Exodus: Bondage, Deliverance, and Passover: The Superiority of Christ

In Honor Of Confederate Veterans And Prisoners

Transcript: AI Transcript

Professor: John Weaver

Subject: Old Testament Studies

Genre: Sermon

Dictation Name:

Date: 2013-10-31

Synopsis: John Weaver delivers a sermon honoring Confederate veterans and prisoners, using biblical memorials to argue that honoring ancestors recalls a body of truth. He contends that Confederate soldiers fought for a constitutional republic, states' rights, and biblical Christianity against Northern tyranny, humanism, and centralized despotism. The message calls for a return to the faith and principles of the founding and Confederate fathers.

[John Weaver] I want to bring a message today that I actually preached yesterday. Since we missed actually Confederate Memorial Day in April, I did preach at a Confederate Memorial yesterday at Point Lookout in Maryland. And then of course in light of July the 4th week that is upon us, I thought that this might be appropriate today And let me just point out, in the next several weeks, I'm going to be bringing several messages that I think that are very practical, very applicable, and I would encourage you

[John Weaver] to be faithful to the preaching and teaching of the Word of God. So the message that I brought yesterday was a message which I entitled in honor of Confederate veterans and prisoners, and I'll explain why in just a moment. We'll look in Exodus chapter 3, beginning there with verse 13. And Moses said unto God, Behold, when I come unto the children of Israel, and shall say to them, The God of your fathers hath sent me unto you, and they shall say to me, What is his name? What shall I say unto them? And God said unto Moses, I am that I am. And he said, Thus shalt thou say unto the children of Israel, I am hath sent me unto you. And God said moreover unto Moses, Thou shalt say unto the children of Israel, the Lord God of your fathers, the God of Abraham, the God of Isaac, and the God of Jacob, hath sent me unto you. This is my name forever, and this is my memorial unto all generations." Now, I want you to note, if you would, what God said concerning His name in verse 15.

[John Weaver] He says, this is my memorial unto all generations. Has it ever occurred to you that the name of God is a memorial? I'm going to explain that just momentarily. We should always remember His grace, His mercy, His power, and His person. And when we lean upon Him, and trust Him, and look unto Him, we do indeed honor Him.

[John Weaver] Now I want you to turn to Exodus chapter 12 and verse 14. Because here God says something concerning the Passover. Notice if you would, Exodus chapter 12 verse 14. When the children of Israel, of course, sacrificed the lamb and God delivered them from Egypt. Notice if you would what God says in verse 14 of Exodus chapter 12. And this day shall be unto you for a memorial.

[John Weaver] And you shall keep it a feast to the Lord throughout your generations. You shall keep it a feast by ordinance forever. So note if you would please, not only the name of God is memorial, but the Passover was a memorial. And if you turn right over to the book of Joshua chapter 4, and there are other passages I'm just skipping, but mainly these three will be sufficient to establish a truth. Look in Joshua chapter 4.

[John Weaver] You remember the children of Israel have walked across the Jordan River on dry land as well. And so in Joshua chapter 4 and verse 7, they erect some stones. Notice what is said. Then you shall answer them, that is, when the children ask you in the future what mean these stones. Then you shall answer them that the waters of Jordan were cut off before the ark of the covenant of the Lord when it passed over Jordan. The waters of Jordan were cut off, and these stones shall be for a memorial unto the children of Israel forever." Now notice if you would, there's three things that the Bible has already stated is to be a memorial. The name of God, the Passover, and these stones.

[John Weaver] Moreover, when you get to the New Testament, without turning there, I'll just quote it. Do you understand that the Lord's Supper is a memorial as well? For in 1 Corinthians 11 and verse 26, the Apostle Paul said this, For as often as you eat this bread and drink this cup, you do show the Lord's death till He comes.

[John Weaver] Now, I quoted all these scriptures to demonstrate two truths. Number one, that memorials are indeed biblical. God's name is a memorial. The Passover was a memorial. The stones were a memorial. The Lord's Supper is a memorial. But secondly, and more importantly, is this. A memorial functions to bring to your mind an entire body of truth. So if I tell you the name of God, I am that I am, Yahweh, is a memorial. When you hear the name of God, it should bring back to your mind a whole body of truth concerning the doctrine of God. If I mention the Lord's Supper, it should bring back to your mind a whole body of truth concerning the substitutionary and sacrificial work of the Lord Jesus Christ. So whenever we talk about a memorial, it is designed to bring back a whole body of truth. So, when we come to honor, whether it be our confederate ancestors or our revolutionary ancestors, whoever it is that we're honoring, it should bring back an entire body of truth.

[John Weaver] Now, if you're not familiar with Point Lookout, I would encourage you to do a little bit of studying because in the short time that Point Lookout was in existence, There were probably around 52,000 Confederates that were imprisoned there. The official record, the official record of those who died there, of course, is under 4,000 according to the Union records. But that does not count the people who entered at the dead house, which was without the gate, or any prisoner that died outside the gate. In fact, I just heard one man say that research is still ongoing, but it looks as if there may be as high as 20,000 to 30,000 Confederates who died just at point look out.

[John Weaver] By the way, if I were to take time, I'd preach another hour telling you about how those men were deliberately starved, how cold it gets, and the wind and ice and snow. They'd give one blanket to three men. A few had tents, a few did not have tents. They were there in the swampy saltwater marshes where diseases were rampant. And the black Union soldiers, anytime a black Confederate happened to walk in, they would immediately shoot him dead. And the Union guards would fire indiscriminately into the tents and into the huts of the Confederate soldiers just trying to hit someone.

[John Weaver] It's unbelievable what these people went through and you have to stop and ask yourself a question or two like this. Why were those men fighting? Why were they willing to die on the battlefield? Why were they willing to die in prison? And why were they willing to suffer such torture and then live through all of that? Why were some of these people deliberately murdered? What was the reason for all of this suffering and death? You have to come to this question. What were they fighting and dying for?

[John Weaver] Now, let me just mention, there are two things that really irritate the living daylights out of me when I begin to talk about history, and especially southern history. I usually say it like this, there are two things that really frost my cake, and the first one is simply this, you lost the war, get over it. Let me tell you something, folks, if just losing the war was the only thing I could get over that very quickly. I could get over losing a fight. That's no problem. If Ed and I got into a fight and Ed beat me up, fine. I could get over that. But you can't get over tyranny and despotism and totalitarianism. You can't get over the loss of family and friends. You can't get over the loss of life and liberty and freedom. You can't get over this thing any more than you can get over being southern or being a Christian or being biblical. The second thing that really causes me to come up in a fury and an uproar It's when someone tries to say, well, you fought for a lost cause.

[John Weaver] Let me just put it to you very bluntly. The causes of truth, righteousness, freedom, and principle are never lost causes. Might does not make right. And just because Ed might can beat me in the ground does not mean that he is right in doing that. Jefferson Davis said it like this, the principle for which we contend is bound to reassert itself though it be at another time and in another form.

[John Weaver] And let me offer something for your consideration. When you look around and see the problems that we now have, the problems that we have had, the problems that we are now going through, all of the struggles that you and I are having politically, economically, morally, educationally, and theologically, I want to submit something for your consideration, and that is simply this, that these are the same principles for which our confederate ancestors fought, and since those principles were never ever settled, we're still having those same battles today. We're still fighting for a limited government. We're still fighting for states' rights. We're still fighting for liberty and freedom.

[John Weaver] Another observation which I think that you should know is this. I believe sincerely that our Confederate ancestors were fighting for the very same principles for which our founding fathers fought liberty and freedom. So let me just try to answer a question for you today. And certainly this is not going to be an exhausted answer because I believe the answers are inexhaustible in one sense of the word. But why in the world were our ancestors willing to fight and die? What did they really and truly fight for? Let me answer that like this. First of all, our confederate ancestors were fighting for a constitutional republic and not for a bureaucratic democracy or an American empire. When you stop and think about the fact that after the Constitutional Convention met, one asked Benjamin Franklin what kind of government do we have and his answer was a republic if you could keep it. Now let me just mention something to you.

[John Weaver] The fourth section of the fourth article of the Constitution of the United States says this, listen carefully, the United States shall guarantee to every state in the Union a Republican form of government. So the federal government is to guarantee every state in the Union a Republican form of government. The form of government that is guaranteed is one that was supposedly already in existence and one that was already established And this is a republican form of government that our founding fathers established and therefore they said the federal government is obligated and duty-bound to guarantee to every state a republican form of government. Now, what is a republican form of government? Well, a republican form of government is a system of government in which the people hold sovereign power.

[John Weaver] It's contrasted to a democracy. It's contrasted to a monarchy. So the first element in a republican form of government is that the power is derived from the people. The second element is a republic is always one that is ruled by law. So in a republic, the people are the masters and the government is the servant. The people are the Lords and the government is the slave. So the Constitution basically when it was written was a grant from we the people to form a limited government. The government that was authorized by the Constitution was to be a limited one deriving its just powers from the people and the states thereof. So the Constitution then was to be a grant of power from the people for the government to do certain limited things. It was the law of the people for the control of the government.

[John Weaver] Can you imagine what our founding fathers would do? If they heard a politician like Nancy Pelosi say, we have to pass this law so we can see what's in it. Can you imagine what our founding fathers would do if they heard someone like Alcee Hastings from Florida, a congressman, say, we make up the rules as we go along. There are no rules. You know what General Lee said? Just to show you that they were indeed fighting for a Constitutional Republic, General Lee said this, if the Constitution and the Union established by our forefathers were restored, then there would be no truer supporters of that Union and that Constitution than the Southern people. Every brave people who considered their rights attacked and their constitutional liberties invaded, would have done as we did. Our conduct was not caused by any insurrectionary spirit, neither can it be termed rebellion, for our construction of the Constitution, under which we lived and acted, was the same from its adoption, and for eighty years we have been taught and educated by the founders of the Republic and their written declarations which controlled

[John Weaver] our consciences and our actions." What did Elyse say? We're not insurrectionaries. We're not rebels. We're fighting for what we understood our founding fathers gave us. Again, Robert E. Lee said, this all that the South ever desired was the union as established by our forefathers should be preserved and that the government as originally organized should be administered in purity and in truth. Couldn't be any plainer. Again, Lee said this, the South has contended only for the supremacy of the Constitution and the just administration of the laws made in pursuance of it. They were not fighting to establish an empire. They were not fighting to establish some huge bureaucratic democracy somewhere.

[John Weaver] Alexander Hamilton Stevens, who was vice president of the Confederacy, said this concerning secession. He said, the real object of those who resorted to secession, as well as those who sustained it, was not the overthrow of the government of the United States, but to perpetuate the principles upon which it was founded. The object in quitting the union was not to destroy, but to save the principles of the Constitution.

[John Weaver] Now, let me just tell you something, folks, very plainly. In case you have not picked up on this, here it is, stated very bluntly, like it or lump it, Abraham Lincoln destroyed our Constitutional Republic. He changed the nature of the government from a republic to an empire. I want to read you just several paragraphs written by Joseph E. Fallon. He wrote this article on Lincoln and the death of the old republic.

[John Weaver] And listen to what he said. Official history venerates Abraham Lincoln as an apostle of American democracy who waged war on the South to preserve the Union and to free the slaves. Official history is a lie. Lincoln was a dictator who destroyed the old republic and replaced the federal principles of 1789 with the ideological foundation of today's welfare warfare state. His administration was characterized by paranoia, a lust for power, and rampant corruption. The magnitude of that paranoia was evidenced by Lincoln's Secretary of War, Edwin Santon, who declared that every department of the government was paralyzed by treason. Traitors were to be found in the Senate, in the House of Representatives, in the Cabinet, in the Federal Courts, Treason was flagrant in the revenue in the post office services as well as in the territorial governments and in the judicial reserves. In his bid for absolute power, Lincoln used treason as a pretext to unleash war and to shred the Constitution.

[John Weaver] Freedom of the press was curtailed. The Chicago Times was one of over 300 northern newspapers suppressed for expressing incorrect views. As late as May 18, 1864, Lincoln ordered his military to arrest and imprison the editors, proprietors, and publishers of the New York World and the New York Journal of Commerce. Lincoln suspended habeas corpus. He criminalized speech and legalized arbitrary arrests. 20,000, some say as high as 40, 20,000 political prisoners were held incommunicado and denied legal counsel. Maryland's legislature was overthrown and New York City was placed under military occupation.

[John Weaver] Now let me just pause right here just a moment. Alice and I took a few minutes while we were up at Point Lookout and we rode on into the Point Lookout State Park. And this is where a lot of these men at Point Lookout died. There's a mass grave there where they're just pushed into it and covered up. But we were looking at a couple of the historical remarkables and I do not remember all of this historical remarker but I read and I could not believe what I was reading that it was printed in bold letters there for anyone to see and it was just talking about how Marylanders were divided

[John Weaver] because of the war etc and it talked about the African-Americans somehow whatever but then it went on to say that private citizens were arrested without warrant to protect freedom. What? How can you protect freedom by destroying freedom? But there it was on historical marker. And here Fallon says 20,000, and as I pointed out, some say as high as 40,000, were arrested without warrant. These are northern people, not southern people. One more quote, one more short paragraph from Fallon. He said in his December 1861 lectures in Boston and New York City, Northern abolitionist Wendell Phillips declared that we live today, every one of us, under martial law. The Secretary of State puts into his Bastille, with a warrant as irresponsible as that of Louis XIV, any man whom he pleases.

[John Weaver] You think it was bad under Lincoln? It was. But as it was then, so it is today. Do you realize the Patriot Act, the National Defense Authorization Act, and every conceivable piece of legislation that has passed since then that destroys life and liberty and property and freedom is a gift to us from Abraham Lincoln? Because he's the one that set up this welfare warfare state and everything that we have today follows in his footsteps. Our ancestors fought and suffered and died to prevent exactly that which is happening in Washington DC today. They fought and died to prevent that which is happening in our state capitals today.

[John Weaver] You need to ponder sometimes how different our world would be if the South had won the war. Why were they fighting? They were not fighting for this bureaucratic democracy that we have today. They were not fighting for an American empire. They wanted to preserve that which the founding fathers had given to us. The second reason I believe that they fought is simply this. They were fighting for states' rights or states' sovereignty and not for a centralized, consolidated government. Now, if you don't understand states' rights, let me take you through this very quickly and very easily. To understand states' rights, you have to go back to the beginning. For instance, in 1781, the second article in the Articles of Confederation 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 and Congress assembled." So the Articles of Confederation state very clearly that each state retained its sovereignty, freedom, and independence. You remember when the war for independence was over, the Treaty of Paris settled it or ended it in 1783.

[John Weaver] And I want you to listen to the first article of the Treaty of Paris. I'm not going to read all of it, just enough to give you this idea. But here it is. His Britannic Majesty acknowledges the said United States, in other words, New Hampshire, Massachusetts, Bay, Rhode Island, Providence, Plantations, Connecticut, New York, New Jersey, Pennsylvania, Delaware, Maryland, Virginia, North Carolina, South Carolina, and Georgia, to be free, sovereign, and independent states.

[John Weaver] And he treats them as such. And I'm stopping right there. But I want you to understand, when Georgia III entered into this treaty, he did not enter this treaty with a consolidated centralized government just known as the United States. He entered into this treaty with 13 sovereign states. They were independent states. He had to make peace with 13 different states. When the Constitutional Convention met, Georgia, the Georgia delegation carried a banner which said this, the state of Georgia, by the grace of God, free, sovereign, and independent. When the Constitution was written, the states, by a common agreement, united to form what is known as the federal government and to give it limited power and authority. Now I want you to understand something. The federal government did not create the states. the states created the federal government and it was to be federal and not national. So the federal government then that was created and authorized by the states was only to act as an agent of the states because the states were the real sovereigns and the federal government could only do that which the states delegated it to do.

[John Weaver] And the right to decide whether or not the federal government did anything that was beyond its power or limitation was reserved to the states. If you allowed the federal government to determine its own power and authority, then you're going to have unlimited and tyrannical powers. Let me point this out. Do you realize even New York, when New York acceded to the Constitution on July the 26th, 1788, it added these words. Listen carefully. that the powers of government may be reassumed by the people when service shall become necessary to their happiness." What did New York say? We gave delegated power and authority to the federal government and we can also take it back whenever we like. Do you realize when Virginia acceded to the Constitution on June the 25th, 1788, it added these words, the powers granted under the Constitution being derived from both people of the United States may be resumed by them whensoever the same shall be perverted to their injury or oppression and that every power not granted

[John Weaver] thereby remains with them at their will." Now, if you really want to understand the independence and sovereignty of each state, I want you to consider the fact that when the Constitution was ratified in 1787, only 11 of the original 13 states ratified it. Do you realize there were two states that did not ratify it right away? Rhode Island and North Carolina. In fact, they did not even ratify it till nearly a year later. The Constitution was not forced upon them. The 11 states did not look at North Carolina And Rhode Island say, well, majority rules, you're in whether you like it or not. No. You know how the 11 states who ratified the Constitution treated Rhode Island and North Carolina? They treated them as independent sovereign states. Neither was there a war mounted to coerce North Carolina and Rhode Island to ratify the Constitution. Not at all. Because they were free and independent states.

[John Weaver] They could come in or they could not come in. It was totally up to the states. When Rhode Island finally did accede to the Constitution, Rhode Island did so with this provision. Listen carefully. 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." Do you realize that every state that acceded to the Constitution understood that since they gave the power, they could take it back? Secession was understood by every state.

[John Weaver] I hope you know that it was Thomas Jefferson and James Madison who wrote the Virginia and the Kentucky resolutions. And in those resolutions they were saying that each state had acceded to the Constitution and each state could secede basically. and that each state had the right and the power to nullify, that is to abrogate any law that came down the pike from the federal government that they deemed unconstitutional. Let me just read to you the first paragraph of the Kentucky Resolution. Listen carefully. Resolved that the several states composing the United States of America are not united on the principle of unlimited submission to the general government. But that by a compact, under the style and title of the Constitution of the United States and of its amendments thereto, they constituted a general government for special purposes. delegated to that government certain definite powers, reserving each state to itself the residuary mass of right to their own self-government, and that whensoever the general government assumes undelegated powers, its acts are unauthoritative, void, and of no force.

[John Weaver] That to this compact, each state is seated as a state and is an integral party. It's co-states forming as to itself the other party. Each party has an equal right to judge for itself as well of infractions as of the mode and measure of redress. So what did Thomas Jefferson and James Madison say? The states are not going to give unlimited submission to the federal government.

[John Weaver] They understood that it was delegated power. and power that could be taken back. And each state reserved the right to nullify or abrogate anything that was unconstitutional. By the way, South Carolina did exactly that. You remember when they nullified the tariffs of 1828 and 1832 known as the tariffs of abomination. And what South Carolina did then when the federal government tried to impose these high taxes and high tariffs They nullified them.

[John Weaver] In fact, they passed a nullifying ordinance. Listen carefully. Here's the second paragraph of the ordinance of nullification. We therefore, the people of the state of South Carolina and convention assembled, do declare and ordain that these acts are unauthorized by the Constitution of the United States, and violate the true meaning and intent thereof, and are null, void, and no law nor binding upon this State, its officers, or citizens, and all promises, contracts, and obligations made or entered into, or to be made or entered into, with purpose to secure the duties imposed by the set Acts, and all judicial proceedings which shall be hereafter had an affirmation thereof, are and shall be held utterly null and void." What did they say?

[John Weaver] We're not going to pay these taxes. We're not going to allow these tariffs. Everything is null and void. We're not going to recognize it. Here's the concluding paragraph. Listen. And we the people of South Carolina to the end that it may be fully understood by the government of the United States and the people of the co-states that we're determined to maintain this Our ordinance and declaration at every hazard do further declare that we will not submit to the application of force on the part of the federal government to reduce this state to obedience, but that we will consider the passage by Congress of any act to coerce this state, shut up her ports, destroy or harass her commerce, or to enforce the acts hereby declared to be null and void."

[John Weaver] And then they go on to say, if you push us, we'll just withdraw from the union. and set up our own government.

[John Weaver] Now let me ask you a question. Was South Carolina wrong? And the answer is no. South Carolina did not misinterpret the Compact. In fact, James Madison, who's known as the father of the Constitution, said this, the powers developed by the proposed Constitution of the federal government are few and defined. Those which are to remain in the state governments are numerous and indefinite. The former will be exercised principally on external objects as war, peace, negotiation, and foreign commerce, with which last the power of taxation will for the most part be connected. The powers reserved to the several states will extend to all objects in which in the ordinary course of affairs concern the lives, liberty, and properties of the people and the internal order improving the prosperity of the state." What did he say? He said, the federal government has such a limited area that's going to affect the lives of the people. Why? It's going to be nothing but war and peace and negotiation with foreign commerce. But the state has all the rest of it.

[John Weaver] That's why we have the 9th and 10th Amendments, especially the 10th that says the power is not delegated to the United States by the Constitution. nor prohibited by the states, or reserved to the states thereof, or to the people." By the way, Jefferson Davis made this same argument when he was in the Senate talking about the equality of the states. However, James Henley Thornwell, and I will mention him again later, James Henley Thornwell was a Presbyterian pastor, author, and theologian.

[John Weaver] He saw the war for what it really and truly was. Here's what he said, if they, talking about the federal government and the north, if they prevail, the whole character of the government will be changed. And instead of a federal public, instead of a federal republic, the common agent of sovereign and independent states, we shall have a central despotism with the notion of states forever abolished, deriving its power from the will and shaping its policy according to the wishes of a numerical majority of the people, we shall

[John Weaver] have, in other words, a supreme, irresponsible democracy. The avowed end of this present war is to make the government a government of force." And he was right. And that's exactly what we have today, not just in this country, but in every country where our government puts its hands, it is a government of force. You know Alexis de Tocqueville was a Frenchman and many of those European countries recognized what the Constitution was about originally and even de Tocqueville said state sovereignty was so ingrained in Southern men that when the South seceded she wrote her own Constitution. And certainly we did, the Confederate Constitution.

[John Weaver] Now, I want to read to you two quotes, and I want you to understand the attitude of the founding fathers. The first one is by Thomas Jefferson, and he said it like this, I consider the foundation of the Constitution is laid on this ground, that all powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution nor prohibited by it to the states are reserved to the states or to the people. To take a single step beyond the boundaries thus specifically drawn around the powers of Congress is to take possession of a boundless field of power no longer susceptible to any definition. Now Thomas Jefferson said when the federal government steps beyond the Constitution It has taken possession of a boundless field of power, no longer susceptible to definition.

[John Weaver] To define is to limit. If you didn't understand that, let me give you one you will understand. John C. Calhoun, known as the Ironclad Southerner, said it just a little more plainly. He said, the Constitution has admitted the jurisdiction of the United States within the limits of the several states only so far as the delegated powers authorize. Beyond that, they are intruders and may be lawfully expelled." Wow. Wow.

[John Weaver] What if the state of Georgia first went to the courts? And then second, went to arms to expel the federal government in the areas that the federal government has absolutely no right to be in this state. What if every state did that? Again, Robert E. Lee said, you remember, that they fought not from any insurrectionary spirit nor any rebellious attitude, but to preserve liberty and freedom. Once again, Alexander Hamilton Stephen said it like this, depend upon it.

[John Weaver] There is no difference between consolidation and empire. No difference between centralism and imperialism. The consummation of either must necessarily end in the overthrow of liberty and the establishment of despotism. And that's exactly what we have. Alexander Hamilton in 1788 said, if the federal government should overpass the just bounds of its authority and make a tyrannical use of its power, the people whose creature it is must appeal to the standard that they have formed and take such measures to redress the injury done. Stop and think. That is exactly what happened in 1793 in my favorite court case Chisholm versus Georgia.

[John Weaver] Some of you are very familiar with that. But in Chisholm versus Georgia, there's a man in South Carolina who went to the Supreme Court to sue the state of Georgia. And the Supreme Court of the United States sent to Georgia and said, come up here, boy. There's a case here against you. And the state of Georgia said this in essence, kiss my foot. We're the master. You're the servant.

[John Weaver] You don't order us around. We're not coming up to the Supreme Court. And so, the justice of the Supreme Court said to Georgia, well, if you don't come, we'll have this case without you and we will rule without you. And then the Georgia House of Representatives passed a bill making it a felony punishable by hanging for any person to carry out the decision of the Supreme Court. So the state of Georgia said, you make all the decisions you want to. When you send your man here in the state of Georgia to enforce your decision, he will immediately be hanged without the benefit of clergy.

[John Weaver] And that led then to the passage of the 11th Amendment, which corrected that problem. Georgia said, you're not going to do this to us. We're not going to have this. Can you imagine what it would be like if each state said boldly to the federal government, no, you've gone beyond your bounds. You're not going to do this. You're not going to tyrannize our people. We're here in an interpositionary step We're standing between our people in tyranny.

[John Weaver] You will not do this. And we will not allow it to be done. Our ancestors fought and were killed and were starved and were imprisoned and tortured for believing in states' rights and states' sovereignty. Because our ancestors fought for a limited government and for liberty and freedom and independence. Let me give you a third one very quickly. They also fought for biblical Christianity and not for a humanistic, rationalistic religion.

[John Weaver] Now, I understand that not everyone in the South was a Christian. I understand that. However, you know that there were two great revivals in the Confederate armies. and a minimum of 150,000 men were converted. There were also revivals in the churches at that particular time. But the point I'm trying to make is this. There are theological implications to that war. You have to remember that ideas have consequences. It is impossible to have a cultural revolution without having a theological revolution. You cannot have a change in culture without having a change in theology.

[John Weaver] I was just reminded very definitely this past week of the difference between when I was a boy and today. Because I remember when I was a boy, if I wanted to see a policeman, I had to go uptown and I had to look around. And it took me a while to find one. driving through North Carolina, Virginia, and Maryland. Lord have mercy. Speed traps everywhere, cops behind every bush. I mean, and it wasn't just one every now and then. We'd see four and five at one time, most of them in unmarked cars, having someone pulled over.

[John Weaver] I could not wait to get out of those states. Why, in the 1950s, Could I hardly find a policeman? And today you can't turn around without seeing five or six of them. Have you thought about that? Why in the 1950's you could hardly find a policeman and today you see five or six on every corner? Why? Back in the 1950's, most people still believed in the Ten Commandments. They still believed in morality and doing what was right and living what was right. Today, nobody believes anything or cares about anything.

[John Weaver] And if you're not going to have self-government, you're going to always have someone with a strong arm willing to govern you. Generally speaking, let me put it like this, it was the North that turned from biblical Christianity to rationalism, humanism, and transcendentalism. I know that not everybody in the North was an atheist and an infidel. I understand that. But generally speaking, that was the truth. The Bible belt was given to the South as a name for derision because the South held tenaciously to the Bible.

[John Weaver] In other words, we were not as educated as those smart, humanistic, rationalistic northerners. And so they made fun of us by saying, well, that's the Bible belt. Just to show you how the theological implications were so clearly evident in those days, James Henley Thornwell, who died in 1862, said this, the parties in this conflict are not merely abolitionists and slaveholders. He says, don't think of it like that. He says, they are atheists, socialists, communists, red republicans, jocumans on the one side, that's the north, and friends of order and regulated freedom on the other. In one word, the world is the battleground, Christianity and atheism, the combatants and the progress of humanity is at stake. It was a theological war. C.

[John Weaver] Greg Singer, in his book, A Theological Interpretation of American History, said this, After 1830, there was a growing philosophical and theological cleavage between the North and the South. While the North was becoming increasingly subject to radical influences, the South was becoming increasingly conservative in its outlook. So as the North was going one way, the South was saying, no, we're holding on to the Scripture. And me, Bradford, in The Southern Partisan in 1991, wrote this, as the war approached, These clergymen more and more tended to view the sectional controversy as a dispute between those who acknowledge the authority of Scripture and those who set their own moral sense above it.

[John Weaver] In other words, between Christians and infidels. Once you understand that one's theology determines one's worldview, then you must understand how the Northen was seeking to impose its culture upon the South. Are you listening to me? Since the North had changed its theology, it had changed basically its culture. Thinking itself to be superior now, it wants to change the culture of the South. And in order to change the culture of the South, it has to change the theology of the South. Do you understand this is what reconstruction was all about? Think about the word. Reconstruction. Richard Taylor has a book entitled Deconstruction and Reconstruction. General Richard Taylor, a confederate soldier who is the son of President Zachary Taylor.

[John Weaver] What were they trying to do? Reconstruct us in their theology and reconstruct us in their way of thinking. Listen folks, you can't act like a northerner unless you believe like a northerner. You can't! One of the reasons so many Southern pastors fought in the war was simply because they believed they were defending the faith against humanism and rationalism. And let me just show you how the North understood this as well. Not just Southern men.

[John Weaver] I suppose that two of my favorite quotes are these. One Yankee critic said this, that he believed the most unmitigated set of villains they have in the South are the Methodist, Baptist, Presbyterians, and Episcopalian preachers, all talking secession, drinking mean liquor, and advocating the cause of Jeff Davis and the devil. Well, I suppose probably there could be no greater compliment, though, that was given Southern soldiers than the one that was given by a Yankee chaplain. The Yankee chaplain was talking to his regiment and he was trying to instill upon the Yankee men the zeal and the enthusiasm and the courage that was being expressed by Southern men in fighting.

[John Weaver] And here's what he said. You may call this fanaticism, enthusiasm, or whatever you will. But remember, you're fighting an enemy that comes from the closet to the battlefield, that comes from its knees in prayer to engage in deadly strife, that comes in the belief that its battles are the battles of Jehovah, that His smile is resting upon its banner and will ensure success. What power to make every man a hero and every hero, if need be, a murderer. What did he say? The southern men were fighting for a religious cause and that religion was biblical Christianity.

[John Weaver] You know what the problem we have today in most of our patriotic organizations and in most of our historical organizations? Here's the problem. Unhappily, a lot of the good and well-intentioned people are just as lost as a hound dog and know nothing of the grace of God. What am I saying that? Here's why I'm saying that, folks. If we want our history and our heritage and our country back. We have to come back and stand on the same foundation that our founding fathers and our confederate ancestors stood upon. And that foundation is the Word of God.

[John Weaver] And in order to be a genuine Christian, one must indeed repent of his sins and believe savingly upon the Lord Jesus Christ. And you will confess Him and acknowledge Him and bring your life in conformity to His Word. We want our country back. But we will never get it back until we come back to the Sovereign God who gave us this country. Well, you've got to remember, God can kick any people out of His country. This is His earth. This is His land. And if we don't give God the honor and glory that's due in His name, if we do not pay our land rent, so to speak, He can kick us off and do so justly and righteously. If we want what our forefathers had, we need to come back to the Lord Jesus Christ. We need to come back in repentance and faith. We need to come back and say, I want what Robert E. Lee had. I want what Stonewall Jackson had. I want what Richard Ewell had. I want what Jeb Stuart had.

[John Weaver] I want what our Founding Fathers had. I want the courage and the character that comes from being a Christian. I just wonder, if our Founding Fathers were alive today, If our confederate fathers were alive today, how long would they put up with what we're putting up with?

[John Weaver] May God give us men. Godly men. Christian men. Courageous men. Southern men. With character. and courage, and grace. Father, in the name of Jesus Christ, we bow to Thee, and we ask, Father, Your blessing and Your help, and we pray that You'll speak to our hearts and make us, Father, what we should be. Help us be thankful, Father, for what our founding fathers and our confederate fathers have given unto us. And help us to see how we've wasted it and thrown it away, despised it, disregarded it, dishonored it. Give us, Lord, what we need to stand for Thee and to live for Thee. In the name of Jesus Christ, we ask and pray. Amen.

In Honor Of Confederate Veterans And Prisoners

John Weaver | YouTube

Lecture Metadata	Details
Speaker	John Weaver
Source	YouTube
Media ID	nlQgCvGdiRk
Subject	Old Testament Studies
Course	Exodus: Bondage, Deliverance, and Passover: The Superiority of Christ
Genre	Sermon
Date	2013-10-31
Dictation Name
Book	Book 079: Exodus: Bondage, Deliverance, and Passover - Volume 2 — Chapter 23
Source Timed Segments	64

Formatted Transcript

Introduction: A Message for Confederate Memorial Day

Weaver introduces his sermon, originally preached at Point Lookout, Maryland, for Confederate Memorial Day, and notes its relevance to the July 4th week.

I want to bring a message today that I actually preached yesterday. Since we missed actually Confederate Memorial Day in April, I did preach at a Confederate Memorial yesterday at Point Lookout in Maryland. And then of course in light of July the 4th week that is upon us, I thought that this might be appropriate today. And let me just point out, in the next several weeks, I'm going to be bringing several messages that I think that are very practical, very applicable, and I would encourage you to be faithful to the preaching and teaching of the Word of God. So the message that I brought yesterday was a message which I entitled "In Honor of Confederate Veterans and Prisoners," and I'll explain why in just a moment. We'll look in Exodus chapter 3, beginning there with verse 13.

Scripture Reading — Exodus 3:13-15

"And Moses said unto God, Behold, when I come unto the children of Israel, and shall say to them, The God of your fathers hath sent me unto you; and they shall say to me, What is his name? what shall I say unto them? And God said unto Moses, I AM THAT I AM: and he said, Thus shalt thou say unto the children of Israel, I AM hath sent me unto you. And God said moreover unto Moses, Thus shalt thou say unto the children of Israel, The LORD God of your fathers, the God of Abraham, the God of Isaac, and the God of Jacob, hath sent me unto you: this is my name for ever, and this is my memorial unto all generations."

Now, I want you to note, if you would, what God said concerning His name in verse 15.

Biblical Basis for Memorials

Weaver cites Exodus 3:13-15, Exodus 12:14, and Joshua 4:7 to show that God's name, the Passover, and stones are memorials, establishing that memorials are biblical and recall a body of truth.

Scripture Reading — Exodus 3:13-15

"And Moses said unto God, Behold, when I come unto the children of Israel, and shall say to them, The God of your fathers hath sent me unto you; and they shall say to me, What is his name? what shall I say unto them? And God said unto Moses, I AM THAT I AM: and he said, Thus shalt thou say unto the children of Israel, I AM hath sent me unto you. And God said moreover unto Moses, Thus shalt thou say unto the children of Israel, The LORD God of your fathers, the God of Abraham, the God of Isaac, and the God of Jacob, hath sent me unto you: this is my name for ever, and this is my memorial unto all generations."

Now, I want you to note, if you would, what God said concerning His name in verse 15.

He says, "this is my memorial unto all generations." Has it ever occurred to you that the name of God is a memorial? I'm going to explain that just momentarily. We should always remember His grace, His mercy, His power, and His person. And when we lean upon Him, and trust Him, and look unto Him, we do indeed honor Him.

Now I want you to turn to Exodus chapter 12 and verse 14. Because here God says something concerning the Passover. Notice if you would, Exodus chapter 12 verse 14. When the children of Israel, of course, sacrificed the lamb and God delivered them from Egypt. Notice if you would what God says in verse 14 of Exodus chapter 12.

Scripture Reading — Exodus 12:14

"And this day shall be unto you for a memorial." "And you shall keep it a feast to the LORD throughout your generations; you shall keep it a feast by an ordinance for ever."

So note if you would please, not only the name of God is a memorial, but the Passover was a memorial. And if you turn right over to the book of Joshua chapter 4, and there are other passages I'm just skipping, but mainly these three will be sufficient to establish a truth. Look in Joshua chapter 4.

You remember the children of Israel have walked across the Jordan River on dry land as well. And so in Joshua chapter 4 and verse 7, they erect some stones. Notice what is said. "Then you shall answer them," that is, when the children ask you in the future what mean these stones.

Scripture Reading — Joshua 4:7

"Then you shall answer them that the waters of Jordan were cut off before the ark of the covenant of the LORD; when it passed over Jordan, the waters of Jordan were cut off: and these stones shall be for a memorial unto the children of Israel for ever."

Now notice if you would, there's three things that the Bible has already stated is to be a memorial. The name of God, the Passover, and these stones. Moreover, when you get to the New Testament, without turning there, I'll just quote it. Do you understand that the Lord's Supper is a memorial as well? For in 1 Corinthians 11 and verse 26, the Apostle Paul said this, "For as often as you eat this bread and drink this cup, you do show the Lord's death till He comes."

Now, I quoted all these scriptures to demonstrate two truths. Number one, that memorials are indeed biblical. God's name is a memorial. The Passover was a memorial. The stones were a memorial. The Lord's Supper is a memorial. But secondly, and more importantly, is this. A memorial functions to bring to your mind an entire body of truth. So if I tell you the name of God, "I AM THAT I AM," Yahweh, is a memorial. When you hear the name of God, it should bring back to your mind a whole body of truth concerning the doctrine of God. If I mention the Lord's Supper, it should bring back to your mind a whole body of truth concerning the substitutionary and sacrificial work of the Lord Jesus Christ. So whenever we talk about a memorial, it is designed to bring back a whole body of truth. So, when we come to honor, whether it be our Confederate ancestors or our Revolutionary ancestors, whoever it is that we're honoring, it should bring back an entire body of truth.

The Suffering at Point Lookout

Weaver describes the harsh conditions and deliberate mistreatment of Confederate prisoners at Point Lookout, emphasizing starvation, exposure, and murder by Union guards.

Now, if you're not familiar with Point Lookout, I would encourage you to do a little bit of studying because in the short time that Point Lookout was in existence, there were probably around 52,000 Confederates that were imprisoned there. The official record, the official record of those who died there, of course, is under 4,000 according to the Union records. But that does not count the people who entered at the dead house, which was without the gate, or any prisoner that died outside the gate. In fact, I just heard one man say that research is still ongoing, but it looks as if there may be as high as 20,000 to 30,000 Confederates who died just at Point Lookout. By the way, if I were to take time, I'd preach another hour telling you about how those men were deliberately starved, how cold it gets, and the wind and ice and snow. They'd give one blanket to three men. A few had tents, a few did not have tents. They were there in the swampy saltwater marshes where diseases were rampant. And the black Union soldiers, anytime a black Confederate happened to walk in, they would immediately shoot him dead. And the Union guards would fire indiscriminately into the tents and into the huts of the Confederate soldiers just trying to hit someone.

It's unbelievable what these people went through and you have to stop and ask yourself a question or two like this. Why were those men fighting? Why were they willing to die on the battlefield? Why were they willing to die in prison? And why were they willing to suffer such torture and then live through all of that? Why were some of these people deliberately murdered? What was the reason for all of this suffering and death? You have to come to this question. What were they fighting and dying for?

Why They Fought: A Constitutional Republic

Weaver argues that Confederates fought to preserve a constitutional republic, not a bureaucratic democracy or empire, citing the Constitution's guarantee of a republican form of government and quotes from Robert E. Lee and Alexander H. Stephens.

Now, let me just mention, there are two things that really irritate the living daylights out of me when I begin to talk about history, and especially Southern history. I usually say it like this, there are two things that really frost my cake, and the first one is simply this, "You lost the war, get over it." Let me tell you something, folks, if just losing the war was the only thing I could get over that very quickly. I could get over losing a fight. That's no problem. If Ed and I got into a fight and Ed beat me up, fine. I could get over that. But you can't get over tyranny and despotism and totalitarianism. You can't get over the loss of family and friends. You can't get over the loss of life and liberty and freedom. You can't get over this thing any more than you can get over being Southern or being a Christian or being biblical. The second thing that really causes me to come up in a fury and an uproar is when someone tries to say, "Well, you fought for a lost cause."

Let me just put it to you very bluntly. The causes of truth, righteousness, freedom, and principle are never lost causes. Might does not make right. And just because Ed might can beat me in the ground does not mean that he is right in doing that. Jefferson Davis said it like this, "The principle for which we contend is bound to reassert itself though it be at another time and in another form." And let me offer something for your consideration. When you look around and see the problems that we now have, the problems that we have had, the problems that we are now going through, all of the struggles that you and I are having politically, economically, morally, educationally, and theologically, I want to submit something for your consideration, and that is simply this, that these are the same principles for which our Confederate ancestors fought, and since those principles were never ever settled, we're still having those same battles today. We're still fighting for a limited government. We're still fighting for states' rights. We're still fighting for liberty and freedom.

Another observation which I think that you should know is this. I believe sincerely that our Confederate ancestors were fighting for the very same principles for which our founding fathers fought: liberty and freedom. So let me just try to answer a question for you today. And certainly this is not going to be an exhausted answer because I believe the answers are inexhaustible in one sense of the word. But why in the world were our ancestors willing to fight and die? What did they really and truly fight for? Let me answer that like this. First of all, our Confederate ancestors were fighting for a constitutional republic and not for a bureaucratic democracy or an American empire. When you stop and think about the fact that after the Constitutional Convention met, one asked Benjamin Franklin what kind of government do we have and his answer was "a republic if you could keep it." Now let me just mention something to you.

The fourth section of the fourth article of the Constitution of the United States says this, listen carefully, "The United States shall guarantee to every state in the Union a Republican form of government." So the federal government is to guarantee every state in the Union a Republican form of government. The form of government that is guaranteed is one that was supposedly already in existence and one that was already established. And this is a republican form of government that our founding fathers established and therefore they said the federal government is obligated and duty-bound to guarantee to every state a republican form of government. Now, what is a republican form of government? Well, a republican form of government is a system of government in which the people hold sovereign power. It's contrasted to a democracy. It's contrasted to a monarchy. So the first element in a republican form of government is that the power is derived from the people. The second element is a republic is always one that is ruled by law. So in a republic, the people are the masters and the government is the servant. The people are the lords and the government is the slave. So the Constitution basically when it was written was a grant from we the people to form a limited government. The government that was authorized by the Constitution was to be a limited one deriving its just powers from the people and the states thereof. So the Constitution then was to be a grant of power from the people for the government to do certain limited things. It was the law of the people for the control of the government.

Can you imagine what our founding fathers would do if they heard a politician like Nancy Pelosi say, "We have to pass this law so we can see what's in it"? Can you imagine what our founding fathers would do if they heard someone like Alcee Hastings from Florida, a congressman, say, "We make up the rules as we go along. There are no rules." You know what General Lee said? Just to show you that they were indeed fighting for a Constitutional Republic, General Lee said this, "If the Constitution and the Union established by our forefathers were restored, then there would be no truer supporters of that Union and that Constitution than the Southern people. Every brave people who considered their rights attacked and their constitutional liberties invaded, would have done as we did. Our conduct was not caused by any insurrectionary spirit, neither can it be termed rebellion, for our construction of the Constitution, under which we lived and acted, was the same from its adoption, and for eighty years we have been taught and educated by the founders of the Republic and their written declarations which controlled

our consciences and our actions." What did Lee say? We're not insurrectionaries. We're not rebels. We're fighting for what we understood our founding fathers gave us. Again, Robert E. Lee said, "This all that the South ever desired was the union as established by our forefathers should be preserved and that the government as originally organized should be administered in purity and in truth." Couldn't be any plainer. Again, Lee said this, "The South has contended only for the supremacy of the Constitution and the just administration of the laws made in pursuance of it." They were not fighting to establish an empire. They were not fighting to establish some huge bureaucratic democracy somewhere.

Alexander H. Stephens, who was vice president of the Confederacy, said this concerning secession. He said, "The real object of those who resorted to secession, as well as those who sustained it, was not the overthrow of the government of the United States, but to perpetuate the principles upon which it was founded. The object in quitting the union was not to destroy, but to save the principles of the Constitution."

Now, let me just tell you something, folks, very plainly. In case you have not picked up on this, here it is, stated very bluntly, like it or lump it, Abraham Lincoln destroyed our Constitutional Republic. He changed the nature of the government from a republic to an empire. I want to read you just several paragraphs written by Joseph E. Fallon. He wrote this article on Lincoln and the death of the old republic.

Lincoln's Destruction of the Republic

Weaver asserts that Abraham Lincoln destroyed the constitutional republic, replacing it with a welfare-warfare state, and details Lincoln's suppression of civil liberties, including press censorship and suspension of habeas corpus.

And listen to what he said. "Official history venerates Abraham Lincoln as an apostle of American democracy who waged war on the South to preserve the Union and to free the slaves. Official history is a lie. Lincoln was a dictator who destroyed the old republic and replaced the federal principles of 1789 with the ideological foundation of today's welfare warfare state. His administration was characterized by paranoia, a lust for power, and rampant corruption. The magnitude of that paranoia was evidenced by Lincoln's Secretary of War, Edwin Stanton, who declared that every department of the government was paralyzed by treason. Traitors were to be found in the Senate, in the House of Representatives, in the Cabinet, in the Federal Courts. Treason was flagrant in the revenue in the post office services as well as in the territorial governments and in the judicial reserves. In his bid for absolute power, Lincoln used treason as a pretext to unleash war and to shred the Constitution."

"Freedom of the press was curtailed. The Chicago Times was one of over 300 northern newspapers suppressed for expressing incorrect views. As late as May 18, 1864, Lincoln ordered his military to arrest and imprison the editors, proprietors, and publishers of the New York World and the New York Journal of Commerce. Lincoln suspended habeas corpus. He criminalized speech and legalized arbitrary arrests. 20,000, some say as high as 40,000 political prisoners were held incommunicado and denied legal counsel. Maryland's legislature was overthrown and New York City was placed under military occupation."

Now let me just pause right here just a moment. Alice and I took a few minutes while we were up at Point Lookout and we rode on into the Point Lookout State Park. And this is where a lot of these men at Point Lookout died. There's a mass grave there where they're just pushed into it and covered up. But we were looking at a couple of the historical markers and I do not remember all of this historical marker but I read and I could not believe what I was reading that it was printed in bold letters there for anyone to see and it was just talking about how Marylanders were divided because of the war etc. and it talked about the African-Americans somehow whatever but then it went on to say that private citizens were arrested without warrant to protect freedom. What? How can you protect freedom by destroying freedom? But there it was on a historical marker. And here Fallon says 20,000, and as I pointed out, some say as high as 40,000, were arrested without warrant. These are northern people, not southern people. One more quote, one more short paragraph from Fallon. He said in his December 1861 lectures in Boston and New York City, Northern abolitionist Wendell Phillips declared that "we live today, every one of us, under martial law. The Secretary of State puts into his Bastille, with a warrant as irresponsible as that of Louis XIV, any man whom he pleases."

You think it was bad under Lincoln? It was. But as it was then, so it is today. Do you realize the Patriot Act, the National Defense Authorization Act, and every conceivable piece of legislation that has passed since then that destroys life and liberty and property and freedom is a gift to us from Abraham Lincoln? Because he's the one that set up this welfare warfare state and everything that we have today follows in his footsteps. Our ancestors fought and suffered and died to prevent exactly that which is happening in Washington D.C. today. They fought and died to prevent that which is happening in our state capitals today.

Why They Fought: States' Rights and Sovereignty

Weaver explains that Confederates fought for states' rights and sovereignty, tracing the principle from the Articles of Confederation through the Treaty of Paris, state ratification conventions, and the Virginia and Kentucky Resolutions, emphasizing the right of secession and nullification.

You need to ponder sometimes how different our world would be if the South had won the war. Why were they fighting? They were not fighting for this bureaucratic democracy that we have today. They were not fighting for an American empire. They wanted to preserve that which the founding fathers had given to us. The second reason I believe that they fought is simply this. They were fighting for states' rights or states' sovereignty and not for a centralized, consolidated government. Now, if you don't understand states' rights, let me take you through this very quickly and very easily. To understand states' rights, you have to go back to the beginning. For instance, in 1781, the second article in the Articles of Confederation 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 in Congress assembled." So the Articles of Confederation state very clearly that each state retained its sovereignty, freedom, and independence. You remember when the war for independence was over, the Treaty of Paris settled it or ended it in 1783.

And I want you to listen to the first article of the Treaty of Paris. I'm not going to read all of it, just enough to give you this idea. But here it is. "His Britannic Majesty acknowledges the said United States, in other words, New Hampshire, Massachusetts Bay, Rhode Island and Providence Plantations, Connecticut, New York, New Jersey, Pennsylvania, Delaware, Maryland, Virginia, North Carolina, South Carolina, and Georgia, to be free, sovereign, and independent states." And he treats them as such. And I'm stopping right there. But I want you to understand, when George III entered into this treaty, he did not enter this treaty with a consolidated centralized government just known as the United States. He entered into this treaty with 13 sovereign states. They were independent states. He had to make peace with 13 different states. When the Constitutional Convention met, Georgia, the Georgia delegation carried a banner which said this, "The state of Georgia, by the grace of God, free, sovereign, and independent." When the Constitution was written, the states, by a common agreement, united to form what is known as the federal government and to give it limited power and authority. Now I want you to understand something. The federal government did not create the states. The states created the federal government and it was to be federal and not national. So the federal government then that was created and authorized by the states was only to act as an agent of the states because the states were the real sovereigns and the federal government could only do that which the states delegated it to do.

And the right to decide whether or not the federal government did anything that was beyond its power or limitation was reserved to the states. If you allowed the federal government to determine its own power and authority, then you're going to have unlimited and tyrannical powers. Let me point this out. Do you realize even New York, when New York acceded to the Constitution on July the 26th, 1788, it added these words. Listen carefully. "That the powers of government may be reassumed by the people whensoever it shall become necessary to their happiness." What did New York say? We gave delegated power and authority to the federal government and we can also take it back whenever we like. Do you realize when Virginia acceded to the Constitution on June the 25th, 1788, it added these words, "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 and that every power not granted

thereby remains with them at their will." Now, if you really want to understand the independence and sovereignty of each state, I want you to consider the fact that when the Constitution was ratified in 1787, only 11 of the original 13 states ratified it. Do you realize there were two states that did not ratify it right away? Rhode Island and North Carolina. In fact, they did not even ratify it till nearly a year later. The Constitution was not forced upon them. The 11 states did not look at North Carolina and Rhode Island and say, "Well, majority rules, you're in whether you like it or not." No. You know how the 11 states who ratified the Constitution treated Rhode Island and North Carolina? They treated them as independent sovereign states. Neither was there a war mounted to coerce North Carolina and Rhode Island to ratify the Constitution. Not at all. Because they were free and independent states.

They could come in or they could not come in. It was totally up to the states. When Rhode Island finally did accede to the Constitution, Rhode Island did so with this provision. Listen carefully. "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." Do you realize that every state that acceded to the Constitution understood that since they gave the power, they could take it back? Secession was understood by every state. I hope you know that it was Thomas Jefferson and James Madison who wrote the Virginia and the Kentucky resolutions. And in those resolutions they were saying that each state had acceded to the Constitution and each state could secede basically, and that each state had the right and the power to nullify, that is to abrogate any law that came down the pike from the federal government that they deemed unconstitutional. Let me just read to you the first paragraph of the Kentucky Resolution. Listen carefully. "Resolved that the several states composing the United States of America are not united on the principle of unlimited submission to the general government. But that by a compact, under the style and title of the Constitution of the United States and of its amendments thereto, they constituted a general government for special purposes, delegated to that government certain definite powers, reserving each state to itself the residuary mass of right to their own self-government, and that whensoever the general government assumes undelegated powers, its acts are unauthoritative, void, and of no force."

"That to this compact, each state is seated as a state and is an integral party. Its co-states forming as to itself the other party. Each party has an equal right to judge for itself as well of infractions as of the mode and measure of redress." So what did Thomas Jefferson and James Madison say? The states are not going to give unlimited submission to the federal government. They understood that it was delegated power, and power that could be taken back. And each state reserved the right to nullify or abrogate anything that was unconstitutional. By the way, South Carolina did exactly that. You remember when they nullified the tariffs of 1828 and 1832 known as the tariffs of abomination. And what South Carolina did then when the federal government tried to impose these high taxes and high tariffs, they nullified them.

In fact, they passed a nullifying ordinance. Listen carefully. Here's the second paragraph of the ordinance of nullification. "We therefore, the people of the state of South Carolina in convention assembled, do declare and ordain that these acts are unauthorized by the Constitution of the United States, and violate the true meaning and intent thereof, and are null, void, and no law nor binding upon this State, its officers, or citizens, and all promises, contracts, and obligations made or entered into, or to be made or entered into, with purpose to secure the duties imposed by the said Acts, and all judicial proceedings which shall be hereafter had in affirmation thereof, are and shall be held utterly null and void." What did they say? We're not going to pay these taxes. We're not going to allow these tariffs. Everything is null and void. We're not going to recognize it. Here's the concluding paragraph. Listen. "And we the people of South Carolina to the end that it may be fully understood by the government of the United States and the people of the co-states that we're determined to maintain this our ordinance and declaration at every hazard do further declare that we will not submit to the application of force on the part of the federal government to reduce this state to obedience, but that we will consider the passage by Congress of any act to coerce this state, shut up her ports, destroy or harass her commerce, or to enforce the acts hereby declared to be null and void."

And then they go on to say, if you push us, we'll just withdraw from the union and set up our own government. Now let me ask you a question. Was South Carolina wrong? And the answer is no. South Carolina did not misinterpret the Compact. In fact, James Madison, who's known as the father of the Constitution, said this, "The powers delegated by the proposed Constitution of the federal government are few and defined. Those which are to remain in the state governments are numerous and indefinite. The former will be exercised principally on external objects as war, peace, negotiation, and foreign commerce, with which last the power of taxation will for the most part be connected. The powers reserved to the several states will extend to all objects which in the ordinary course of affairs concern the lives, liberty, and properties of the people and the internal order improving the prosperity of the state." What did he say? He said, the federal government has such a limited area that's going to affect the lives of the people. Why? It's going to be nothing but war and peace and negotiation with foreign commerce. But the state has all the rest of it.

That's why we have the 9th and 10th Amendments, especially the 10th that says "the powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the states, are reserved to the states respectively, or to the people." By the way, Jefferson Davis made this same argument when he was in the Senate talking about the equality of the states. However, James Henley Thornwell, and I will mention him again later, James Henley Thornwell was a Presbyterian pastor, author, and theologian. He saw the war for what it really and truly was. Here's what he said, "If they," talking about the federal government and the north, "if they prevail, the whole character of the government will be changed. And instead of a federal republic, the common agent of sovereign and independent states, we shall have a central despotism with the notion of states forever abolished, deriving its power from the will and shaping its policy according to the wishes of a numerical majority of the people, we shall

have, in other words, a supreme, irresponsible democracy. The avowed end of this present war is to make the government a government of force." And he was right. And that's exactly what we have today, not just in this country, but in every country where our government puts its hands, it is a government of force. You know Alexis de Tocqueville was a Frenchman and many of those European countries recognized what the Constitution was about originally and even de Tocqueville said state sovereignty was so ingrained in Southern men that when the South seceded she wrote her own Constitution. And certainly we did, the Confederate Constitution.

Now, I want to read to you two quotes, and I want you to understand the attitude of the founding fathers. The first one is by Thomas Jefferson, and he said it like this, "I consider the foundation of the Constitution is laid on this ground, that all powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution nor prohibited by it to the states are reserved to the states or to the people. To take a single step beyond the boundaries thus specifically drawn around the powers of Congress is to take possession of a boundless field of power no longer susceptible to any definition." Now Thomas Jefferson said when the federal government steps beyond the Constitution it has taken possession of a boundless field of power, no longer susceptible to definition. To define is to limit. If you didn't understand that, let me give you one you will understand. John C. Calhoun, known as the Ironclad Southerner, said it just a little more plainly. He said, "The Constitution has admitted the jurisdiction of the United States within the limits of the several states only so far as the delegated powers authorize. Beyond that, they are intruders and may be lawfully expelled." Wow. Wow.

What if the state of Georgia first went to the courts? And then second, went to arms to expel the federal government in the areas that the federal government has absolutely no right to be in this state. What if every state did that? Again, Robert E. Lee said, you remember, that they fought not from any insurrectionary spirit nor any rebellious attitude, but to preserve liberty and freedom. Once again, Alexander H. Stephens said it like this, "Depend upon it.

There is no difference between consolidation and empire. No difference between centralism and imperialism. The consummation of either must necessarily end in the overthrow of liberty and the establishment of despotism." And that's exactly what we have. Alexander Hamilton in 1788 said, "If the federal government should overpass the just bounds of its authority and make a tyrannical use of its power, the people whose creature it is must appeal to the standard that they have formed and take such measures to redress the injury done." Stop and think. That is exactly what happened in 1793 in my favorite court case Chisholm versus Georgia. Some of you are very familiar with that. But in Chisholm versus Georgia, there's a man in South Carolina who went to the Supreme Court to sue the state of Georgia. And the Supreme Court of the United States sent to Georgia and said, "Come up here, boy. There's a case here against you." And the state of Georgia said this in essence, "Kiss my foot. We're the master. You're the servant."

You don't order us around. We're not coming up to the Supreme Court. And so, the justice of the Supreme Court said to Georgia, "Well, if you don't come, we'll have this case without you and we will rule without you." And then the Georgia House of Representatives passed a bill making it a felony punishable by hanging for any person to carry out the decision of the Supreme Court. So the state of Georgia said, "You make all the decisions you want to. When you send your man here in the state of Georgia to enforce your decision, he will immediately be hanged without the benefit of clergy." And that led then to the passage of the 11th Amendment, which corrected that problem. Georgia said, "You're not going to do this to us. We're not going to have this." Can you imagine what it would be like if each state said boldly to the federal government, "No, you've gone beyond your bounds. You're not going to do this. You're not going to tyrannize our people. We're here in an interpositionary step. We're standing between our people and tyranny."

You will not do this. And we will not allow it to be done. Our ancestors fought and were killed and were starved and were imprisoned and tortured for believing in states' rights and states' sovereignty. Because our ancestors fought for a limited government and for liberty and freedom and independence. Let me give you a third one very quickly. They also fought for biblical Christianity and not for a humanistic, rationalistic religion.

Why They Fought: Biblical Christianity vs. Humanism

Weaver contends that the war was a theological conflict between biblical Christianity in the South and Northern humanism, rationalism, and transcendentalism, citing James Henley Thornwell and other sources to show that Southerners saw themselves defending the faith.

Now, I understand that not everyone in the South was a Christian. I understand that. However, you know that there were two great revivals in the Confederate armies, and a minimum of 150,000 men were converted. There were also revivals in the churches at that particular time. But the point I'm trying to make is this. There are theological implications to that war. You have to remember that ideas have consequences. It is impossible to have a cultural revolution without having a theological revolution. You cannot have a change in culture without having a change in theology.

I was just reminded very definitely this past week of the difference between when I was a boy and today. Because I remember when I was a boy, if I wanted to see a policeman, I had to go uptown and I had to look around. And it took me a while to find one. Driving through North Carolina, Virginia, and Maryland. Lord have mercy. Speed traps everywhere, cops behind every bush. I mean, and it wasn't just one every now and then. We'd see four and five at one time, most of them in unmarked cars, having someone pulled over.

I could not wait to get out of those states. Why, in the 1950s, could I hardly find a policeman? And today you can't turn around without seeing five or six of them. Have you thought about that? Why in the 1950s you could hardly find a policeman and today you see five or six on every corner? Why? Back in the 1950s, most people still believed in the Ten Commandments. They still believed in morality and doing what was right and living what was right. Today, nobody believes anything or cares about anything.

And if you're not going to have self-government, you're going to always have someone with a strong arm willing to govern you. Generally speaking, let me put it like this, it was the North that turned from biblical Christianity to rationalism, humanism, and transcendentalism. I know that not everybody in the North was an atheist and an infidel. I understand that. But generally speaking, that was the truth. The Bible belt was given to the South as a name for derision because the South held tenaciously to the Bible. In other words, we were not as educated as those smart, humanistic, rationalistic northerners. And so they made fun of us by saying, "Well, that's the Bible belt." Just to show you how the theological implications were so clearly evident in those days, James Henley Thornwell, who died in 1862, said this, "The parties in this conflict are not merely abolitionists and slaveholders." He says, don't think of it like that. He says, "They are atheists, socialists, communists, red republicans, Jacobins on the one side," that's the north, "and friends of order and regulated freedom on the other. In one word, the world is the battleground, Christianity and atheism, the combatants and the progress of humanity is at stake." It was a theological war.

C. Gregg Singer, in his book, A Theological Interpretation of American History, said this, "After 1830, there was a growing philosophical and theological cleavage between the North and the South. While the North was becoming increasingly subject to radical influences, the South was becoming increasingly conservative in its outlook." So as the North was going one way, the South was saying, "No, we're holding on to the Scripture." And M. E. Bradford, in The Southern Partisan in 1991, wrote this, "As the war approached, these clergymen more and more tended to view the sectional controversy as a dispute between those who acknowledge the authority of Scripture and those who set their own moral sense above it." In other words, between Christians and infidels. Once you understand that one's theology determines one's worldview, then you must understand how the North was seeking to impose its culture upon the South. Are you listening to me? Since the North had changed its theology, it had changed basically its culture. Thinking itself to be superior now, it wants to change the culture of the South. And in order to change the culture of the South, it has to change the theology of the South. Do you understand this is what reconstruction was all about? Think about the word. Reconstruction. Richard Taylor has a book entitled Deconstruction and Reconstruction. General Richard Taylor, a Confederate soldier who is the son of President Zachary Taylor.

What were they trying to do? Reconstruct us in their theology and reconstruct us in their way of thinking. Listen folks, you can't act like a northerner unless you believe like a northerner. You can't! One of the reasons so many Southern pastors fought in the war was simply because they believed they were defending the faith against humanism and rationalism. And let me just show you how the North understood this as well. Not just Southern men.

I suppose that two of my favorite quotes are these. One Yankee critic said this, that he believed "the most unmitigated set of villains they have in the South are the Methodist, Baptist, Presbyterians, and Episcopalian preachers, all talking secession, drinking mean liquor, and advocating the cause of Jeff Davis and the devil." Well, I suppose probably there could be no greater compliment, though, that was given Southern soldiers than the one that was given by a Yankee chaplain. The Yankee chaplain was talking to his regiment and he was trying to instill upon the Yankee men the zeal and the enthusiasm and the courage that was being expressed by Southern men in fighting. And here's what he said. "You may call this fanaticism, enthusiasm, or whatever you will. But remember, you're fighting an enemy that comes from the closet to the battlefield, that comes from its knees in prayer to engage in deadly strife, that comes in the belief that its battles are the battles of Jehovah, that His smile is resting upon its banner and will ensure success. What power to make every man a hero and every hero, if need be, a murderer." What did he say? The Southern men were fighting for a religious cause and that religion was biblical Christianity.

Application: Returning to the Foundation of God's Word

Weaver calls for repentance and faith in Christ, urging a return to the biblical foundation of the founding and Confederate fathers to reclaim the nation's heritage and liberty.

You know what the problem we have today in most of our patriotic organizations and in most of our historical organizations? Here's the problem. Unhappily, a lot of the good and well-intentioned people are just as lost as a hound dog and know nothing of the grace of God. What am I saying that? Here's why I'm saying that, folks. If we want our history and our heritage and our country back, we have to come back and stand on the same foundation that our founding fathers and our Confederate ancestors stood upon. And that foundation is the Word of God.

And in order to be a genuine Christian, one must indeed repent of his sins and believe savingly upon the Lord Jesus Christ. And you will confess Him and acknowledge Him and bring your life in conformity to His Word. We want our country back. But we will never get it back until we come back to the Sovereign God who gave us this country. Well, you've got to remember, God can kick any people out of His country. This is His earth. This is His land. And if we don't give God the honor and glory that's due in His name, if we do not pay our land rent, so to speak, He can kick us off and do so justly and righteously. If we want what our forefathers had, we need to come back to the Lord Jesus Christ. We need to come back in repentance and faith. We need to come back and say, "I want what Robert E. Lee had. I want what Stonewall Jackson had. I want what Richard Ewell had. I want what Jeb Stuart had."

I want what our Founding Fathers had. I want the courage and the character that comes from being a Christian. I just wonder, if our Founding Fathers were alive today, if our Confederate fathers were alive today, how long would they put up with what we're putting up with?

May God give us men. Godly men. Christian men. Courageous men. Southern men. With character and courage, and grace. Father, in the name of Jesus Christ, we bow to Thee, and we ask, Father, Your blessing and Your help, and we pray that You'll speak to our hearts and make us, Father, what we should be. Help us be thankful, Father, for what our founding fathers and our Confederate fathers have given unto us. And help us to see how we've wasted it and thrown it away, despised it, disregarded it, dishonored it. Give us, Lord, what we need to stand for Thee and to live for Thee. In the name of Jesus Christ, we ask and pray. Amen.

Study Guide

Major Themes

Biblical Memorials

Summary: Memorials are established by God to recall a body of truth, and honoring Confederate ancestors should bring to mind the principles for which they fought.

Evidence: Weaver cites Exodus 3:15, Exodus 12:14, Joshua 4:7, and 1 Corinthians 11:26 to argue that memorials are biblical and function to bring an entire body of truth to mind.

Constitutional Republic vs. Empire

Summary: Confederates fought to preserve a constitutional republic with limited government, as opposed to the centralized bureaucratic democracy or empire imposed by Lincoln.

Evidence: Weaver quotes Article IV, Section 4 of the Constitution, Robert E. Lee, and Alexander H. Stephens to show that the South sought to maintain the original republican form of government.

States' Rights and Sovereignty

Summary: The Southern cause was fundamentally about states' rights, sovereignty, and the right of secession, rooted in the founding documents and early American practice.

Evidence: Weaver references the Articles of Confederation, Treaty of Paris, state ratification conventions, and the Virginia and Kentucky Resolutions to argue that states retained sovereignty and the right to nullify federal acts.

Theological War: Christianity vs. Humanism

Summary: The Civil War was a theological conflict between biblical Christianity in the South and Northern humanism, rationalism, and transcendentalism.

Evidence: Weaver quotes James Henley Thornwell, C. Gregg Singer, and M. E. Bradford to assert that the North had abandoned biblical authority while the South held to it, making the war a battle between Christianity and atheism.

Lincoln as Tyrant

Summary: Abraham Lincoln is portrayed as a dictator who destroyed the old republic, suppressed civil liberties, and established the foundation for modern welfare-warfare state.

Evidence: Weaver reads from Joseph E. Fallon's article detailing Lincoln's suspension of habeas corpus, suppression of newspapers, and arbitrary arrests of political prisoners.

Return to Biblical Foundation

Summary: Reclaiming the nation's heritage requires a return to the Word of God and genuine Christian faith, as exemplified by Confederate leaders.

Evidence: Weaver calls for repentance and faith in Christ, stating that the foundation of the founding and Confederate fathers was the Word of God, and that without it, the country cannot be restored.

Key Arguments

Memorials recall a body of truth

Summary: Biblical memorials are designed to bring to mind an entire body of truth, so honoring Confederate ancestors should recall the principles they fought for.

Evidence: Weaver states, 'A memorial functions to bring to your mind an entire body of truth... So whenever we talk about a memorial, it is designed to bring back a whole body of truth.'

Confederates fought for a constitutional republic

Summary: The South fought to preserve the original constitutional republic established by the founders, not to create a new empire or democracy.

Evidence: Weaver quotes Robert E. Lee: 'The South has contended only for the supremacy of the Constitution and the just administration of the laws made in pursuance of it.'

Lincoln destroyed the republic

Summary: Lincoln's actions during the war transformed the government from a limited republic into a centralized, tyrannical empire.

Evidence: Weaver reads Fallon: 'Lincoln was a dictator who destroyed the old republic and replaced the federal principles of 1789 with the ideological foundation of today's welfare warfare state.'

States retained sovereignty and right of secession

Summary: The states created the federal government and reserved the right to resume delegated powers, including through secession.

Evidence: Weaver cites New York's ratification statement: 'That the powers of government may be reassumed by the people whensoever it shall become necessary to their happiness.'

The war was theological

Summary: The conflict was fundamentally between biblical Christianity and Northern infidelity, with Southerners defending the faith.

Evidence: Weaver quotes Thornwell: 'The parties in this conflict are not merely abolitionists and slaveholders... They are atheists, socialists, communists... on the one side, and friends of order and regulated freedom on the other.'

Modern tyranny stems from Lincoln's precedent

Summary: Contemporary erosions of liberty, such as the Patriot Act, are direct descendants of Lincoln's wartime measures.

Evidence: Weaver states, 'the Patriot Act, the National Defense Authorization Act, and every conceivable piece of legislation that has passed since then that destroys life and liberty and property and freedom is a gift to us from Abraham Lincoln.'

Cultural change requires theological change

Summary: The North's cultural shift was rooted in a theological shift away from biblical authority, and reconstruction aimed to impose that new theology on the South.

Evidence: Weaver says, 'It is impossible to have a cultural revolution without having a theological revolution. You cannot have a change in culture without having a change in theology.'

Return to Christ is necessary for national restoration

Summary: Only by returning to the Christian faith of the founders and Confederate fathers can the nation's heritage and liberty be recovered.

Evidence: Weaver prays, 'If we want what our forefathers had, we need to come back to the Lord Jesus Christ. We need to come back in repentance and faith.'

Scripture References

Exodus 3:13-15

Context: Weaver reads this passage to show that God's name is a memorial, establishing the biblical precedent for memorials.

Exodus 12:14

Context: Weaver cites this verse to demonstrate that the Passover was instituted as a memorial.

Joshua 4:7

Context: Weaver references the stones set up after crossing the Jordan as another biblical memorial.

1 Corinthians 11:26

Context: Weaver quotes this verse to show that the Lord's Supper is a memorial in the New Testament.

Historical References

Point Lookout Prison Camp

Context: Weaver describes the conditions at Point Lookout, where up to 52,000 Confederates were imprisoned and many died from starvation, exposure, and murder.

Constitutional Convention and Benjamin Franklin

Context: Weaver recounts Franklin's reply that the new government was 'a republic if you could keep it' to emphasize the fragility of the republic.

Articles of Confederation (1781)

Context: Weaver quotes Article II to show that each state retained its sovereignty, freedom, and independence.

Treaty of Paris (1783)

Context: Weaver reads from Article I to demonstrate that Great Britain recognized each state as free, sovereign, and independent.

Virginia and Kentucky Resolutions (1798)

Context: Weaver cites these resolutions, authored by Jefferson and Madison, to argue that states had the right to nullify unconstitutional federal acts.

South Carolina Nullification Crisis (1832)

Context: Weaver details South Carolina's nullification of the tariffs of 1828 and 1832 as an exercise of states' rights.

Chisholm v. Georgia (1793)

Context: Weaver recounts this Supreme Court case to illustrate Georgia's assertion of state sovereignty against federal judicial overreach.

Lincoln's suspension of habeas corpus and suppression of press

Context: Weaver describes Lincoln's wartime measures, including the arrest of political prisoners and suppression of newspapers, as tyrannical.

Revivals in the Confederate armies

Context: Weaver mentions that at least 150,000 men were converted during revivals in the Confederate armies, highlighting the religious character of the South.

Reconstruction

Context: Weaver interprets Reconstruction as an attempt to impose Northern theology and culture on the South.

Important Quotes

A memorial functions to bring to your mind an entire body of truth.

Significance: This is the central hermeneutical principle Weaver uses to connect biblical memorials to honoring Confederate ancestors.

The causes of truth, righteousness, freedom, and principle are never lost causes.

Significance: Weaver refutes the 'lost cause' criticism by asserting the enduring moral validity of the Confederate cause.

The South has contended only for the supremacy of the Constitution and the just administration of the laws made in pursuance of it.

Significance: Weaver uses Robert E. Lee's words to argue that the Confederacy fought for constitutional fidelity, not rebellion.

Lincoln was a dictator who destroyed the old republic and replaced the federal principles of 1789 with the ideological foundation of today's welfare warfare state.

Significance: This quote from Joseph Fallon encapsulates Weaver's view of Lincoln as the destroyer of the original republic.

It is impossible to have a cultural revolution without having a theological revolution.

Significance: Weaver asserts the foundational role of theology in shaping culture, explaining the North's attempt to reconstruct the South.

If we want our history and our heritage and our country back, we have to come back and stand on the same foundation that our founding fathers and our Confederate ancestors stood upon. And that foundation is the Word of God.

Significance: This is the sermon's primary application, calling for a return to biblical Christianity as the basis for national restoration.

Discussion Questions

How does the biblical concept of a memorial shape the way we should remember historical figures and events?

Context: Weaver argues that memorials recall a body of truth; this question explores the application of that principle.

In what ways does the distinction between a republic and a democracy affect our understanding of American government?

Context: Weaver emphasizes that the founders established a republic, not a democracy, and that this distinction was central to the Confederate cause.

How should Christians evaluate the actions of political leaders who violate constitutional limits in the name of national unity or security?

Context: Weaver condemns Lincoln's suspension of habeas corpus and suppression of dissent as tyrannical.

What is the biblical basis for the doctrine of states' rights or the right of secession, if any?

Context: Weaver argues from early American documents that states retained sovereignty, but does not directly cite Scripture for this political doctrine.

How does a change in theology lead to a change in culture, and what examples can we see today?

Context: Weaver states that cultural revolution requires theological revolution, using the North's shift to humanism as an example.

In what ways might the modern church be tempted to conform to the prevailing culture rather than stand on biblical truth?

Context: Weaver contrasts the South's adherence to Scripture with the North's rationalism, implying a warning for today.

What does genuine repentance and faith look like in the context of reclaiming a nation's spiritual heritage?

Context: Weaver calls for a return to Christ as the only way to recover what the founding and Confederate fathers had.

Applications

Honor ancestors by remembering their principles

Summary: When honoring Confederate veterans, we should recall the body of truth they fought for, including constitutional government and biblical faith.

Evidence: Weaver states, 'when we come to honor... our Confederate ancestors... it should bring back an entire body of truth.'

Defend constitutional limits on government

Summary: Christians should resist federal overreach and uphold the original constitutional republic, as the Confederates sought to do.

Evidence: Weaver argues that the federal government is limited to delegated powers and that states have the right to resist unconstitutional acts.

Recognize the theological roots of cultural conflict

Summary: Understand that modern political and cultural battles are ultimately theological, and engage accordingly.

Evidence: Weaver says, 'It is impossible to have a cultural revolution without having a theological revolution.'

Return to the Word of God as the foundation

Summary: To reclaim our heritage and liberty, we must return to the biblical foundation of our forefathers through repentance and faith in Christ.

Evidence: Weaver states, 'If we want our history and our heritage and our country back, we have to come back and stand on the same foundation... the Word of God.'

Emulate the faith of Confederate leaders

Summary: Seek the courage and character that comes from being a Christian, as exemplified by Robert E. Lee, Stonewall Jackson, and others.

Evidence: Weaver prays, 'I want what Robert E. Lee had. I want what Stonewall Jackson had... I want the courage and the character that comes from being a Christian.'

deepseek | deepseek-v4-pro | clean_readable_transcript | 2026-06-04T23:28:59Z

deepseek | deepseek-v4-pro | weaver_study | 2026-06-05T23:25:10Z

Clean Transcript

In Honor Of Confederate Veterans And Prisoners

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

I want to bring a message today that I actually preached yesterday. Since we missed actually Confederate Memorial Day in April, I did preach at a Confederate Memorial yesterday at Point Lookout in Maryland. And then of course in light of July the 4th week that is upon us, I thought that this might be appropriate today. And let me just point out, in the next several weeks, I'm going to be bringing several messages that I think that are very practical, very applicable, and I would encourage you
#1 | 0:17 to 0:56 | cleaned
to be faithful to the preaching and teaching of the Word of God. So the message that I brought yesterday was a message which I entitled "In Honor of Confederate Veterans and Prisoners," and I'll explain why in just a moment. We'll look in Exodus chapter 3, beginning there with verse 13. "And Moses said unto God, Behold, when I come unto the children of Israel, and shall say to them, The God of your fathers hath sent me unto you; and they shall say to me, What is his name? what shall I say unto them? And God said unto Moses, I AM THAT I AM: and he said, Thus shalt thou say unto the children of Israel, I AM hath sent me unto you. And God said moreover unto Moses, Thus shalt thou say unto the children of Israel, The LORD God of your fathers, the God of Abraham, the God of Isaac, and the God of Jacob, hath sent me unto you: this is my name for ever, and this is my memorial unto all generations." Now, I want you to note, if you would, what God said concerning His name in verse 15.
#2 | 0:56 to 2:04 | cleaned
He says, "this is my memorial unto all generations." Has it ever occurred to you that the name of God is a memorial? I'm going to explain that just momentarily. We should always remember His grace, His mercy, His power, and His person. And when we lean upon Him, and trust Him, and look unto Him, we do indeed honor Him.
#3 | 2:04 to 2:27 | cleaned
Now I want you to turn to Exodus chapter 12 and verse 14. Because here God says something concerning the Passover. Notice if you would, Exodus chapter 12 verse 14. When the children of Israel, of course, sacrificed the lamb and God delivered them from Egypt. Notice if you would what God says in verse 14 of Exodus chapter 12. "And this day shall be unto you for a memorial."
#4 | 2:27 to 2:53 | cleaned
"And you shall keep it a feast to the LORD throughout your generations; you shall keep it a feast by an ordinance for ever." So note if you would please, not only the name of God is a memorial, but the Passover was a memorial. And if you turn right over to the book of Joshua chapter 4, and there are other passages I'm just skipping, but mainly these three will be sufficient to establish a truth. Look in Joshua chapter 4.
#5 | 2:54 to 3:19 | cleaned
You remember the children of Israel have walked across the Jordan River on dry land as well. And so in Joshua chapter 4 and verse 7, they erect some stones. Notice what is said. "Then you shall answer them," that is, when the children ask you in the future what mean these stones. "Then you shall answer them that the waters of Jordan were cut off before the ark of the covenant of the LORD; when it passed over Jordan, the waters of Jordan were cut off: and these stones shall be for a memorial unto the children of Israel for ever." Now notice if you would, there's three things that the Bible has already stated is to be a memorial. The name of God, the Passover, and these stones.
#6 | 3:19 to 4:05 | cleaned
Moreover, when you get to the New Testament, without turning there, I'll just quote it. Do you understand that the Lord's Supper is a memorial as well? For in 1 Corinthians 11 and verse 26, the Apostle Paul said this, "For as often as you eat this bread and drink this cup, you do show the Lord's death till He comes."
#7 | 4:05 to 4:25 | cleaned
Now, I quoted all these scriptures to demonstrate two truths. Number one, that memorials are indeed biblical. God's name is a memorial. The Passover was a memorial. The stones were a memorial. The Lord's Supper is a memorial. But secondly, and more importantly, is this. A memorial functions to bring to your mind an entire body of truth. So if I tell you the name of God, "I AM THAT I AM," Yahweh, is a memorial. When you hear the name of God, it should bring back to your mind a whole body of truth concerning the doctrine of God. If I mention the Lord's Supper, it should bring back to your mind a whole body of truth concerning the substitutionary and sacrificial work of the Lord Jesus Christ. So whenever we talk about a memorial, it is designed to bring back a whole body of truth. So, when we come to honor, whether it be our Confederate ancestors or our Revolutionary ancestors, whoever it is that we're honoring, it should bring back an entire body of truth.
#8 | 4:26 to 5:46 | cleaned
Now, if you're not familiar with Point Lookout, I would encourage you to do a little bit of studying because in the short time that Point Lookout was in existence, there were probably around 52,000 Confederates that were imprisoned there. The official record, the official record of those who died there, of course, is under 4,000 according to the Union records. But that does not count the people who entered at the dead house, which was without the gate, or any prisoner that died outside the gate. In fact, I just heard one man say that research is still ongoing, but it looks as if there may be as high as 20,000 to 30,000 Confederates who died just at Point Lookout.
#9 | 5:46 to 6:42 | cleaned
By the way, if I were to take time, I'd preach another hour telling you about how those men were deliberately starved, how cold it gets, and the wind and ice and snow. They'd give one blanket to three men. A few had tents, a few did not have tents. They were there in the swampy saltwater marshes where diseases were rampant. And the black Union soldiers, anytime a black Confederate happened to walk in, they would immediately shoot him dead. And the Union guards would fire indiscriminately into the tents and into the huts of the Confederate soldiers just trying to hit someone.
#10 | 6:43 to 7:32 | cleaned
It's unbelievable what these people went through and you have to stop and ask yourself a question or two like this. Why were those men fighting? Why were they willing to die on the battlefield? Why were they willing to die in prison? And why were they willing to suffer such torture and then live through all of that? Why were some of these people deliberately murdered? What was the reason for all of this suffering and death? You have to come to this question. What were they fighting and dying for?
#11 | 7:33 to 8:10 | cleaned
Now, let me just mention, there are two things that really irritate the living daylights out of me when I begin to talk about history, and especially Southern history. I usually say it like this, there are two things that really frost my cake, and the first one is simply this, "You lost the war, get over it." Let me tell you something, folks, if just losing the war was the only thing I could get over that very quickly. I could get over losing a fight. That's no problem. If Ed and I got into a fight and Ed beat me up, fine. I could get over that. But you can't get over tyranny and despotism and totalitarianism. You can't get over the loss of family and friends. You can't get over the loss of life and liberty and freedom. You can't get over this thing any more than you can get over being Southern or being a Christian or being biblical. The second thing that really causes me to come up in a fury and an uproar is when someone tries to say, "Well, you fought for a lost cause."
#12 | 8:11 to 9:23 | cleaned
Let me just put it to you very bluntly. The causes of truth, righteousness, freedom, and principle are never lost causes. Might does not make right. And just because Ed might can beat me in the ground does not mean that he is right in doing that. Jefferson Davis said it like this, "The principle for which we contend is bound to reassert itself though it be at another time and in another form."
#13 | 9:23 to 9:55 | cleaned
And let me offer something for your consideration. When you look around and see the problems that we now have, the problems that we have had, the problems that we are now going through, all of the struggles that you and I are having politically, economically, morally, educationally, and theologically, I want to submit something for your consideration, and that is simply this, that these are the same principles for which our Confederate ancestors fought, and since those principles were never ever settled, we're still having those same battles today. We're still fighting for a limited government. We're still fighting for states' rights. We're still fighting for liberty and freedom.
#14 | 9:57 to 10:41 | cleaned
Another observation which I think that you should know is this. I believe sincerely that our Confederate ancestors were fighting for the very same principles for which our founding fathers fought: liberty and freedom. So let me just try to answer a question for you today. And certainly this is not going to be an exhausted answer because I believe the answers are inexhaustible in one sense of the word. But why in the world were our ancestors willing to fight and die? What did they really and truly fight for? Let me answer that like this. First of all, our Confederate ancestors were fighting for a constitutional republic and not for a bureaucratic democracy or an American empire. When you stop and think about the fact that after the Constitutional Convention met, one asked Benjamin Franklin what kind of government do we have and his answer was "a republic if you could keep it." Now let me just mention something to you.
#15 | 10:46 to 11:59 | cleaned
The fourth section of the fourth article of the Constitution of the United States says this, listen carefully, "The United States shall guarantee to every state in the Union a Republican form of government." So the federal government is to guarantee every state in the Union a Republican form of government. The form of government that is guaranteed is one that was supposedly already in existence and one that was already established. And this is a republican form of government that our founding fathers established and therefore they said the federal government is obligated and duty-bound to guarantee to every state a republican form of government. Now, what is a republican form of government? Well, a republican form of government is a system of government in which the people hold sovereign power.
#16 | 11:59 to 12:57 | cleaned
It's contrasted to a democracy. It's contrasted to a monarchy. So the first element in a republican form of government is that the power is derived from the people. The second element is a republic is always one that is ruled by law. So in a republic, the people are the masters and the government is the servant. The people are the lords and the government is the slave. So the Constitution basically when it was written was a grant from we the people to form a limited government. The government that was authorized by the Constitution was to be a limited one deriving its just powers from the people and the states thereof. So the Constitution then was to be a grant of power from the people for the government to do certain limited things. It was the law of the people for the control of the government.
#17 | 12:59 to 14:10 | cleaned
Can you imagine what our founding fathers would do if they heard a politician like Nancy Pelosi say, "We have to pass this law so we can see what's in it"? Can you imagine what our founding fathers would do if they heard someone like Alcee Hastings from Florida, a congressman, say, "We make up the rules as we go along. There are no rules." You know what General Lee said? Just to show you that they were indeed fighting for a Constitutional Republic, General Lee said this, "If the Constitution and the Union established by our forefathers were restored, then there would be no truer supporters of that Union and that Constitution than the Southern people. Every brave people who considered their rights attacked and their constitutional liberties invaded, would have done as we did. Our conduct was not caused by any insurrectionary spirit, neither can it be termed rebellion, for our construction of the Constitution, under which we lived and acted, was the same from its adoption, and for eighty years we have been taught and educated by the founders of the Republic and their written declarations which controlled
#18 | 14:11 to 15:31 | cleaned
our consciences and our actions." What did Lee say? We're not insurrectionaries. We're not rebels. We're fighting for what we understood our founding fathers gave us. Again, Robert E. Lee said, "This all that the South ever desired was the union as established by our forefathers should be preserved and that the government as originally organized should be administered in purity and in truth." Couldn't be any plainer. Again, Lee said this, "The South has contended only for the supremacy of the Constitution and the just administration of the laws made in pursuance of it." They were not fighting to establish an empire. They were not fighting to establish some huge bureaucratic democracy somewhere.
#19 | 15:31 to 16:23 | cleaned
Alexander H. Stephens, who was vice president of the Confederacy, said this concerning secession. He said, "The real object of those who resorted to secession, as well as those who sustained it, was not the overthrow of the government of the United States, but to perpetuate the principles upon which it was founded. The object in quitting the union was not to destroy, but to save the principles of the Constitution."
#20 | 16:25 to 16:49 | cleaned
Now, let me just tell you something, folks, very plainly. In case you have not picked up on this, here it is, stated very bluntly, like it or lump it, Abraham Lincoln destroyed our Constitutional Republic. He changed the nature of the government from a republic to an empire. I want to read you just several paragraphs written by Joseph E. Fallon. He wrote this article on Lincoln and the death of the old republic.
#21 | 16:51 to 17:25 | cleaned
And listen to what he said. "Official history venerates Abraham Lincoln as an apostle of American democracy who waged war on the South to preserve the Union and to free the slaves. Official history is a lie. Lincoln was a dictator who destroyed the old republic and replaced the federal principles of 1789 with the ideological foundation of today's welfare warfare state. His administration was characterized by paranoia, a lust for power, and rampant corruption. The magnitude of that paranoia was evidenced by Lincoln's Secretary of War, Edwin Stanton, who declared that every department of the government was paralyzed by treason. Traitors were to be found in the Senate, in the House of Representatives, in the Cabinet, in the Federal Courts. Treason was flagrant in the revenue in the post office services as well as in the territorial governments and in the judicial reserves. In his bid for absolute power, Lincoln used treason as a pretext to unleash war and to shred the Constitution."
#22 | 17:26 to 18:35 | cleaned
"Freedom of the press was curtailed. The Chicago Times was one of over 300 northern newspapers suppressed for expressing incorrect views. As late as May 18, 1864, Lincoln ordered his military to arrest and imprison the editors, proprietors, and publishers of the New York World and the New York Journal of Commerce. Lincoln suspended habeas corpus. He criminalized speech and legalized arbitrary arrests. 20,000, some say as high as 40,000 political prisoners were held incommunicado and denied legal counsel. Maryland's legislature was overthrown and New York City was placed under military occupation."
#23 | 18:37 to 19:24 | cleaned
Now let me just pause right here just a moment. Alice and I took a few minutes while we were up at Point Lookout and we rode on into the Point Lookout State Park. And this is where a lot of these men at Point Lookout died. There's a mass grave there where they're just pushed into it and covered up. But we were looking at a couple of the historical markers and I do not remember all of this historical marker but I read and I could not believe what I was reading that it was printed in bold letters there for anyone to see and it was just talking about how Marylanders were divided
#24 | 19:24 to 20:05 | cleaned
because of the war etc. and it talked about the African-Americans somehow whatever but then it went on to say that private citizens were arrested without warrant to protect freedom. What? How can you protect freedom by destroying freedom? But there it was on a historical marker. And here Fallon says 20,000, and as I pointed out, some say as high as 40,000, were arrested without warrant. These are northern people, not southern people. One more quote, one more short paragraph from Fallon. He said in his December 1861 lectures in Boston and New York City, Northern abolitionist Wendell Phillips declared that "we live today, every one of us, under martial law. The Secretary of State puts into his Bastille, with a warrant as irresponsible as that of Louis XIV, any man whom he pleases."
#25 | 20:05 to 21:09 | cleaned
You think it was bad under Lincoln? It was. But as it was then, so it is today. Do you realize the Patriot Act, the National Defense Authorization Act, and every conceivable piece of legislation that has passed since then that destroys life and liberty and property and freedom is a gift to us from Abraham Lincoln? Because he's the one that set up this welfare warfare state and everything that we have today follows in his footsteps. Our ancestors fought and suffered and died to prevent exactly that which is happening in Washington D.C. today. They fought and died to prevent that which is happening in our state capitals today.
#26 | 21:12 to 22:08 | cleaned
You need to ponder sometimes how different our world would be if the South had won the war. Why were they fighting? They were not fighting for this bureaucratic democracy that we have today. They were not fighting for an American empire. They wanted to preserve that which the founding fathers had given to us. The second reason I believe that they fought is simply this. They were fighting for states' rights or states' sovereignty and not for a centralized, consolidated government. Now, if you don't understand states' rights, let me take you through this very quickly and very easily. To understand states' rights, you have to go back to the beginning. For instance, in 1781, the second article in the Articles of Confederation 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 in Congress assembled." So the Articles of Confederation state very clearly that each state retained its sovereignty, freedom, and independence. You remember when the war for independence was over, the Treaty of Paris settled it or ended it in 1783.
#27 | 22:10 to 23:35 | cleaned
And I want you to listen to the first article of the Treaty of Paris. I'm not going to read all of it, just enough to give you this idea. But here it is. "His Britannic Majesty acknowledges the said United States, in other words, New Hampshire, Massachusetts Bay, Rhode Island and Providence Plantations, Connecticut, New York, New Jersey, Pennsylvania, Delaware, Maryland, Virginia, North Carolina, South Carolina, and Georgia, to be free, sovereign, and independent states."
#28 | 23:37 to 24:01 | cleaned
And he treats them as such. And I'm stopping right there. But I want you to understand, when George III entered into this treaty, he did not enter this treaty with a consolidated centralized government just known as the United States. He entered into this treaty with 13 sovereign states. They were independent states. He had to make peace with 13 different states. When the Constitutional Convention met, Georgia, the Georgia delegation carried a banner which said this, "The state of Georgia, by the grace of God, free, sovereign, and independent." When the Constitution was written, the states, by a common agreement, united to form what is known as the federal government and to give it limited power and authority. Now I want you to understand something. The federal government did not create the states. The states created the federal government and it was to be federal and not national. So the federal government then that was created and authorized by the states was only to act as an agent of the states because the states were the real sovereigns and the federal government could only do that which the states delegated it to do.
#29 | 24:01 to 25:24 | cleaned
And the right to decide whether or not the federal government did anything that was beyond its power or limitation was reserved to the states. If you allowed the federal government to determine its own power and authority, then you're going to have unlimited and tyrannical powers. Let me point this out. Do you realize even New York, when New York acceded to the Constitution on July the 26th, 1788, it added these words. Listen carefully. "That the powers of government may be reassumed by the people whensoever it shall become necessary to their happiness." What did New York say? We gave delegated power and authority to the federal government and we can also take it back whenever we like. Do you realize when Virginia acceded to the Constitution on June the 25th, 1788, it added these words, "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 and that every power not granted
#30 | 25:24 to 26:39 | cleaned
thereby remains with them at their will." Now, if you really want to understand the independence and sovereignty of each state, I want you to consider the fact that when the Constitution was ratified in 1787, only 11 of the original 13 states ratified it. Do you realize there were two states that did not ratify it right away? Rhode Island and North Carolina. In fact, they did not even ratify it till nearly a year later. The Constitution was not forced upon them. The 11 states did not look at North Carolina and Rhode Island and say, "Well, majority rules, you're in whether you like it or not." No. You know how the 11 states who ratified the Constitution treated Rhode Island and North Carolina? They treated them as independent sovereign states. Neither was there a war mounted to coerce North Carolina and Rhode Island to ratify the Constitution. Not at all. Because they were free and independent states.
#31 | 26:39 to 28:00 | cleaned
They could come in or they could not come in. It was totally up to the states. When Rhode Island finally did accede to the Constitution, Rhode Island did so with this provision. Listen carefully. "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." Do you realize that every state that acceded to the Constitution understood that since they gave the power, they could take it back? Secession was understood by every state.
#32 | 28:00 to 28:47 | cleaned
I hope you know that it was Thomas Jefferson and James Madison who wrote the Virginia and the Kentucky resolutions. And in those resolutions they were saying that each state had acceded to the Constitution and each state could secede basically, and that each state had the right and the power to nullify, that is to abrogate any law that came down the pike from the federal government that they deemed unconstitutional. Let me just read to you the first paragraph of the Kentucky Resolution. Listen carefully. "Resolved that the several states composing the United States of America are not united on the principle of unlimited submission to the general government. But that by a compact, under the style and title of the Constitution of the United States and of its amendments thereto, they constituted a general government for special purposes, delegated to that government certain definite powers, reserving each state to itself the residuary mass of right to their own self-government, and that whensoever the general government assumes undelegated powers, its acts are unauthoritative, void, and of no force."
#33 | 28:50 to 30:11 | cleaned
"That to this compact, each state is seated as a state and is an integral party. Its co-states forming as to itself the other party. Each party has an equal right to judge for itself as well of infractions as of the mode and measure of redress." So what did Thomas Jefferson and James Madison say? The states are not going to give unlimited submission to the federal government.
#34 | 30:12 to 30:41 | cleaned
They understood that it was delegated power, and power that could be taken back. And each state reserved the right to nullify or abrogate anything that was unconstitutional. By the way, South Carolina did exactly that. You remember when they nullified the tariffs of 1828 and 1832 known as the tariffs of abomination. And what South Carolina did then when the federal government tried to impose these high taxes and high tariffs, they nullified them.
#35 | 30:43 to 31:17 | cleaned
In fact, they passed a nullifying ordinance. Listen carefully. Here's the second paragraph of the ordinance of nullification. "We therefore, the people of the state of South Carolina in convention assembled, do declare and ordain that these acts are unauthorized by the Constitution of the United States, and violate the true meaning and intent thereof, and are null, void, and no law nor binding upon this State, its officers, or citizens, and all promises, contracts, and obligations made or entered into, or to be made or entered into, with purpose to secure the duties imposed by the said Acts, and all judicial proceedings which shall be hereafter had in affirmation thereof, are and shall be held utterly null and void." What did they say?
#36 | 31:18 to 32:07 | cleaned
We're not going to pay these taxes. We're not going to allow these tariffs. Everything is null and void. We're not going to recognize it. Here's the concluding paragraph. Listen. "And we the people of South Carolina to the end that it may be fully understood by the government of the United States and the people of the co-states that we're determined to maintain this our ordinance and declaration at every hazard do further declare that we will not submit to the application of force on the part of the federal government to reduce this state to obedience, but that we will consider the passage by Congress of any act to coerce this state, shut up her ports, destroy or harass her commerce, or to enforce the acts hereby declared to be null and void."
#37 | 32:08 to 32:58 | cleaned
And then they go on to say, if you push us, we'll just withdraw from the union and set up our own government.
#38 | 32:58 to 33:04 | cleaned
Now let me ask you a question. Was South Carolina wrong? And the answer is no. South Carolina did not misinterpret the Compact. In fact, James Madison, who's known as the father of the Constitution, said this, "The powers delegated by the proposed Constitution of the federal government are few and defined. Those which are to remain in the state governments are numerous and indefinite. The former will be exercised principally on external objects as war, peace, negotiation, and foreign commerce, with which last the power of taxation will for the most part be connected. The powers reserved to the several states will extend to all objects which in the ordinary course of affairs concern the lives, liberty, and properties of the people and the internal order improving the prosperity of the state." What did he say? He said, the federal government has such a limited area that's going to affect the lives of the people. Why? It's going to be nothing but war and peace and negotiation with foreign commerce. But the state has all the rest of it.
#39 | 33:06 to 34:19 | cleaned
That's why we have the 9th and 10th Amendments, especially the 10th that says "the powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the states, are reserved to the states respectively, or to the people." By the way, Jefferson Davis made this same argument when he was in the Senate talking about the equality of the states. However, James Henley Thornwell, and I will mention him again later, James Henley Thornwell was a Presbyterian pastor, author, and theologian.
#40 | 34:20 to 34:52 | cleaned
He saw the war for what it really and truly was. Here's what he said, "If they," talking about the federal government and the north, "if they prevail, the whole character of the government will be changed. And instead of a federal republic, the common agent of sovereign and independent states, we shall have a central despotism with the notion of states forever abolished, deriving its power from the will and shaping its policy according to the wishes of a numerical majority of the people, we shall
#41 | 34:54 to 35:30 | cleaned
have, in other words, a supreme, irresponsible democracy. The avowed end of this present war is to make the government a government of force." And he was right. And that's exactly what we have today, not just in this country, but in every country where our government puts its hands, it is a government of force. You know Alexis de Tocqueville was a Frenchman and many of those European countries recognized what the Constitution was about originally and even de Tocqueville said state sovereignty was so ingrained in Southern men that when the South seceded she wrote her own Constitution. And certainly we did, the Confederate Constitution.
#42 | 35:30 to 36:24 | cleaned
Now, I want to read to you two quotes, and I want you to understand the attitude of the founding fathers. The first one is by Thomas Jefferson, and he said it like this, "I consider the foundation of the Constitution is laid on this ground, that all powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution nor prohibited by it to the states are reserved to the states or to the people. To take a single step beyond the boundaries thus specifically drawn around the powers of Congress is to take possession of a boundless field of power no longer susceptible to any definition." Now Thomas Jefferson said when the federal government steps beyond the Constitution it has taken possession of a boundless field of power, no longer susceptible to definition.
#43 | 36:26 to 37:26 | cleaned
To define is to limit. If you didn't understand that, let me give you one you will understand. John C. Calhoun, known as the Ironclad Southerner, said it just a little more plainly. He said, "The Constitution has admitted the jurisdiction of the United States within the limits of the several states only so far as the delegated powers authorize. Beyond that, they are intruders and may be lawfully expelled." Wow. Wow.
#44 | 37:27 to 38:05 | cleaned
What if the state of Georgia first went to the courts? And then second, went to arms to expel the federal government in the areas that the federal government has absolutely no right to be in this state. What if every state did that? Again, Robert E. Lee said, you remember, that they fought not from any insurrectionary spirit nor any rebellious attitude, but to preserve liberty and freedom. Once again, Alexander H. Stephens said it like this, "Depend upon it.
#45 | 38:07 to 38:49 | cleaned
There is no difference between consolidation and empire. No difference between centralism and imperialism. The consummation of either must necessarily end in the overthrow of liberty and the establishment of despotism." And that's exactly what we have. Alexander Hamilton in 1788 said, "If the federal government should overpass the just bounds of its authority and make a tyrannical use of its power, the people whose creature it is must appeal to the standard that they have formed and take such measures to redress the injury done." Stop and think. That is exactly what happened in 1793 in my favorite court case Chisholm versus Georgia.
#46 | 38:50 to 39:44 | cleaned
Some of you are very familiar with that. But in Chisholm versus Georgia, there's a man in South Carolina who went to the Supreme Court to sue the state of Georgia. And the Supreme Court of the United States sent to Georgia and said, "Come up here, boy. There's a case here against you." And the state of Georgia said this in essence, "Kiss my foot. We're the master. You're the servant."
#47 | 39:46 to 40:21 | cleaned
You don't order us around. We're not coming up to the Supreme Court. And so, the justice of the Supreme Court said to Georgia, "Well, if you don't come, we'll have this case without you and we will rule without you." And then the Georgia House of Representatives passed a bill making it a felony punishable by hanging for any person to carry out the decision of the Supreme Court. So the state of Georgia said, "You make all the decisions you want to. When you send your man here in the state of Georgia to enforce your decision, he will immediately be hanged without the benefit of clergy."
#48 | 40:21 to 41:11 | cleaned
And that led then to the passage of the 11th Amendment, which corrected that problem. Georgia said, "You're not going to do this to us. We're not going to have this." Can you imagine what it would be like if each state said boldly to the federal government, "No, you've gone beyond your bounds. You're not going to do this. You're not going to tyrannize our people. We're here in an interpositionary step. We're standing between our people and tyranny."
#49 | 41:14 to 41:47 | cleaned
You will not do this. And we will not allow it to be done. Our ancestors fought and were killed and were starved and were imprisoned and tortured for believing in states' rights and states' sovereignty. Because our ancestors fought for a limited government and for liberty and freedom and independence. Let me give you a third one very quickly. They also fought for biblical Christianity and not for a humanistic, rationalistic religion.
#50 | 41:47 to 42:30 | cleaned
Now, I understand that not everyone in the South was a Christian. I understand that. However, you know that there were two great revivals in the Confederate armies, and a minimum of 150,000 men were converted. There were also revivals in the churches at that particular time. But the point I'm trying to make is this. There are theological implications to that war. You have to remember that ideas have consequences. It is impossible to have a cultural revolution without having a theological revolution. You cannot have a change in culture without having a change in theology.
#51 | 42:31 to 43:11 | cleaned
I was just reminded very definitely this past week of the difference between when I was a boy and today. Because I remember when I was a boy, if I wanted to see a policeman, I had to go uptown and I had to look around. And it took me a while to find one. Driving through North Carolina, Virginia, and Maryland. Lord have mercy. Speed traps everywhere, cops behind every bush. I mean, and it wasn't just one every now and then. We'd see four and five at one time, most of them in unmarked cars, having someone pulled over.
#52 | 43:14 to 43:59 | cleaned
I could not wait to get out of those states. Why, in the 1950s, could I hardly find a policeman? And today you can't turn around without seeing five or six of them. Have you thought about that? Why in the 1950s you could hardly find a policeman and today you see five or six on every corner? Why? Back in the 1950s, most people still believed in the Ten Commandments. They still believed in morality and doing what was right and living what was right. Today, nobody believes anything or cares about anything.
#53 | 44:01 to 44:46 | cleaned
And if you're not going to have self-government, you're going to always have someone with a strong arm willing to govern you. Generally speaking, let me put it like this, it was the North that turned from biblical Christianity to rationalism, humanism, and transcendentalism. I know that not everybody in the North was an atheist and an infidel. I understand that. But generally speaking, that was the truth. The Bible belt was given to the South as a name for derision because the South held tenaciously to the Bible.
#54 | 44:46 to 45:23 | cleaned
In other words, we were not as educated as those smart, humanistic, rationalistic northerners. And so they made fun of us by saying, "Well, that's the Bible belt." Just to show you how the theological implications were so clearly evident in those days, James Henley Thornwell, who died in 1862, said this, "The parties in this conflict are not merely abolitionists and slaveholders." He says, don't think of it like that. He says, "They are atheists, socialists, communists, red republicans, Jacobins on the one side," that's the north, "and friends of order and regulated freedom on the other. In one word, the world is the battleground, Christianity and atheism, the combatants and the progress of humanity is at stake." It was a theological war.
#55 | 45:26 to 46:23 | cleaned
C. Gregg Singer, in his book, A Theological Interpretation of American History, said this, "After 1830, there was a growing philosophical and theological cleavage between the North and the South. While the North was becoming increasingly subject to radical influences, the South was becoming increasingly conservative in its outlook." So as the North was going one way, the South was saying, "No, we're holding on to the Scripture." And M. E. Bradford, in The Southern Partisan in 1991, wrote this, "As the war approached, these clergymen more and more tended to view the sectional controversy as a dispute between those who acknowledge the authority of Scripture and those who set their own moral sense above it."
#56 | 46:23 to 47:08 | cleaned
In other words, between Christians and infidels. Once you understand that one's theology determines one's worldview, then you must understand how the North was seeking to impose its culture upon the South. Are you listening to me? Since the North had changed its theology, it had changed basically its culture. Thinking itself to be superior now, it wants to change the culture of the South. And in order to change the culture of the South, it has to change the theology of the South. Do you understand this is what reconstruction was all about? Think about the word. Reconstruction. Richard Taylor has a book entitled Deconstruction and Reconstruction. General Richard Taylor, a Confederate soldier who is the son of President Zachary Taylor.
#57 | 47:08 to 48:13 | cleaned
What were they trying to do? Reconstruct us in their theology and reconstruct us in their way of thinking. Listen folks, you can't act like a northerner unless you believe like a northerner. You can't! One of the reasons so many Southern pastors fought in the war was simply because they believed they were defending the faith against humanism and rationalism. And let me just show you how the North understood this as well. Not just Southern men.
#58 | 48:17 to 48:54 | cleaned
I suppose that two of my favorite quotes are these. One Yankee critic said this, that he believed "the most unmitigated set of villains they have in the South are the Methodist, Baptist, Presbyterians, and Episcopalian preachers, all talking secession, drinking mean liquor, and advocating the cause of Jeff Davis and the devil." Well, I suppose probably there could be no greater compliment, though, that was given Southern soldiers than the one that was given by a Yankee chaplain. The Yankee chaplain was talking to his regiment and he was trying to instill upon the Yankee men the zeal and the enthusiasm and the courage that was being expressed by Southern men in fighting.
#59 | 48:55 to 49:57 | cleaned
And here's what he said. "You may call this fanaticism, enthusiasm, or whatever you will. But remember, you're fighting an enemy that comes from the closet to the battlefield, that comes from its knees in prayer to engage in deadly strife, that comes in the belief that its battles are the battles of Jehovah, that His smile is resting upon its banner and will ensure success. What power to make every man a hero and every hero, if need be, a murderer." What did he say? The Southern men were fighting for a religious cause and that religion was biblical Christianity.
#60 | 49:58 to 50:43 | cleaned
You know what the problem we have today in most of our patriotic organizations and in most of our historical organizations? Here's the problem. Unhappily, a lot of the good and well-intentioned people are just as lost as a hound dog and know nothing of the grace of God. What am I saying that? Here's why I'm saying that, folks. If we want our history and our heritage and our country back, we have to come back and stand on the same foundation that our founding fathers and our Confederate ancestors stood upon. And that foundation is the Word of God.
#61 | 50:45 to 51:48 | cleaned
And in order to be a genuine Christian, one must indeed repent of his sins and believe savingly upon the Lord Jesus Christ. And you will confess Him and acknowledge Him and bring your life in conformity to His Word. We want our country back. But we will never get it back until we come back to the Sovereign God who gave us this country. Well, you've got to remember, God can kick any people out of His country. This is His earth. This is His land. And if we don't give God the honor and glory that's due in His name, if we do not pay our land rent, so to speak, He can kick us off and do so justly and righteously. If we want what our forefathers had, we need to come back to the Lord Jesus Christ. We need to come back in repentance and faith. We need to come back and say, "I want what Robert E. Lee had. I want what Stonewall Jackson had. I want what Richard Ewell had. I want what Jeb Stuart had."
#62 | 51:53 to 53:06 | cleaned
I want what our Founding Fathers had. I want the courage and the character that comes from being a Christian. I just wonder, if our Founding Fathers were alive today, if our Confederate fathers were alive today, how long would they put up with what we're putting up with?
#63 | 53:06 to 53:39 | cleaned
May God give us men. Godly men. Christian men. Courageous men. Southern men. With character and courage, and grace. Father, in the name of Jesus Christ, we bow to Thee, and we ask, Father, Your blessing and Your help, and we pray that You'll speak to our hearts and make us, Father, what we should be. Help us be thankful, Father, for what our founding fathers and our Confederate fathers have given unto us. And help us to see how we've wasted it and thrown it away, despised it, disregarded it, dishonored it. Give us, Lord, what we need to stand for Thee and to live for Thee. In the name of Jesus Christ, we ask and pray. Amen.
#64 | 53:48 to 54:43 | cleaned

deepseek | deepseek-v4-pro | clean_readable_transcript | 2026-06-04T23:28:59Z

In Honor Of Confederate Veterans And Prisoners

John Weaver | Freedom Ministries

John Weaver delivers a sermon honoring Confederate veterans and prisoners, using biblical memorials to argue that honoring ancestors recalls a body of truth. He contends that Confederate soldiers fought for a constitutional republic, states' rights, and biblical Christianity against Northern tyranny, humanism, and centralized despotism. The message calls for a return to the faith and principles of the founding and Confederate fathers.

Introduction: A Message for Confederate Memorial Day

Weaver introduces his sermon, originally preached at Point Lookout, Maryland, for Confederate Memorial Day, and notes its relevance to the July 4th week.

Scripture Reading — Exodus 3:13-15

"And Moses said unto God, Behold, when I come unto the children of Israel, and shall say to them, The God of your fathers hath sent me unto you; and they shall say to me, What is his name? what shall I say unto them? And God said unto Moses, I AM THAT I AM: and he said, Thus shalt thou say unto the children of Israel, I AM hath sent me unto you. And God said moreover unto Moses, Thus shalt thou say unto the children of Israel, The LORD God of your fathers, the God of Abraham, the God of Isaac, and the God of Jacob, hath sent me unto you: this is my name for ever, and this is my memorial unto all generations."

Now, I want you to note, if you would, what God said concerning His name in verse 15.

Biblical Basis for Memorials

Weaver cites Exodus 3:13-15, Exodus 12:14, and Joshua 4:7 to show that God's name, the Passover, and stones are memorials, establishing that memorials are biblical and recall a body of truth.

Scripture Reading — Exodus 3:13-15

"And Moses said unto God, Behold, when I come unto the children of Israel, and shall say to them, The God of your fathers hath sent me unto you; and they shall say to me, What is his name? what shall I say unto them? And God said unto Moses, I AM THAT I AM: and he said, Thus shalt thou say unto the children of Israel, I AM hath sent me unto you. And God said moreover unto Moses, Thus shalt thou say unto the children of Israel, The LORD God of your fathers, the God of Abraham, the God of Isaac, and the God of Jacob, hath sent me unto you: this is my name for ever, and this is my memorial unto all generations."

Now, I want you to note, if you would, what God said concerning His name in verse 15.

Scripture Reading — Exodus 12:14

"And this day shall be unto you for a memorial." "And you shall keep it a feast to the LORD throughout your generations; you shall keep it a feast by an ordinance for ever."

Scripture Reading — Joshua 4:7

"Then you shall answer them that the waters of Jordan were cut off before the ark of the covenant of the LORD; when it passed over Jordan, the waters of Jordan were cut off: and these stones shall be for a memorial unto the children of Israel for ever."

The Suffering at Point Lookout

Weaver describes the harsh conditions and deliberate mistreatment of Confederate prisoners at Point Lookout, emphasizing starvation, exposure, and murder by Union guards.

Why They Fought: A Constitutional Republic

Lincoln's Destruction of the Republic

Why They Fought: States' Rights and Sovereignty

Why They Fought: Biblical Christianity vs. Humanism

Application: Returning to the Foundation of God's Word

Weaver calls for repentance and faith in Christ, urging a return to the biblical foundation of the founding and Confederate fathers to reclaim the nation's heritage and liberty.

In Honor Of Confederate Veterans And Prisoners

John Weaver | YouTube

Lecture Metadata	Details
Speaker	John Weaver
Source	YouTube
Media ID	nlQgCvGdiRk
Subject	Old Testament Studies
Course	Exodus: Bondage, Deliverance, and Passover: The Superiority of Christ
Genre	Sermon
Date	2013-10-31
Dictation Name
Book	Book 079: Exodus: Bondage, Deliverance, and Passover - Volume 2 — Chapter 23
Source Timed Segments	64

Lecture Guide

Outline

Introduction: A Message for Confederate Memorial Day: Weaver introduces his sermon, originally preached at Point Lookout, Maryland, for Confederate Memorial Day, and notes its relevance to the July 4th week.
Biblical Basis for Memorials: Weaver cites Exodus 3:13-15, Exodus 12:14, and Joshua 4:7 to show that God's name, the Passover, and stones are memorials, establishing that memorials are biblical and recall a body of truth.
The Suffering at Point Lookout: Weaver describes the harsh conditions and deliberate mistreatment of Confederate prisoners at Point Lookout, emphasizing starvation, exposure, and murder by Union guards.
Why They Fought: A Constitutional Republic: Weaver argues that Confederates fought to preserve a constitutional republic, not a bureaucratic democracy or empire, citing the Constitution's guarantee of a republican form of government and quotes from Robert E. Lee and Alexander H. Stephens.
Lincoln's Destruction of the Republic: Weaver asserts that Abraham Lincoln destroyed the constitutional republic, replacing it with a welfare-warfare state, and details Lincoln's suppression of civil liberties, including press censorship and suspension of habeas corpus.
Why They Fought: States' Rights and Sovereignty: Weaver explains that Confederates fought for states' rights and sovereignty, tracing the principle from the Articles of Confederation through the Treaty of Paris, state ratification conventions, and the Virginia and Kentucky Resolutions, emphasizing the right of secession and nullification.
Why They Fought: Biblical Christianity vs. Humanism: Weaver contends that the war was a theological conflict between biblical Christianity in the South and Northern humanism, rationalism, and transcendentalism, citing James Henley Thornwell and other sources to show that Southerners saw themselves defending the faith.
Application: Returning to the Foundation of God's Word: Weaver calls for repentance and faith in Christ, urging a return to the biblical foundation of the founding and Confederate fathers to reclaim the nation's heritage and liberty.

Major Themes

Key Arguments

Memorials recall a body of truth

Biblical memorials are designed to bring to mind an entire body of truth, so honoring Confederate ancestors should recall the principles they fought for.

Weaver states, 'A memorial functions to bring to your mind an entire body of truth... So whenever we talk about a memorial, it is designed to bring back a whole body of truth.'

Confederates fought for a constitutional republic

The South fought to preserve the original constitutional republic established by the founders, not to create a new empire or democracy.

Weaver quotes Robert E. Lee: 'The South has contended only for the supremacy of the Constitution and the just administration of the laws made in pursuance of it.'

Lincoln destroyed the republic

Lincoln's actions during the war transformed the government from a limited republic into a centralized, tyrannical empire.

Weaver reads Fallon: 'Lincoln was a dictator who destroyed the old republic and replaced the federal principles of 1789 with the ideological foundation of today's welfare warfare state.'

States retained sovereignty and right of secession

The states created the federal government and reserved the right to resume delegated powers, including through secession.

Weaver cites New York's ratification statement: 'That the powers of government may be reassumed by the people whensoever it shall become necessary to their happiness.'

The war was theological

The conflict was fundamentally between biblical Christianity and Northern infidelity, with Southerners defending the faith.

Weaver quotes Thornwell: 'The parties in this conflict are not merely abolitionists and slaveholders... They are atheists, socialists, communists... on the one side, and friends of order and regulated freedom on the other.'

Modern tyranny stems from Lincoln's precedent

Contemporary erosions of liberty, such as the Patriot Act, are direct descendants of Lincoln's wartime measures.

Weaver states, 'the Patriot Act, the National Defense Authorization Act, and every conceivable piece of legislation that has passed since then that destroys life and liberty and property and freedom is a gift to us from Abraham Lincoln.'

Cultural change requires theological change

The North's cultural shift was rooted in a theological shift away from biblical authority, and reconstruction aimed to impose that new theology on the South.

Weaver says, 'It is impossible to have a cultural revolution without having a theological revolution. You cannot have a change in culture without having a change in theology.'

Return to Christ is necessary for national restoration

Only by returning to the Christian faith of the founders and Confederate fathers can the nation's heritage and liberty be recovered.

Weaver prays, 'If we want what our forefathers had, we need to come back to the Lord Jesus Christ. We need to come back in repentance and faith.'

Scripture References

Exodus 3:13-15: Weaver reads this passage to show that God's name is a memorial, establishing the biblical precedent for memorials.
Exodus 12:14: Weaver cites this verse to demonstrate that the Passover was instituted as a memorial.
Joshua 4:7: Weaver references the stones set up after crossing the Jordan as another biblical memorial.
1 Corinthians 11:26: Weaver quotes this verse to show that the Lord's Supper is a memorial in the New Testament.

Historical References

Point Lookout Prison Camp: Weaver describes the conditions at Point Lookout, where up to 52,000 Confederates were imprisoned and many died from starvation, exposure, and murder.
Constitutional Convention and Benjamin Franklin: Weaver recounts Franklin's reply that the new government was 'a republic if you could keep it' to emphasize the fragility of the republic.
Articles of Confederation (1781): Weaver quotes Article II to show that each state retained its sovereignty, freedom, and independence.
Treaty of Paris (1783): Weaver reads from Article I to demonstrate that Great Britain recognized each state as free, sovereign, and independent.
Virginia and Kentucky Resolutions (1798): Weaver cites these resolutions, authored by Jefferson and Madison, to argue that states had the right to nullify unconstitutional federal acts.
South Carolina Nullification Crisis (1832): Weaver details South Carolina's nullification of the tariffs of 1828 and 1832 as an exercise of states' rights.
Chisholm v. Georgia (1793): Weaver recounts this Supreme Court case to illustrate Georgia's assertion of state sovereignty against federal judicial overreach.
Lincoln's suspension of habeas corpus and suppression of press: Weaver describes Lincoln's wartime measures, including the arrest of political prisoners and suppression of newspapers, as tyrannical.
Revivals in the Confederate armies: Weaver mentions that at least 150,000 men were converted during revivals in the Confederate armies, highlighting the religious character of the South.
Reconstruction: Weaver interprets Reconstruction as an attempt to impose Northern theology and culture on the South.

Important Quotes

A memorial functions to bring to your mind an entire body of truth.

This is the central hermeneutical principle Weaver uses to connect biblical memorials to honoring Confederate ancestors.

The causes of truth, righteousness, freedom, and principle are never lost causes.

Weaver refutes the 'lost cause' criticism by asserting the enduring moral validity of the Confederate cause.

The South has contended only for the supremacy of the Constitution and the just administration of the laws made in pursuance of it.

Weaver uses Robert E. Lee's words to argue that the Confederacy fought for constitutional fidelity, not rebellion.

Lincoln was a dictator who destroyed the old republic and replaced the federal principles of 1789 with the ideological foundation of today's welfare warfare state.

This quote from Joseph Fallon encapsulates Weaver's view of Lincoln as the destroyer of the original republic.

It is impossible to have a cultural revolution without having a theological revolution.

Weaver asserts the foundational role of theology in shaping culture, explaining the North's attempt to reconstruct the South.

If we want our history and our heritage and our country back, we have to come back and stand on the same foundation that our founding fathers and our Confederate ancestors stood upon. And that foundation is the Word of God.

This is the sermon's primary application, calling for a return to biblical Christianity as the basis for national restoration.

Discussion Questions

[Question]

How does the biblical concept of a memorial shape the way we should remember historical figures and events?

[Context]

Weaver argues that memorials recall a body of truth; this question explores the application of that principle.

[Question]

In what ways does the distinction between a republic and a democracy affect our understanding of American government?

[Context]

Weaver emphasizes that the founders established a republic, not a democracy, and that this distinction was central to the Confederate cause.

[Question]

How should Christians evaluate the actions of political leaders who violate constitutional limits in the name of national unity or security?

[Context]

Weaver condemns Lincoln's suspension of habeas corpus and suppression of dissent as tyrannical.

[Question]

What is the biblical basis for the doctrine of states' rights or the right of secession, if any?

[Context]

Weaver argues from early American documents that states retained sovereignty, but does not directly cite Scripture for this political doctrine.

[Question]

How does a change in theology lead to a change in culture, and what examples can we see today?

[Context]

Weaver states that cultural revolution requires theological revolution, using the North's shift to humanism as an example.

[Question]

In what ways might the modern church be tempted to conform to the prevailing culture rather than stand on biblical truth?

[Context]

Weaver contrasts the South's adherence to Scripture with the North's rationalism, implying a warning for today.

[Question]

What does genuine repentance and faith look like in the context of reclaiming a nation's spiritual heritage?

[Context]

Weaver calls for a return to Christ as the only way to recover what the founding and Confederate fathers had.

Applications

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

deepseek | deepseek-v4-pro | weaver_study | 2026-06-05T23:25:10Z