the way, there was no war fought against Rhode Island and North Carolina to save the Union. And I want you to note something, what the majority of states did, did not affect the other states. We couldn't come along and say, well, 11 out of 13 voted for it, that means the other two have got to take it. No, no, no, no. Every state was free, sovereign, and independent. And when over a year later, both North Carolina and Rhode Island did ratify the Constitution, Rhode Island came out with this reservation. They said, "We, the delegates of the people of Rhode Island and Providence Plantations duly elected, do declare and make known that the powers of government may be resumed by the people whensoever it shall become necessary to their happiness." Now here are three states that dogmatically asserted the right to secede. Every state had that right, every state believed they had that right, or they would have never ratified the Constitution to begin with.

Thus, when one says, "I pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States of America, to the republic for which it stands, one nation, under God, indivisible," you're pledging allegiance to a lie, because the plain fact of history is originally, it was divisible. If you have the right to accede, you also have the right to secede. Now, it's not my intention to deal today with the biblical doctrine of secession. I've done that before. But let me tell you something. You can say indivisible all you want to today. But the truth of the matter is our nation is divided in a multitude of ways today. Economically, politically, culturally, linguistically, ethnically, all kinds of ways. There is no way in the world that we have an indivisible nation today. It's not true historically and it's certainly not true practically.

Analysis of 'Liberty and Justice for All'

Bellamy's vision of liberty and justice was tied to the 14th, 15th, and 16th Amendments and his socialist ideals. True liberty and justice come only from God and His law.

And then the pledge says "with liberty and justice for all." Now Bellamy's idea of liberty and justice for all is found in the 14th, 15th, and 16th Amendments of the Constitution, which were really, when he said, "with liberty and justice for all," he really wanted to use his French Revolution slogan, "liberty, equality, and fraternity," which he was unable to do so. But I've got news for you folks. If you depend on the 14th Amendment for your justice, excuse my English, but you ain't got any. Same thing with the 15th and same thing with the 16th. Francis Bellamy, as a Christian socialist, that's what he called himself, in conjunction with many other liberal thinkers and writers of his day, favored a socialistic centralized federal government as opposed to the traditional conservative Christianity and the local government concepts of the South. He, along with his cousins, and especially Edward Bellamy, became the heroes of John Dewey and others who advocated progressive revelation or progressive education, which in a hundred years has produced in our country a morally corrupt, anti-Christian, multicultural, secular public school system which now openly opposes Christianity, parents, and morality. That's a fact.

And by the way, when you say "with liberty and justice for all," may I point out, there is no liberty and there is no justice apart from God and His law. What does the Bible say in 2 Corinthians 3 and verse 17?

Scripture Reading — 2 Corinthians 3:17

"Now the Lord is that Spirit: and where the Spirit of the Lord is, there is liberty."

And what did our Lord say in John 8, verse 36? "If the Son therefore shall make you free, ye shall be free indeed." But without Him, there is no liberty, there is no freedom, there is no justice. You cannot have justice apart from God and His law. You want to know another thing wrong with our country? The judicial system.

And let me tell you something, when you let murderers go, and rapists go, and kidnappers go, and when you do not execute those whom God demands to be put to death, let me tell you, God has it fixed up where either the murderer is put to death or society dies, one or the other. You cannot have justice apart from God and his law. Now, let me just make some very quick applications. The first one is this. Am I going to get mad with you because you recite the pledge? No, I'm not going to get mad at you. But I think this, I think if you're going to recite the pledge, you ought to know what you mean and you ought to know what Francis Bellamy meant. And you better determine what meaning you're going to give to those words and what concepts you're going to give to those words. You may exercise your liberty to say the pledge, or you may exercise your liberty not to say the pledge. But I'm going to tell you one thing. You flat better understand the aim and the intent of that pledge. And Francis Bellamy did not hide it.

Applications and Conclusion

Christians may recite the pledge if they understand its original intent, but must not let government become an idol. Our first, full, and final allegiance is to Jesus Christ, as expressed in the song 'I Pledge Allegiance to the Lamb.'

He said point blank he was going to elevate, he wanted to elevate the state, he wanted a socialistic fascist controlled government that dictated every area of our lives. Our founding fathers never ever envisioned the kind of republic that Francis Bellamy envisioned. Their definition of republic and his definition of republic are two totally different things. And may I point out, this was one of the issues of the War of Northern Aggression. The South had one interpretation of republic and one interpretation of the Constitution. And the North had a completely different interpretation of a republican constitution. Do you realize the problem that we're having today with a gargantuan government is the same problem? Because we have different ideas as to what a republic really, truly is. And certainly, I hope you can see that government can become a god.

Not in truth and reality. But when you and I begin to ascribe to government power and authority over and above that and beyond that which the Word of God gives, that is indeed idolatry. And God said, "Thou shalt have no other gods before me." And when you look to government instead of God, you are an idolater, pure and simple. You know what our Lord said? And by the way, I hope you know that as Christians, our first, our full and our final allegiance must be to Jesus Christ. Our Lord said in Matthew 10, verse 37, "He that loveth father or mother more than me is not worthy of me: and he that loveth son or daughter more than me is not worthy of me." We may owe a duty to man and to government, but first and full and final allegiance is only owed to the one true, the living God. Ray Boltz wrote these words.

Many of you have heard this song many times. "I Pledge Allegiance to the Lamb." Here are the words: "I have heard how Christians long ago were brought before a tyrant's throne, and they were told that he would spare their lives if they would renounce the name of Christ. But one by one they chose to die. The Son of God they would not deny, like a great angelic choir sings. I can almost hear their voices ring. I pledge allegiance to the Lamb with all my strength, with all I am. I will seek to honor His commands. I pledge allegiance to the Lamb."

"Now the years have come and the years have gone, but the cause of Jesus still goes on. And now our time has come to count the cost, to reject this world, to embrace the cross, and one by one let us live our lives for the One who died to give us life. Till the trumpet sounds on the final day, let us proudly stand and boldly say, I pledge allegiance to the Lamb with all my strength, with all I am." "I will seek to honor His commands. I pledge allegiance to the Lamb, to the Lamb who bore my pain, who took my place, who wore my shame. I will seek to honor His commands. I pledge allegiance to the Lamb." If we give our allegiance to Christ, I can assure you we will not be wrong. If you have your duty to God down first, your duty to man will automatically fall in place. But if you put man first, you're going to be wrong.

every which way you turn. We must remember, as Christians, our first, full, and final allegiance is to Jesus Christ. Why? He's God of gods and King of kings and Lord of lords, and as Scripture says, He only is worthy of all honor and all praise and all glory. Let's pray. Father, we ask today that you help us, give us understanding, quicken our minds. May we be able to think things through and to think them through biblically and scripturally. Give us grace, Lord, to serve Thee acceptably with reverence and godly fear and to put Thee first in every area of our lives. In the name of Jesus Christ, we ask and pray, Amen.

Study Guide

Major Themes

The Pledge as an Express Oath

Summary: Reciting the pledge constitutes a binding express oath of allegiance, not merely a natural sentiment, and was designed to replace the distasteful 'oath of allegiance' forced on Southerners.

Evidence: Weaver explains that 'pledge' is a promise or oath, and Bellamy chose it deliberately because 'oath of allegiance' was offensive to Southerners who had been forced to take such oaths after the Civil War.

Redefinition of Key Terms

Summary: Words like 'republic,' 'nation,' and 'indivisible' have been redefined from their original constitutional meanings to support a centralized, statist government.

Evidence: Weaver contrasts the founders' definition of a republic (power from the people, government under law) with Bellamy's socialist vision, and notes that 'nation' now means those under federal jurisdiction.

Symbolism and Changing Principles

Summary: The flag's symbolism can remain the same while the principles it represents change; Pastor Handy was imprisoned for stating the flag no longer stood for the Constitution but for oppression.

Evidence: Weaver quotes Handy: 'The symbols are the same, but the principles have changed... I have no respect for any flag representing such enormities.'

Idolatry of Government

Summary: Ascribing to government power beyond what God's Word allows is idolatry; the pledge can elevate the state to a god-like status, violating the First Commandment.

Evidence: Weaver states, 'when you look to government instead of God, you are an idolater, pure and simple,' and references Exodus 20:3.

Ultimate Allegiance to Christ

Summary: A Christian's first, full, and final allegiance must be to Jesus Christ, not to any flag or government; this is illustrated by the song 'I Pledge Allegiance to the Lamb.'

Evidence: Weaver quotes Matthew 10:37 and recites the lyrics of 'I Pledge Allegiance to the Lamb,' emphasizing that allegiance to Christ ensures right duties to man.

Historical Right of Secession

Summary: The original states were sovereign and independent, with the reserved right to resume delegated powers; the claim of indivisibility is historically false.

Evidence: Weaver cites the ratification statements of Virginia, New York, and Rhode Island, all asserting the right to resume powers when government becomes oppressive.

Key Arguments

Bellamy's Socialist Intent

Summary: Francis Bellamy wrote the pledge to promote a centralized, socialist government and used government schools as the means to achieve a statist utopia.

Evidence: Weaver quotes Bellamy's speech advocating that 'the training of citizens... belongs irrevocably to the state' and his aim to elevate the state.

Pledge as Binding Oath

Summary: The word 'pledge' denotes a solemn, binding promise, akin to the biblical concept of an earnest or guarantee, making the reciter accountable to the government.

Evidence: Weaver links 'pledge' to the Greek word for 'earnest' in 2 Corinthians 1:22 and Ephesians 1:14, showing it as a binding commitment.

Allegiance to Government vs. Country

Summary: Natural allegiance to one's country is distinct from express allegiance to a government; when government becomes tyrannical, allegiance to country supersedes.

Evidence: Weaver cites John Locke's Second Treatise: when legislators seek to enslave the people, they are 'absolved from any further obedience.'

The Flag's Changed Meaning

Summary: The U.S. flag originally symbolized liberty under God and the Constitution, but now represents a centralized bureaucracy that oppresses rather than protects rights.

Evidence: Weaver quotes George Washington on the flag's original meaning and Pastor Handy's statement that it now represents 'abolition, coercion, downtrodden constitution, oppression, tyranny.'

Republic vs. Democracy

Summary: The founders established a republic (rule of law, power from the people), not a democracy (mob rule); the shift to democracy has led to loss of rights.

Evidence: Weaver quotes James Madison in Federalist No. 10 and the 1928 U.S. Army Training Manual, both warning that democracies are incompatible with personal security and property rights.

'Under God' Was Unwanted by Bellamy

Summary: The phrase 'under God' was added in 1954 against the wishes of Bellamy, who was a deist denying the virgin birth, resurrection, and ascension of Christ.

Evidence: Weaver quotes John Behr and Bellamy's descendants stating Bellamy would have opposed the addition, as he did not believe in core Christian doctrines.

Indivisibility Is a Historical Lie

Summary: The claim that the nation is indivisible contradicts the historical fact that states entered the Union with the explicit right to secede.

Evidence: Weaver reads the ratification reservations of Virginia, New York, and Rhode Island, all asserting the right to resume delegated powers.

No Liberty or Justice Apart from God

Summary: True liberty and justice are impossible without God and His law; the pledge's promise of 'liberty and justice for all' is empty without biblical foundation.

Evidence: Weaver cites 2 Corinthians 3:17 ('where the Spirit of the Lord is, there is liberty') and argues that ignoring God's law leads to societal decay.

Scripture References

Exodus 20:1-3

Context: Read at the opening as the foundational text against idolatry, applied to the danger of making government a god.

Genesis 38:13-23

Context: Used to illustrate the biblical concept of a pledge as a binding promise or collateral, as Judah gave his signet and staff as a pledge.

2 Corinthians 1:22

Context: Shows that the Holy Spirit is given as an 'earnest' (same Greek word as 'pledge'), a guarantee of our full redemption.

Ephesians 1:13-14

Context: The Holy Spirit is the 'earnest' or pledge of our inheritance, demonstrating the binding nature of a pledge.

Psalm 60:4

Context: God gives a banner (flag) to those who fear Him, to be displayed because of truth.

Isaiah 59:19

Context: The Spirit of the Lord lifts up a standard (battle flag) against the enemy, illustrating the biblical purpose of a flag.

2 Corinthians 3:17

Context: Where the Spirit of the Lord is, there is liberty; true freedom is found only in Christ.

John 8:36

Context: If the Son makes you free, you are free indeed; liberty is a product of relationship with Christ.

Matthew 10:37

Context: Loving family more than Christ makes one unworthy of Him; our ultimate allegiance must be to Jesus.

Historical References

Francis Bellamy

Context: Author of the Pledge of Allegiance; a socialist, Freemason, and ousted Baptist pastor who advocated centralized government and government-run schools.

Dr. Clyde Wilson

Context: Historian who noted that antebellum Americans had no loyalty oaths or pledges to the flag; they swore to uphold the Constitution.

Abraham Lincoln's Oath of Allegiance

Context: Lincoln recommended an oath forcing Southerners to support all acts of Congress during the rebellion, including those passed without Southern representation.

Ironclad Oath

Context: A post-Civil War oath that barred Southerners from office unless they swore they had never voluntarily aided the Confederacy; used to disenfranchise them.

John Locke, Second Treatise on Government

Context: Argued that when legislators seek to enslave the people, they are absolved from obedience; cited to support resistance to tyranny.

Theodore Roosevelt (1918)

Context: Stated that standing by the president right or wrong is unpatriotic and morally treasonous; used to contrast modern blind allegiance.

Pastor Isaac Handy

Context: Baptist pastor imprisoned for 15 months for saying the U.S. flag no longer represented the Constitution but rather oppression and tyranny.

George Washington on the Flag

Context: Washington explained the flag's symbolism: stars from heaven, red from the mother country, white stripes representing separation and liberty.

James Madison, Federalist No. 10

Context: Warned that democracies are incompatible with personal security and property rights; the founders gave us a republic, not a democracy.

U.S. Army Training Manual (1928)

Context: Described democracy as leading to mobocracy, communism, and anarchy; used to show the founders' distinction between republic and democracy.

Important Quotes

The true reason for allegiance to the flag is the republic for which it stands. And what does that vast thing, the republic, mean? It is the concise political word for the nation, the one nation that the Civil War was thought to prove.

Significance: Reveals Bellamy's view that the pledge was about the nation as proven by the Civil War, emphasizing indivisibility and centralized nationhood.

The training of citizens in the common knowledge and the common duties of citizenship belongs irrevocably to the state.

Significance: Demonstrates Bellamy's statist philosophy that education is a state function, not a parental or church prerogative.

I venerated that flag too, sir, when it represented the Constitution and proclaimed equal rights protecting alike the North and the South. But that, sir, is no longer the flag of the Union. It is not the old flag. The symbols are the same, but the principles have changed.

Significance: Pastor Handy's testimony that the flag's meaning had shifted from constitutional liberty to oppression, for which he was imprisoned.

We take the stars from heaven, the red from our mother country, separating it by white stripes, thus showing that we have separated from her. And the white stripes shall go down in prosperity, representing liberty.

Significance: George Washington's original interpretation of the flag as a symbol of liberty under God, contrasting with later statist meanings.

Hence, it is such that democracies have ever been spectacles of turbulence and contention, have ever been found incompatible with personal security or the rights of property.

Significance: James Madison's warning that democracy leads to loss of rights, underscoring the founders' intent for a republic.

Reverend Francis Bellamy, 1855 to 1931, probably would be happy with this decision. When Bellamy wrote the pledge in August 1892, he never considered placing the words 'under God' in his original version of the Pledge of Allegiance.

Significance: Historian John Behr confirms that Bellamy, a deist, would have opposed the addition of 'under God' to the pledge.

To announce that there must be no criticism of the President or that we're to stand by the President, right or wrong, is not only unpatriotic and servile, but is morally treasonous to the American public.

Significance: Theodore Roosevelt's statement that blind allegiance to a president is morally wrong, used to challenge modern patriotic assumptions.

I pledge allegiance to the Lamb with all my strength, with all I am. I will seek to honor His commands. I pledge allegiance to the Lamb.

Significance: The song's chorus, used to illustrate that a Christian's ultimate allegiance is to Jesus Christ, not to any flag or nation.

Discussion Questions

What is the difference between natural allegiance and express allegiance, and why does this distinction matter when reciting the pledge?

Context: Weaver explains that express allegiance is a binding oath, while natural allegiance arises from birth and culture.

How can a symbol like the flag retain the same appearance while its underlying principles change? Can you think of modern examples?

Context: Pastor Handy's imprisonment illustrates that the flag's meaning shifted from representing the Constitution to representing oppression.

In what ways does the biblical concept of a 'pledge' as an earnest or guarantee inform how we should view making oaths to human institutions?

Context: Weaver connects the pledge to the Holy Spirit as the earnest of our inheritance, showing the seriousness of binding promises.

Why did the founders prefer a republic over a democracy, and what are the practical differences we see today?

Context: James Madison and the 1928 Army Manual warn that democracies threaten property rights and lead to mob rule.

If Francis Bellamy was a deist who denied core Christian doctrines, what does the addition of 'under God' to his pledge signify about American civil religion?

Context: Bellamy's descendants and historian John Behr state he would have opposed 'under God'; the phrase was added later for political reasons.

How should Christians balance their allegiance to Christ with any duties they may owe to their country or government?

Context: Weaver concludes that first, full, and final allegiance belongs to Jesus, and that right duty to God orders all other duties.

Is it historically accurate to call the United States 'indivisible'? What do the ratification statements of Virginia, New York, and Rhode Island imply?

Context: These states explicitly reserved the right to resume delegated powers, indicating they believed secession was lawful.

What does it mean to make government an idol, and how might reciting the pledge contribute to that?

Context: Weaver applies Exodus 20:3, warning that looking to government for what only God can provide is idolatry.

Applications

Understand What You Are Pledging

Summary: If you choose to recite the pledge, you must understand the original intent of its author and decide what meaning you assign to its words.

Evidence: Weaver says, 'if you're going to recite the pledge, you ought to know what you mean and you ought to know what Francis Bellamy meant.'

Guard Against Government Idolatry

Summary: Do not ascribe to government power or authority beyond what God's Word allows; doing so is a violation of the First Commandment.

Evidence: Weaver states, 'when you look to government instead of God, you are an idolater, pure and simple,' referencing Exodus 20:3.

Give Ultimate Allegiance to Christ

Summary: Ensure that your first, full, and final allegiance is to Jesus Christ, not to any flag, nation, or government.

Evidence: Weaver quotes Matthew 10:37 and the song 'I Pledge Allegiance to the Lamb' to emphasize that Christ must be preeminent.

Exercise Liberty Conscientiously

Summary: You may exercise your liberty to say the pledge or not, but you must do so with a clear understanding of its implications and history.

Evidence: Weaver says, 'You may exercise your liberty to say the pledge, or you may exercise your liberty not to say the pledge. But... you flat better understand the aim and the intent of that pledge.'

Seek True Liberty and Justice in God

Summary: Recognize that genuine liberty and justice are found only where God's Spirit and law are honored, not in human governments.

Evidence: Weaver cites 2 Corinthians 3:17 and argues that without God's law, society cannot have true justice.

deepseek | deepseek-v4-pro | clean_readable_transcript | 2026-06-06T02:51:19Z

deepseek | deepseek-v4-pro | weaver_study | 2026-06-06T16:05:05Z

Clean Transcript

The Pledge-History & Problems-2

Clean readable transcript. This view follows the Commentary.net cleaned segment text while preserving timestamps for audio follow-along.

If you have not opened your Bibles to Exodus chapter 20, and if you have not heard the message from last Sunday, I would encourage that you do so because today is the second part on the Pledge of Allegiance. I just simply entitle it, "The Pledge, Its History and Its Problems." And we begin by reading Exodus 20, verses 1 through 3: "And God spake all these words, saying, I am the Lord thy God who hath brought thee up out of the land of Egypt, out of the house of bondage."
#1 | 0:01 to 0:37 | cleaned
"Thou shalt have no other gods before me." And certainly we're going to understand one application of verse 3 before we close today. Let me just simply review a few minutes of what I covered last Sunday. I simply said in the introduction that usually speaking, since most people have grown up with the pledge, that our feathers are very easily and quickly ruffled when someone will not recite the pledge or at least would not stand reverently while the pledge is being recited. And I said that the average attitude is simply that someone who would not do that is in the least unpatriotic and at the very most Marxist or communist.
#2 | 0:37 to 1:22 | cleaned
And then I also pointed out in my introduction that I hesitated tackling this subject only because it is controversial and I'm not trying to start a fight, I'm not trying to start a debate, I'm not trying to create problems, but I'm rather trying to resolve problems by showing you some reasoning and some rationalism and also some biblical common sense as well.
#3 | 1:23 to 1:47 | cleaned
Now, last week we covered two points. We first of all looked at the author of the pledge. And we discovered that Francis Bellamy was an ousted Baptist pastor, he was a Freemason, and above all, he was a socialist to the nth degree. He advocated a centralized government with autocratic power, and he wanted government to control all the means of production. That means government would either own and/or control land, labor, and capital. He was also the head of the Christian Socialist Society, and he taught that government schools were the key to establishing the socialistic utopia in America. So he was indeed the author of the Pledge. And then secondly, we looked at the aim, and very quickly I'm going to tell you what he said when he began to contemplate writing the Pledge.
#4 | 1:47 to 2:45 | cleaned
In August of 1892, he said, "It began as an intensive communing with salient points of our national history, from the Declaration of Independence onwards, with the making of the Constitution, with the meaning of the Civil War, with the aspiration of the people." And I know he said that when he sat down to write the pledge, he thought about not just simply the national history, the Declaration, the Constitution, but he also thought about the meaning of the Civil War. And then he goes on and he says this, and I'm quoting his words, "The true reason for allegiance to the flag is the republic for which it stands. And what does that vast thing, the republic, mean? It is the concise political word for the nation, the one nation that the Civil War was thought to prove."
#5 | 2:45 to 3:38 | cleaned
"To make that one nation idea clear, we must specify that it is indivisible as Webster and Lincoln used to repeat in their great speeches." So here he is saying once again that his philosophy is the same as Abraham Lincoln and is the same as Daniel Webster. And he says the republic to him is the concise political word for the nation. I'm going to explain that just a little bit later. But let me give you one other quote that I gave you last week, just to show you his socialism.
#6 | 3:39 to 4:14 | cleaned
In his speech, "The Meaning of Four Centuries," he was advocating a strong position for government schools, and he says this: "We assemble here today that we too may exalt the free school of the government school that embodies the American principle of universal enlightenment and equality, the most characteristic product of our four centuries of American life. One institution more than any other has wrought out the achievements of the past and is today the most trusted for the future. Our fathers in their wisdom knew that the foundations of liberty, fraternity, and equality, the slogan of the French Revolution, must be universal education. The free school, therefore, was conceived as the cornerstone of the republic. Washington and Jefferson recognized that the education of citizens is not the prerogative of the church or of other private interests, that while religious training belongs to the church and while technical and higher culture may be given by private institutions, the training of citizens in the common knowledge and the common duties of citizenship belongs irrevocably to the state."
#7 | 4:15 to 5:26 | cleaned
Now, here's what he said very clearly, that the state has the right to educate the children. He said, it is not the prerogative of the church, nor is it the prerogative of other private interests, and you ask yourself, who other would private interests refer to other than the parents? It's the parents that have the private interest in the children. So he says it's not the church that has the interest, it's not the parents that have the interest, it is the state. And so he was looking then at government schools as the way to bring up our children as good little statists. So his aim then was basically to elevate the state to the position of godhood, almost, in the fact that it controlled every aspect of our lives.
#8 | 5:27 to 6:20 | cleaned
Now, I told you that the pledge had gone through at least four revisions. And the pledge that we have today, or that we recite today, is codified in the United States Code. And it did not basically even become recognized by Congress until 1942. And of course, the phrase "under God" was not added until 1954. So today I want to come to the third point, the analysis, and let you and I try to analyze the Pledge of Allegiance. Now, before I begin analyzing the Pledge of Allegiance, I want to give you a quote from Dr. Clyde Wilson.
#9 | 6:21 to 7:00 | cleaned
Listen to what he says. He has a very excellent point. Dr. Clyde Wilson has graphically pointed out this simple fact: There were in antebellum America no loyalty oaths or pledges of allegiance to the flag of the nation. Free-born American citizens would have considered such to be an insult to their patriotism, as well as an invasion of the rights of their states. Americans did not pledge allegiance to the flag.
#10 | 7:01 to 7:32 | cleaned
They swore to uphold and defend the Constitution, the swearing having definite overtones of Christianity and the Anglo-American tradition, unlike the secularistic imperial pledge of allegiance."
#11 | 7:34 to 7:49 | cleaned
Now you just stop and think about what Dr. Wilson has said. In antebellum South, before the War of Northern Aggression, there were no loyalty oaths. There were no pledges of allegiance. The only thing men swore to do was to uphold and to defend the Constitution. With that in mind, I want you to follow with me as I try to analyze the pledge. I'm going to take a phrase or even a word at a time and let's break it down and see what is actually being said when someone says, "I pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States of America, and to the republic for which it stands, one nation under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all." So, let's take the first words, "I pledge." Do you realize that a pledge is a promise or an oath of allegiance? A pledge is a promise or an oath of allegiance. Webster in his 1828 dictionary defines a pledge as a promise or an agreement by which one binds himself to do something or forbear doing something.
#12 | 7:51 to 9:04 | cleaned
Now, the word pledge is found 22 times in our Bible. It usually refers to something given temporarily as a promise for the performance of a duty or something that would be considered as collateral for a loan. In fact, if you'll look in your Bibles very quickly to Genesis 38, you will find where Judah used a pledge to commit fornication with his daughter-in-law. He did not know that it was his daughter-in-law, but look in Genesis 38, beginning there in verse 13. The Bible says this: "And it was told Tamar, saying, Behold, thy father-in-law goeth up to Timnath to shear his sheep. And she put her widow's garments off from her, and covered her with a veil, and wrapped herself, and sat in an open place, which is by the way to Timnath; for she saw that Shelah was grown, and she was not given unto him to wife. When Judah saw her, he thought her to be an harlot; because she had covered her face. And he turned unto her by the way, and said, Go to, I pray thee, let me come in unto thee; for he knew not that she was his daughter-in-law."
#13 | 9:04 to 10:11 | cleaned
"And she said, What wilt thou give me, that thou mayest come in unto me? And he said, I will send thee a kid from the flock. And she said, Wilt thou give me a pledge, till thou send it? And he said, What pledge shall I give thee? And she said, Thy signet, and thy bracelets, and thy staff that is in thine hand. And he gave it her, and came in unto her, and she conceived by him."
#14 | 10:12 to 10:33 | cleaned
"And she arose, and went away, and laid by her veil from her, and put on the garments of her widowhood. And Judah sent the kid by the hand of his friend the Adullamite, to receive his pledge from the woman's hand: but he found her not. Then he asked the men of that place, saying, Where is the harlot, that was openly by the way side? And they said, There is no harlot in this place. And he returned to Judah, and said, I cannot find her; and also the men of the place said, that there was no harlot in this place. And Judah said, Let her take it to her, lest we be shamed: behold, I sent this kid, and thou hast not found her."
#15 | 10:34 to 11:08 | cleaned
Well, I'm not preaching on this text today, but the point I'm trying to make is she took his ring. She took his staff as a pledge, something that she was going to hold until he gave her the fulfillment of his promise which was a young kid of the flock. Now let me show you how important a pledge is. Many of you understand that the Septuagint is the Greek translation of the Hebrew Old Testament.
#16 | 11:09 to 11:41 | cleaned
It was a very prominent book. Our Lord and the disciples used it and quoted from it. And the word pledge used in Genesis chapter 38—and I want you to turn in your Bibles to 2 Corinthians 1 and then Ephesians chapter 1—2 Corinthians 1 verse 22 and then Ephesians chapter 1—and I'm going to show you the word pledge that is used in Genesis chapter 38 is also used in the New Testament. Notice, if you would please, 2 Corinthians chapter 1, and look, if you would please, at verse 22. Here we will find the word "earnest." The Bible talks about Christ and our salvation, and the Bible says, "who also hath sealed us, and given the earnest of the Spirit in our hearts." Now, the word pledge and the word earnest are the same in the Greek. If you would look in your Bibles to the book of Ephesians, chapter 1 and verse 14, Ephesians 1 and verse 14, the Bible in referring to the Holy Spirit—in fact, look in the latter part of verse 13.
#17 | 11:42 to 12:57 | cleaned
The Bible says in Ephesians 1 and verse 13, the latter part, "ye were sealed with that holy Spirit of promise, which is the earnest"—or which is the pledge—"of our inheritance until the redemption of the purchased possession, unto the praise of his glory." Now, those of us who have been regenerated and converted by the grace of God have been sealed with the Holy Spirit. Well, what is the Holy Spirit? The Holy Spirit is our pledge. It is our guarantee that Jesus Christ is going to return and complete and finish our redemption in the sense that we will be ultimately glorified and live with Him. So that Holy Spirit is our pledge. Now, when Christ gave us the Holy Spirit, what was He doing? He was binding Himself to return and complete our salvation by saving us not only out of our sin and from the penalty of sin, but from the very presence of sin itself. So the Holy Spirit is our pledge, it's the guarantee that Jesus Christ is going to return. Now, when you pledge, when you say, "I pledge," you are binding yourself.
#18 | 12:57 to 14:19 | cleaned
You are agreeing and promising something. And just like Christ promised to come back and redeem His own, so when you say, "I pledge," you are now beginning to bind yourself to something. Let's go further. "I pledge allegiance." Allegiance is the obligation of fidelity and obedience to a government in consideration for the protection that the government gives. Now Webster goes further in defining allegiance and he says this, he defines allegiance as the tie or obligation of a subject to his prince or government; the duty of fidelity to a king, government, or state. Now let me just tell you there is a difference between express allegiance and what you and I would call a natural allegiance. Express allegiance is that obligation which proceeds from an express promise or an oath of obligation. So when you say "I pledge allegiance," you are now expressing allegiance, you are expressing an oath, you are tying and binding yourself to something over and above and beyond natural allegiance. And as Lampster is correct, if you are going to swap allegiance for protection, governmental protection, if you swap allegiance for a governmental protection day, I can assure you, you're going to be the loser.
#19 | 14:19 to 16:03 | cleaned
It is our highest governmental officials who are declaring that we must give up our rights for protection. Is it not absolutely strange and mind-boggling that in the 21st century, with all the technological advances that we have, that our government cannot protect its own people without causing us to give up or lose or waive our rights? Isn't that absolutely amazing? You see, the truth of the matter is this. I'd rather have my rights and governmental protection. Thank you. I'll protect myself. The amazing thing is this.
#20 | 16:06 to 16:54 | cleaned
When Bellamy was writing the Pledge of Allegiance and he chose the word pledge, "I pledge allegiance," he did so very carefully and very deliberately. You know why? Because he knew that the word oath, or the phrase "oath of allegiance," would be very distasteful and uncomfortable for Southerners. Let me tell you why. Because during and after the War of Northern Aggression, many Southerners were forced to take an oath of allegiance. They were either forced to take it, or they would be shot.
#21 | 16:55 to 17:40 | cleaned
It would be that simple. Here is an oath, or at least a portion of the oath, that Abraham Lincoln recommended. Here it is: "I, [blank], fill in your name, do solemnly swear in the presence of Almighty God that I will henceforth faithfully support, protect, and defend the Constitution of the United States and the union of the states thereunder, and that I will in like manner abide by and faithfully support all acts of Congress passed
#22 | 17:41 to 18:15 | cleaned
during the existing rebellion with reference to slaves." Now it goes on. So what Lincoln wanted us to do was not only to bind ourselves to the Constitution, which by the way all Southerners wanted anyhow was the Constitution, and it applied the way it should be applied to North and South equally. But he not only wanted that, he wanted us also to swear allegiance to every act that Congress passed. You've got to remember that during those four years of the war, we had no representatives in Congress. And for several years afterwards, we still had no representatives in Congress. And although the 14th Amendment was passed unlawfully, yet he said, now you've got to swear allegiance that you're going to uphold it. Well, there were other oaths as well that would bind Southerners and would effectually lock them out of any governmental office or position of authority.
#23 | 18:15 to 19:17 | cleaned
One of those oaths I've mentioned earlier when I was dealing with Jesse James was the ironclad oath. And here's a portion of that oath. It went as follows: "I, [blank], do solemnly swear or affirm that I have never voluntarily borne arms against the United States since I have been a citizen thereof; that I have voluntarily given no aid, countenance, counsel, or encouragement to persons engaged in armed hostility thereto." And if Southerners did not take this oath,
#24 | 19:17 to 19:52 | cleaned
they could either be shot or cut out of all political offices or offices of authority. You couldn't even preach. You couldn't teach. You couldn't do anything unless you took this ironclad oath in Missouri and in Kansas and in those areas like that.
#25 | 19:53 to 20:08 | cleaned
Now, when you and I think about allegiance, and we say "I pledge allegiance," when we think about allegiance, we have to admit there is a natural allegiance that is owed to your own country. But a natural allegiance is different from an express allegiance. A natural allegiance just simply comes from the fact that you're born in a country with a people, with a community, with traditions, with a language. But an express allegiance is not demanded. You put yourself under express allegiance by making a promise or making an oath or an obligation. That is what you do when you say, "I pledge allegiance." And by the way, there is a difference between allegiance to one's country and allegiance to one's government.
#26 | 20:09 to 21:04 | cleaned
Now, it is wonderful when both are possible at the same time. It is wonderful when you can have allegiance to your country and your government. However, when your government becomes unlawful and unconstitutional and seeks to destroy the country, your first allegiance, naturally, is to your country and not your government. John Locke, in his second treatise on government, chapter 19, paragraph 222, said this, listen carefully: "Whenever the legislators endeavor to take away and destroy the property of the people, or to reduce them to slavery under arbitrary power, they put themselves into a state of war with the people who are thereupon absolved from any further obedience." So John Locke, in his treatise on government, says that when government then becomes tyrannical and oppressive and begins to steal from the people, then the government is putting itself in a state of war against the people. And the people are thereby absolved from any allegiance to that government or any obedience to that government.
#27 | 21:06 to 22:25 | cleaned
To show you how times have changed, in 1918 President Theodore Roosevelt said this: "To announce that there must be no criticism of the President or that we're to stand by the President, right or wrong, is not only unpatriotic and servile, but is morally treasonous to the American public." Can you imagine George Bush saying that today? "To announce that there must be no criticism of the President, or that we're to stand by the President, right or wrong?"
#28 | 22:26 to 23:06 | cleaned
Remember what he said about the war in Iraq? "For us or against us?" "To stand by the President right or wrong is not only unpatriotic and servile, but is morally treasonable to the American public." That was the President of the United States who said that in 1918. And if you have difficulty with this, I would suggest that you take my book on Romans 13, and especially read the second chapter on the covenantal nature of government, because I make this point exceedingly clear. Our allegiance is not due to a government that is reducing its citizens to slavery and subjecting them to tyranny. Let's go further. "I pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States of America."
#29 | 23:08 to 23:59 | cleaned
Let me ask a question. What is a flag? Well, you say, "Pastor, it's a symbol." I would agree with that, but the question must be asked, what does it symbolize? Another legitimate question is this: has the symbolization changed?
#30 | 24:01 to 24:26 | cleaned
Now, the word flag does not occur in our Bibles, but the words banner, standard, and ensign do. And a banner and a standard and an ensign is the same as a flag. Psalm 60 and verse 4 says to God, "Thou hast given a banner to them that fear thee, that it may be displayed because of thy truth." So what has God done? God has given us a banner to those of us who fear Him. He's given us a flag that that flag may be displayed because of the truth. One of my favorite verses is found in Isaiah 59 and verse 19. It has reference to the Holy Spirit and it says this: "So shall they fear the name of the Lord from the west, and his glory from the rising of the sun. When the enemy shall come in like a flood, the Spirit of the Lord shall lift up a standard against him." What is the Spirit of the Lord doing? He's lifting up a standard. He's lifting up a battle flag against the enemy.
#31 | 24:29 to 25:42 | cleaned
What is our flag really supposed to represent, biblically speaking? Well, it's really supposed to represent truth, righteousness, and a willingness to fight against ungodliness and wickedness.
#32 | 25:44 to 25:58 | cleaned
Now, I'm going to go a little bit further in just a moment, but let's consider this phrase: "I pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States of America." Another important question that must be asked is this: If you're going to pledge allegiance to the United States of America, which United States are you pledging allegiance to? Now, that's a legitimate question. Are we pledging allegiance to the original United States that were formed under the Articles of Confederation and later on the Constitution, or are we referring to the corporate United States that resides in the District of Columbia?
#33 | 25:59 to 26:47 | cleaned
And believe me, there's a difference. Now prior to the War of Northern Aggression, Americans usually referred to "these United States." After the war, it became "the United States." Whereas before it was plural, now it became singular in one sense of the word. And whereas before it was little "u" and little "s," now it becomes capital "U" and capital "S." Now ask yourself, if you say, "I pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States of America," are you pledging allegiance to a symbol of freedom and to the organic states that were brought together under the Constitution? Or are you pledging allegiance to a centralized bureaucracy that resides in the District of Columbia? Which United States do you mean? Now, I can assure you I know which United States Francis Bellamy meant when he wrote it.
#34 | 26:49 to 28:03 | cleaned
Because I'm going to give you the quote again in just a moment. But I asked another question earlier, and that was this: Can a symbol change its meaning? And the answer is yes. The symbol may remain the same. But the principles which the symbol represents may change. I know most of you have never heard of Pastor Isaac Handy. He was a Baptist pastor. And he spent 15 months in Fort Delaware, New Jersey prison for a statement that he made concerning the symbolism of the flag. Pastor Isaac Handy was a Southerner who had married a woman from New Jersey.
#35 | 28:03 to 28:51 | cleaned
But her parents were Southern sympathizers. Pastor Handy and his wife went to New Jersey to visit her family. And they had a number of family members there and some friends around. One of the men who was invited was Reverend Mr. Gaylord, who was the pastor of the Port Penn Church. Well, since he was in the home of Handy's in-laws, and most people there were Southern sympathizers, and everything was spoken rather freely there, something came up regarding the flag. And Pastor Handy said that he could no longer venerate that flag now as he had once, but now it was nothing more than an old rag, no longer representing the union or the principles which he believed in. Well, Pastor Gaylord then challenged Pastor Handy concerning his statement. And Pastor Handy said this. Listen carefully. Here's what he said concerning the flag of the United States of America.
#36 | 28:52 to 30:08 | cleaned
He said, and I quote, "I venerated that flag too, sir, when it represented the Constitution and proclaimed equal rights protecting alike the North and the South. But that, sir, is no longer the flag of the Union. It is not the old flag. The symbols are the same, but the principles have changed. What is the flag irrespective of its principles? It is simply a painted rag. That flag once represented high and noble principles. I venerated those principles, and I love the old Ensign because of the principles."
#37 | 30:08 to 30:50 | cleaned
"But what means those stars and stripes today? Not certainly what they once meant."
#38 | 30:51 to 30:56 | cleaned
"Now when I look upon a United States flag, I think I see written upon its broad folds, abolition, coercion, downtrodden constitution, oppression, tyranny. Those are not my principles and I have no respect for any flag representing such enormities." Pastor Gaylord went and reported Pastor Handy, testified against him, and on July 20, 1863, he was sentenced to 15 months in a federal prison. Because he would not venerate the flag. Why would he not venerate it? He said the symbol is the same, but the principles have changed. Do you realize we have the same symbol today? We've had that same symbol for many, many years. But the symbol no longer stands for what it used to stand. Symbols may remain the same while the principles change. The principles that symbol represent may change dramatically. I will guarantee that most of you that hear my voice do not even know the original meaning of the United States flag. I'm going to tell you the real nature of the United States flag in the words of General and President George Washington.
#39 | 30:56 to 32:42 | cleaned
Here's what George Washington said: "We take the stars from heaven, the red from our mother country, separating it by white stripes, thus showing that we have separated from her. And the white stripes shall go down in prosperity, representing liberty." So according to George Washington, thus the flag really and truly represents liberty under God. The stars from heaven, the red from our mother country, the white separating it, meaning liberty, meaning we've separated from them under the stars, under heaven, under God, we have liberty.
#40 | 32:44 to 33:28 | cleaned
Let me put it out very pointedly. The flag did not represent, nor has it ever represented, a sovereign government that simply took the place of the king and ruled over the states. When you pledge allegiance to the flag, you've got to ask yourself, what are the principles for which that symbol now stands? Let me go further. "I pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States of America and to the republic for which it stands." Most of you know the story that when Ben Franklin stepped out of the Constitutional Convention, someone asked him, "What kind of government have you given unto us?" And his answer was, "A republic, if you can keep it." A republic, if you can keep it.
#41 | 33:29 to 34:27 | cleaned
Now, there's a difference between the principle or between the republic that our founding fathers created and the republic that motivated and inspired and moved Bellamy to write the pledge. Now, our founding fathers established a republic. And Francis Bellamy used the word republic, but he does not mean by the word republic what our founding fathers meant. The French Republic, achieved by and through the French Revolution, has absolutely nothing in common with the American Republic that is guaranteed to us in the United States Constitution. The United States Constitution, Article 4, Section 4, Paragraph 1 states this: "The United States shall guarantee to every state in this Union a Republican form of government." That's in our Constitution. The United States shall guarantee to every state in this union a republican form of government. Now, if you look up the word republic in most dictionaries, you're most likely to find this definition: A republic is a government of elected representatives.
#42 | 34:28 to 35:55 | cleaned
That may be true, but it is not all the truth and it is a deliberate deception. A republic in a governmental sense is a government which the sovereignly held authority is held by and granted by the people and the rule of government is according to law.
#43 | 35:58 to 36:22 | cleaned
Now let me go further, listen carefully. The Declaration of Independence states that the purpose of government is to protect the rights of the people, and that government does what? It derives its just powers from whom? The consent of the governed. Now, the first element in a republican form of government is that the power is derived from the people. The second element is that government itself operates within and under the control of law. In other words, a republic, an inner republic, the people are the masters and the government is the servant. The people are on top and the government is on the bottom. To put it another way, the people are the head and the government is the tail. The Constitution, listen carefully now, the Constitution of the United States is a grant of authority from we the people to form a government. And the government that was thus formed by the Constitution was a limited government operating on authority granted from we the people. In every sense it meets the earlier historical definition of republic. The Constitution is the grant of authority from we the people for the government to act.
#44 | 36:24 to 37:57 | cleaned
The Constitution then, listen carefully, the Constitution is the law of the people for the control of government. The Constitution was never meant to bind the states nor to bind the people. It was meant to bind the federal government. When we say a republic, what our founding fathers meant is this, that in a republic the power is derived from the people, and when the people give the government that law, the only thing the government can do is act according to that law and under that law. Period.
#45 | 37:58 to 38:39 | cleaned
I got news for you folks. There is a difference as well between a republic and a democracy, and our politicians need to know that. They apparently do not understand the distinction. There's a vast difference. Listen to what James Madison—by the way, James Madison is known as the father of the Constitution because he was secretary at the Constitutional Convention. So if anybody should know, it should be James Madison who took all the notes.
#46 | 38:41 to 39:09 | cleaned
Here's what he said in the Federalist Paper number 10: "Hence, it is such that democracies have ever been spectacles of turbulence and contention, have ever been found incompatible with personal security or the rights of property, have been in general as short in their lives as they've been as violent in their deaths." Did James Madison say that we have given Americans a democracy? No. He said democracies are known for stealing the rights and the property of the people. What's happening in our democracy today? See, we've changed our Constitutional Republic to a democracy.
#47 | 39:10 to 39:53 | cleaned
That's why the Supreme Court judges can rule in an eminent domain. The cities and towns can do whatever they want to do. We have no property. It's all theirs. That's why you pay a tax to use their property. You pay the rent. James Madison says you cannot have freedom in a democracy. This may shock you, but I'm going to read it to you. This is directly from the United States Army Training Manual from 1928. Democracy. Quote: "A democracy of the masses.
#48 | 39:54 to 40:40 | cleaned
Authority derived through mass meetings or any form of direct expression. Results in mobocracy. Attitude toward property is communistic, negating property rights. Attitude toward law is that the will of the majority shall regulate, whether it be based upon deliberation or governed by passion, prejudice, and impulse, without restraint or regard to consequences. Results in demagoguism, license, agitation, discontent, and anarchy." That's from the United States Army Manual in 1928.
#49 | 40:42 to 41:23 | cleaned
Our constitutional fathers certainly were familiar with the differences between a republic and a democracy. And they were understandably knowledgeable in the difference between an autocracy and a democracy. And when they gave us a republic, they did so with certain fixed principles in mind. And they defined a republic, as I've already given it to you, and it's very marked from a democracy. And repeatedly they said they had given us a republic.
#50 | 41:23 to 42:00 | cleaned
Now we could go further and say this, because remember now, the Constitution of the United States guarantees to every state a republican form of government. How can the United States, how can the federal government guarantee to every state a Republican form of government? Here's why. Because each state in the Union that met at the Constitutional Convention and agreed to form the federal government was a sovereign, independent state, and listen, the federal government, therefore, is an association of small republics, and therefore it was to guarantee that each one would continue as a republican form of government. Do you remember when Robert E. Lee refused command of the Union Army and resigned his commission in 1861? He told the commanding general of the army, Winfield Scott, that he was refusing command of the Union Army and he was resigning his commission. Why? Here's why.
#51 | 42:01 to 43:19 | cleaned
Because he said, "I cannot raise my sword against my own country." What was his country? Virginia. What was his state? Virginia. And Winfield Scott understood. He understood because Virginia was his country, it was his state, it was his republic. They understood what was meant by then and the United States government or the federal government was set up to mirror the republican form of government in the states. That every state would be ruled by the consent of the people, by a law, by a constitution, and that constitution would even bind down the state governments, and that's why we did it to the federal government, to bind them down. Let's go further. "I pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States and to the republic for which it stands, one nation under God." One nation.
#52 | 43:19 to 44:27 | cleaned
Now, the truth is we do not understand terms the way our forefathers did. One of the first things we need to learn to do is to define our terms. Think of the word nation. And what do you think about when you hear the word nation? What does it mean? If you're going to swear allegiance to the nation, what are you swearing allegiance to? Let me give you two definitions. You will find these two definitions in Black's Law Dictionary. They're probably Bouvier's as well, but I just took them out of Black's. Listen to Black's definition of nation. Here it is. Here's the first definition.
#53 | 44:29 to 45:17 | cleaned
"A people or aggregation of men existing in the form of an organized jural society, usually inhabiting a distinct portion of the earth, speaking the same language, using the same customs, possessing historic continuity, and distinguished from other like groups by their racial origin and characteristics, and generally, but not necessarily, living under the same government and sovereignty."
#54 | 45:19 to 45:47 | cleaned
Now let's just stop there. I want you to think about that definition. That's not a bad definition. What did he say is the first definition of a nation? It's a group of people living under an organized jural society. That is, you have a law, usually inhabiting a certain distinct portion of the earth. You speak the same language, not 40. You have the same customs, not 40. You have a historic continuity, and you're distinct from other racial groups. And you normally live under the same government. We understand that.
#55 | 45:49 to 46:43 | cleaned
We have no problem with that. But listen to the second definition. "In American constitutional law, the word state is applied to the several members of the American Union while the word nation is applied to the whole body of people embraced within the jurisdiction of the federal government." Did you hear that? Embraced within the jurisdiction of the federal government. All I can say is my, how times have changed. Do you remember that originally the government which was created by the states was to be the servant of the states? The states were the masters and the government was the servant. Now the bottom rail is on top and our nation is described as the whole body of people within the jurisdiction of the federal government.
#56 | 46:44 to 47:44 | cleaned
Let me ask you one question. Is it right to pledge allegiance to usurped or stolen authority? How did the federal government get where it is today? I will tell you, it stole authority that was never given to it by the states or by the people. Certainly, we should be loyal to our country. We should be loyal to our people. We should be loyal to our way of life. But not to a usurped authority that denies everything for which the people stand.
#57 | 47:45 to 48:25 | cleaned
Kirk Tofte, who is a financial manager in Des Moines, Iowa, wrote this. Listen carefully. He hit the nail on the head. He said, "Nationalism is the worship of a nation state. As a civil religion, it is a false faith. It represents chasing after idols. When nationalism is used to mask militarism and imperialism, it is worse than a false faith. It is the gravest of sins that can only be forgiven by a truly loving God."
#58 | 48:29 to 49:03 | cleaned
So what is he saying about today? Nationalism is a mask for militarism and imperialism. One does not need to bow down to a graven idol in order to be an idolater. You've got to remember that idolatry begins in the mind and it often stays there. Unbiblical and ungodly thinking and wrong attitudes are just as idolatrous as bowing down to graven images. Let's go further. He said, "one nation under God." What is meant by that phrase "under God"? Remember now, that phrase was not put in until 1954. If the phrase "under God" means under God's sovereign authority and law, I would concede that's exactly where we need to be as people, as a country.
#59 | 49:05 to 50:12 | cleaned
But let me read to you an article. This article was from the Commercial Appeal in Memphis, Tennessee, and it's on Francis Bellamy and his great grandson. Here's what it says: "Descendants of the man who authored the Pledge of Allegiance says he probably wouldn't mind the removal of the words 'under God' because he wouldn't have wanted them added in the first place. Scott Bellamy, 49, who owns a sandwich shop in Memphis suburb, says his great-grandfather, Francis Bellamy, a socialist editor and Baptist minister, had clear reasons behind every word of the original pledge he wrote in 1892. Francis Bellamy protested even the addition of 'the United States of America' on Flag Day in 1924, believing the pledge as he wrote it did not need changing. 'If he didn't want the United States of America in the pledge, he wouldn't have wanted under God either,' said Scott Bellamy, who told the Commercial Appeal of Memphis.
#60 | 50:14 to 51:20 | cleaned
Wednesday, the Federal Appeals Court in California found reciting the pledge at public schools was unconstitutional because the words 'under God,' inserted by Congress in 1954, amounted to a government endorsement of religion. The ruling ignited a storm of criticism and was put on hold. Shortly before his death in 1931, Francis Bellamy wrote a letter to his 10-year-old grandson, Scott Bellamy's father, explaining how he wrote the pledge originally for school children.
#61 | 51:21 to 51:48 | cleaned
He said that in 1892 he was an associate editor of the Youth's Companion Magazine and was chosen to prepare an official program to celebrate the 400th anniversary of Columbus's arrival in America." So the descendants of Francis Bellamy said they don't want "under God" in there either, because their father didn't want it in there.
#62 | 51:48 to 52:08 | cleaned
Now, John Behr, and I told you his book was very significant because Behr is the one who wrote the centennial history of the Pledge of Allegiance from 1892 to 1992. He has some question and answers. And I want you to listen to the question and the answer. Get ready for this now. The question is to Mr. Behr: "What would have been the opinions of Rev. Francis Bellamy, the author of the Pledge, and James Madison, father of the United States Constitution, about the June 26, 2002 9th U.S.
#63 | 52:09 to 52:40 | cleaned
Circuit Court ruling, that is Michael Newdow v. the United States Congress, when they said the words 'under God' are unconstitutional." So, I'm not concerned about James Madison right now, I am concerned about the response to Francis Bellamy. Here is his answer. And I would say that John Behr is probably the foremost authority on the pledge that is alive today. But here's his answer to that question. What would Francis Bellamy think of a Ninth Circuit Court's ruling that "under God" is unconstitutional? Here's his answer: "Reverend Francis Bellamy, 1855 to 1931, probably would be happy with this decision. When Bellamy wrote the pledge in August 1892, he never considered placing the words 'under God' in his original version of the Pledge of Allegiance. In 1954, David Bellamy, the son, sent a message to Congress politely stating that his father would not like the addition by Congress.
#64 | 52:41 to 53:40 | cleaned
His granddaughter and his great-granddaughter have made similar statements. Francis Bellamy was probably a Christian deist. He did not believe in the virgin birth, the resurrection, or the ascension of Jesus Christ. He stopped attending church during his retirement in Florida. His father, Rev. David Bellamy, was more orthodox. In 1847, David Bellamy founded the Calvary Baptist Church, now located at 123rd West 57th Street in New York City, next door to the New York Bible School, John Behr."
#65 | 53:41 to 54:15 | cleaned
Did you hear what he said? Francis Bellamy would not want "under God" in there. Why? He did not believe in the virgin birth. He did not believe in the resurrection. He did not believe in the ascension of Jesus Christ. He was a deist. He was an unbeliever. He thought that, yeah, there may be a God somewhere up there, but he's just kind of wound up the clock of the universe and let everything run down. There's no intervention of God. There's no miracles. There's no concern. Wow.
#66 | 54:15 to 54:42 | cleaned
Certainly no Christian and hopefully no Southerner would ever have any problem with acknowledging the sovereignty and the supremacy and the ultimacy of the one true and living God who has revealed himself in Jesus Christ. But the problem that you have with this statement, "I pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States of America and to the Republic for which it stands, one nation under God." Here's my question. Which God? Who's God? If we are indeed under God, the one true and living God, as a people, what does that mean?
#67 | 54:43 to 55:30 | cleaned
It means we're to obey His law, we're to keep His word, we're to honor His statutes. However, what we've done is we've become so accustomed to saying words, we do not even understand what they mean. And I've got news for you, every Muslim could repeat that phrase "under God" and there'd be no problem. A Hindu, there'd be no problem. If I'm going to acknowledge that I'm under God, I want everyone to know the God that I'm talking about is the God and Father of Jesus Christ, the only true and living God.
#68 | 55:30 to 56:13 | cleaned
Listen to what he says. Now listen, we're just analyzing the pledge. "I pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States of America, and to the Republic for which it stands, one nation under God, indivisible." Indivisible. One of my main contentions with the pledge is this word, indivisible. Because the word indivisible is a denial of history, of fact, and of plain truth. Listen to what Francis Bellamy said, here are his own words: "That phrase encompassed our struggle for independence and for indivisibility, which the Civil War was required to fully prove."
#69 | 56:15 to 56:58 | cleaned
Might does not make right. And the simple fact that the South lost the war of northern aggression does not change the truth, it does not change history, and it does not change facts. The truth is every state acceded to the Constitution, and every state reserved to itself and kept to itself the right to secede from the Constitution. You see, when George III made peace with the American colonies in 1783 at the Treaty of Paris, he did not make peace with just a United States government, no. Here's what it says, the opening words: "His Britannic Majesty acknowledges the said United States"—this, and then names the thirteen states—"to be free and independent states." George III made peace with thirteen independent sovereign states. The second article in the Articles of Confederation clearly state this: "Each state retains its sovereignty, freedom, and independence, and every power, jurisdiction, and right which is not by this Confederation expressly delegated to the United States." So when the Articles of Confederation was written, every state was free, sovereign, and independent. Virginia, when she acceded to the Constitution on June 25, 1788, said this: They said, "We're going to ratify the Constitution, but here's the reservation."
#70 | 57:02 to 58:33 | cleaned
Listen carefully: "The powers granted under the Constitution being derived from the people of the United States may be resumed by them, whensoever the same shall be perverted to their injury or oppression, that every power not granted thereby remains with them at their will." What did Virginia say? We're going to ratify the Constitution, but we want everybody to understand that when tyranny and oppression comes along, we have the absolute right to take back what we gave the federal government. By the way, it wasn't just Virginia, because New York, on July 26, 1788, when she ratified the Constitution, said this: "That the powers of government may be resumed by the people, whensoever it shall become necessary to their happiness." New York also said, we're going to take it back whenever we want it. Do you realize when the Constitution was being ratified, only 11 of the original 13 states ratified it? North Carolina and Rhode Island did not ratify the Constitution right away. In fact, it was over a year later before they ever ratified the Constitution.
#71 | 58:33 to 59:44 | cleaned
By the way, there was no war fought against Rhode Island and North Carolina to save the Union. And I want you to note something, what the majority of states did, did not affect the other states. We couldn't come along and say, well, 11 out of 13 voted for it, that means the other two have got to take it. No, no, no, no. Every state was free, sovereign, and independent. And when over a year later, both North Carolina and Rhode Island did ratify the Constitution, Rhode Island came out with this reservation. They said, "We, the delegates of the people of Rhode Island and Providence Plantations duly elected, do declare and make known that the powers of government may be resumed by the people whensoever it shall become necessary to their happiness." Now here are three states that dogmatically asserted the right to secede. Every state had that right, every state believed they had that right, or they would have never ratified the Constitution to begin with.
#72 | 59:45 to 1:00:45 | cleaned
Thus, when one says, "I pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States of America, to the republic for which it stands, one nation, under God, indivisible," you're pledging allegiance to a lie, because the plain fact of history is originally, it was divisible. If you have the right to accede, you also have the right to secede.
#73 | 1:00:49 to 1:01:15 | cleaned
Now, it's not my intention to deal today with the biblical doctrine of secession. I've done that before. But let me tell you something. You can say indivisible all you want to today. But the truth of the matter is our nation is divided in a multitude of ways today. Economically, politically, culturally, linguistically, ethnically, all kinds of ways. There is no way in the world that we have an indivisible nation today. It's not true historically and it's certainly not true practically.
#74 | 1:01:16 to 1:01:55 | cleaned
And then the pledge says "with liberty and justice for all." Now Bellamy's idea of liberty and justice for all is found in the 14th, 15th, and 16th Amendments of the Constitution, which were really, when he said, "with liberty and justice for all," he really wanted to use his French Revolution slogan, "liberty, equality, and fraternity," which he was unable to do so. But I've got news for you folks. If you depend on the 14th Amendment for your justice, excuse my English, but you ain't got any. Same thing with the 15th and same thing with the 16th.
#75 | 1:01:55 to 1:02:40 | cleaned
Francis Bellamy, as a Christian socialist, that's what he called himself, in conjunction with many other liberal thinkers and writers of his day, favored a socialistic centralized federal government as opposed to the traditional conservative Christianity and the local government concepts of the South. He, along with his cousins, and especially Edward Bellamy, became the heroes of John Dewey and others who advocated progressive revelation or progressive education, which in a hundred years has produced in our country a morally corrupt, anti-Christian, multicultural, secular public school system which now openly opposes Christianity, parents, and morality. That's a fact.
#76 | 1:02:41 to 1:03:32 | cleaned
And by the way, when you say "with liberty and justice for all," may I point out, there is no liberty and there is no justice apart from God and His law. What does the Bible say in 2 Corinthians 3 and verse 17?
#77 | 1:03:33 to 1:03:50 | cleaned
"Now the Lord is that Spirit: and where the Spirit of the Lord is, there is liberty." And what did our Lord say in John 8, verse 36? "If the Son therefore shall make you free, ye shall be free indeed." But without Him, there is no liberty, there is no freedom, there is no justice. You cannot have justice apart from God and His law. You want to know another thing wrong with our country? The judicial system.
#78 | 1:03:50 to 1:04:16 | cleaned
And let me tell you something, when you let murderers go, and rapists go, and kidnappers go, and when you do not execute those whom God demands to be put to death, let me tell you, God has it fixed up where either the murderer is put to death or society dies, one or the other. You cannot have justice apart from God and his law.
#79 | 1:04:17 to 1:04:41 | cleaned
Now, let me just make some very quick applications. The first one is this. Am I going to get mad with you because you recite the pledge? No, I'm not going to get mad at you. But I think this, I think if you're going to recite the pledge, you ought to know what you mean and you ought to know what Francis Bellamy meant. And you better determine what meaning you're going to give to those words and what concepts you're going to give to those words. You may exercise your liberty to say the pledge, or you may exercise your liberty not to say the pledge. But I'm going to tell you one thing. You flat better understand the aim and the intent of that pledge. And Francis Bellamy did not hide it.
#80 | 1:04:41 to 1:05:37 | cleaned
He said point blank he was going to elevate, he wanted to elevate the state, he wanted a socialistic fascist controlled government that dictated every area of our lives. Our founding fathers never ever envisioned the kind of republic that Francis Bellamy envisioned. Their definition of republic and his definition of republic are two totally different things. And may I point out, this was one of the issues of the War of Northern Aggression. The South had one interpretation of republic and one interpretation of the Constitution. And the North had a completely different interpretation of a republican constitution. Do you realize the problem that we're having today with a gargantuan government is the same problem? Because we have different ideas as to what a republic really, truly is. And certainly, I hope you can see that government can become a god.
#81 | 1:05:38 to 1:06:53 | cleaned
Not in truth and reality. But when you and I begin to ascribe to government power and authority over and above that and beyond that which the Word of God gives, that is indeed idolatry. And God said, "Thou shalt have no other gods before me." And when you look to government instead of God, you are an idolater, pure and simple. You know what our Lord said? And by the way, I hope you know that as Christians, our first, our full and our final allegiance must be to Jesus Christ. Our Lord said in Matthew 10, verse 37, "He that loveth father or mother more than me is not worthy of me: and he that loveth son or daughter more than me is not worthy of me." We may owe a duty to man and to government, but first and full and final allegiance is only owed to the one true, the living God. Ray Boltz wrote these words.
#82 | 1:06:54 to 1:07:58 | cleaned
Many of you have heard this song many times. "I Pledge Allegiance to the Lamb." Here are the words: "I have heard how Christians long ago were brought before a tyrant's throne, and they were told that he would spare their lives if they would renounce the name of Christ. But one by one they chose to die. The Son of God they would not deny, like a great angelic choir sings.
#83 | 1:07:59 to 1:08:28 | cleaned
I can almost hear their voices ring. I pledge allegiance to the Lamb with all my strength, with all I am. I will seek to honor His commands. I pledge allegiance to the Lamb."
#84 | 1:08:29 to 1:08:40 | cleaned
"Now the years have come and the years have gone, but the cause of Jesus still goes on. And now our time has come to count the cost, to reject this world, to embrace the cross, and one by one let us live our lives for the One who died to give us life. Till the trumpet sounds on the final day, let us proudly stand and boldly say, I pledge allegiance to the Lamb with all my strength, with all I am."
#85 | 1:08:41 to 1:09:08 | cleaned
"I will seek to honor His commands. I pledge allegiance to the Lamb, to the Lamb who bore my pain, who took my place, who wore my shame. I will seek to honor His commands. I pledge allegiance to the Lamb." If we give our allegiance to Christ, I can assure you we will not be wrong. If you have your duty to God down first, your duty to man will automatically fall in place. But if you put man first, you're going to be wrong.
#86 | 1:09:09 to 1:09:51 | cleaned
every which way you turn. We must remember, as Christians, our first, full, and final allegiance is to Jesus Christ. Why? He's God of gods and King of kings and Lord of lords, and as Scripture says, He only is worthy of all honor and all praise and all glory. Let's pray. Father, we ask today that you help us, give us understanding, quicken our minds. May we be able to think things through and to think them through biblically and scripturally. Give us grace, Lord, to serve Thee acceptably with reverence and godly fear and to put Thee first in every area of our lives. In the name of Jesus Christ, we ask and pray, Amen.
#87 | 1:09:52 to 1:10:50 | cleaned

deepseek | deepseek-v4-pro | clean_readable_transcript | 2026-06-06T02:51:19Z

The Pledge-History & Problems-2

John Weaver | Freedom Ministries

John Weaver continues his analysis of the Pledge of Allegiance, examining its wording phrase by phrase. He argues that the pledge, authored by socialist Francis Bellamy, binds the reciter to an express oath of allegiance to a centralized government rather than to the original constitutional republic. Weaver contends that key terms like 'republic,' 'nation,' and 'indivisible' have been redefined to support a statist agenda, and that the phrase 'under God' was added later against Bellamy's wishes. He emphasizes that a Christian's ultimate allegiance belongs to Jesus Christ alone.

Review of Previous Week

Scripture Reading — Exodus 20:1-3

"And God spake all these words, saying, I am the Lord thy God who hath brought thee up out of the land of Egypt, out of the house of bondage." "Thou shalt have no other gods before me."

Historical Context of Loyalty Oaths

Dr. Clyde Wilson notes that antebellum Americans had no loyalty oaths or pledges to the flag; they swore to uphold the Constitution. This contrasts with the secular imperial pledge.

Analysis of 'I Pledge'

A pledge is a binding promise or oath. Biblical examples (Genesis 38, 2 Corinthians 1:22, Ephesians 1:13-14) show a pledge as a guarantee, like the Holy Spirit as the earnest of our inheritance.

Analysis of 'Allegiance'

Allegiance to Country vs. Government

When government becomes tyrannical, allegiance is owed to country, not government. John Locke and Theodore Roosevelt affirmed that blind allegiance to a president is morally treasonous.

Analysis of 'the Flag'

Now, the word flag does not occur in our Bibles, but the words banner, standard, and ensign do. And a banner and a standard and an ensign is the same as a flag. Psalm 60 and verse 4 says to God,

Scripture Reading — Psalm 60:4

"Thou hast given a banner to them that fear thee, that it may be displayed because of thy truth."

Analysis of 'the Republic'

Bellamy's 'republic' differs from the founders' constitutional republic. A true republic derives power from the people and operates under law. The founders warned against democracy as mob rule.

Analysis of 'One Nation' and 'Under God'

Analysis of 'Indivisible'

The claim of indivisibility denies historical fact: states acceded to the Constitution with the reserved right to secede. Virginia, New York, and Rhode Island explicitly asserted this right.

Analysis of 'Liberty and Justice for All'

Bellamy's vision of liberty and justice was tied to the 14th, 15th, and 16th Amendments and his socialist ideals. True liberty and justice come only from God and His law.

Scripture Reading — 2 Corinthians 3:17

"Now the Lord is that Spirit: and where the Spirit of the Lord is, there is liberty."

Applications and Conclusion

The Pledge-History & Problems-2

John Weaver | SermonAudio

Lecture Metadata	Details
Speaker	John Weaver
Source	SermonAudio
Media ID	730611024
Subject	Old Testament Studies
Course	Genesis: Abraham, Covenant, and Promise
Genre	Sermon
Date	2006-04-16
Dictation Name
Book	Book 091: The Pledge-History & Problems — Chapter 2
Source Timed Segments	87

Lecture Guide

Outline

Review of Previous Week: Weaver recaps the introduction and first two points: the author Francis Bellamy was a socialist, Freemason, and ousted Baptist pastor; his aim was to elevate the state and use government schools to create a socialist utopia.
Historical Context of Loyalty Oaths: Dr. Clyde Wilson notes that antebellum Americans had no loyalty oaths or pledges to the flag; they swore to uphold the Constitution. This contrasts with the secular imperial pledge.
Analysis of 'I Pledge': A pledge is a binding promise or oath. Biblical examples (Genesis 38, 2 Corinthians 1:22, Ephesians 1:13-14) show a pledge as a guarantee, like the Holy Spirit as the earnest of our inheritance.
Analysis of 'Allegiance': Allegiance is an obligation of fidelity to a government. Express allegiance via an oath goes beyond natural allegiance. Southerners were forced to take oaths after the Civil War, making 'pledge' a deliberate word choice by Bellamy.
Allegiance to Country vs. Government: When government becomes tyrannical, allegiance is owed to country, not government. John Locke and Theodore Roosevelt affirmed that blind allegiance to a president is morally treasonous.
Analysis of 'the Flag': A flag is a symbol, but its meaning can change. Pastor Isaac Handy was imprisoned for saying the flag no longer represented the Constitution but rather oppression. George Washington said the flag represents liberty under God.
Analysis of 'the Republic': Bellamy's 'republic' differs from the founders' constitutional republic. A true republic derives power from the people and operates under law. The founders warned against democracy as mob rule.
Analysis of 'One Nation' and 'Under God': The definition of 'nation' has shifted to mean those under federal jurisdiction. 'Under God' was added in 1954; Bellamy's descendants and historian John Behr say Bellamy would have opposed it as a deist who denied core Christian doctrines.
Analysis of 'Indivisible': The claim of indivisibility denies historical fact: states acceded to the Constitution with the reserved right to secede. Virginia, New York, and Rhode Island explicitly asserted this right.
Analysis of 'Liberty and Justice for All': Bellamy's vision of liberty and justice was tied to the 14th, 15th, and 16th Amendments and his socialist ideals. True liberty and justice come only from God and His law.
Applications and Conclusion: Christians may recite the pledge if they understand its original intent, but must not let government become an idol. Our first, full, and final allegiance is to Jesus Christ, as expressed in the song 'I Pledge Allegiance to the Lamb.'

Major Themes

Key Arguments

Bellamy's Socialist Intent

Francis Bellamy wrote the pledge to promote a centralized, socialist government and used government schools as the means to achieve a statist utopia.

Weaver quotes Bellamy's speech advocating that 'the training of citizens... belongs irrevocably to the state' and his aim to elevate the state.

Pledge as Binding Oath

The word 'pledge' denotes a solemn, binding promise, akin to the biblical concept of an earnest or guarantee, making the reciter accountable to the government.

Weaver links 'pledge' to the Greek word for 'earnest' in 2 Corinthians 1:22 and Ephesians 1:14, showing it as a binding commitment.

Allegiance to Government vs. Country

Natural allegiance to one's country is distinct from express allegiance to a government; when government becomes tyrannical, allegiance to country supersedes.

Weaver cites John Locke's Second Treatise: when legislators seek to enslave the people, they are 'absolved from any further obedience.'

The Flag's Changed Meaning

The U.S. flag originally symbolized liberty under God and the Constitution, but now represents a centralized bureaucracy that oppresses rather than protects rights.

Weaver quotes George Washington on the flag's original meaning and Pastor Handy's statement that it now represents 'abolition, coercion, downtrodden constitution, oppression, tyranny.'

Republic vs. Democracy

The founders established a republic (rule of law, power from the people), not a democracy (mob rule); the shift to democracy has led to loss of rights.

Weaver quotes James Madison in Federalist No. 10 and the 1928 U.S. Army Training Manual, both warning that democracies are incompatible with personal security and property rights.

'Under God' Was Unwanted by Bellamy

The phrase 'under God' was added in 1954 against the wishes of Bellamy, who was a deist denying the virgin birth, resurrection, and ascension of Christ.

Weaver quotes John Behr and Bellamy's descendants stating Bellamy would have opposed the addition, as he did not believe in core Christian doctrines.

Indivisibility Is a Historical Lie

The claim that the nation is indivisible contradicts the historical fact that states entered the Union with the explicit right to secede.

Weaver reads the ratification reservations of Virginia, New York, and Rhode Island, all asserting the right to resume delegated powers.

No Liberty or Justice Apart from God

True liberty and justice are impossible without God and His law; the pledge's promise of 'liberty and justice for all' is empty without biblical foundation.

Weaver cites 2 Corinthians 3:17 ('where the Spirit of the Lord is, there is liberty') and argues that ignoring God's law leads to societal decay.

Scripture References

Exodus 20:1-3: Read at the opening as the foundational text against idolatry, applied to the danger of making government a god.
Genesis 38:13-23: Used to illustrate the biblical concept of a pledge as a binding promise or collateral, as Judah gave his signet and staff as a pledge.
2 Corinthians 1:22: Shows that the Holy Spirit is given as an 'earnest' (same Greek word as 'pledge'), a guarantee of our full redemption.
Ephesians 1:13-14: The Holy Spirit is the 'earnest' or pledge of our inheritance, demonstrating the binding nature of a pledge.
Psalm 60:4: God gives a banner (flag) to those who fear Him, to be displayed because of truth.
Isaiah 59:19: The Spirit of the Lord lifts up a standard (battle flag) against the enemy, illustrating the biblical purpose of a flag.
2 Corinthians 3:17: Where the Spirit of the Lord is, there is liberty; true freedom is found only in Christ.
John 8:36: If the Son makes you free, you are free indeed; liberty is a product of relationship with Christ.
Matthew 10:37: Loving family more than Christ makes one unworthy of Him; our ultimate allegiance must be to Jesus.

Historical References

Francis Bellamy: Author of the Pledge of Allegiance; a socialist, Freemason, and ousted Baptist pastor who advocated centralized government and government-run schools.
Dr. Clyde Wilson: Historian who noted that antebellum Americans had no loyalty oaths or pledges to the flag; they swore to uphold the Constitution.
Abraham Lincoln's Oath of Allegiance: Lincoln recommended an oath forcing Southerners to support all acts of Congress during the rebellion, including those passed without Southern representation.
Ironclad Oath: A post-Civil War oath that barred Southerners from office unless they swore they had never voluntarily aided the Confederacy; used to disenfranchise them.
John Locke, Second Treatise on Government: Argued that when legislators seek to enslave the people, they are absolved from obedience; cited to support resistance to tyranny.
Theodore Roosevelt (1918): Stated that standing by the president right or wrong is unpatriotic and morally treasonous; used to contrast modern blind allegiance.
Pastor Isaac Handy: Baptist pastor imprisoned for 15 months for saying the U.S. flag no longer represented the Constitution but rather oppression and tyranny.
George Washington on the Flag: Washington explained the flag's symbolism: stars from heaven, red from the mother country, white stripes representing separation and liberty.
James Madison, Federalist No. 10: Warned that democracies are incompatible with personal security and property rights; the founders gave us a republic, not a democracy.
U.S. Army Training Manual (1928): Described democracy as leading to mobocracy, communism, and anarchy; used to show the founders' distinction between republic and democracy.

Important Quotes

The true reason for allegiance to the flag is the republic for which it stands. And what does that vast thing, the republic, mean? It is the concise political word for the nation, the one nation that the Civil War was thought to prove.

Reveals Bellamy's view that the pledge was about the nation as proven by the Civil War, emphasizing indivisibility and centralized nationhood.

The training of citizens in the common knowledge and the common duties of citizenship belongs irrevocably to the state.

Demonstrates Bellamy's statist philosophy that education is a state function, not a parental or church prerogative.

I venerated that flag too, sir, when it represented the Constitution and proclaimed equal rights protecting alike the North and the South. But that, sir, is no longer the flag of the Union. It is not the old flag. The symbols are the same, but the principles have changed.

Pastor Handy's testimony that the flag's meaning had shifted from constitutional liberty to oppression, for which he was imprisoned.

We take the stars from heaven, the red from our mother country, separating it by white stripes, thus showing that we have separated from her. And the white stripes shall go down in prosperity, representing liberty.

George Washington's original interpretation of the flag as a symbol of liberty under God, contrasting with later statist meanings.

Hence, it is such that democracies have ever been spectacles of turbulence and contention, have ever been found incompatible with personal security or the rights of property.

James Madison's warning that democracy leads to loss of rights, underscoring the founders' intent for a republic.

Reverend Francis Bellamy, 1855 to 1931, probably would be happy with this decision. When Bellamy wrote the pledge in August 1892, he never considered placing the words 'under God' in his original version of the Pledge of Allegiance.

Historian John Behr confirms that Bellamy, a deist, would have opposed the addition of 'under God' to the pledge.

To announce that there must be no criticism of the President or that we're to stand by the President, right or wrong, is not only unpatriotic and servile, but is morally treasonous to the American public.

Theodore Roosevelt's statement that blind allegiance to a president is morally wrong, used to challenge modern patriotic assumptions.

I pledge allegiance to the Lamb with all my strength, with all I am. I will seek to honor His commands. I pledge allegiance to the Lamb.

The song's chorus, used to illustrate that a Christian's ultimate allegiance is to Jesus Christ, not to any flag or nation.

Discussion Questions

[Question]

What is the difference between natural allegiance and express allegiance, and why does this distinction matter when reciting the pledge?

[Context]

Weaver explains that express allegiance is a binding oath, while natural allegiance arises from birth and culture.

[Question]

How can a symbol like the flag retain the same appearance while its underlying principles change? Can you think of modern examples?

[Context]

Pastor Handy's imprisonment illustrates that the flag's meaning shifted from representing the Constitution to representing oppression.

[Question]

In what ways does the biblical concept of a 'pledge' as an earnest or guarantee inform how we should view making oaths to human institutions?

[Context]

Weaver connects the pledge to the Holy Spirit as the earnest of our inheritance, showing the seriousness of binding promises.

[Question]

Why did the founders prefer a republic over a democracy, and what are the practical differences we see today?

[Context]

James Madison and the 1928 Army Manual warn that democracies threaten property rights and lead to mob rule.

[Question]

If Francis Bellamy was a deist who denied core Christian doctrines, what does the addition of 'under God' to his pledge signify about American civil religion?

[Context]

Bellamy's descendants and historian John Behr state he would have opposed 'under God'; the phrase was added later for political reasons.

[Question]

How should Christians balance their allegiance to Christ with any duties they may owe to their country or government?

[Context]

Weaver concludes that first, full, and final allegiance belongs to Jesus, and that right duty to God orders all other duties.

[Question]

Is it historically accurate to call the United States 'indivisible'? What do the ratification statements of Virginia, New York, and Rhode Island imply?

[Context]

These states explicitly reserved the right to resume delegated powers, indicating they believed secession was lawful.

[Question]

What does it mean to make government an idol, and how might reciting the pledge contribute to that?

[Context]

Weaver applies Exodus 20:3, warning that looking to government for what only God can provide is idolatry.

Applications

Format deepseek deepseek-v4-pro structured study JSON | Source Commentary.net transcript enrichment

deepseek | deepseek-v4-pro | weaver_study | 2026-06-06T16:05:05Z