Jump to content
Washington DC Message Boards
Sign in to follow this  
Luke_Wilbur

The Didache (The Teaching) 2nd Revision

Recommended Posts

The Didache - Introduction
 
"Son, if you look for the good you will find it. If you look for the bad you will find it too." This was the first moral teaching given to me by my father when I was just a boy.  Learning the truth of good and bad starts with life experiences with family (mothers, fathers, brothers, sisters, grandparents, aunts, uncles, guardians etc..) friends, classmates, teachers (pastors, priests, rabbis, professors, councilors, etc), and adversaries. Truth can be further shaped with the knowledge gained from media (internet, television, radio, movies, books, etc ). In this age of Science and Faith it can be difficult discerning the Truth that comes from a Creative Force of Nature and what is from the teaching of Man.

It is a natural desire to want and hope for happiness, long life, and good fortune. It is interesting to see the world from another's eyes. My pursuit of happiness started when my Dad read me "Treasure Island" as a child. After each chapter he would tell me to close my eyes and follow my dreams. Since those moments I have traveled around this globe on many life adventures. And have been enlightened through the words of many great teachers, storytellers, grifters, false prophets, and those holy and euphoric beings.

The above introduction gives you a point in my road map to understanding and accepting the Truth to what is good and bad is important to critical thinking.  To understand my reasoning it is important to that I give you the reader background on what has been deemed as good and bad conduct , and the concepts of truth and happiness. I will be introducing and organizing relevant subject material (data) that establishes a frame of reference relating to systematic chains of thought that accurately explain the noumenon (conception) known as human wisdom of discerning the truth of what is good and bad. 
 
In humble admiration, I am using President Thomas Jefferson's syllabus method used in his book "The Life and Morals of Jesus of Nazareth" (also known as the Jefferson Bible) to best present the truth to what is good and bad. Jefferson's book was made made by cutting out gospel wisdom passages of the New Testament (Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John) and arranging them on the pages of a blank book, in a certain order of time or subject that he thought best to present the philosophical teachings of Jesus without the supernatural.

President John Adams understood the magnitude of Jefferson's work.
 
John Adams to Thomas Jefferson, 14 November 1813

Quote

I admire your Employment, in Selecting the Philosophy and Divinity of Jesus and Separating it from all intermixtures. If I had Eyes and Nerves, I would go through both Testaments and mark all that I understand. To examine the Mishna Gemara Cabbala Jezirah, Sohar Cosri and Talmud of the Hebrews would require the life of Methuselah, and after all, his 969 years would be wasted to very little purpose.

In humility, I hope my essay to be an addendum to Jefferson's "The Life and Morals of Jesus of Nazareth" (also known as the Jefferson Bible) to best present the moral truth found in the Didache of the 12 Apostles.  I will follow Jefferson's same method by adapting the modern technology of copying, cutting, and pasting a reasoned comparison of the Didache's text line by line with my life experiences, media and the Holy Word (Scripture) given by a supernatural Creative Force of Nature that has been witnessed and testified by the Jewish, Christian, and Muslim faiths.

In addition, I will include other faiths, philosophy, and natural science in context to critically research a particular Apostolic teaching. President George Washington's Farewell address emphasized that Religion and Moralism share the same objective platform in framing a civil society. Both concepts share faith (trust) in others and belief that justice and benevolence should be universal (equal) towards others.

Washington's Farewell Address 1796

Quote

Observe good faith and justice towards all nations; cultivate peace and harmony with all. Religion and morality enjoin this conduct; and can it be, that good policy does not equally enjoin it - It will be worthy of a free, enlightened, and at no distant period, a great nation, to give to mankind the magnanimous and too novel example of a people always guided by an exalted justice and benevolence.

It is my hope to enjoin,"The Life and Morals of Jesus of Nazareth" with The Didache (dee-da-ke, Greek word for teaching) of the 12 Apostles,  the 'first recognized catechism' (articles of faith) of the Christian church. The Didache is honored as a timeless moral compass that identifies selfless positive actions that lead to life and prosperity and negative selfish actions that lead to death and destruction.The historical tradition of the Church reveals that it was Jesus brother, James The Just who wrote and  passed down a guidebook to Jews, Smaritans, Noahides, and Gentiles to understanding on the honor of being Civil to other Son's and Daughter's of the Creator of the world and the Heavens.

Over time the original Didache was replaced with revised teachings that brought about new catechisms, church schisms, reformations, and the birth of Arianism, Islam, Protestantism, Mormonism, Unitarianism, and an evolving isms from a branch of knowledge of what is good and bad. During my research I have found many concepts of happiness to connected to religion,  spirituality, philosophy, and science. The principles of right living by the golden rule apply to everyone regardless of culture or creed.

For nonChristians the The Didache of the 12 Apostles is a code of conduct without references to angels, prophecy and miracles. For those in Behavior Sciences and religious naturalist I found the Didache to a good window to understanding the evolution of Jewish, Christian, and Islamic social morality. Congruent (in harmony) to the Laws given to the Israelites through Moses, the Didache is an instruction manual Jesus gave to the Apostles (Messengers, Missionaries) that further defines how to be righteous (law abiding) Christians and gain happiness in life. All of those who with faith in a higher power will see the truth to happiness follows the same moral path of guidance. It is the degree of what is considered good and bad that is different between us all.

I propose the Didache to be a great mechanism to create positive neuroplasticity (physical change to the brain) and socioplasticity (cultural change to a society) that should be studied for its benefits to the happiness of our human condition. It is my belief that our imperfect primal inclinations can subdued by striving on building virtuous habits based on reason without expectation of reward. 

I ask you the reader to temporarily suspend your preconception or disbelief on whether or not a Creative Force of Nature exists or how an Apostolic teaching can give us an understanding on how the choice of our actions can lead to Life and Happiness or Death and Misery until I am finished presenting testimony of definitions of to you. It is my hope that together you the reader and I the writer strip away the bias of belief and unbelief in our quest for truth to better understanding what it means to have good moral sense in life and share the happiness when we find it.

The Pursuit of Happiness

In our pursuit for the Truth of happiness I shall begin my essay with a quote from the United States Declaration of Independence adopted by The Second Continental Congress on July 4, 1776.

Quote

We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.

There are also aspects of truth that are beyond explicit reason. The concept of happiness being a natural state of mind that gives us hope beyond explicit reason. The concept of happiness has been shared in wisdom and spiritual writings (symbology) in cultures since the beginning of recorded time. 

Before you start reading further, please take the time make yourself comfortable. Relaxation will open your mind to understanding what is being shared to you. Reflect on a cherished memory of people you trust and love being happy around you. I have many fond memories of vacationing around the country with my parents in our 68 Volkswagen Van. It was on cool camper. We took it everywhere and had a lot of fun!  One reoccurring memory I have is camping at Big Meadows Campground secluded in the rolling hills of Shenandoah National Park.  One moment plays over and over is where I am trying to roast the perfect marshmallow over the glowing coals of our campfire while staring at my Dad telling Mom what a good time he was having and how much he loves us. Try to imagine the people you trust in your memory inviting other individuals to share their thoughts of what makes them happy. I like to dream that my father is camping with the grandchildren he never got to meet during his time here on earth. 

The first moment of happiness I have chosen comes from George Washington, a distinguished American gentleman that exemplified leadership, vision and civil (virtuous) conduct throughout his life. George writes a letter to his elderly mother, giving practical advice on what is really important in life.  Washington's belief that implicit happiness is not a quantifiable object or equation lost in the world.  Rather, America's first President regarded happiness to be found if understood as an internal framework mechanism (attitude) within our conscious that controls the outcome of our thoughts. Any man that can convince battle weary soldiers to fight for the dream of happiness gets a seat in my campfire as guest I trust.

From George Washington to Mary Ball Washington, 15 February 1787

Quote

happiness depends more upon the internal frame of a person's own mind, than on the externals in the world. 

I can imagine Epicurus teaching his students how to frame one's mind to seek wisdom in finding happiness, long life, and good fortune by looking for the Just (Good, righteous) actions one can discover peace of mind. And with this wisdom a Just being sees the unhealthy risks and consequences of being corrupt (bad, wicked) is a mind in constant unrested conflict. For me Contrasting Peace to Conflict is like being comfortably cool with a slight breeze brushing your skin or experiencing the agony the sweat boiling on your skin from stagnant heat. A Behavior scientist would look at a just person as an individual that has the ability control primal feelings for knowledge in pursuit of of happiness.

Principal Doctrines, 310 BC – 270 BC

Epicurus

Quote

17. The just person enjoys the greatest peace of mind, while the unjust is full of the utmost disquietude.

In this passage Plato writes the dialogue between Socrates persuading Cleinias to love and share wisdom. Socrates frames happiness and good fortune being found through knowledge of the right use of things in life. A behavior scientist understands that social learning comes through observation, imitation, and modelling others that those that appear happy and successful. Every time we learn something new our mirror neuron system (network of neurons located in frontal lobe of brain) becomes active and stores that information, so in the future we can act accordingly. The truth to our reality is constructed by social and cultural processes in harmony with our independent intellect.

Euthydemus 380 BC

By Plato

Quote

SOCRATES: Let us consider a further point. Seeing that all men desire happiness, and happiness, as has been shown, is gained by a use, and a right use, of the things of life, and the right use of them, and good fortune in the use of them, is given by knowledge,-the inference is that everybody ought by all means to try and make himself as wise as he can?

CLEINIAS: Yes, he said.

SOCRATES: And when a man thinks that he ought to obtain this treasure, far more than money, from a father or a guardian or a friend or a suitor, whether citizen or stranger-the eager desire and prayer to them that they would impart wisdom to you, is not at all dishonourable, Cleinias; nor is any one to be blamed for doing any honourable service or ministration to any man, whether a lover or not, if his aim is to get wisdom. Do you agree? 

CLEINIAS:Yes. I quite agree, and think that you are right.

SOCRATES: Cleinias, if only wisdom can be taught, and does not come to man spontaneously; for this is a point which has still to be considered, and is not yet agreed upon by you and me-   

CLEINIAS: But I think, Socrates, that wisdom can be taught

SOCRATES: Best of men, I said, I am delighted to hear you say so; and I am also grateful to you for having saved me from a long and tiresome investigation as to whether wisdom can be taught or not. But now, as you think that wisdom can be taught, and that wisdom only can make a man happy and fortunate will you not acknowledge that all of us ought to love wisdom, and you individually will try to love her?

CLEINIAS: Certainly, Socrates, he said; I will do my best.

Plato's student, Aristotle understood that knowledge of what is happiness comes first through the distinguishing the sensual pains and pleasures that come from our senses every waking moment.

 

Through our memory we are to frame our thoughts to recall the pleasurable moments to override the painful ones that transpire. Reflect on the cherished memory you choose earlier when I asked you to relax. The next time when your in pain or depressed recall your happy memory. The more you recall the moment the synthesis of extra receptors  signal-receiving neurons in the dorsal horn behavior scientist would state this neuronal override is accomplished through established visual, auditory, kinesthetic, and tactile pathways to the brain. This produces a multisensory connection to the concepts and skills being taught and helps children retain new information. Kinesthetic pain-amplifying mechanism by keeping the spinal cord neurons

Metaphysics,

Book 1, section 980a

Quote

All men naturally desire knowledge. An indication of this is our esteem for the senses; for apart from their use we esteem them for their own sake, and most of all the sense of sight. Not only with a view to action, but even when no action is contemplated, we prefer sight, generally speaking, to all the other senses.The reason of this is that of all the senses sight best helps us to know things, and reveals many distinctions.

Now animals are by nature born with the power of sensation, and from this some acquire the faculty of memory, whereas others do not.

Aristotle believed virtue (good habits) to be the supporting structure for our internal framework our minds to think above mainstream thoughts.  It is virtue that provides us the ability to be aware of a higher form of happiness than a temporary pleasure moments to our physical appetites (cravings). To obtain virtue one must learn to develop the ability to discern (reason) what actions are deemed virtues.  And then like physical exercise, one must intend to consistently practice doing virtuous actions even when they feel uncomfortable.  In time, the repetition of virtuous actions will develop into automatic habits that are done without intentional thinking. One will gain wisdom (greater understanding) to the benefits and risks of following principles (ideas) that may or may not lead to happiness. After explaining this to my son Luke, he responded that understanding happiness takes practice doing what you believe to be good.

The Nicomachean Ethics , 340 BC

Book X - Chapter 7

Aristotle

Quote

instead of listening to those who advise us as men and mortals not to lift our thoughts above what is human and mortal, we ought rather, as far as possible, to put off our mortality and make every effort to live in the exercise of the highest of our faculties; for though it be but a small part of us, yet in power and value it far surpasses all the rest.

AMozi (Mo-tze) taught that a Righteous (Superior) Being has a unique ability to frame the mind to sacrifice self-interest and focus on respectful actions of altruism towards others. Superior beings are free from corruption and humble with their fortune. One must respect and love and mourn all that have passed through all stages of life and death. By being mindful (focusing) on knowledge learned on how altruism brings happiness over temporary pleasures.

Mozi 470 - 391 BC

Book 1

Self-cultivation

Quote

...The superior men are daily more energetic in performing their duty, but weaker in their desires, and more stately in their appearance. The way of the superior man makes the individual incorruptible in poverty and righteous when wealthy; it makes him love the living and mourn the dead. These four qualities of conduct cannot be hypocritically embodied in one's personality. There is nothing in his mind that goes beyond love; there is nothing in his behavior that goes beyond respectfulness, and there is nothing from his mouth that goes beyond gentility. When one pursues such a way until it pervades his four limbs and permeates his flesh and skin, and until he becomes white-haired and bald-headed without ceasing, one is truly a sage.

The Analects (Selected Passages) of Confucius recorded by his students. Here we see Confucius understanding that outcome is related to one's thoughts and actions. Happiness is having a positive attitude during every moment of your life under any circumstance. Wealth and honors are outside who you are  What others say about you is only a guide to how you present yourself. All of these material things fade away. 

The Analects of Confucius 

7. 述而  Shu er -  Transmitting - 475 - 221 BC

Quote

7:15 Confucius said: "I can live with coarse rice to eat, water for drink and my arm as a pillow and still be happy. Wealth and honors that one possesses in the midst of injustice are like floating clouds."

Buddha framed happiness to be found in all beings free of hate or violence. One should have a solid attitude of gladness. LIfe is a chrysalis (transformation) of existence recorded in many thoughts. Those that are beneficial have a chance to be eternal. But, many thoughts get altered through malice and hate.

KALAMA SUTTA 563 - 400 BC

The Buddha's Charter of Free Inquiry

The Four Exalted Dwellings

Quote

He lives, having pervaded (filled), with the thought of gladness, one  quarter; likewise the second; likewise the third; likewise the fourth; so above, below, and across; he dwells, having pervaded  because of the existence in it of all living beings, everywhere, the entire world, with the great, exalted, boundless thought of gladness that is free of hate or malice.

Lao Tzu (Laozi, Old Master) taught his students that how to frame one's mind to seek happiness by learning from individuals with a good attitude towards life and calm actions that are open and respectful towards others free from malice or hate. 

Chapter 20

Quote

Enlightenment of the absolute Tao can free a person from worries and sorrow.
How much is the difference between a respectful response and an angry response?
How great is the difference between good and evil?
What people naturally fear, one should also fear.
One’s endless desire can result in negligence of the true nature of life.
People like to pursue after excitement as if they were ascending the terrace in spring and
celebrate a sacrificial feast.
But I alone remain quiet and calm like an infant who is pure and innocent.
And I alone appeared to be lost like one who has nowhere to go.
All people have a surplus, but I alone was simple and left out like a fool.
People seemed bright and shrewd, while I seemed dull.
People like to dispute, while I alone remain quiet.
I am calm and peaceful like the boundless ocean.
I am open-hearted and free like the wind blowing high above the sky without hindrance.
Everyone thinks of themselves as capable and outstanding while I appeared unlearned.
I am the only one to be different from others for I value highly the Great Tao and joyfully act
accordingly. 

Zarathushtra composed the Ahuna Vairya (Yatha Ahu Vairyo) a sacred prayer and wisdom that if understood and implemented into daily life will provide the key to receiving blessing from the Creator and defeat evil, by doing virtuous acts such as protecting the poor with a loving mind. Buddhists would accept happiness to found in all beings free of hate and protecting those in need with love. Epicureans would accept turning away from selfish hate for altruistic love to be a higher frame of mind.

Ahuna Vairya, 1500 BC - 1000 BC

Quote

Just as the Ahu (Sovereign Lord, King) is all-powerful,
So the Ratu (Spiritual Teacher, Rabbi, Pastor, Guru) by reason (judgement) in accord with his store of Asha (Truth, Virtue, Purity),

The gifts of Vohu Mano (Loving Mind, Good Thinking ),
For works (deeds) done for the Lord of Creation in this world,
And the Kshathra (Blessing, Happiness, Power) of Ahura (God) descends indeed,
Upon him who becomes a Shepherd (Protector) to the meek (poor).

The Great Prophet Moses taught the just (virtuous) will prosper under the Creator's protective care.   

Devarim  - Deuteronomy - Second Law - Chapter 12, 1300 BC - 609 BC

Quote

Look down from Your holy abode, from heaven, and bless Your people Israel and the soil You have given us, a land flowing with milk and honey, as You swore to our fathers.”

Unlike Zoroaster, the Prophet Moses taught no Dyeumorphic manifestation of abstract concepts such as Truth and Righteousness that emanate from the Creator's thoughts.  However, like Zoraster, Moses reveals the Torah (Teaching, Laws) as way for one to connect to the Creator thoughts and receive His blessings of prosperity and offspring.

Devarim  - Deuteronomy - Second Law - Chapter 12, 1300 BC - 609 BC

Quote

11. observe faithfully the Instruction—the laws and the rules—with which I charge you today.

12. And if you do obey these rules and observe them carefully, the LORD your God will maintain faithfully for you the covenant that He made on oath with your fathers:

13. He will favor you and bless you and multiply you; He will bless the issue of your womb and the produce of your soil, your new grain and wine and oil, the calving of your herd and the lambing of your flock, in the land that He swore to your fathers to assign to you.

The Israelite King David made a declaration that the pursuit of happiness is not to be found in ideas given by corrupt minds. Happiness can be found by understanding the laws given by a Just Creator. The Israelite King believes one needs to follow the instructions revealed to Moses to connect to the Creator and receive His blessings of prosperity and offspring. David uses an analogy that like trees that need an adequate water supply to thrive and set fruit, we need to be adequately connected to the Torah given by the Creator to help us be happy, thrive, and be fruitful in all of our endeavors.

Psalms, 1407 BC - 586 BC

Chapter 1

Quote

1. Happy is the man who has not followed the counsel of the wicked, or taken the path of sinners, or joined the company of the insolent;

rather, the teaching of the LORD is his delight, and he studies that teaching day and night.

He is like a tree planted beside streams of water, which yields its fruit in season, whose foliage never fades, and whatever it produces thrives.

Hindus believe that True Happiness (Supreme Bliss) can be found by a sinless follower of the Veda (Hindu Sacred Texts, Books of Knowledge) from ancient India. Vedas are also called śruti ("what is heard") literature that has been passed down by Rishi (enlightened ones, sages) after who receivedthe nature of Brahma and the instructions on the rules of conduct. this  intense meditation.  The Upanishads  (Sanskrit Upaniṣad also known as the Vedānta) are the last chapters of the Veda texts known as 'object of the highest purpose.'  Upanishad is composed of the terms upa (near) and shad (to sit), meaning “sitting down near” and connecting to a Rishi, an enlightened messenger of the Vedas that is unaffected by desire and wholly free from all cravings.  The Rishi have taught that the intensity one is meditates on Vedas determines how close the spirit is to the happiness of the Creator. Christians and Jews would look at a Rishi similar to a Righteous (Tzadik),  but not infallible spiritual masters who actively teach and perform Good Deeds (Mitzvah)  found in sacred scriptures (Bible, Tanakh). 

The Taittiriya (Sanskrit Tittiri , Partridge) consist of three Adhyāya (Chapters, Lessons) of the Yajurveda (Worship) rituals taught by the Rishi that are done before the Yajna (Sacred Fire) on the Nature (Knowledge) of Brahma (Highest Universal Principle) and  Atman (self, soul) that one can attain the eternal wisdom of joy by not being influenced by desire. The less one is exposed to desire the purer joy achieves.

There are several titles given to the Creator that relate to Hinduism's spiritual manifestations : El as the general term for God (Allah); YHWH (Tetragrammaton) is the name of the Uncreated God (Spirit); the Ruach El as the Spirit of the God; Rauch Elohim as Lord of Spirits; (Elyon) as Lord of Most High; Ruach Chokhmah as the Spirit of Wisdom; and Hashem as a being beyond reality. And the meaning of the word Torah to be the mind of the Lord (cosmic conscious),  

Ha-Navi be a human heavenly messenger, but not infallible , Sandalphon    mal’akh

Upanishads - 800 BC - 500 BC

Taittriya - The Partridge

2.8.1 – 2.8.4

Quote

This, then, is an Evaluation of that Bliss (Joy, Happiness):
Suppose there is a young man - in the prime of life, good, learned, most expeditious, most strongly built, and most energetic. Suppose there lies this earth for him filled with wealth. 

This will be one unit of human joy (A unit of measurement for the estimation of Bliss). If this human joy be multiplied a hundred times, it is one joy of the man-Gandharvas (Rishi, elightened messengers), and so also of a follower of the Vedas unaffected by desires. If this joy of the man-Gandharvas be multiplied a hundred times, it is one joy of the divine-Gandharvas (heavenly messenger), and so also of a follower of the Vedas unaffected by desires. If the joy of the divine-Gandharvas be increased a hundredfold, it is one joy of the manes (demigods) whose world is everlasting, and so also of a follower of the Vedas unaffected by desires. If the joy of the manes that dwell in the everlasting world be increased a hundredfold, it is one joy of those that are born as gods in heaven, and so also of a follower of the Vedas untouched by desires. If the joy of those that are born as gods in heaven be multiplied a hundredfold, it is one joy of the gods called the Karma Devas (the seven demigod founders of fate), who reach the gods through Vedic rites, and so also of a follower of the Vedas unaffected by desires. If the joy of the gods, called the Karma-Devas, be multiplied a hundredfold, it is one joy of the gods, and so also of a follower of the Vedas untarnished by desires.

If the joy of the gods be increased a hundred times, it is one joy of Indra (Lord of all beings), and so also of a follower of the Vedas unaffected by desires. If the joy of Indra be multiplied a hundredfold, it is one joy of Brihaspati (Cosmic Guru, Sage to the Gods, teacher of wisdom to all beings) and so also of a follower of the Vedas unaffected by desires. If the joy of Brihaspati be increased a hundred times, it is one joy of Virat (cosmic conscious of all beings and thought forms), and so also of a follower of the Vedas untarnished by desires. If the joy of Virat be multiplied a hundred times, it is one joy of Hiranyagarbha (Cosmic Egg, Germ of all joys), and so also of a follower of the Vedas unsullied by desires.

He that is here in the human person, and He that is there in the sun, are one. He who knows thus attains, after desisting (abstain) from this world, this self made of food, attains this self made of vital force, attains this self made of mind, attains this self made of intelligence, attains this self made of bliss.

Jefferson and Washington taught the honor in focusing on the welfare of the People of all nations and religions. And to be on guard against those that pursue their own self interest and personal advantage over Civility of accepted conduct.

As the primary author of the United States Declaration of Independence , Thomas Jefferson understood the liberty of choice our Creator has given us to pursuit the wisdom of life and prosperity or suffer the evils of death and destruction. The truth of choice that the followers of religion and/or nature, universally agree upon is defined as 'self evident.' Having just overthrown the King of England during the American Revolution, Jefferson and his political Democratic-Republican party feared Federalist desire for a strong national government would threaten the Liberty of a young Nation with a growing Federal control of power.   

Jefferson and America's Founding Fathers considered supreme happiness to not come from nobility or priests, but rather from having faith that Nature (Creator) has given us a sense of justice through the cherishment of others. It is also my opinion, that Jefferson also also reasoned against selfish false teachings that man bestowed aristocracy the hereditary right to govern and judge one's fate. It will be through the false teaching of fearing others without sound reason could as a consequence destroy law and order built by free men. 

From Thomas Jefferson to William Johnson, 12 June 1823

Quote

...ours, on the contrary, was to maintain the will of the majority of the Convention, and of the people themselves. We believed with them that man was a rational animal, endowed by nature with rights, and with an innate (natural) sense of justice, and that he could be restrained from wrong, & protected in right, by moderate powers, confided to persons of his own choice, and held to their duties by dependence on his own willwe believe that the complicated organization of kings, nobles, and priests was not the wisest nor best to effect the happiness of associated man; that wisdom and virtue were not hereditary (legacy); that the trappings of such a machinery consumed, by their expense, those earnings of industry they were meant to protect, and, by the inequalities they produced, exposed liberty to sufferance. We believed that men, enjoying in ease and security the full fruits of their own industry, enlisted by all their interests on the side of law and order, habituated (became accustomed) to think for themselves and to follow their reason as their guide, would be more easily and safely governed than with minds nourished in error, and vitiated (spoiled) and debased (wicked), as in Europe, by ignorance, indigence (poverty) and oppression. The cherishment of the people then was our principle, the fear and distrust of them that of the other party. Composed, as we were, of the landed and laboring interests of the country, we could not be less anxious for a government of law and order than were the inhabitants of the cities, the strong holds of federalism. And whether our efforts to save the principles and form of our constitution have not been salutary (satisfactory), let the present republican freedom, order and prosperity of our country determine.

Like Thomas Jefferson, George Washington understood that Civility of Law and Order depends on the cherishment of people in all stations of life that mutually desire Happiness and understand their duty to follow the agreed upon rules to enjoy it. 

George Washington to Joshua Holmes, 2 December 1783

Quote

The bosom of America is open to receive not only the opulent (wealthy) & respectable Stranger, but the oppressed & persecuted of all Nations & Religions; whom we shall welcome to a participation of all our rights & privileges, if by decency & propriety (civility) of conduct they appear to merit (be worthy) the enjoyment.

We can see the seeds of understanding equity and justice through the leaders of the monotheistic faiths. Hillel the Elder

Shabbat 31a

Quote

...one gentile who came before Shammai and said to Shammai: Convert me on condition that you teach me the entire Torah (the first five books of the Old Testament)  while I am standing on one foot. Shammai pushed him away with the builder’s cubit in his hand. This was a common measuring stick and Shammai was a builder by trade. The same gentile came before Hillel. He converted him and said to him: That which is hateful to you do not do to another; that is the entire Torah, and the rest is its interpretation. Go study.

Jesus taught that our Creator will bless us when we treat others they way we want to be treated. 

Matthew 7

Quote

7 “Ask and it will be given to you; seek and you will find; knock and the door will be opened for you. 8 For everyone who asks receives, and the one who seeks finds, and to the one who knocks, the door will be opened. 9 Is there anyone among you who, if his son asks for bread, will give him a stone? 10 Or if he asks for a fish, will give him a snake? 11 If you then, although you are evil, know how to give good gifts to your children, how much more will your Father in heaven give good gifts to those who ask him! 12 In everything, treat others as you would want them to treat you, for this fulfills the law and the prophets.

The Apostle Paul taught Christians that all believers share the same universal privilege and position under the Creator.

Galations 3

Quote

28 There is neither Jew nor Greek, there is neither slave nor free, there is neither male nor female—for all of you are one in Christ Jesus. 

The Prophet Mohamed taught that the Creator wants us to put aside personal self interest and be fair and impartial when dealing with people. 

An-Nisa (The Women) 

Quote

4:135  O YOU who have attained to faith! Be ever steadfast in upholding equity, bearing witness to the truth for the sake of God, even though it be against your own selves or your parents and kinsfolk. Whether the person concerned be rich or poor, God's claim takes precedence over [the claims of] either of them.  Do not, then, follow your own desires, lest you swerve from justice: for if you distort [the truth], behold, God is indeed aware of all that you do!

It is my theory that one must know what it is to suffer to truly understand the aspects of happiness that are both agreeable and contrary to reason and or self interest. Lao Tzu (Laozi, Old Master) Tao Te Ching

Tao Te Ching  (The way of Righteousness) - 400 BC

Chapter 58

Quote

Misery is what happiness rests upon.

Happiness is what misery lurks beneath.

America's Founding Fathers rightfully reasoned that all human beings are born equally regardless of differences in gender, skin color, wealth, health, and location. No mortal man can be compared to a God with infinite wisdom and power. The Spirit of Liberty, or more importantly the the Spirit of the Creator becomes unknown to Citizens who willingly submit their Freedom for Self-Interest.

All 56 men who signed the Declaration of Independence clearly understood an individual profiting from the institution of owning another human being was morally wrong.  

Declaration of Independence

Quote

Prudence (caution), indeed, will dictate that Governments long established should not be changed for light and transient (short-term causes); and accordingly all experience hath (has) shewn (shown), that mankind are more disposed to suffer, while evils are sufferable, than to right themselves by abolishing the forms to which they are accustomed. But when a long train of abuses and usurpations (wrongfully seize), pursuing invariably the same Object evinces (manifests) a design to reduce them under absolute Despotism (rule by individual or small group), it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such Government, and to provide new Guards for their future security.--Such has been the patient sufferance (allowance of wrongdoing) of these Colonies; and such is now the necessity which constrains them to alter their former Systems of Government. The history of the present King of Great Britain is a history of repeated injuries and usurpations, all having in direct object the establishment of an absolute Tyranny over these States. 

 

Liberty: A Path To Its Recovery
by F.A. Harper

Page 44

Quote

...it is, in fact, a main purpose of liberty that the blind are free to follow those who can see. The danger is that in the absence of liberty the blind may become authorized to lead those who can see—by a chain around their necks!

Some of the Declaration Signers viewed Universal Liberty contrary to their self interest of personal prosperity and material happiness. Many of the Signers lived as Feudal Lords over large plantations involuntarily worked  by human Chattel (tangible property), more commonly known as the Institution of Slavery. True Liberty would be a huge expense of Plantation owners relinquishing their Right over Slaves that could be involuntarily eugenically bred and put to work like Horse and Oxen. 

President and Commander in Chief of the United States George Washington had to live with fighting for the Liberty of Colonists while being Lord over 300 slaves living in his Mount Vernon Plantation. Washington was a Freemason  gentleman that lived by law by elected legislative authority. He stated the first order would be to motion giving slaves the Right of Suffrage, meaning the right to vote for Representatives that create and amend the Constitution.

From George Washington to Robert Morris, 12 April 1786

Quote

I give you the trouble of this letter at the instance of Mr Dalby of Alexandria; who is called to Philadelphia to attend what he conceives to be a vexatious law-suit respecting a slave of his, which a Society of Quakers in the City (formed for such purposes) have attempted to liberate. The merits of this case will no doubt appear upon trial; but from Mr Dalby’s state of the matter, it should seem that this Society is not only acting repugnant to justice so far as its conduct concerns strangers, but, in my opinion extremely impolitickly wit respect to the State—the City in particular; & without being able (but by Acts of tyranny & oppression) to accomplish their own ends. He says the conduct of this society is not sanctioned by Law; had the case been otherwise, whatever my opinion of the Law might have been, my respect for the policy of the State would on this occasion have appeared in my silence; because against the penalties of promulgated (promoting) Laws one may guard; but there is no avoiding the snares of individuals, or of private societies—and if the practice of this Society of which Mr Dalby speaks, is not discountenanced (disfavored), none of those whose misfortune it is to have slaves as attendants will visit the City if they can possibly avoid it; because by doing so they hazard their property—or they must be at the expence (& this will not always succeed) of providing servants of another description for the trip.

I hope it will not be conceived from these observations, that it is my wish to hold the unhappy people who are the subject of this letter, in slavery. I can only say that there is not a man living who wishes more sincerely than I do, to see a plan adopted for the abolition of it—but there is only one proper and effectual mode by which it can be accomplished, & that is by Legislative authority: and this, as far as my suffrage will go, shall never be wanting.

But when slaves who are happy & content to remain with their present masters, are tampered with & seduced to leave them; when masters are taken at unawares by these practices; when a conduct of this sort begets discontent on one side and resentment on the other, & when it happens to fall on a man whose purse will not measure with that of the Society, & he looses his property for want of means to defend it—it is oppression in the latter case, & not humanity in any; because it introduces more evils than it can cure.

I will make no apology for writing to you on this subject; for if Mr Dalby has not misconceived the matter, an evil exists which requires a remedy; if he has, my intentions have been good though I may have been too precipitate (accelerate) in this address. 

Public Notice Philip Dalby

Alexandria Advertiser - March 30, 1786

Quote

it will be necessary to inform you and the public, that there is a society established in Pennsylvania, for the purpose of aiding and assisting all those unhappy persons who are cruelly and unjustly detained in bondage, in obtaining their freedom. The society have a committee of their members who reside in Philadelphia, and whose business it is, to inquire after, and assist all who come within the line laid down by the society at their institution. This committee has council retained, and agents employed, to give them information of all such; and of the arrival of every gentleman, who has with him a slave or a waiting-man (personal servant), who is immediately tampered (interfered) with. If he proves to be well disposed (friendly), and satisfied with his station, arguments are used, and every measure taken, to disgust him with it, and to spur him on to prosecute his master for his freedom. 

Having given you the outlines of this committee, and their business, I am to inform you, that in the month of February, 1785, business called me to Philadelphia, I took with me as a waiter, a Mulatto boy, a slave for life, purchased for my use the January before, by Mr. John Nicholson, of Doctor Belt of Leesburg. The boy was soon after my arrival, accosted by some of the agents employed by the committee, and informed that a fair opportunity now presented him of procuring his liberty, if he would avail himself of it, which he for some time declined; but having been guilty of a small theft, he was apprehended, and previous to his examination brought before me. I ordered him a corporal punishment in presence of the person he had plundered, who thereupon discharged him from further prosecution. The chastisement seemed to inflame him, and he then applied to the committee for their assistance to procure his freedom. Upon hearing his relation, they very candidly informed him, that they could not render him that service, which from his complexion (appearance), they were induced to think they could. 

Thus matters rested, until I had finished my business and was preparing to set off, on my return home, when the day preceding my departure the boy was again brought before the committee, who carried him to their council, who undertaking his case that evening, served me with an habeas corpus, (summons) commanding my attendance at Judge Bryan’s chambers the next morning. Being wholly unacquainted with every kind of law proceeding, I was much at a loss how to conduct myself, or what steps were necessary for me to take on this occasion. I waited upon a gentleman of the profession, with whom I had some acquaintance, and mentioned the process which had been served upon me, my recent purchase of the boy; and that he was held by the person who sold him to me as a slave for life, under the laws of Virginia, of which State I was an inhabitant. This gentleman considered the matter as very trivial, but said that it was necessary to make a proper return to the writ (overpassing the authority normally held), and obligingly offered to accompany me the next morning to the Judge’s chambers for that purpose. 

This boy I found in slavery, and purchased him agreeable to the laws of Virginia, and have as absolute a right to his service, during life, as I have to
the use of the coat which is on my back, and have as just a right to complain, if deprived of that service, as I should have were I robbed of my coat. But behold the consequence, a set of men of whom I have no knowledge, with whom I have no connection, tell me that I must discharge him from my service—and for what, pray? Why, truly, for no other good reason, than to gratify their pride and self-love, and perhaps furnish a subject of eulogy to their characteristic meeting, and a desire to be thought better men and members of society than others. But does their conduct in this instance prove them to be so? Have they not in the most wanton and unprovoked manner seized upon my property, and run me to an expence far greater than the value of that property, in supporting my right thereto? My expences arising from my detention in Philadelphia, when the habeas corpus was first served upon me, the seeing of council, the execution of the commission for the examination of my witnesses, sending the boy up to Philadelphia, and procuring a person to take charge of him at the October term, have arisen far above fifty pounds; and my next trip cannot cost me less than twenty-five pounds, besides neglecting my other business. 

When I reflect that the point which they have assumed the decision of, is a question of right between two persons inhabiting another State, arising out of the particular laws of that State, and that business alone brought them for a short time into the State where the controversy happened, I am at a loss for a civil expression to convey my idea of their conduct, or the motives by which they appear to be influenced. To say in their justification, that it is only a matter of fact which may be inquired into by a jury as well in Pennsylvania as Virginia, is idle, and only fit to amuse the ignorant. For from the facts arise the points of law, and how can the judges of Pennsylvania undertake to say what the laws of Virginia are upon those facts? Will they in their justification say, that they could not trust the judges of Virginia with the decision of so nice a point as that of liberty? Or will they say that they have a right of hearing and determining all and every matter of controversy between the inhabitants of the State of Virginia, if any accident throws it into their power, to have their process executed. If they support the first, may we not justly conclude that they form their opinion of the Virginia judges, from a knowledge of themselves. If they entertain the latter opinion, and attempt to put it in practice, it will in all probability produce very serious consequences.

I am as much disposed to lament the hard fate of any set of men, who are doomed to groan under the galling yoke of slavery, as any of the worthy
judges, or members of the noble-minded committee; and when they can effect a general liberation of the black host, which darkens the State of Virginia, I will forget my loss, and partake with them in the joy and exultation which would result from an act so glorious, so ornamental to human kind. The fate of a memorial presented to the Virginia Assembly at their late session by the society of Quakers, praying such an act, will shew that the Legislature of that State do not yet approve of the measure. It exerted such a spirit of indignation as is not often experienced in that house,
and was with difficulty saved from being treated with the last contempt. Can it be thought that they will suffer another State to do for them what they have rejected themselves? Upon the whole, it appears to me, that the Judges of Pennsylvania have made a most insolent and daring attack upon the sovereign rights of Virginia, in taking upon themselves to hear and decide a question of right between two subjects of that State, which arises out of the particular laws of that State; and that I have been very wantonly and unjustly involved in a very heavy expence, from motives which cannot be justified, namely, to procure freedom to a person, whether by the laws of his country he be entitled to it or not. If this was not the expectation, why do the judges claim jurisdiction where they know perfectly well they have none?

Then why have they declined to bring the business forward in the State where the decision of it most properly belongs? Can it be ascribed to any other cause than that they hope to find a prejudice, a prepossession in the one court, which they have no hopes of meeting with in the other. And now let me assure you, that notwithstanding I have, at so much expence, defended this prosecution, it is not because I am an advocate for slavery, but because I considered my rights as very unjustly invaded, and because I did not conceive that I found that redress which is due to persons of every denomination, from the quarter where alone they are to look for it. I found slavery established in many of the States of America. I did not conceive, nor do I that any act of mine or of any set of private men, could have any influence upon a general establishment. 

The Religious Society of Friends (Quakers) played a major role in the abolition movement against slavery.  In 1775 Pennsylvania Abolition Society was formed by seven Quakers of the ten white members. 

To George Washington from Robert Morris, 26 April 1786

Quote

I am happy to confirm what Mr Dalby will have informed you off, the Successful Issue of his Suit respecting his Slave, could any interference on my part have been useful, your letter would have commanded it, indeed I had done him before what little service I could when his Petition was before the Assembly from a perfect Conviction both of the Injustice and impolicy of the treatment he had met with. The Society which attacked him tread (walked) on popular ground, and as their Views are disinterested as to themselves, and sometimes very laudable (laudable) as to the objects of their Compassion, it is not a very pleasant thing to Attack them & this consideration deters Mr Dalby from seeking redress at Law for the Expense & trouble they have occasioned, altho I think he would meet a just determination in our Courts of Law.

From George Washington to the Hebrew Congregation in Newport, Rhode Island, 18 August 1790

Quote

The Citizens of the United States of America have a right to applaud themselves for having given to mankind examples of an enlarged and liberal policy: a policy worthy of imitation. All possess alike liberty of conscience and immunities of citizenship It is now no more that toleration is spoken of, as if it was by the indulgence of one class of people, that another enjoyed the exercise of their inherent natural rights. For happily the Government of the United States, which gives to bigotry no sanction, to persecution no assistance requires only that they who live under its protection should demean themselves as good citizens, in giving it on all occasions their effectual support.

From John Adams to George Churchman, 24 January 1801

Quote

Although I have never Sought popularity by any animated Speeches or inflammatory publications against the Slavery of the Blacks, my opinion against it has always been known, and my practice has been so conformable to my Sentiment that I have always employed freemen both as Domestics and Laborers, and never in my Life did I own a Slave. The Abolition of Slavery must be gradual and accomplished with much caution and Circumspection. Violent means and measures would produce greater violations of Justice and Humanity, than the continuance of the practice. Neither Mr Mifflin nor yourselves, I presume would be willing to venture on Exertions which would probably excite Insurrections among the Blacks to rise against their Masters and imbue their hands in innocent blood

There are many other Evils in our Country which are growing, (whereas the practice of Slavery is fast diminishing,) and threaten to bring Punishment in our Land, more immediately than the oppression of the blacks. That sacred regard to Truth in which you and I were educated, and which is certainly taught and enjoined from on high, Seems to be vanishing from among Us. A general Relaxation of Education and Government. A general Debauchery as well as dissipation, produced by pestilential philosophical Principles of Epicures infinitely more than by Shews and theatrical Entertainment. These are in my opinion more Serious and threatening Evils, than even the Slavery of the Blacks, hatefull as that is. I might even Add that I have been informed, that the condition, of the common Sort of White People in Some of the Southern States particularly Viginia, is more oppressed, degraded and miserable that that of the Negroes.

These Vices and these Miseries deserve the serious and compassionate Consideration of Friends as well as the Slave Trade and the degraded State of the blacks.

The primary author of the Declaration of Independence, Thomas Jefferson, owned over 600 African-American slaves that worked on his Monticello plantation. The retired President Thomas Jefferson foresaw the rising tension between those that considered American Liberty to be a Federal Human Right over State Regulation of Human Right according to designated types. The outcome would affect his and many Founders net working capital (NWC) and creditworthiness to money lenders.

From Thomas Jefferson to John Holmes, 22 April 1820

Quote

 justice is in one scale, and self-preservation in the other. of one thing I am certain, that as the passage of slaves from one state to another would not make a slave of a single human being who would not be so without it, so their diffusion (dispersal) over a greater surface would make them individually happier and proportionally facilitate the accomplishment of their emancipation (freedom); by dividing the burden on a greater number of coadjutors (assistants). an abstinence (restraint) too from this act of power would remove the jealousy excited by the undertaking of Congress; to regulate the condition of the different descriptions of men composing a state. this certainly is the exclusive right of every state, which nothing in the Constitution has taken from them and given to the general government. could congress, for example say that the Non-freemen of Connecticut, shall be freemen, or that they shall not emigrate (emigrate) into any other state?

Jefferson's letter to John Holmes was in response to the Democratic-Republican (now known as the Republican Party) Representative James Tallmadge Jr. amendment to a bill regarding the admission of the Territory of Missouri to the Union, which requested that Missouri be admitted as a free state and restrict slavery and involuntary servitude. The Tallmadge Amendment set off a fierce debate about the future of slavery and Congress's power to stem its expansion into new states.

Annals of Congress, House of Representatives

15th Congress, 2nd Session - February 16, 1819

Quote

The House having again resolved itself into a committee  of the whole, (on the Missouri Bill.) 

The question being on the proposition of Mr. Tallmadge, to amend the bill by adding to it the following proviso : 

And provided, that the further introduction of slavery or involuntary servitude be prohibited, except for the punishment of crimes, whereof the party shall have been fully convicted; and that all children born within the said State, after the admission thereof into the Union, shall be Free at the age of twenty-five years

From Thomas Jefferson to William Short, 13 April 1820

Quote

...this Syllabus is meant to place the character of Jesus in it’s true and high light, as no imposter himself, but a great Reformer of the Hebrew code of religion, it is not to be understood that I am with Him in all His doctrines. I am a Materialist; He takes the side of spiritualism: He preaches the efficacy (value) of repentance towards forgiveness of sin, I require a counterpoise of good works to redeem it Etc. Etc. it is the innocence of his character, the purity & sublimity of his moral precepts, the eloquence of his inculcations (teachings), the beauty of the apologues (allegories, parable)  in which he conveys them, that I so much admire; sometimes indeed needing indulgence to Eastern hyperbole. 

 

 

Washington and Jefferson both both were slave holders. existed in many cultures, dating back to early human civilizations. Since the beginning of civilation, predating written records, and has existed in many cultures. In Pre-Columbian America the most common forms of slavery were those of prisoners of war and debtors.   Like European Colonist, Native North American tribes groups over time adopted chattel slave ownership 

North American indigenous groups over time adopted slave ownership 

Quakers increasingly became associated with antislavery activism and antislavery literature: not least through the work of abolitionist Quaker poet John Greenleaf Whittier. In 1833, Whittier published the antislavery pamphlet Justice and Expediency,[8] and from there dedicated the next twenty years of his life to the abolitionist cause.

Our Countrymen in Chains

John Greenleaf Whittier - 1833

Quote

 

Up NOW for Freedom !—not in strife
     Like that your sterner fathers saw
The awful waste of human life—
     The glory and the guilt of war :
But break the chain—the yoke remove
     And smite to earth oppression's rod,
With those mild arms of Truth and Love,
     Made mighty through the living God !

Prone let the shrine of Moloch sink,
     And leave no traces where it stood
Nor longer let its idol drink
     His daily cup of human blood :
Bur rear another altar there,
     To truth and love and mercy given,
And Freedom's gift and Freedom's prayer
     Shall call an answer down from Heaven !

 

 

Prior to public service, both George Washington and Thomas Jefferson were surveyors. 

different areas of colonial and frontier territories of the Virginia Coastal Plains across the Western slopes of Appalachian Mountains to the Ohio river and its tributaries.  Both gentlemen would have been aware and possibly interacted with the Algonquian (Powhatan), Eastern Siouan (Mannahoac) and Iroquoian (Cherokee) speaking Native Americans.  It was the Powhatan people living in eastern Virginia that interacted with English colony of Jamestown in 1607.  These hunter-gatherer communities composed of bands of people through kinship and marriage called a Confederation. Each village had a Council House where ceremonies and tribal meetings were held using a democratic process.  These Native Virginians would hunt animals, gather fruits and nuts from trees/vines, and pull handfuls of seeds from wild plants to obtain protein, carbohydrates, lipids and nicotine according to the particular biome they lived in.  In time seed gathering evolved to trading, and planting maize (corn), beans, squash, tobacco and other seed crops that would thrive in their environment. Eventually planting seed crops (farming )became more reliable food source and could feed more people than hunting or gathering could feed. Farming led to permanent settlements instead of small tribes that moved frequently.

The Eurasian Steppe (Great Steppe), is the  large area of flat unforested temperate grasslands, savannas, and shrublands biome of Euroasia. It stretches from Bulgaria, Romania and Moldova through Ukraine, Russia, Kazakhstan, Xinjiang, and Mongolia to Manchuria, with one major exclave, the Pannonian steppe or Puszta, located mostly in Hungary. The plains of North America (especially the shortgrass and mixed prairie) is an example of a steppe, though it is not usually called such. A nomad (Middle French: nomade "people without fixed habitation")[1][dubious – discuss] is a member of a community of people without fixed habitation who regularly move to and from the same areas, including nomadic hunter-gatherers, pastoral nomads (owning livestock), and tinker or trader nomads.

 

In the grasslands and highlands of Eurasia, the dry climate and poorer soil made it hard to make a living from growing crops. The term Shepherd (Pastor) is frequently used as a metaphor to mean leader of the people.

Homer

Iliad

Book 1, line 245

Quote

In earlier times I moved among men more warlike than you, [ and never did they despise me. Such warriors have I never since seen, nor shall I see, as Peirithous was and Dryas, shepherd of the people, and Caeneus and Exadius and godlike Polyphemus, and Theseus, son of Aegeus, a man like the immortals.

Shepherd of Hosts would be considered Commander (Chief) of military forces

Homer

Iliad

Book 2, line 76  

Quote

Lord Agamemnon uprose, bearing in his hands the sceptre which Hephaestus had wrought with toil. Hephaestus gave it to king Zeus, son of Cronos, and Zeus gave it to the messenger Argeïphontes; and Hermes, the lord, gave it to Pelops, driver of horses, [105] and Pelops in turn gave it to Atreus, shepherd of the host; and Atreus at his death left it to Thyestes, rich in flocks, and Thyestes again left it to Agamemnon to bear, that so he might be lord of many isles and of all Argos

Sheep are among the first animals to have been domesticated by humans for meat, milk, skins somewhere between 11,000 and 9000 BC. 

Homer

Iliad

Book 5, line 121 

Quote

Tydeus returned again and mingled with the foremost fighters; [135] and though afore his heart had been eager to do battle with the Trojans, now verily did fury thrice so great lay hold upon him, even as upon a lion that a shepherd in the field, guarding his fleecy sheep, hath wounded as he leapt over the wall of the sheep-fold, but hath not vanquished; his might hath he roused, but thereafter maketh no more defence, [140] but slinketh amid the farm buildings, and the flock all unprotected is driven in rout, and the sheep are strewn in heaps, each hard by each, but the lion in his fury leapeth forth from the high fold; even in such fury did mighty Diomedes mingle with the Trojans. Then slew he Astynous and Hypeiron, shepherd of the host; [145] the one he smote above the nipple with a cast of his bronze-shod spear, and the other he struck with his great sword upon the collar-bone beside the shoulder, and shore off the shoulder from the neck and from the back.

Socrates points out that like a shepherd that cares for his sheep, a ruler's primary concern should be doing what is best for his people. 

The Republic 380 BC

Book 1

Plato

Quote

Surely the art (work) of the Shepherd seeks what is best for the sheep. What's best is achieved whenever the Shepherd's work is properly performed. And that's what I said earlier about the ruler. Both in public and private life, the ruler should seek what is best for his fellow citizens (subjects).

The Nicomachean Ethics , 340 BC

Book VII - Chapter 11

Aristotle

Quote

...The friendship between a king and his subjects depends on an excess of benefits conferred; for he confers benefits on his subjects if being a good man he cares for them with a view to their well-being, as a shepherd does for his sheep (whence Homer called Agamemnon 'shepherd of the peoples'). Such too is the friendship of a father, though this exceeds the other in the greatness of the benefits conferred; for he is responsible for the existence of his children, which is thought the greatest good, and for their nurture and upbringing.

 These things are ascribed to ancestors as well. Further, by nature a father tends to rule over his sons, ancestors over descendants, a king over his subjects. These friendships imply superiority of one party over the other, which is why ancestors are honored. The justice therefore that exists between persons so related is not the same on both sides but is in every case proportioned to merit; for that is true of the friendship as well. The friendship of man and wife, again, is the same that is found in an aristocracy; for it is in accordance with virtue the better gets more of what is good, and each gets what befits him; and so, too, with the justice in these relations. The friendship of brothers is like that of comrades; for they are equal and of like age, and such persons are for the most part like in their feelings and their character. Like this, too, is the friendship appropriate to timocratic government; for in such a constitution the ideal is for the citizens to be equal and fair; therefore rule is taken in turn, and on equal terms; and the friendship appropriate here will correspond.

 But in the deviation-forms, as justice hardly exists, so too does friendship. It exists least in the worst form; in tyranny there is little or no friendship. For where there is nothing common to ruler and ruled, there is not friendship either, since there is not justice; e.g. between craftsman and tool, soul and body, master and slave; the latter in each case is benefited by that which uses it, but there is no friendship nor justice towards lifeless things. But neither is there friendship towards a horse or an ox, nor to a slave qua slave. For there is nothing common to the two parties; the slave is a living tool and the tool a lifeless slave. Qua slave then, one cannot be friends with him. But qua man one can; for there seems to be some justice between any man and any other who can share in a system of law or be a party to an agreement; therefore there can also be friendship with him in so far as he is a man. Therefore while in tyrannies friendship and justice hardly exist, in democracies they exist more fully; for where the citizens are equal they have much in common.

References to Shepherds and animal husbandry are found throughout sacred scriptures of the oldest faiths. Prophets, Priests, Rabbis, and Pastors are called Shepherds because they watch over and care for their congregation like those who care for livestock.  The wisdom and visions the Shepherds share to those around them reflect the daily socioeconomic world of their time period in our world history.  The life of a Shepard is tasked with all aspects of maintaining the health of domesticated animals. They keep a lookout for predators and rescue animals if they get lost or trapped. When a calf gets wounded or sick the Shepherd nurses it back to health.  An enormous amount of time is spent guiding the herd to the places of nourishment and rest.  The result is a bond of trust that keeps the herd following the shepherd. 

'In the 29th chapter of the Yasna (reverence, veneration), known as the The Cow's Lament'  found within the 17 Avestan (Zend, Scripture) Gatha (sacred hymns) the Prophet Zarathusthra (Zoroaster) creates an allegorical text on the importance of righteous Shepherding is to our survival. Zarathustra uses metaphor of the Cow soul (spirit, thought) and Ox soul to represent the female and male aspects of humanity. When a calf cries out in help its needs take priority. The Cow soul despairs over being abandoned without an adequate Shepherd to care for his and the cows protection. Their plight is our plight and the provider they seek is what we all seek; the virtuous Shepard (leader) who can lead the Creator's great herd in the pursuit happiness and prosperity.

The Cow soul invokes invokes a Dyeumorphic (Deity Characteristic, aspect, manifestation) of Ahura (Lord) Mazda (Wisdom) eminating the unbegotton Amesha (Aməša, Immortal) Spentas (thoughts, spirits) of Armaiti (Devoted Creator and Guardian) and Asha (Truth and Righteousness).    Through divine eminating Spentas (Armaiti and Asha) Ahura Mazda, identifies a proper protector, Zarathusthra as the only one fit for the job. The Ox spirit laments all the more, since he regards Zoroaster as a weakling. Ultimately he must make do with him.

Zoroaster asks Ahura Mazda through his Holy Spirit Asha to bring peace and happiness to people through Vohu (Good, Loving) and Manah (Thought, Mind). Behavior Scientist and Religious Naturalist would respect one meditating on the wisdom of promoting the mental states of peace and happiness through reason and acting in accordance with the law of the land. Zoroastrians believe that Happiness can be found by a sinless follower of Truth and Good Thoughts.

The Cow's Lament'  is recited in Ahunuvaiti, the first part of the Zoroastrian Yasna liturgy in the pavi area (inner sanctum) of a fire temple to promote happines, good health and purify the connection between the spiritual and physical worlds. The complete Ahunuvaiti is taken from Chapter 28 to Chapter 34 of the Yasna Gathas.

Ahunuvaiti Gatha, 1500 BC - 1000 BC

Yasna 29 - the Cow's Lament

Quote

1. Unto you Creator wailed the Cow Soul (Cow Spirit), "For whom did you fashion me? Who created me? Cruelty, oppression, bloodlust, rage, and violence have fettered me; there is no Shepard (Herdsman) for me other than you. Reveal a herdsman to prepare for me the blessings of pasture." 

2. Then the Armaiti (Creator and Protector Spandarmad) contemplated with Asha (Truth and Rightousness): "An eager Shepherd (mortal Lord, Herdsman) for the Cow, will drive off violence and destruction that comes from the Liars (followers of the Lie, Angra Mainyu, Satan, Lucifer)?"

3. The Asha replied: "For the Cow there is no Shepard with aligned with truth. Those distant have no knowledge how the righteous act towards the lowly (poor in spirit, not proud).
(The Cow-Creator):" the Highest of Beings will give Wisdom to both the Ox-soul and his partner the Pregnant Cow.

4. (Asha) "The Wise (Mazda) One knows best the purposes to the actions commited already by daevas (rejected demons, evil spirits, selfish thoughts) and by mortals, and that shall be wrought hereafter. He, the Lord (Ahura), is the judge. So shall it be as He wills."

5. (Zarathustra) "To the Lord with outspread hands both my soul and that of the pregnant cow we pray. We ask the Wise One for guidance. Destruction is not for the righteous.  Is there no prospect for a just Shepard that lives among Liars

6. The Wise Lord (Ahura Mazda) himself, who knows the law with wisdom spoke: "There is no Righteous Shepherd found that lives according to my teachings (commands). My Armaiti has formed you for the benefit of the cattle breeder and the herdsman."

7. This Wise (One) is generous towards the welfare of the lowly in accordance with His teaching. The Wise Lord sustains the Righteous Truth by creating the cow to produce butter and milk (strength and prosperity) for those that crave nourisment. 
The Ox and Cow:  "O Good Thought who among mortals may care for us two?"

8.Eminating Vohu Manah (Good Thought, Good Mind) the Wise Lord replied: There is this one found here who alone hears holy instruction; Zarathustra Spitama: he is eager to give praises for his Creator and  recite the path the path to Truth, O Wise One, If I shall bestow on him the gift teaching with a sweetness of voice."

9. The Cow-Soul lamented: "Must I be content with the help of ineffectual voice of a powerless man for my protector, when I wish for one that is Mighty! When ever shall there be someone who shall give him (the Ox) effective help?"

10. O Ahura Mazda, and O Spenta Asha! Grant these mortals authority and power through Truth, that with the Good Mind, that they may bring the world peace and happiness, Of which, Thou, O Lord, are indeed the first possessor. 

11  [The Cow:] "Where are Truth, Good Mind, and [their] power? Know me, through the mortal one, You, O Wise One, in Your concern for the great offering. Come down to us now, O Lord, on account of our gift for those like you."

Persians began breeding sheep for wool since 6000 BC. The wild sheep found in Iran are known to have the largest phenotype (size, color, shape, etc) and chromosome (DNA) variation in the world. The mouflon (Ovis orientalis orientalis) is a subspecies of the wild sheep (Ovis orientalis) found in the Syro-Arabian desert (Kurdistan Region in the north of Iraq and Syria). This location corresponds to the zone of the initial domestication of sheep which includes many native breeds such as Hamdani, Karadi, and Awassi (the native breed of Israel)

To Jews and Christians the dove is a symbol of God's peace following judgment.

Genesis 8

Quote

At the end of forty days, Noah opened the window of the ark that he had made

and sent out the raven; it went to and fro until the waters had dried up from the earth.

Then he sent out the dove to see whether the waters had decreased from the surface of the ground.

But the dove could not find a resting place for its foot, and returned to him to the ark, for there was water over all the earth. So putting out his hand, he took it into the ark with him.

He waited another seven days, and again sent out the dove from the ark.

The dove came back to him toward evening, and there in its bill was a plucked-off olive leaf! Then Noah knew that the waters had decreased on the earth.

He waited still another seven days and sent the dove forth; and it did not return to him anymore.

The Priestly Blessing.

Numbers 6

Quote

22 The LORD said to Moses:

23 Speak to Aaron and his sons and tell them: This is how you shall bless the Israelites. Say to them:

24 The LORD bless you and keep you!

25 The LORD let his face shine upon you, and be gracious to you!

26 The LORD look upon you kindly and give you peace (shalom)!

Psalm 34

Quote

5 I sought the LORD, and he answered me, delivered me from all my fears.

6 Look to him and be radiant, and your faces may not blush for shame.

7 This poor one cried out and the LORD heard, and from all his distress he saved him.

8 The angel of the LORD encamps around those who fear him, and he saves them.

The wing sun disc is a common symbol of the manifestation of the Creator in the ancient Near East

Malachi 3

Quote

19 For the day is coming, blazing like an oven, when all the arrogant and all evildoers will be stubble, And the day that is coming will set them on fire, leaving them neither root nor branch, says the LORD of hosts.

20 But for you who fear my name, the sun of righteousness will arise with healing in its wings; And you will go out leaping like calves from the stall

21 and tread down the wicked; They will become dust under the soles of your feet, on the day when I take action, says the LORD of hosts.

The dove symbolized the Creator's Holy Spirit.  Doves were thought to be not bound to terrestrial existence and were mediators between this world and heaven; 

Mark

Quote

Jesus came from Nazareth in Galilee and was baptized by John in the Jordan River. 10 And just as Jesus was coming up out of the water, he saw the heavens splitting apart and the Spirit descending on him like a dove. 11 And a voice came from heaven: “You are my one dear Son; in you I take great delight.” 12 The Spirit immediately drove him into the wilderness. 13 He was in the wilderness forty days, enduring temptations from Satan. He was with wild animals, and angels were ministering to his needs.

https://www.ecatholic2000.com/athanasius/untitled-208.shtml

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Moses_the_Black

The Muslims believe that a dove whispered the word of God into Muhammad’s ear.

Chapter 2.

Concerning the Posterity of Adam, and the ten Generations from him to the Deluge.

 Abel...was a lover of righteousness; and believing that God was present at all his actions, he excelled in virtue: and his employment was that of a shepherd. 

G'd displayed favour to the person bringing the offering and to the offering itself.

 he brought from the “first,” is that before enjoying the fruits of his labour himself, he wished to express his gratitude to G’d. Only after that would he use the milk and the wool for his personal consumption. He also included in the gift the best quality, seeing that not all were of the same uniform quality. The word חלב is used in that sense on the author’s book

Rabbi Joseph Kimchi explains the reason why G’d did not respond to Kayin’s gift as due to the fact that he first ate his fill before giving G’d the share we call bikkurim, the first ripe fruit we produce. Hevel, on the other hand, offered to G’d the very first of the wool his sheep had produced.

Genesis 3

Quote

To Adam He said, “Because you did as your wife said and ate of the tree about which I commanded you, ‘You shall not eat of it,’ Cursed be the ground because of you; By toil shall you eat of it All the days of your life:

Thorns and thistles shall it sprout for you. But your food shall be the grasses of the field;

By the sweat of your brow Shall you get bread to eat, Until you return to the ground— For from it you were taken. For dust you are, And to dust you shall return.”

Genesis 4

Quote

Now the man knew his wife Eve, and she conceived and bore Cain, saying, “I have gained a male child with the help of the LORD.”

She then bore his brother Abel. Abel became a keeper of sheep, and Cain became a tiller of the soil.

In the course of time, Cain brought an offering to the LORD from the fruit of the soil;

and Abel, for his part, brought the choicest of the firstlings of his flock. The LORD paid heed to Abel and his offering,

but to Cain and his offering He paid no heed. Cain was much distressed and his face fell.

And the LORD said to Cain, “Why are you distressed, And why is your face fallen?

Surely, if you do right, There is uplift. But if you do not do right Sin couches at the door; Its urge is toward you, Yet you can be its master.”

Hebrews 11

Quote

1 Now faith is being sure of what we hope for, being convinced of what we do not see. 2 For by it the people of old received God’s commendation. 3 By faith we understand that the worlds were set in order at God’s command, so that the visible has its origin in the invisible. 4 By faith Abel offered God a greater sacrifice than Cain, and through his faith he was commended as righteous, because God commended him for his offerings. 

The rewards of shepherding are well earned. Abraham rejected his family business of manufacturing idols. He chose a chose to earn his living as a nomadic Shepard.  As we see in the book of Genesis raising and selling livestock was prosperious for him.

Genesis 13

Quote

Now Abram was very rich in livestock, silver, and gold.

Genesis 18

Quote

7 Then Abraham ran to the herd, took a calf, tender and choice, and gave it to a servant-boy, who hastened to prepare it.

8 He took curds and milk and the calf that had been prepared and set these before them; and he waited on them under the tree as they ate.

Like Zoraster, and Moses, King David considered the Creator to be a faithful shepherd, will never forsake His precious flock (worshippers, followers, congregation, church). 

Psalms 23 

Quote

1 A psalm of David. The LORD is my shepherd; I lack nothing.

2 He makes me lie down in green pastures; He leads me to water in places of repose;

3 He renews my life; He guides me in right paths as befits His name.

4 Though I walk through a valley of deepest darkness, I fear no harm, for You are with me; Your rod and Your staff—they comfort me.

General Washington's dictatated a letter to the The Delaware Nation (Delaware Tribe of Western Oklahoma, Western Delaware, Lenape, Lenni-Lenape ) Chief of Staff and Personal Secretary, Robert Hanson Harrison. on understanding how Happiness can be found by understanding the teachings of Jesus Christ.  The Deleware people understood the Creator to be the Great Chief of Heaven and His Son, the Mighty Warrior Jesus Christ, to be the Rescuer of the people of all nations.

Address to the Delaware Nation, 12 May 1779

George Washington
Commander in chief 
of all the armies in the 
United States of America

Quote

Brothers.

I am glad you have brought three of the Children of your principal Chiefs to be educated with us. I am sure Congress will open the Arms of love to them—and will look upon them as their own Children and will have them educated accordingly. This is a great mark of your confidence and of your desire to preserve the friendship between the Two Nations to the end of time—and to become One people with your Brethren of the United States. My ears hear with pleasure the other matters you mention. Congress will be glad to hear them too. You do well to wish to learn our arts and ways of life and above all—the religion of Jesus Christ. [Which will give you eternal life in the world to come.] These will make you a greater and happier people than you are. Congress will do every thing they can to assist you in this wise intention; and to tie the knot of friendship and union so fast—that nothing shall ever be able to loose it.

Robert Harrison wrote then crossed out the following additional text to the Deleware Nation: “Which will give you eternal life in the world to come.” This text does not appear on the copies. It is possible that Washington wanted the Deleware to learn the teachings of Jesus and compare them with their legendary Sakima (Chief) Tamanend (translated means affable), who was known to be a beloved peacemaker and friend to everyone. Chief Tamanend reputedly took part in a peace meeting between the leaders of the Lenni-Lenape nation, and the leaders of the Pennsylvania colony held under a large elm tree at Shakamaxon in the early 1680s. The people of Philadelphia began to call him "Saint Tammany" and the "Patron Saint of America."

Just like King David, Christians believe the Good Shepard, Jesus taught that happiness results from being morally just in our daily actions and trusting that ultimate security rests with the Creator and secondarily with the righteous individuals that follow His commands. Religious Naturalist and Humanist can appreciate connecting to a determined individual who has compassion and is willing to give hist life for his community's salvation (deliverance) from harm, ruin, loss, and corruption.

John 10 gives reason why Christians are conscientiously opposed to accepting services that are run outside their community. Religious Naturalist and Humanist can appreciate the concern of private and public services ethical obligations to a community they are not part of. There potential ignorance in thinking that public and private contractors have the ability handle a situation that spirals out of control and damages the community.  In addition, Christians understand that Jesus has given his followers a goal of a salvation and its reward is never finished in this life. Behavior scientist can appreciate that once we complete a earthly goal, maintaining the level and starting over can be difficult. This is why the Good Shepard makes sure the sheep are genuine by listening to obeying his word. 

Jews and Muslims understand Jesus calling the Creator "Father" to signify an intimate trust that his revelations and actions while on Earth were in perfect harmony as one voice and will of the Most High. They believe the bond between the Father and His Son testified in John to be a moral relationship like Samuel reveals about the Creator favoring (loving) King David as human father would do (II Samuel 7:14 - 15, I Chronicles 22:10). From this type of reasoning of John it can be induced that to gain eternal life one must be in harmony with revelations and actions Jesus taught by authority of the Creator.

John 10

Quote

7 So Jesus said again, I tell you the solemn truth, I am the door for the sheep. 8 All who came before me were thieves and robbers, but the sheep did not listen to them. 9 I am the door. If anyone enters through me, he will be saved, and will come in and go out, and find pasture. 10 The thief comes only to steal and kill and destroy; I have come so that they may have life, and may have it abundantly.

11 “I am the good shepherd. The good shepherd lays down his life for the sheep. 12 The hired hand, who is not a shepherd and does not own sheep, sees the wolf coming and abandons the sheep and runs away. So the wolf attacks the sheep and scatters them. 13 Because he is a hired hand and is not concerned about the sheep, he runs away.

14 I am the good shepherd. I know my own and my own know me— 15 just as the Father knows me and I know the Father—and I lay down my life for the sheep. 16 I have other sheep that do not come from this sheepfold. I must bring them too, and they will listen to my voice, so that there will be one flock and one shepherd. 

Luke 14

Quote

3 Jesus told this parable: 4 “Which one of you, if he has a hundred sheep and loses one of them, would not leave the ninety-nine in the open pasture and go look for the one that is lost until he finds it? 5 Then when he has found it, he places it on his shoulders, rejoicing. 6 Returning home, he calls together his friends and neighbors, telling them, ‘Rejoice with me, because I have found my sheep that was lost.’ 7 I tell you, in the same way there will be more joy in heaven over one sinner who repents than over ninety-nine righteous people who have no need to repent.

Paul thanked the Creator for changing him from the worst of lawbreakers

1 Timothy

Quote

12 I am grateful to the one who has strengthened me, Christ Jesus our Lord, because he considered me faithful in putting me into ministry, 13 even though I was formerly a blasphemer and a persecutor, and an arrogant man. But I was treated with mercy because I acted ignorantly in unbelief, 14 and our Lord’s grace was abundant, bringing faith and love in Christ Jesus.

Just like Christians and Jews, Muslims believe that true happiness (salvation) is a goal never finished in this life. And the ultimate reward is given in the next life. The Prophet Mohamed taught one will be rewarded with happiness by being virtious following good habits taught by the authority of the Creator.

An-Nahl (The Bee)

16:97

Quote

Whoever does righteousness, whether male or female, while he is a believer - We will surely cause him to live a good life, and We will surely give them their reward [in the Hereafter] according to the best of what they used to do.

Gathering data... 

The four Vedas (knowledge) are generally known by Hindus as the oldest hymns (scriptures) taught by the Creator to Aryan (Andronovo culture) Rishi (Sages) that decended South from Kazakhstan into India. According to Hindu tradition, the first vedas are the Rigvedic hymns taught by the Indra (Creator) to Rishi Vyāsa (Veda Vyāsa, Krishna Dwaipayana). The hymns were later written down by Paila, the disciple of Rishi Vyāsa and divided into ten Mandalas (Books, Volumes).

 

The fortunes of these people have a direct co-relation of their possession of cattle. The cattle were sheltered in separate cow-pens and it was important that were cared for – “happy near us”. Their breeding in prolific numbers would have mattered as well, given that the cattle were the “wealth” of these people.

When the Indo-Aryans entered India, they brought with them a religion in which the gods were chiefly personified powers of Nature, a few of them, such as Dyaus, going back to the Indo-European, others, such as Mitra, Varuṇa, Indra, to the Indo-Iranian period. They also brought with them the cult of fire and of Soma

 

Rigvedic period, but, even if they did, the prevailingly loose boundaries of class allowed a man of nonpriestly parentage to become a priest.

he Vedas are considered to be the oldest surviving literature of India. The oldest Veda is Rig Veda.

Rig Veda
The oldest and most important of the four Vedas.

Among other features of Rigvedic religious life that were important for later generations were the munis, who  were particularly associated with the god Rudra, a deity connected with mountains and storms and more feared than loved. Rudra developed into the Hindu god Shiva, and his prestige increased steadily. The same is true of Vishnu, a solar deity

Indra Thunder god

Rudra Storm God, part oftrinity in later Hinduism

King of the Gods. The chief deity of the Rigveda, the god of weather and war as well as Lord of Svargaloka in Hinduism. Indra, also known as Śakra in the Vedas, is the leader of the Devas and the lord of Svargaloka or heaven in Hinduism. He is the deva of rain and thunderstorms. 

Indra, Agni, Soma and Varuna are most worshipped Gods in Rig Veda

books i-viii, which were the sphere of the Hotṛ or reciting priest

his is concerned with the worship of gods that are largely personifications of the powers of nature. The hymns are mainly invocations of these gods, and are meant to accompany the oblation of Soma juice and the fire sacrifice of melted butter. 

Rudra is very often associated with the Maruts (i. 85). He is their father, and is said to have generated them from the shining udder of the cow Pṛśni.
He is fierce and destructive like a terrible beast, and is called a bull, as well as the ruddy (aruṣá) boar of heaven. He is exalted, strongest of the strong, swift, unassailable, unsurpassed in might. He is young and unaging, a lord (í̄śāna) and father of the world. By his rule and univeral dominion he is aware of the doings of men and gods. He is bountiful (mīḍhvá̄ṃs), easily invoked and auspicious (śivá). But he is usually regarded as malevolent; for the hymns addressed to him chiefly express fear of his terrible shafts and deprecation of his wrath. He is implored not to slay or injure, in his anger, his worshippers and their belongings, but to avert his great malignity and his cow-slaying, man-slaying bolt from them, and to lay others low. He is, however, not purely maleficent like a demon. He not only preserves from calamity, but bestows blessings. His healing powers are especially often mentioned; he has a thousand remedies, and is the [57] greatest physician of physicians. In this connexion he has two exclusive epithets, jálāṣa, cooling, and jálāṣa-bheṣaja, possessing cooling remedies.

Rudra, in glory, the mightiest of the mighty, O wielder of the bolt. 

f Rudra; in vii. 46, 1 he is described by the epithets sthirádhanvan having a strong bow, kṣipréṣu swift-arrowed, tigmá̄yudha having a sharp weapon, and in vii. 46, 3 his lightning shaft, didyút, is mentioned

Rudra. They are described as ‘true’ and ‘not deceitful’, being friends and protectors of the honest and righteous, but punishing sin and guilt.

s the Soma sacrifice formed the centre of the ritual of the RV., the god Soma is one of the most prominent deities. With rather more than 120 hymns (all those in Maṇḍala ix, and about half a dozen in others) [153] addressed to him, he comes next to Ágni (i. 1) in importance. The anthropomorphism of his character is less developed than that of Indra or Varuṇa because the plant and its juice are constantly present to the mind of the poet. Soma has terrible and sharp weapons, which he grasps in his hand; he wields a bow and a thousand-pointed shaft. He has a car which is heavenly, drawn by a team like Vāyu’s. He is also said to ride on the same car as Indra. He is the best of charioteers. In about half a dozen hymns he is associated with Indra, Agni, Pūṣan, and Rudra respectively as a dual divinity. 

he exhilarating power of Soma led to its being regarded as a divine drink bestowing immortal life. Hene it is called amṛ́ta draught of immortality. All the gods drink Soma; they drank it to gain immortality; it confers immortality not only on gods, but on men. It has, moreover, medicinal powers: Soma heals whatever is sick, making the blind to see and the lame to walk. Soma also stimulates the voice, and is called ‘lord of speech’. He awakens eager thought: he is a generator of hymns, a leader of poets, a seer among priests. Hence his wisdom is much dwelt upon; thus he is a wise seer, and he knows the races of the gods.

Soma appears to be a real plant that has intoxicating properties, as well as being a god and a "life force" that permeates all animate beings.

The Rig-Veda forms the great literary memorial of the early Aryan settlements in the Punjab. The earlier hymns exhibit the Aryans on the northwestern frontiers of India, just starting on their long journey. Whatever the original homeland of the Aryans may have been, the RigVeda makes no explicit mention of regions distant from the Indian subcontinent. 

The Rig Veda - 6,000 - 3000 BC

Mandala (Book) 6

 Hymn 28 -  Cows

Quote

I. THE Kine (cattle) have come and brought good fortune: let them rest in the cow-pen and be happy near us.
     Here let them stay prolific, many-coloured, and yield through many mornings their milk for Indra.
2. Indra aids him who offers sacrifice and gifts: he takes not what is his, and gives him more thereto.
     Increasing ever more and ever more his wealth, he makes the pious dwell within unbroken bounds.
3. These are never lost, no robber ever injures them: no evil-minded foe attempts to harass them.
     The Shepherd of the Kine lives many years with these, the Cows whereby he pours his gifts and serves the many eminations (gods).
4. The charger (charioteer) with his dusty brow overtakes them not, and never to the shambles do they take their way. These Cows, the cattle of the Righteous worshiper, roam over widespread pasture where no danger is.
5. To me the Cows seem like Bhaga (fortune), they seem Indra (King of Gods), they seem a portion of the first-poured Soma (drink).
     These present Cows, they, O ye Indra. I long for Indra with my heart and spirit.
6. O Cows, ye fatten just the worn and wasted, and make the unpleasant beautiful to look on.
     Prosper my house, ye with auspicious voices. Your power is glorified in our assemblies.
7. Crop goodly pasturage and be prolific drink pure sweet water at good drinking places.
     Never be thief or sinful man your matter, and may the dart (arrow) of Rudra still avoid you.
8. Now let this close admixture be close intermigled with these Cows,
     Mix with the Steer's prolific flow, and, Indra, with thy hero might.

 

 

Hindus believe that True Happiness (Supreme Bliss) can be found by a sinless follower of the Veda (Hindu Sacred Texts, Books of Knowledge) from ancient India. Vedas are also called śruti ("what is heard") literature that has been passed down by Rishi (enlightened ones, sages) after who receivedthe nature of Brahma and the instructions on the rules of conduct. this  intense meditation.  The Upanishads  (Sanskrit Upaniṣad also known as the Vedānta) are the last chapters of the Veda texts known as 'object of the highest purpose.'  Upanishad is composed of the terms upa (near) and shad (to sit), meaning “sitting down near” and connecting to a Rishi, an enlightened messenger of the Vedas that is unaffected by desire and wholly free from all cravings.  The Rishi have taught that the intensity one is meditates on Vedas determines how close the spirit is to the happiness of the Creator. Christians and Jews would look at a Rishi similar to a Righteous (Tzadik),  but not infallible spiritual masters who actively teach and perform Good Deeds (Mitzvah)  found in sacred scriptures (Bible, Tanakh). 

The Taittiriya (Sanskrit Tittiri , Partridge) consist of three Adhyāya (Chapters, Lessons) of the Yajurveda (Worship) rituals taught by the Rishi that are done before the Yajna (Sacred Fire) on the Nature (Knowledge) of Brahma (Highest Universal Principle) and  Atman (self, soul) that one can attain the eternal wisdom of joy by not being influenced by desire. The less one is exposed to desire the purer joy achieves.

There are several titles given to the Creator that relate to Hinduism's spiritual manifistations : El as the general term for God (Allah); YHWH (Tetragrammaton) is the name of the Uncreated God (Spirit); the Ruach El as the Spirit of the God; Rauch Elohim as Lord of Spirits; (Elyon) as Lord of Most High; Ruach Chokhmah as the Spirit of Wisdom; and Hashem as a being beyond reality. And the meaning of the word Torah to be the mind of the Lord (cosmic conscious),  

Ha-Navi be a human heavenly messenger, but not infallible , Sandalphon    mal’akh

Upanishads - 800 BC - 500 BC

Taittriya - The Partridge

2.8.1 – 2.8.4

Quote

This, then, is an Evaluation of that Bliss (Joy, Happiness):
Suppose there is a young man - in the prime of life, good, learned, most expeditious, most strongly built, and most energetic. Suppose there lies this earth for him filled with wealth. 

This will be one unit of human joy (A unit of measurement for the estimation of Bliss). If this human joy be multiplied a hundred times, it is one joy of the man-Gandharvas (Rishi, elightened messengers), and so also of a follower of the Vedas unaffected by desires. If this joy of the man-Gandharvas be multiplied a hundred times, it is one joy of the divine-Gandharvas (heavenly messenger), and so also of a follower of the Vedas unaffected by desires. If the joy of the divine-Gandharvas be increased a hundredfold, it is one joy of the manes (demigods) whose world is everlasting, and so also of a follower of the Vedas unaffected by desires. If the joy of the manes that dwell in the everlasting world be increased a hundredfold, it is one joy of those that are born as gods in heaven, and so also of a follower of the Vedas untouched by desires. If the joy of those that are born as gods in heaven be multiplied a hundredfold, it is one joy of the gods called the Karma Devas (the seven demigod founders of fate), who reach the gods through Vedic rites, and so also of a follower of the Vedas unaffected by desires. If the joy of the gods, called the Karma-Devas, be multiplied a hundredfold, it is one joy of the gods, and so also of a follower of the Vedas untarnished by desires.

If the joy of the gods be increased a hundred times, it is one joy of Indra (Lord of all beings), and so also of a follower of the Vedas unaffected by desires. If the joy of Indra be multiplied a hundredfold, it is one joy of Brihaspati (Cosmic Guru, Sage to the Gods, teacher of wisdom to all beings) and so also of a follower of the Vedas unaffected by desires. If the joy of Brihaspati be increased a hundred times, it is one joy of Virat (cosmic conscious of all beings and thought forms), and so also of a follower of the Vedas untarnished by desires. If the joy of Virat be multiplied a hundred times, it is one joy of Hiranyagarbha (Cosmic Egg, Germ of all joys), and so also of a follower of the Vedas unsullied by desires.

He that is here in the human person, and He that is there in the sun, are one. He who knows thus attains, after desisting (abstain) from this world, this self made of food, attains this self made of vital force, attains this self made of mind, attains this self made of intelligence, attains this self made of bliss.

KALAMA SUTTA

The Buddha's Charter of Free Inquiry

The Four Exalted Dwellings

Quote

He lives, having pervaded, with the thought of gladness, one  quarter; likewise the second; likewise the third; likewise the fourth; so above, below, and across; he dwells, having pervaded  because of the existence in it of all living beings, everywhere, the entire world, with the great, exalted, boundless thought of gladness that is free of hate or malice.

 

The Father of Western Philosophy

The Nicomachean Ethics

Book X - Chapter 9

Quote

he who is to be good must be well nurtured and trained, and thereafter must continue in a like excellent way of life, and must never, either voluntarily or involuntarily, do anything vile; and this can only be effected if men live subject to some kind of reason and proper regimen, backed by force.

Buddha taught to spread pure selfless thoughts of love without selfish want or hate

KALAMA SUTTA

The Buddha's Charter of Free Inquiry

The Four Exalted Dwellings

Quote

The disciple of the Noble Ones, Kalamas, who in this way is devoid of coveting (craving), devoid of ill will, undeluded, clearly comprehending and mindful, dwells, having pervaded (dispersed), with the thought of amity (friendliness), one quarter; likewise the second; likewise the third; likewise the fourth; so above, below, and across; he dwells, having pervaded because of the existence in it of all living beings, everywhere, the entire world, with the great, exalted, boundless thought of amity that is free of hate or malice.

After reading the above I asked my son Luke how is it we find happiness? He responded, "Happiness to me is found within ourselves." My son, Luke reasoned that one should not be dependant on others to find happiness." At this point, do you the reader see happiness to be found in our love of self or love of others? Or is happiness found in a mixure of both?

Jefferson believed difficult to see distinction between right and wrong or good and bad behavior with just one self. Morality is to found by observing our duty to the rules given by our Creator and agreed upon by a social contract made with fellow citizens.The imperfection of ego allows one to share false implicit ideas of what is good is a life of self gratification. Self love leads to putting ourselves over our duty to being civil with and at times endanger others. For this reason Jefferson considered self love should not be defined as being either moral or virtous. Our late president went further and affirmed that through instruction and discipline one could attain virtue. Jefferson believed the primal emotional pleasure of happiness orginates from the realization that that is a natural instinct to love of others. And it is our love of that drives our instinct to help others escape the primal emotional pain of misery. But, it is our imprefection of senses that limit our ability to understand this instinct to love and and the duty preserve it that impedes our pursuit of happiness.

Thomas Jefferson to Thomas Law, 13 June 1814

Quote

Self-interest, or rather Self love, or Egoism, has been more plausibly substituted as the basis of morality. But, I consider our relations with others as constituting the boundaries of morality. With ourselves we stand on the ground of identity, not of relation; which last, requiring two subjects, excludes self-love confined to a single one. To ourselves, in strict language, we can owe no duties, obligation requiring also two parties. Self-love therefore is no part of morality. Indeed it is exactly it’s counterpart. it is the sole antagonist of virtue (goodness), leading us constantly by our propensities (inclinations) to self-gratification in violation of our moral duties to others. 

...take from man his selfish propensities, and he can have nothing to seduce him from the practice of virtue. or subdue those propensities by education, instruction, or restraint, and virtue remains without a competitor. Egoism (self-interest), in a broader sense, has been thus presented as the source of moral action. it has been said that we feed the hungry, clothe the unclothed, bind up the wounds of the man beaten by thieves, pour oil and wine into them, set him on our own beast (horse, livestock), and bring him to the inn, because we recieve ourselves pleasure from these acts. so Helvetius, one of the best men on earth, and the most ingenious advocate of this principle, after defining ‘interest’ to mean, not merely that which is pecuniary (monetary), but whatever may procure us pleasure or withdraw us from pain, [de l’Esprit. 2. 1.] says [ib. 2. 2.] ‘the humane man is he to whom the sight of misfortune is insupportable and who, to rescue himself from this spectacle, is forced to succour (aid) the unfortunate object.’ this indeed is true. but it is one step short of the ultimate question. these good acts give us pleasure: but how happens it that they give us pleasure? because nature hath implanted in our breasts a love of others, a sense of duty to them, a moral instinct in short, which prompts us irresistibly to feel and to succour (assist) their distresses; and protests against the language of Helvetius [ib. 2. 5.] ‘what other motive than self interest could determine a man to generous actions? it is as impossible for him to love what is good for the sake of good, as to love evil for the sake of evil.’ the creator would indeed have been a bungling artist, had he intended man for a social animal, without planting in him social dispositions. it is true they are not planted in every man; because there is no rule without exceptions: but it is false reasoning which converts exceptions into the general rule. some men are born without the organs of sight, or of hearing, or without hands. yet it would be wrong to say that man is born without these faculties: and sight, hearing and hands may with truth enter into the general definition of Man. the want or imperfection of the moral sense in some men, like the want or imperfection of the senses of sight and hearing in others, is no proof that it is a general characteristic of the species. when it is wanting we endeavor to supply the defect by education, by appeals to reason and calculation, by presenting to the being so unhappily conformed (adapted) other motives to do good, and to eschew (reject) evil; such as the love, or the hatred or rejection of those among whom he lives and whose society is necessary to his happiness, and even existence; demonstrations by sound calculation that honesty promotes interest in the long run; the rewards & penalties established by the laws; and ultimately the prospects of a future state of retribution for the evil as well as the good done while here. these are the correctives which are supplied by education, and which exercise the functions of the moralist, the preacher & legislator: and they lead into a course of correct action all those whose depravity is not too  profound to be eradicated. some have argued against the existence of a moral sense, by saying that if nature had given us such a sense, impelling us to virtuous actions, and warning us against those which are vicious, then nature must also have designated, by some particular ear-marks, the two sets of actions which are, in themselves, the one virtuous, and the other vicious: whereas we find in fact, that the same actions are deemed virtuous in one country, and vicious in another. the answer is that nature has constituted utility to man the standard & test of virtue. men living in different countries, under different circumstances, different habits, and regimens, may have different utilities. the same act therefore may be useful, and consequently virtuous, in one country, which is injurious and vicious in another differently circumstanced. I sincerely then believe with you in the general existence of a moral instinct. I think it the brightest gem with which the human character is studded; and the want of it as more degrading than the most hideous of the bodily deformities. I am happy in reviewing the roll of associates in this principle which you present in your letter, some of which I had not before met with. to these might be added Ld Kaims, one of the ablest of our advocates, who goes so far as to say, in his Principles of Natural religion, that a man owes no duty to which he is not urged by some impulsive feeling. this is correct if referred to the standard of general feeling in the given case, and not to the feeling of a single individual. 

Claude Adrien Helvétius defined physical sensibility as an instinctual function of the mind to percieve and remember resemblence and differences in objects. This instinctual function also allows us to distinguish agreements or disagreements of ideas and show compassion for others in their time of need. Ideas that we take notice originate from individuals we trust and have acted to benifit our self interest. It is testimony of these trusted individuals that communicate impressions of pleasure and pain that give a basis of judging the truth of personal and public morality. It is the formation of these accepted ideas that gives us respect of others. Helvétius believed that we praise individuals that promote, support, and defend our self interest. At times the testimony individuals share with us give the illusion of honesty, but in reality stem from their personal self interest and not for our benefit. It is through our intellect that we must reason whether these testifiers are good or bad. If the the indivdual appears genuinely to believe that his testimony  is to our benefit, then we must look to the general interest of the people where the idea the originated.  

Helvétius explained that the concept of Liberty is the attainment of wisdom of knowledge on how to train our physical pleasure and pain instincts to remember and discern the truth to ideas and actions that make us happy or sad. Further,  Helvétius was of the opinion that the knowledge of Liberty can only be achieved  by an individual with no mental disability, paying close attention and connecting ideas that are being communicated about the subject. The more an individual discusses Liberty the greater one gains Wisdom to genuinely understand the concept of it.

Helvétius was  of the position the problem of misunderstanding Liberty was not only found in with individuals with mental conditions. Intelligent people with physical sensibility can process and adopt false ideas given by those who they trust and admire. Contextual associations can be linked to deliberative or unintentional false truths (misleading ideas) to agreed upon code (rules) of conduct made with fellow citizens by social contract. A false truth given by those that we have an instinct to love and admire can initiate a duty preserve and propagate the error.

De L'esprit, Or, Essays on the Mind, and Its Several Faculties
by Helvétius

Quote

Preface

I desire but one favor of my reader, that is, to hear, before he condemns me; to the chain that unites all my ideas together; to be my judge, and and not of my party

I say then that the Physical Sensibility and Memory, or, to speak more exactly, the Sensibility alone produces our ideas, and in effect Memory can be nothing more than one of the organs of Physical Sensibility.

This principle being laid down, I farther say, that all the operations of the Mind consist in the power we have of perceiving resemblence and difference, the agreement or disagreement, of various objects among themselves. And this power, being the Physical Sensibility itself, everything is reducible to feeling.

Through internal Understanding if others do good then you feel happy and they do bad you will feel sad

If you only yourself you will not understand what is good and bad. In a social situation someone may either say something nice or mean to you and you might react in the wrong way. If you help others you will feel happy and good about yourself 

We have a moral instinct to love and help others in their time of need.

Essay II

Of the Mind Relatively to Society

Contents

It is proposed to prove in this discourse, that the same interest which influences the judgement we form on actions, and makes us consider them as virtuous, vicious, or allowable according as they are useful, prejudicial (harmful), or indifferent, with  respect to the public, equally influences the judgment we form of ideas; that, as well in subjects of morality, as in those of  genius, it is interest alone that dictates our judgments; a truth cannot be perceived in its full context, without considering probity (honesty) and genius, relatively, 1. to an individual; 2. to a small society; 3. to a nation; 4. to different ages and countries; and to 5. the whole world.

Essay II

Of the Mind Relatively to Society

Chapter 1

Page 37

Every individual judges of things or persons, by the agreeable or disagreeable impressions he receives from them; and the public is no more than an assemblage of al the individuals; therefore it cannot fail in making its interest the rule of its decisions.

The word interest is generally confined to the the love of money; but the intelligent reader will perceive that I use it in a more extensive sense; and that I apply it in general to whatever may procure us pleasure, or exempt us from pain.

Page 38

...personal interest alone dictates the judgment of individuals; while general interest dictates that of nations; and consequently that, in the public as in individuals, it is always love and gratitude that praises, and hatred and revenge that depreciates.

...interest is the only judge of Probity and the Understanding.

Essay II

Of Probity Relatively to the Individual 

Chapter II

Page 43

...personal interest is the only and universal estimator of the merit of human actions; and therefore, that Probity, with regard to an individual is, according to my definition, nothing more than the habitude of actions personally advantageous to this individual.

Chapter III

Of the Mind, or Understanding, With Regard to an Individual

Contents

...we esteem (respect) in others, only the ideas we have interest in esteeming.

Chapter IV

Of the Necessity We Are Under of Esteeming in Others Only Ourselves

Essay i 

Chapter 1

page 49

...the desire of esteem is common to all men; though some, to the pleasure of being admired, will add the merit of contemning (disdaining) admiration; but this contempt is not real, the person admired never thinking the admirer stupid; Now if all men are fond of esteem, every one, knowing, from experience, that his ideas will appear esteemable, or contemptible to other, only as they agree or clash with their own, the consequence is, that swayed by vanity, every one cannot help esteeming in others a conformity of ideas, which assure him of their esteem; and to hate in them an opposition of ideas, as a certain indication of their hatred; or, at least, of their contempt, which is to be considered as a corrective of hatred. But suppose a person should sacrifice his vanity (excessive pride) for the love of truth, if this person be not animated with the keenest desire of information, I say, that indolence (laziness) will allow him to have, for those opinions opposite to his own, on an esteem upon trust. In order to explain what I mean by an esteem upon trust, I shall distinguish esteem into two kinds, one, which may be considered as the effect, either of diference to public opinion, or of confidence in the judgement of certain persons; and this I call esteem upon trust. 

page 50

...Whether, after forming to ourselves a vague idea of the merit of those great geniuses, their admirers, in this idea, respect the work of their own admiration; or whether pretending to be judges of such a man as Newton, they think to share in eugiums (praise) they so profusely (excessively) bestow on him. This kind of esteem, which our ignorance often obliges us to use, is, from that very circumstance, the most general. Nothing is so uncommon as to judge according to our own sentiments (opinion).  

The other kind of esteem is that which, independently of the opinions of others, is produced solely by the impression made on us by certain ideas; and therefore I call it Felt-esteem, because the only real esteem, and that which is here meant. Now, in order to prove, that indolence (laziness) allows us to grant this kind of esteem only to ideas analgous to our own, it will be suffient to observe that, as geometry sensibly proves, by the analogy of secret relations which ideas already known have with unknown ideas, we obtain a knowledge of the latter; and that, by following the progession of these analogies, we may attain the utmost perfection of a science; it follows, that ideas of no analogy with our own, would be unitelligible ideas. But it will be said, there are no ideas which have not necessarily some relation, as they would otherwise be universally unknown.

Let a manuscript work be put into the hands of seven men of genius, equally free from prepossessions (preconception) or prejudice, and let them be seperately desired to mark the most striking of passages; each of them will underline different places; and if, afterwards, the approved passages be compared with the genius and temper of the approver, each will be found to have praised only the ideas analogous to his manner of seeing and perceiving; and understanding is, if I may be allowed the expression, a string that vibrates only with the unison.

...it must be acknowledged, that the only difference between the learned, or men of wit, and the common, is, that the former having a greater number of ideas, their sphere of analogies is much more extensive. If the question relates to species of wit, very different from what he is master of, the man of genius, who is, in all respects, like other men, esteems only those ideas that are analogous to his own.

Now, if superior men, entirely absorbed in their respective kinds of study, and not susceptible of a Felt-esteem, for a species of genius too different from their own, every author

Page 53

who abounds with new ideas can only expect esteem from two sorts of men; either young persons, who, by not previously adopting any opinion, have still the desire and leisure of informing themselves; or of those whose minds, being desirious of truth, and analogous to that of the author, had previously some glimpse of the existence of these ideas. But the number of such men has always been very small. This retards the progress of the human mind; and hence the extreme slowness of which every truth comes displayed to the eyes of all the world.

...It appears, from what has been just said, that most men, subject to indolence, form a perfect conception only of those ideas that analogous (comparable) to their own; that they only a Felt-esteem for no other that this kind of ideas; and hence proceeds that high opinion which ever one is, in a manner, forced to have of himself; an opinion which the moralists whould not, perhaps, have attributed to pride, had they been more thoroughly aquainted with the principles laid down. They would have been sensible, that the sacred respect and the profound admiration, which, when alone, they often feel for themselves, can be nothing more than an effect of the necessity we were

Preface

I desire but one favor of my reader, that is, to hear, before he condemns me; to the chain that unites all my ideas together; to be my judge, and and not of my party

I say then that the Physical Sensibility and Memory, or, to speak more exactly, the Sensibility alone produces our ideas, and in effect Memory can be nothing more than one of the organs of Physical Sensibility.

This principle being laid down, I farther say, that all the operations of the Mind consist in the power we have of perceiving resemblence and difference, the agreement or disagreement, of various objects among themselves. And this power, being the Physical Sensibility itself, everything is reducible to feeling.

Through internal Understanding if others do good then you feel happy and they do bad you will feel sad

If you only yourself you will not understand what is good and bad. In a social situation someone may either say something nice or mean to you and you might react in the wrong way. If you help others you will feel happy and good about yourself 

We have a moral instinct to love and help others in their time of need.

Essay II

Of the Mind Relatively to Society

Contents

It is proposed to prove in this discourse, that the same interest which influences the judgement we form on actions, and makes us consider them as virtuous, vicious, or allowable according as they are useful, prejudicial (harmful), or indifferent, with  respect to the public, equally influences the judgment we form of ideas; that, as well in subjects of morality, as in those of  genius, it is interest alone that dictates our judgments; a truth cannot be perceived in its full context, without considering probity (honesty) and genius, relatively, 1. to an individual; 2. to a small society; 3. to a nation; 4. to different ages and countries; and to 5. the whole world.

Essay II

Of the Mind Relatively to Society

Chapter 1

Page 37

Every individual judges of things or persons, by the agreeable or disagreeable impressions he receives from them; and the public is no more than an assemblage of al the individuals; therefore it cannot fail in making its interest the rule of its decisions.

The word interest is generally confined to the the love of money; but the intelligent reader will perceive that I use it in a more extensive sense; and that I apply it in general to whatever may procure us pleasure, or exempt us from pain.

Page 38

...personal interest alone dictates the judgment of individuals; while general interest dictates that of nations; and consequently that, in the public as in individuals, it is always love and gratitude that praises, and hatred and revenge that depreciates.

...interest is the only judge of Probity and the Understanding.

Essay II

Of Probity Relatively to the Individual 

Chapter II

Page 43

...personal interest is the only and universal estimator of the merit of human actions; and therefore, that Probity, with regard to an individual is, according to my definition, nothing more than the habitude of actions personally advantageous to this individual.

Chapter III

Of the Mind, or Understanding, With Regard to an Individual

Contents

...we esteem (respect) in others, only the ideas we have interest in esteeming.

Chapter IV

Of the Necessity We Are Under of Esteeming in Others Only Ourselves

Essay i 

Chapter 1

page 49

...the desire of esteem is common to all men; though some, to the pleasure of being admired, will add the merit of contemning (disdaining) admiration; but this contempt is not real, the person admired never thinking the admirer stupid; Now if all men are fond of esteem, every one, knowing, from experience, that his ideas will appear esteemable, or contemptible to other, only as they agree or clash with their own, the consequence is, that swayed by vanity, every one cannot help esteeming in others a conformity of ideas, which assure him of their esteem; and to hate in them an opposition of ideas, as a certain indication of their hatred; or, at least, of their contempt, which is to be considered as a corrective of hatred. But suppose a person should sacrifice his vanity (excessive pride) for the love of truth, if this person be not animated with the keenest desire of information, I say, that indolence (laziness) will allow him to have, for those opinions opposite to his own, on an esteem upon trust. In order to explain what I mean by an esteem upon trust, I shall distinguish esteem into two kinds, one, which may be considered as the effect, either of diference to public opinion, or of confidence in the judgement of certain persons; and this I call esteem upon trust. 

page 50

...Whether, after forming to ourselves a vague idea of the merit of those great geniuses, their admirers, in this idea, respect the work of their own admiration; or whether pretending to be judges of such a man as Newton, they think to share in eugiums (praise) they so profusely (excessively) bestow on him. This kind of esteem, which our ignorance often obliges us to use, is, from that very circumstance, the most general. Nothing is so uncommon as to judge according to our own sentiments (opinion).  

The other kind of esteem is that which, independently of the opinions of others, is produced solely by the impression made on us by certain ideas; and therefore I call it Felt-esteem, because the only real esteem, and that which is here meant. Now, in order to prove, that indolence (laziness) allows us to grant this kind of esteem only to ideas analgous to our own, it will be suffient to observe that, as geometry sensibly proves, by the analogy of secret relations which ideas already known have with unknown ideas, we obtain a knowledge of the latter; and that, by following the progession of these analogies, we may attain the utmost perfection of a science; it follows, that ideas of no analogy with our own, would be unitelligible ideas. But it will be said, there are no ideas which have not necessarily some relation, as they would otherwise be universally unknown.

Let a manuscript work be put into the hands of seven men of genius, equally free from prepossessions (preconception) or prejudice, and let them be seperately desired to mark the most striking of passages; each of them will underline different places; and if, afterwards, the approved passages be compared with the genius and temper of the approver, each will be found to have praised only the ideas analogous to his manner of seeing and perceiving; and understanding is, if I may be allowed the expression, a string that vibrates only with the unison.

...it must be acknowledged, that the only difference between the learned, or men of wit, and the common, is, that the former having a greater number of ideas, their sphere of analogies is much more extensive. If the question relates to species of wit, very different from what he is master of, the man of genius, who is, in all respects, like other men, esteems only those ideas that are analogous to his own.

Now, if superior men, entirely absorbed in their respective kinds of study, and not susceptible of a Felt-esteem, for a species of genius too different from their own, every author

Page 53

who abounds with new ideas can only expect esteem from two sorts of men; either young persons, who, by not previously adopting any opinion, have still the desire and leisure of informing themselves; or of those whose minds, being desirious of truth, and analogous to that of the author, had previously some glimpse of the existence of these ideas. But the number of such men has always been very small. This retards the progress of the human mind; and hence the extreme slowness of which every truth comes displayed to the eyes of all the world.

...It appears, from what has been just said, that most men, subject to indolence, form a perfect conception only of those ideas that analogous (comparable) to their own; that they only a Felt-esteem for no other that this kind of ideas; and hence proceeds that high opinion which ever one is, in a manner, forced to have of himself; an opinion which the moralists whould not, perhaps, have attributed to pride, had they been more thoroughly aquainted with the principles laid down. They would have been sensible, that the sacred respect and the profound admiration, which, when alone, they often feel for themselves, can be nothing more than an effect of the necessity we were under a higher esteem of ourselves that for others. 

Chapter V

Page 57

Of Probity in Relation to Private Societies

Certain virtuous societies indeed frequently appear to lay aside their own interest to judge the actions of men, in conformity to the interest of the public; but in this they only gratify the passion which an enlightened pride gives them for virtue; and consequently, like all other societies, obey the law of personal interest.

... in each society private interest is the only distributor of the esteem bestowed on account of human actions.

... interest is the only judge of the merit of men's actions

Page 60

Chapter VI

Of the Means of Securing Virtue

A Prince has a thousand places to bestow; he must fill them up; and he cannot avoid rendering a thousand people happy. Here then his virtue depends only on the justice and injustice of his choice. If, when a place of importance is vacant, he gives it from friendship, from weakness, from solicitation, or from indolance, to a man of moderate abilities, preference to another of superior talents, he ought to be considered unjust, whatever praises others may bestow on his probity.

In the affair of probity, he ought to only consult and listen to the public interest, and not to men by whom he is surrounded; for personal interest too often leads him into an illusion.

In courts, this interest gives falsehood the name of prudence (wisdom), and that of stupidity to truth, which it there considered at at least as a folly, and must be considered as much.

offensive virtues will always be considered in the rank of faults.

...in the case of probity counsel is not to be taken from private connections, but only the interest of the public: he who constantly consults it will have all his acions directed either immediately to the public utility, or to the advantage of individuals, without their being detrimental to the state.

The person who succours merit in distress gives undoubtedly an example of beneficience (charity) comformable to the general interest; he pays the tax which probity imposes on riches.

Chapter VII

Of the Understanding in Relation to Particular Societies

...society weighs in the same balance of merit of not always being comformable to the general interest, them must, in consequence of this, form very different judgments of the same subjects from those of the public.

If we are under a necessity of pursuing happiness whenever we discern it, we are at least at liberty in making choice of the means for procuring our happiness. Yes, I know the answer; but then Liberty is only synomimous term for Knowledge. The more or less a person understands the law, or the more or less eligible will be his measures (discernment). But, whatever conduct be, the desire of happiness will always induce him to take those measures which appear to him the best calculated to promote his interest, his dispositions (character), his passions, and in fine, whatever accounts his happiness.

Chapter VIII

Of the Difference Between the Judgements of the Public and those of Private Societies

...societies must affix great esteem to what is called good breeding and polite conversation.

Chapter XI

On Probity in Relation to the Public 

...general interest regulates judgement formed by the public of the actions of men.

Chapter XII

Of Genius in Relation to the Public 

...the esteem of the public for the ideas of men is alway proportioned to the interest people have in esteeming them

Chapter XVIII

The Principal Effects of Depotic Power

...viziers have no interest in obtaining instruction, or supporting censure; that, being taken from the body of the citizens, they, on entering into place, have no principles of justice or skill in the art of government; and cannot form clear ideas of virtue.

Chapter XX

Of Genius, Considered in Relation to Different Countries

...the interest of among all nations, is the dispenser, of the esteem granted to the ideas of men; and that of nations, always faithful to the interest of their vanity, exteem in other nations only such ideas as are analogous to their own.

Chapter XXII

...vanity rules nations as well as individuals; that every one obeys the law of interest; and if consequently each nation has such an esteem for  morality as it out to have for that science, it is because morality is still in its cradle, and seems to hitherto of no use to the world.

Chapter XXVI

...interest, as we propose to prove, is the only dispenser of the esteem and contempt affixed to the actions and ideas of men.

Essay III

Chapter III

Of the Extent of Memory

Page 202

...attention alone may engrave in the memory the subjects that, without attention, would only make insensible impressions upon us

...to judge whether a defect of memory is in men an effect of their inattention, or an imperfection in their organs, we must have recourse to experience.

The extent of memory therefore depends on the daily use made of it: secondly, on the attention with which we consider the objects we would impress upon it, and which without attention,..., would only slight traces that would be easily effaced; and thirdly, on the order in which we range our ideas. To this order we are all prodigies of memory; it consists in uniting together all our ideas, and consequently charging the memory only with such objects as by their nature, or the manner in which they are considered, preserve between them a connection sufficient to recal each other.

page 203

The frequent representations of the same objects to the memory are in a manner so many touches of the graver, which cuts them deeper in proportion to the frequency with which they are represented. 

...the sagacity (wisdom) of mind in one person, that is, the promptitude (timeliness) with which one man is struck with the force of truth (revelation), frequently depends on the analogy of that truth with the objects about which he is employed. He cannot catch it by perceiving all its connections without rejecting all the ideas that first presented themselves to his rememberance, and without turning up-side down the whole magazine of of his memory, to search for the ideas connected with that truth.

This is the reason why so many men are insensible to the exposition of certain facts, for those truths shake the whole chain of their thoughts, by awakening a great number of ideas in their minds.

under a higher esteem of ourselves that for others. 

Chapter V

Page 57

Of Probity in Relation to Private Societies

Certain virtuous societies indeed frequently appear to lay aside their own interest to judge the actions of men, in conformity to the interest of the public; but in this they only gratify the passion which an enlightened pride gives them for virtue; and consequently, like all other societies, obey the law of personal interest.

... in each society private interest is the only distributor of the esteem bestowed on account of human actions.

... interest is the only judge of the merit of men's actions

Page 60

Chapter VI

Of the Means of Securing Virtue

A Prince has a thousand places to bestow; he must fill them up; and he cannot avoid rendering a thousand people happy. Here then his virtue depends only on the justice and injustice of his choice. If, when a place of importance is vacant, he gives it from friendship, from weakness, from solicitation, or from indolance, to a man of moderate abilities, preference to another of superior talents, he ought to be considered unjust, whatever praises others may bestow on his probity.

In the affair of probity, he ought to only consult and listen to the public interest, and not to men by whom he is surrounded; for personal interest too often leads him into an illusion.

In courts, this interest gives falsehood the name of prudence (wisdom), and that of stupidity to truth, which it there considered at at least as a folly, and must be considered as much.

offensive virtues will always be considered in the rank of faults.

...in the case of probity counsel is not to be taken from private connections, but only the interest of the public: he who constantly consults it will have all his acions directed either immediately to the public utility, or to the advantage of individuals, without their being detrimental to the state.

The person who succours merit in distress gives undoubtedly an example of beneficience (charity) comformable to the general interest; he pays the tax which probity imposes on riches.

Chapter VII

Of the Understanding in Relation to Particular Societies

...society weighs in the same balance of merit of not always being comformable to the general interest, them must, in consequence of this, form very different judgments of the same subjects from those of the public.

If we are under a necessity of pursuing happiness whenever we discern it, we are at least at liberty in making choice of the means for procuring our happiness. Yes, I know the answer; but then Liberty is only synomimous term for Knowledge. The more or less a person understands the law, or the more or less eligible will be his measures (discernment). But, whatever conduct be, the desire of happiness will always induce him to take those measures which appear to him the best calculated to promote his interest, his dispositions (character), his passions, and in fine, whatever accounts his happiness.

Chapter VIII

Of the Difference Between the Judgements of the Public and those of Private Societies

...societies must affix great esteem to what is called good breeding and polite conversation.

Chapter XI

On Probity in Relation to the Public 

...general interest regulates judgement formed by the public of the actions of men.

Chapter XII

Of Genius in Relation to the Public 

...the esteem of the public for the ideas of men is alway proportioned to the interest people have in esteeming them

Chapter XVIII

The Principal Effects of Depotic Power

...viziers have no interest in obtaining instruction, or supporting censure; that, being taken from the body of the citizens, they, on entering into place, have no principles of justice or skill in the art of government; and cannot form clear ideas of virtue.

Chapter XX

Of Genius, Considered in Relation to Different Countries

...the interest of among all nations, is the dispenser, of the esteem granted to the ideas of men; and that of nations, always faithful to the interest of their vanity, exteem in other nations only such ideas as are analogous to their own.

Chapter XXII

...vanity rules nations as well as individuals; that every one obeys the law of interest; and if consequently each nation has such an esteem for  morality as it out to have for that science, it is because morality is still in its cradle, and seems to hitherto of no use to the world.

Chapter XXVI

...interest, as we propose to prove, is the only dispenser of the esteem and contempt affixed to the actions and ideas of men.

Essay III

Chapter III

Of the Extent of Memory

Page 202

...attention alone may engrave in the memory the subjects that, without attention, would only make insensible impressions upon us

...to judge whether a defect of memory is in men an effect of their inattention, or an imperfection in their organs, we must have recourse to experience.

The extent of memory therefore depends on the daily use made of it: secondly, on the attention with which we consider the objects we would impress upon it, and which without attention,..., would only slight traces that would be easily effaced; and thirdly, on the order in which we range our ideas. To this order we are all prodigies of memory; it consists in uniting together all our ideas, and consequently charging the memory only with such objects as by their nature, or the manner in which they are considered, preserve between them a connection sufficient to recal each other.

page 203

The frequent representations of the same objects to the memory are in a manner so many touches of the graver, which cuts them deeper in proportion to the frequency with which they are represented. 

...the sagacity (wisdom) of mind in one person, that is, the promptitude (timeliness) with which one man is struck with the force of truth (revelation), frequently depends on the analogy of that truth with the objects about which he is employed. He cannot catch it by perceiving all its connections without rejecting all the ideas that first presented themselves to his rememberance, and without turning up-side down the whole magazine of of his memory, to search for the ideas connected with that truth.

This is the reason why so many men are insensible to the exposition of certain facts, for those truths shake the whole chain of their thoughts, by awakening a great number of ideas in their minds.

One should first correctly diagnose the cognative ability of an audience to learn concepts. There are individuals with mental disabilities that suffer from the brain's ability to receive and process information to fully understand what Liberty really means. I am of the belief that the meaning of Liberty can be taught as long as the one teaching the concept correctly addresses what is needed to convey the idea so that it is not too overwhelming to gain interest. We all learn concepts through familiar knowledge and life experiences. If you share an idea an individual already understands and accepts; and then associate the known idea by contextual association to an unknown idea; new contexts and problems become linked.  At times new contextual associations concur or conflict with the ideas we know. Contextual associations can solve problems or create new ones for us solve. In logic, when two ideas are compared that are mostly different from each other, but share one or more attributes (properties, components, traits) in common, an analogy can be formed to create a new idea.

From my experience it is best to start with knowng the background of the audience you are communicating with. There are individuals with a cognative Attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder marked by an ongoing pattern of inattention and/or hyperactivity-impulsivity that interferes with concentrating (focusing) on Ideas (topics) that they have little interest in learning.  Autism is another mental condition characterized by impaired social interactions, limited communication and repetitive behaviors that impede concentration of new ideas. Dementia is also a condition that causes a gradual decrease of cognitive memory and the ability to connect ideas that are being communicated. In addition, there are individuals that have physical visual and auditory conditions that impede communication and sharing ideas.  Traumatic brain injury (physical brain damage) located in the frontal or temporal lobes of the organ of soft nervous tissue contained in the skull of individuals can result in confusion, memory loss, poor organizational skills, disinhibition, poor reasoning skills and judgment. Sometimes I find an individual's beackground through familiar life experiences. There are those that suffer from substance abuse (drug addiction) and mental disorders (or mental illnesses) are conditions that affect cognitive memory and concentraton. Depression is a common mental disorder that causes people to experience a depressed mood that nterferes with their interest in concentrating on ideas. Understanding the cognative abilities of the audience your communicating, gives greater chance for acceptance of your idea.

After reading the above passages I asked my son again how he plans to find happiness. Luke reasoned, that we are not dependent on others to find happiness or misery. But, our internal understanding of happiness and misery can be refined through observation of others. "If you only interact with yourself, then you will not understand how others define happy and sad. But, if others are good to you, then you feel happy. If others are bad to you, then you will feel sad." He then asked me a question, "How can I tell whether person is good or bad?" I told him to first, observe whether the individual appears to be honest or just acting in their own self interest. Second, does the individual's ideas resemble or differ from the ones he trusts to make him him happy. Third, do any part of these new ideas protect or endanger his happiness and those he trusts. 

Essays on the Principles of Morality and Natural Religion

Henry Home, Lord Kames

Quote

Our nature, as far as concerns action, is made up of appetites and passions which move us to act, and of the moral sense by which these appetites and passions are governed. 

...It is probable, that in the following particular, man differs from the brute creation. Brutes are entirely governed by principles of action, which, in them, obtain the name of instincts. They blindly follow their instincts, and are led by that instinct which is strongest for the time. It is meet and fit they should act after this manner, because it is acting according to the whole of their nature. But for man to suffer himself to be led implicitly by instinct or by his principles of action, without check or control, is not acting according to the whole of his nature. He is endued with a moral sense or conscience, to check and control his principles of action, and to instruct him which of them he may indulge, and which of them he ought to restrain.

The chief objects of a man’s love are his friends and relations. He reserves some share to bestow on his neighbors. His affection lessens gradually, in proportion to the distance of the object, till it vanish altogether. But were this the whole of human nature with regard to benevolence, man would be but an abject creature. By a very happy contrivance (plan), objects which, because of their distance, have little or no influence, are gathered together in one general view, and made to have the very strongest effect; exceeding, in many instances, the most lively affection that is bestowed on a particular object. By this happy contrivance, the attention of  the mind, and its affections are preserved entire, to be bestowed upon general objects, instead of being dissipated among an endless number of individuals. Nothing more ennobles (refines) human nature than this principle of action: nor is there any thing more wonderful, than that a general term which has no precise meaning, should be the foundation of a more intense affection than is bestowed, for the most part, upon particular objects, even the most attractive. When we talk of our country, our religion, our government, the ideas annexed to these general terms, are obscure and indistinct.

General terms are extremely useful in language; serving, like mathematical signs, to communicate our thoughts in a summary way. But the use of them is not confined to language: they serve for a much nobler purpose, that of exciting us to generous and benevolent actions of the most exalted kind; not confined to individuals, but grasping whole societies, towns, countries, kingdoms, nay all mankind. By this curious mechanism, the defect of our nature is amply remedied. Distant objects, other ways invisible, are rendered conspicuous (obvious): accumulation makes them great; and greatness brings them near the eye: affection is preserved, to be bestowed entire, as upon a single object. And, to say all in one word, this system of benevolence, which is really founded on human nature and not the invention of man, is infinitely better contrived to advance the good and happiness of mankind, than any Utopian system that ever has been produced by the warmest imagination.

The first thing that nature consults, is the preservation of her creatures. Hence the love of life is made the strongest of all instincts. Upon the same foundation, pain is in a greater degree the object of aversion, than pleasure is of desire. Pain warns us of what tends to our dissolution (termination): pleasure is often sought after unwarily (carelessly), and by means dangerous to health and life. Pain comes in as a monitor of our danger; and nature, consulting our preservation in the first place and our gratification in the second only, wisely gives pain more force to draw us back, than it gives pleasure to push us on.
The second principle of action is self-love, or desire of our own happiness and good. This is a stronger principle than benevolence, or love bestowed upon others: wisely so ordered; because every man has more power, knowledge, and opportunity, to promote his own good than that of others. Thus individuals are mostly left to their own care. It is agreeable to the limited nature of such a creature as man, that it should be so; and, consequently, it is wisely ordered, that every man should have the strongest affection for himself.

Fidelity (Loyalty), a third principle, is circumscribed (confined) within narrower bounds; for it cannot exist without a peculiar connection betwixt (between) two persons, to found a reliance on the one side, which requires on the other a conduct corresponding to the reliance.

Gratitude is a fourth principle, universally acknowledged.

And benevolence possesses the last place, diversified by its objects, and exerting itself more vigorously or more faintly, in proportion to the distance of particular objects, and the grandeur of those that are general. This principle of action has one remarkable quality, that it operates with much greater force to relieve those in distress, than to promote positive good. In the case of distress, sympathy comes to it said; and, in that circumstance, it acquires the name of compassion.

To some objects we have an affection, and we desire to possess and enjoy them: other objects raise our aversion (dislike), and move us to avoid them. No object can move our affection but what is agreeable, nor our aversion but what is disagreeable. 

The above-mentioned principles of action belong to man as such, and constitute what may be called the common nature of man. Many other principles exert themselves upon particular objects in the instinctive manner, without the intervention of any sort of reasoning or reflection; appetite for food, animal love, etc. Other particular appetites, passions, and affections, such as ambition, avarice, envy, etc. constitute the peculiar nature of some individuals; being distributed in different proportions. It belongs to the science of ethics, to treat of these particular principles of action.

The moral sense also, though rooted in the nature of man, admits of great refinements by culture and education. It improves gradually, like our other powers and faculties, till it comes to be productive of the strongest as well as the most delicate feelings. I will endeavour to explain in what manner this happens. Every one must be sensible of the great advantages of education and imitation. 

The moral sense not only accompanies our other senses in their gradual refinement, but receives additional strength upon every occasion from these other senses. For example, a savage inured to acts of cruelty, feels little pain or aversion in putting an enemy to death in cold blood; and consequently, will have no remorse at such an action, other than what proceeds from the moral sense acting by its native strength. But let us suppose a person of so delicate feelings, as scarce to endure a common operation of phlebotomy (drawing blood), and who cannot behold without some degree of horror the amputation of a fractured member; such a person will be shocked to the highest degree, if he see an enemy put to death in cold blood. The grating emotion thus raised in him, must communicate itself to the feelings of the moral sense, and render them more acute. And thus, refinement in taste and manners, operating by communication upon the moral sense, occasions a stronger perception of immorality in every vitious action, than what would arise before such refinement. Upon the whole, the operations of the moral sense in a savage, bear no proportion to its operations in a person possessed of all the advantages of which human nature is susceptible by refined education.

As the moral sense is the true criterion of virtue, virtue undoubtedly is confined to the human species, and cannot in any just sense be attributed to any inferior being.

If in the moral sense be involved liberty of action, there must of consequence be the highest sense or feeling of morality where liberty is greatest. Now, in judging of human actions, those actions, which are essential to the order and preservation of society, are considered to be in a good measure necessary. It is our strict duty to be just and honest. We are bound by a law in our nature, which we ought not to transgress. No such feeling of duty or obligation attends those actions which come under the denomination of generosity, greatness of mind, heroism. Justice, therefore, is considered as less free than generosity; and, upon that very account, we ascribe less merit to the former, than to the latter. We ascribe no merit at all to an action which is altogether involuntary; and we ascribe more or less merit, in proportion as the action is more or less voluntary.

Man is an active being, and is not in his element but when in variety of occupation. A constant and uniform tenor of life without hopes or fears, would soon bring on satiety and disgust. Pain therefore is necessary, not only to enhance our pleasures, but to keep us in motion.* And it is needless to observe a second time, that to complain of man’s constitution in this respect, is in other words to complain, that there is such a creature as man in the scale of being. To mention but one other thing, pain and distress have a wonderful tendency to advance the interests of society. Grief, compassion, and sympathy, are strong connecting principles, by which every individual is made subservient to the general good of the whole species.

That branch of justice which regards promises and covenants, hath also a solid foundation in human nature; notwithstanding what is laid down by our author in two distinct propositions“That a promise would not be intelligible (understood), before human conventions had established it; and, That, even if it were intelligible, it would not be attended (addressed) with any moral obligation.” As man is framed for society, mutual trust and confidence, without which there can be no useful society, enter into the character of the human species. Corresponding to these, are the principles of veracity (truth) and fidelity (loyalty). Veracity and fidelity would be of no significancy, were men not disposed to have faith, and to rely upon what is said to them, whether in the way of evidence or engagement. Faith and trust, on the other hand, would be very hurtful principles, were mankind void of veracity and fidelity. For upon that supposition, the world, as observed above, would be over-run with fraud and deceit. If that branch of justice which restrains us from harming each other, be essential to the very existance of society, fidelity and veracity are not less essential to its well-being: for from them spring mostly the advantages that are peculiar to the social life. It is justly observed by our author, that man in a solitary state is the most helpless of beings; and that by society only he is enabled to supply his defects, and to acquire a superiority over his fellow-creatures; that, by conjunction of forces, our power is augmented; by partition of employments, we work to better purpose; and, by mutual succour, we acquire security. But, without mutual fidelity and trust, we could enjoy none of these advantages; without them, we could not have any comfortable intercourse with each other. Hence it is, that treachery is the vilest of crimes, held in utter abhorrence. It is worse than murder, because it forms a character, and is directed against all mankind; whereas murder is but a transitory (temporary) act, directed against a single person. Infidelity (disloyalty) is of the same species with treachery. The essence of both crimes is the same, to wit, breach of trust. Treachery has only this aggravating circumstance, that it turns the confidence reposed in me against the friend who trusts me. Now, breach of promise is a species of infidelity; and therefore our author has but a single choice: he must maintain either that treachery is no crime, or that breach of promise is a crime. And, in fact, that it is so, every man can bear evidence from his own feelings. The performance of a deliberate promise has, in all ages, been considered as a duty. We have that sense of a promise, as what we are strictly bound to perform; and the breach of promise is attended with the same natural stings which attend other crimes, namely remorse, and a sense of merited punishment.

Solomon repeated his former counsel in view of this limited perspective (cf. 2:24). “Do good” (v. 12) should read “enjoy themselves.” We could translate verse 13, “If any man eats and drinks and finds satisfaction in all his toil, it is a gift of God.”

Ecclesiastes 3

Quote

 

10. I have observed the business that God gave man to be concerned with:

11. He brings everything to pass precisely at its time; He also puts eternity in their mind, but without man ever guessing, from first to last, all the things that God brings to pass.

12. Thus I realized that the only worthwhile thing there is for them is to enjoy themselves and do what is good in their lifetime;

13. also, that whenever a man does eat and drink and get enjoyment out of all his wealth, it is a gift of God.

 

The Rabbi Shlomo Yitzchaki (Rashi) explained the above passage of Ecclesiastes  Solomon's the wisdom of choice and reward and punishment is found the compiled testimonies of many rather rather than one source. Individuals that fail to discern the truth of the wisdom of their deeds will not understand value to their choices. It is difficult to see the importance of repenting the evil actions committed in a material world. Those that do value their choice understand that they do not know the time and place of their demise and the importance of enjoying the gift of life each day and to do actions that are good.

Rashi

Quote

 

Beautiful in its time. In its proper time, it is beautiful that reward be given for good deeds, but at the time of evil, it is appropriate for meting out punishment for evil deeds. Even [a sense of] the external world

He(Creator) has set in their heart, etc. Also the wisdom of the world that He instilled into the hearts of mankind, He did not instill it all into each one’s heart, rather a little to this one and a little to that one, in order that man should not fully grasp the workings of the Holy One, Blessed Is He, to know it; [and thereby] he will not know the day of his visitation [death] and on what he will stumble, in order that he put his heart to repent, so that he will be concerned and say [to himself], “Today or tomorrow I will die.” Therefore, ‘הָעֹלָם’ is written here defectively [i.e., without a ‘vav’], an expression of “hidden,” for if man knew that the day of his death was near, he would neither build a house nor plant a vineyard. Therefore, he says that, “He has made everything beautiful in its time.” The fact that there is a time for death is a beautiful thing, for a person optimistically says [to himself], “Perhaps my death is far off,” and he builds a house and plants a vineyard; and it is beautiful that it is concealed from people.

I know. Now, since the time of visitation [death] is concealed, that there is nothing better for man than to rejoice with his portion and to do that which is good in his Creator’s eyes, while he is yet alive.

And enjoys the good. The Torah and the commandments.

 

The Rabbi (teacher) Jesus washed the feet of his disciples. He reminded humankind that we are all equal under the Creator's eyes. We are all His Children. We must humble ourselves and cherish others before our own self interests. No truth is greater than God's Natural Law. We need to embrace this reality that our own reasoning and inclinations may not be beneficial to our Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.  John 18

John 13

Quote

13 You call me ‘Teacher’ and ‘Lord,’ and do so correctly, for that is what I am. 14 If I then, your Lord and Teacher, have washed your feet, you too ought to wash one another’s feet. 15 For I have given you an example – you should do just as I have done for you. 16 I tell you the solemn truth, the slave is not greater than his master, nor is the one who is sent as a messenger greater than the one who sent him. 17 If you understand these things, you will be blessed if you do them.

Philippians 2

Quote

3 Instead of being motivated by selfish ambition or vanity, each of you should, in humility, be moved to treat one another as more important than yourself. 4 Each of you should be concerned not only about your own interests, but about the interests of others as well.

Al-Baqarah (The Cow)

Quote

177 Goodness does not consist in turning your face towards East or West. The truly good are those who believe in God and the Last Day, in the angels, the Scripture, and the prophets; who give away some of their wealth, however much they cherish it, to their relatives, to orphans, the needy, travellers and beggars, and to liberate those in bondage; those who keep up the prayer and pay the prescribed alms; who keep pledges whenever they make them; who are steadfast in misfortune, adversity, and times of danger. These are the ones who are true, and it is they who are aware of God.

Jews, Christians, and Muslims would agree with King David's teaching that People can become dependant upon their earthly leaders for guidance, and forget the Creator is the orginator of all eternal wisdom and laws.

Psalms 146

Quote

 

3 Do not trust in princes, in the son of men, who has no salvation.

4 His spirit leaves, he returns to his soil; on that day, his thoughts are lost.

5. Praiseworthy is he in whose help is the God of Jacob; his hope is in the Lord his God.

6 Who made heaven and earth, the sea and all that is in them, Who keeps truth forever.

7 Who performs justice for the oppressed, Who gives bread to the hungry; the Lord sets loose the bound.

8 The Lord gives sight to the blind; the Lord straightens the bent; the Lord loves the righteous.

9 The Lord guards the strangers; He strengthens the orphan and the widow, and He perverts the way of the wicked.

10 The Lord will reign forever! Your God, O Zion, to all generations. Hallelujah!

 

Matthew 20

Quote

25 But Jesus called them and said, “You know that the rulers of the Gentiles lord it over them, and those in high positions use their authority over them. 26 It must not be this way among you! Instead whoever wants to be great among you must be your servant, 27 and whoever wants to be first among you must be your slave – 28 just as the Son of Man did not come to be served but to serve, and to give his life as a ransom for many.”

Al-Baqara (The Cow)

Quote

2:258 (Asad) ART THOU NOT aware of that [king] who argued with Abraham about his Sustainer, (simply] because God had granted him kingship? Lo! Abraham said: "My Sustainer is He who grants life and deals death." [The king] replied: "I [too] grant life and deal death!" Said Abraham: "Verily, God causes the sun to rise in the east; cause it, then, to rise in the west!" Thereupon he who was bent on denying the truth remained dumbfounded: for God does not guide people who [deliberately] do wrong.

Congress gives Washington the Power

George Washington to the Executive Committee of the Continental Congress, 1 January 1777

Quote

Yours of the 31st last Month, incloses me sundry Resolves of Congress, by which I find, they have done me the honor to intrust me with powers, in my military Capacity, of the highest Nature and al〈most〉 unlimited in extent. Instead of thinking myself free’d from all civil Obligations, by this mark of their Confidence, I shall constantly bear in Mind, that as the Sword was the last Resort for the preservation of our Liberties, so it ought to be the first thing laid aside, when those Liberties are firmly established.

After the Revolutionary war, General Washington relinqueshed his power to serve under the Creator and the Charter of the United States Constitution. It was President Washington's hope that the Creator would bless America with Liberty and Happiness.

George Washington, December 23, 1783, Resignation Address

Quote

 

Mr. President: The great events on which my resignation depended having at length taken place; I have now the honor of offering my sincere Congratulations to Congress and of presenting myself before them to surrender into their hands the trust committed to me, and to claim the indulgence of retiring from the Service of my Country.

Happy in the confirmation of our Independence and Sovereignty, and pleased with the opportunity afforded the United States of becoming a respectable Nation, I resign with satisfaction the Appointment I accepted with diffidence (modesty). A diffidence in my abilities to accomplish so arduous a task, which however was superseded by a confidence in the rectitude (righteousness) of our Cause, the support of the Supreme Power of the Union, and the patronage of Heaven.

...The Successful termination of the War has verified the most sanguine expectations, and my gratitude for the interposition of Providence, and the assistance I have received from my Countrymen, increases with every review of the momentous Contest.

I consider it an indispensable duty to close this last solemn act of my Official life, by commending the Interests of our dearest Country to the protection of Almighty God, and those who have the superintendence of them, to his holy keeping.

Having now finished the work assigned me, I retire from the great theater of Action; and bidding an Affectionate farewell to this August body under whose orders I have so long acted, I here offer my Commission, and take my leave of all the employments of public life.

 

George Washington's first act as President of the United States was to thank the Creator for providing the citizens of the United States assistance in the Revolutionary War to gain its freedom from the power of England and its king. He considered this gratitude to be a universal sentiment of the Nation. He then asked for the Creator's blessing to make Liberty in the United States sacred.

Note. I do add parentheses ( ) to add further explanation to words that are not frequently used.

George Washington's Inaugural Address 1798

Quote

 

Fellow Citizens of the Senate and the House of Representatives.

Among the vicissitudes (fortunes) incident (episode) to life, no event could have filled me with greater anxieties than that of which the notification was transmitted by your order, and received on the fourteenth day of the present month. On the one hand, I was summoned by my Country, whose voice I can never hear but with veneration and love, from a retreat which I had chosen with the fondest predilection, and, in my flattering hopes, with an immutable (unchanging) decision, as the asylum of my declining years: a retreat which was rendered every day more necessary as well as more dear to me, by the addition of habit to inclination, and of frequent interruptions in my health to the gradual waste committed on it by time. On the other hand, the magnitude and difficulty of the trust to which the voice of my Country called me, being sufficient to awaken in the wisest and most experienced of her citizens, a distrustful scrutiny into his qualifications, could not but overwhelm with dispondence (discouragement), one, who, inheriting inferior endowments from nature and unpractised in the duties of civil administration, ought to be peculiarly conscious of his own deficiencies. In this conflict of emotions, all I dare aver, is, that it has been my faithful study to collect my duty from a just appreciation of every circumstance, by which it might be affected. All I dare hope, is, that, if in executing this task I have been too much swayed by a grateful remembrance of former instances, or by an affectionate sensibility to this transcendent proof, of the confidence of my fellow-citizens; and have thence too little consulted my incapacity as well as disinclination for the weighty and untried cares before me; my error will be palliated (soothed) by the motives which misled me, and its consequences be judged by my Country, with some share of the partiality in which they originated.
Such being the impressions under which I have, in obedience to the public summons, repaired to the present station; it would be peculiarly improper to omit in this first official Act, my fervent supplications to that Almighty Being who rules over the Universe, who presides in the Councils of Nations, and whose providential aids can supply every human defect, that His benediction (blessing) may consecrate (declare sacred) to the liberties and happiness of the People of the United States, a Government instituted (established) by themselves for these essential purposes: and may enable every instrument employed in its administration to execute with success, the functions allotted (given) to His charge (responsibility). In tendering this homage to the Great Author of every public and private good I assure myself that it expresses your sentiments not less than my own; nor those of my fellow-citizens at large, less than either. No People can be bound to acknowledge and adore the Invisible Hand, which conducts the Affairs of men more than the People of the United States. Every step, by which they have advanced to the character of an independent nation, seems to have been distinguished by some token of Providential Agency (Divine Assistance). And in the important revolution just accomplished in the system of their United Government, the tranquil deliberations and voluntary consent of so many distinct communities, from which the event has resulted, cannot be compared with the means by which most Governments have been established, without some return of pious gratitude along with an humble anticipation of the future blessings which the past seem to presage. 

...By the article establishing the Executive Department, it is made the duty of the President "to recommend to your consideration, such measures as he shall judge necessary and expedient." The circumstances under which I now meet you, will acquit me from entering into that subject, farther than to refer to the Great Constitutional Charter under which you are assembled; and which, in defining your powers, designates the objects to which your attention is to be given. It will be more consistent with those circumstances, and far more congenial with the feelings which actuate me, to substitute, in place of a recommendation of particular measures, the tribute that is due to the talents, the rectitude (morally correct behavior), and the patriotism which adorn the characters selected to devise and adopt them. In these honorable qualifications, I behold the surest pledges, that as on one side, no local prejudices, or attachments; no seperate views, nor party animosities, will misdirect the comprehensive and equal eye which ought to watch over this great assemblage of communities and interests: so, on another, that the foundations of our National policy will be laid in the pure and immutable (permanent) principles of private morality; and the pre-eminence of a free Government, be exemplified by all the attributes which can win the affections of its Citizens, and command the respect of the world.

I dwell on this prospect with every satisfaction which an ardent love for my Country can inspire: since there is no truth more thoroughly established, than that there exists in the economy and course of nature, an indissoluble union between virtue and happiness, between duty and advantage, between the genuine maxims of an honest and magnanimous (generous) policy, and the solid rewards of public prosperity and felicity (happiness): Since we ought to be no less persuaded that the propitious (favorable) smiles of Heaven, can never be expected on a nation that disregards the eternal rules of order and right, which Heaven itself has ordained: And since the preservation of the sacred fire of liberty, and the destiny of the Republican model of Government, are justly considered as deeply, perhaps as finally staked, on the experiment entrusted to the hands of the American people.

 

Scripture reveals that God owes man nothing. God is not unjust because He hides truth from some while revealing it to others. Hiding things from some is an evidence of God’s judgment, not His justice. That He extends mercy to any is amazing. That He extends it to those who are inadequate and totally dependent is even more incredible. Furthermore, because He hides truth from those who reject it He shows mercy to them because He will just all people by their response to the truth they have.

Matthew 11

Quote

25 At that time Jesus said, “I praise you, Father, Lord of heaven and earth, because you have hidden these things from the wise and intelligent, and have revealed them to little children. 26 Yes, Father, for this was your gracious will. 27 All things have been handed over to me by my Father. No one knows the Son except the Father, and no one knows the Father except the Son and anyone to whom the Son decides to reveal him. 28 Come to me, all you who are weary and burdened, and I will give you rest. 29 Take my yoke on you and learn from me, because I am gentle and humble in heart, and you will find rest for your souls. 30 For my yoke is easy to bear, and my load is not hard to carry.”

John 17

Quote

...“Father, the time has come. Glorify your Son, so that your Son may glorify you – 2 just as you have given him authority over all humanity, so that he may give eternal life to everyone you have given him. 3 Now this is eternal life – that they know you, the only true God, and Jesus Christ, whom you sent. 4 I glorified you on earth by completing the work you gave me to do. 5 And now, Father, glorify me at your side with the glory I had with you before the world was created.

Saint Paul tells us after Jesus has conquered evil and death, he will relinquish his power to serve under the Creator and his Laws. The Creator will then have direct relations and share power with all of His righteous children throughout eternity.

1 Corinthians 15

Quote

20 But now Christ has been raised from the dead, the firstfruits of those who have fallen asleep. 21 For since death came through a man, the resurrection of the dead also came through a man. 22 For just as in Adam all die, so also in Christ all will be made alive. 23 But each in his own order: Christ, the firstfruits; then when Christ comes, those who belong to him. 24 Then comes the end, when he hands over the kingdom to God the Father, when he has brought to an end all rule and all authority and power. 25 For he must reign until he has put all his enemies under his feet. 26 The last enemy to be eliminated is death. 27 For he has put everything in subjection under his feet. But when it says “everything” has been put in subjection, it is clear that this does not include the one who put everything in subjection to him. 28 And when all things are subjected to him, then the Son himself will be subjected to the one who subjected everything to him, so that God may be all in all.

Philippians 2

Quote

3 Instead of being motivated by selfish ambition or vanity, each of you should, in humility, be moved to treat one another as more important than yourself. 4 Each of you should be concerned not only about your own interests, but about the interests of others as well.

The Religious naturalist would accept understaning our environment and respecting Natural laws that govern is the key to understanding our Liberty and Happiness.

Jefferson acquired John Locke's notion how Nature has transcribed into man the understanding of primal inclinations of happiness and misery that influence our actions. In the 1689 book, An Essay Concerning Human Understanding, Locke writes. 
 
Chapter III
No Innate Practical Principles

Quote

Nature, I confess, has put into man a desire of happiness and an aversion to misery: these indeed are innate practical principles which (as practical principles ought) do continue constantly to operate and influence all our actions without ceasing: these may be observed in all persons and all ages, steady and universal; but these are inclinations of the appetite to good, not impressions of truth on the understanding.

An Essay Concerning Human Understanding, ( Chapters 2 -3) John Locke writes that the knowledge of the truths of Nature, Happiness and Misery comes through our senses from acquired experiences that are placed into memory. In infancy sensory development begins with our innate ability to differentiate pain from pleasure, hot from cold, bitter from sweet, stench from perfume, light from dark, loud from quiet, and rough from smooth. Locke notes that as our development continues, our minds begin to acquire general abstract ideas from familiar objects and prior experienced events. Some of the abstract ideas our minds formulate are right (successful) and some are wrong (failure). Our ability to recognize right and wrong ideas is what John Locke calls "the use of reason." Acquired ideas that become more accepted by reason are given names and basic language is formed. Ideas that are shared, understood and accepted by others become undoubted truths are what John Locke defines as "maxims." Many undoubted truths not known to others are reasoned by reflecting on their own unique development experiences. Undoubted truths that are reasoned and accepted before they are known are what John Locke terms "implicit maxims.' Ideas that are shared and not understood to be accepted as true or false, assent or dissent, are considered ignorant.
 
An Essay Concerning Human Understanding
John Locke

Chapter 3
No Innate Practical Principles

Quote

I grant the existence of God is so many ways manifest, and the obedience we owe him so congruous to the light of reason, that a great part of mankind give testimony to the law of nature: but yet I think it must be allowed that several moral rules may receive from mankind a very general approbation, without either knowing or admitting the true ground of morality; which can only be the will and law of a God, who sees men in the dark, has in His hand rewards and punishments and power enough to call to account the proudest offender.

Chapter 28
Of Other Relations
 
 

Quote

8. Divine law the measure of sin and duty. First, the Divine Law, whereby that law which God has set to the actions of men — whether promulgated to them by the light of nature, or the voice of revelation. That God has given a rule whereby men should govern themselves, I think there is nobody so brutish as to deny. He has a right to do it; we are his creatures: he has goodness and wisdom to direct our actions to that which is best: and he has power to enforce it by rewards and punishments of infinite weight and duration in another life; for nobody can take us out of his hands. This is the only true touchstone of moral rectitude; and, by comparing them to this law, it is that men judge of the most considerable moral good or evil of their actions; that is, whether, as duties or sins, they are like to procure them happiness or misery from the hands of the ALMIGHTY.


To understand how  Thomas Jefferson acquired maxim of the Laws of Nature and of Nature's God we must first review Commentaries on the Laws of England  by English judge, Sir William Blackstone published in 1765.  Blackstone considered the Will of the Creative force of Nature is called Natural Law. It is the explicit Will of Natural Law that binds us to this Universe and each other. It is the implicit Will of Natural Law to protect those who choose to accept and follow what we find to be good and self evident with our life.
 
Blackstone's Commentaries on the Laws of England
Introduction
Of the Nature of Laws in General.

Quote

This Will of his Maker is called the Law of Nature. For as God, when He created matter, and endued it with a principle of mobility, established certain rules for the perpetual direction of that motion; so, when he created man, and endued him with free will to conduct himself in all parts of life, He laid down certain immutable laws of human nature, whereby that free will is in some degree regulated and restrained, and gave him also the faculty of reason to discover the purpose of those laws.
 
IF man were to live in a state of nature, unconnected with other individuals, there would be no occasion for any other laws, than the law of nature, and the law of God. Neither could any other law possibly exist; for a law always supposes some superior who is to make it; and in a state of nature we are all equal, without any other superior but him who is the author of our being. But man was formed for society; and, as is demonstrated by the writers on this subject, is neither capable of living alone, nor indeed has the courage to do it. However, as it is impossible for the whole race of mankind to be united in one great society, they must necessarily divide into many; and form separate states, commonwealths, and nations; entirely independent of each other, and yet liable to a mutual intercourse. Hence arises a third kind of law to regulate this mutual intercourse, called “the law of “nations;” which, as none of these states will acknowledge a superiority in the other, cannot be dictated by either; but depends entirely upon the rules of natural law, or upon mutual compacts, treaties, leagues, and agreements between these several communities: in the construction also of which compacts we have no other rule to resort to, but the law of nature; being the only one to which both communities are equally subject: and therefore the civil law very justly observes, that quod naturalis ratio inter omnes hominess conftituit, vocatur jus gentium.

 Locke, Blackstone, Adams and Jefferson believed that a Creative Force of Nature has given us power over our body and mind to pursue or avoid sensations and reflections of pleasure and pain. John Locke believed that the Creator willed us to follow moral laws of virtue and happiness that preserve our individual selves and society from pain. Locke wrote that mankind will be rewarded if we abide by the given laws and punished if we disobey them.

In John Adams letter to Thomas Jefferson mentions Smithfield, London the location of executions of heretics and political rebels over the centuries. Scottish patriot Sir William Wallace, and Wat Tyler, leader of the Peasants' Revolt, were among the many religious reformers and dissenters ended in Smithfield. It is probable that Adams, Jefferson, and the Founding Fathers of the United States may have feared they might be added to the list of martyrs. Rebellion against the failure of a monarch to properly rule by a destructive system of Colony Administration. It was Adam's hope that the Creator would support the injustice that caused the degradation of descendants of English Freemen to a state of servitude. 

John Adams to Thomas Jefferson, 9 August 1816

Quote

 

Promise me eternal Life free from Pain, tho’ in all other respects no better than our present terrestrial Existence, I know not how many thousand Years of Smithfield fires I would not endure to obtain it.

In fine, without the Supposition of a future State, Mankind and this Globe appear to me the most Sublime and beautiful Bubble and Bauble that Imagination can conceive.

Let us then wish for Immortality at all hazards and trust the Ruler with His Skies. I do: and earnestly wish for His Commands which to the Utmost of my Power Shall be implicitly and piously obeyed.

 

Benjamin Franklin delivered this Petition of the Continental Congress, dated October 26, 1774 and signed by fifty-one delegates to the Congress, to Britain's King George III. The petition, stated the grievances of the American provinces and asked for the King's help in seeking solutions to their new founded misery. That their actions would be considered just to the Creator who would be the final judge to every one of them.

The Petition of the Grand American Continental Congress, to the King's Most Excellent Majesty

Oct. 26 1774 letter of transmittal

Quote

Had we been permitted to enjoy in quiet, the inheritance  left us by our forefathers, we should at this time have been peaceably, cheerfully and usefully employed in recommending  ourselves by every testimony of devotion to your Majesty, and of veneration to the state from which we derive our origin. 

But though now exposed to unexpected and unnatural scenes of distress by a contention with that nation, on whose parental guidance on all important affairs, we have hitherto with filial reverence constantly trusted, and therefore can derive no instruction in our present unhappy and perplexing circumstances from any former experience ; yet we doubt not the purity of our intention and the integrity of our conduct will justify us at that grand tribunal before which all mankind must submit to judgment.

We ask but for peace, liberty and safety. We wish not a diminution of the prerogative, nor do we solicit the grant of any new right in our favor. Your royal authority over us and our connection with Great-Britain, we shall always carefully and zealously endeavor to support and maintain.

 

King George considered the Colonist message of loyalty and attachment to his kingdom to be a farce. The Creator had blessed in England with Freedom and Bounty. Many of King's subjects gave their lives so that that the citizens of England could enjoy the greatest freedom that one could desire. King George considered the words of the rebellious criminal leaders to misrepresenting the truth about the constitution of colonies to be subordinate to Great Britain. America's Continental Congress were unlawfully taking control of British legislative, executive and judicial powers through acts of acts of violence threatening the property and lives of people loyal to the crown. The happiness of England and her subjects depended on her defending the resources the Creator had blessed them with.

King George III Speech to Parliament, October 27, 1775

Quote

"Those who have long too successfully labored to inflame my people in America by gross misrepresentations, and to infuse into their minds a system of opinions, repugnant to the true constitution of the colonies, and to their subordinate relation to Great-Britain, now openly avow their revolt, hostility and rebellion. They have raised troops, and are collecting a naval force; they have seized the public revenue, and assumed to themselves legislative, executive and judicial powers, which they already exercise in the most arbitrary manner, over the persons and property of their fellow-subjects: And although many of these unhappy people may still retain their loyalty, and may be too wise not to see the fatal consequence of this usurpation [unlawful right], and wish to resist it, yet the torrent of violence has been strong enough to compel their acquiescence [acceptance without protest], till a sufficient force shall appear to support them.

"The authors and promoters of this desperate conspiracy have, in the conduct of it, derived great advantage from the difference of our intentions and theirs. They meant only to amuse by vague expressions of attachment to the Parent State, and the strongest protestations [insistence] of loyalty to me, whilst they were preparing for a general revolt. On our part, though it was declared in your last session that a rebellion existed within the province of the Massachusetts Bay, yet even that province we wished rather to reclaim than to subdue. The resolutions of Parliament breathed a spirit of moderation and forbearance; conciliatory propositions accompanied the measures taken to enforce authority; and the coercive acts were adapted to cases of criminal combinations among subjects not then in arms. I have acted with the same temper; anxious to prevent, if it had been possible, the effusion of the blood of my subjects; and the calamities which are inseparable from a state of war; still hoping that my people in America would have discerned the traitorous views of their leaders, and have been convinced, that to be a subject of Great Britain, with all its consequences, is to be the freest member of any civil society in the known world.

"The rebellious war now levied is become more general, and is manifestly carried on for the purpose of establishing an independent empire. I need not dwell upon the fatal effects of the success of such a plan. The object is too important, the spirit of the British nation too high, the resources with which God hath blessed her too numerous, to give up so many colonies which she has planted with great industry, nursed with great tenderness, encouraged with many commercial advantages, and protected and defended at much expense of blood and treasure.

 


King George was no hero. We will see that King George's greatest failure was that he did not cherish his Subjects as equal citizens, but rather let his emotions lead him to the ignorance of considering them to be indentured caretakers of his corporate empire. Reason would have shown him that the common rights, and interests, of mankind are what all leaders should see. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It is clear that George III learned through his instruction that there are times when one must restrain their personal inclinations of the appetite (self interest) for the greater good of the nation. This becomes evident when George III intended to marry his true love to marry Lady Sarah Lenox, the sister of the Duke of Richmond.  When the marriage was opposed by his adviser John Stuart, Earl of Bute. George immediately broke off the relationship and wrote in his journal “The interest of my country shall ever be my first care, my own inclinations shall ever submit to it; I am born for the happiness or misery of a great nation and consequently must often act contrary to my passions.”  Later, King George III asked Lady Sarah to be one of the ten bridesmaids at his wedding to Princess Charlotte of Mecklenburg-Strelitz. It was John Stuart who designed the curriculum that shaped the future king's thoughts on history, law, and politics, relying heavily on works such as a manuscript version of William Blackstone's Commentaries on the Laws of England and St. John Bolingbroke's The Idea of the Patriot King (1740). 

Like King George, Thomas Jefferson was very familiar with Bolingboke's work. Much of his commonplace book follows Bolingboke's method of critical reasoning and evidence. Jefferson may have looked at Boilingbroke's words on the human inventions of gods, on his own reasoning of Judaism, Christianity, and Islam. Further, Jefferson's was on the same opinion of the idolatry of revering the papacy and kings.Henry St. John Bolingbroke considered any leader that put the interests of People that support him befere to him to be a hero. A hero finds virtue through a natural progression of reason to self discipline emotions. Boilingbrook correctly understood deifying human heroes that help maintain order during their lifetime is a blasphamous deception of the higheset order.  

No leader has the Divine Right to put himself above others. Bolingbroke considered this type of self idol worship to be the cause to the effect of polytheism. These type of leaders deceive even themselves to be worshiped as Divine Judges. But, in the end all of these human idols gain no power from the Creator, unlesss His Divine Will to do so. Boilingbroke does make a good point that these divine clowns betray an imperfection of our nature, being our pride, vanity, and presumption? The notion of lawgivers or a leader deceiving subjects, to be ordained by the Creator, would be known by any simpleton as using His name for personal Vanity. Any lawgiver or leader that deceives Citizens to believing thier office to be Divine and sacred should be considered false idol worship.

Jefferson most likely understood that Boilingbrook lead King George and his readers into a Sophist trap by inventing a false presumption that our happiness is dependent on good society and king. While Society does plays a significant role in a person's happiness, but is not the only factor. Monotheist would instantly point that the Prophet Abraham left the comfort of society fillled with false idol worship and found the Creator. Thomas Jefferson would have also rebuked any notion that we are always governed by laws that are always of interest to the People. Further, Jefferson would also have rebuked any duty or obligation of submission to laws that take or give away any person's right to Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness given by the Creator. It is my understanding that our third president would have argued that any laws enacted on personal self interest would not be ordained by the Creator in any way.

It is true that Lawmaking and governing becomes more difficult, if the People do not share the same morality, grievances and common enemies as their leaders. A Patriot must protect Liberty, whether or not it is in his interest to do so. It is all our duty protect Liberty and promote happiness for all mankind. But a good Leader must hold the highest conduct, because it is his duty to do so; a duty that he owes to The Creator by one law, and to his people by another. Both Jefferson would support the implicit idea that the Creator has given power to no particular individual, because by nature all Men are Equal; therefore, by Natural Law Power is given to the People or Multitude. At this period of time Jews, Christians, and Muslims would most likely have objected Pure Democracy by pointing to the royal bloodline of King David of the Old Testament. Britains's Royal College of Arms believes Queen Elizabeth, to bee a direct descendant of King David. Queen Elizabeth is also head of the Anglican Church.

The Idea of a Patriot King
Henry St. John Bolingbroke

Quote

...The iniquity of all the principal men in any community, of kings and ministers especially, does not consist alone in the crimes they commit, and in the immediate consequences of these crimes: and, therefore, their guilt is not to be measured by these alone. Such men sin against posterity, as well as against their own age; and when the consequences of their crimes are over, the consequences of their example remain. I think, and every wise and honest man in generations yet unborn will think, if the history of this administration descends to blacken our annals, that the greatest iniquity of the minister, on whom the whole iniquity ought to be charged, since he has been so long in possession of the whole power, is the constant endeavor he has employed to corrupt the morals of men. I say thus generally, the morals; because he, who abandons or betrays his country, will abandon or betray his friend; and because he, who is prevailed on to act in Parliament without any regard to truth or justice, will easily prevail on himself to act in the same manner every where else. 

...In a word, will the British spirit, that spirit which has preserved liberty hitherto in one corner of the world at least, be so easily or so soon reinfused into the British nation? I think not. We have been long coming to this point of deprivation: and the progress from confirmed habits of evil is much more slow than the progress to them. Virtue is not placed on a rugged mountain of difficult and dangerous access, as they who would excuse the indolence of their temper, or the perverseness of their will, desire to have it believed; but she is seated, however, on an eminence (exalted position). We may go up to her with ease, but we must go up gradually, according to the natural progression of reason, who is to lead the way, and to guide our steps. On the other hand, if we fall from thence, we are sure to be hurried down the hill with a blind impetuosity (violent action), according to the natural violence of those appetites and passions that caused our fall at first, and urge it on the faster, the further they are removed from the control that before restrained them.

...to save or redeem a nation, under such circumstances, from perdition, nothing less is necessary than some great, some extraordinary conjuncture of ill fortune, or of good, which may purge, yet so as by fire. Distress from abroad, bankruptcy at home, and other circumstances of like nature and tendency, may beget universal confusion. Out of confusion order may arise: but it may be the order of a wicked tyranny, instead of the order of a just monarchy. Either may happen: and such an alternative, at the disposition of fortune, is sufficient to make a Stoic tremble! We may be saved, indeed, by means of a very different kind; but these means will not offer themselves, this way of salvation will not be opened to us, without the concurrence, and the influence, of a Patriot King, the most uncommon of all phenomena in the physical or moral world.

Nothing can so surely and so effectually restore the virtue and public spirit essential to the preservation of liberty and national prosperity, as the reign of such a prince.

...But let us not neglect, on our part, such means as are in our power, to keep the cause of truth, of reason, of virtue, and of liberty, alive. If the blessing be withheld from us, let us deserve, at least, that it should be granted to us. If heaven, in mercy, bestows it on us, let us prepare to receive it, to improve it, and to co-operate with it.

I mean what this institution ought to have been, whenever it began, according to the rule of reason, founded in the common rights, and interests, of mankind. On this head it is quite necessary to make some reflections, that will, like angular stones laid on a rock, support the little fabric, the model however of a great building, that I propose to raise.

So plain a matter could never have been rendered intricate and voluminous, had it not been for lawless ambition, extravagant vanity, and the detestable spirit of tyranny, abetted by the private interests of artful men, by adulation (excessive flattery) and superstition, two vices to which that staring timid (weak spirited) creature man is excessively prone; if authority had not imposed on such as did not pretend to reason; and if such as did attempt to reason had not been caught in the common snares of sophism (moral scepticism and false reasoning), and bewildered in the labyrinths of disputation (debate). In this case, therefore, as in all those of great concernment (matters of interest, the shortest and the surest method of arriving at real knowledge is to unlearn the lessons we have been taught, to remount to first principles, and take nobody's word about them; for it is about them that almost all the juggling and legerdemain (illusions), employed by men whose trade it is to deceive, are set to work.

...the notions concerning the divine institution and right of kings, as well as the absolute power belonging to their office, have no foundation in fact or reason, but have risen from an old alliance between ecclesiastical and civil policy. The characters of king and priest have been sometimes blended together: and when they have been divided, as kings have found the great effects wrought in government by .the empire which priests obtain over the consciences of mankind, so priests have been taught by experience, that the best method to preserve their own rank, dignity, wealth, and power, all raised upon a supposed divine right, is to communicate the same pretension [claim] to kings, and, by a fallacy common to both, impose their usurpations [theft] on a silly world. This they have done: and, in the state, as in the Church, these pretensions to a have been generally carried highest by those, who have had the least pretension to the divine favor.

The authors of such inventions (conceived deceptions), as were of general use to the well being (free and happy) of mankind, were not only reverenced (awe) and obeyed (submit) during their lives, but worshiped (deified) after their deaths: they became principal gods, Dii majorum gentium (the superior governing gods of this world). The founders of commonwealths, the lawgivers, and the heroes of particular states, became gods of a second class, Dii minorum gentium. All preeminence (supremacy) was given in heaven, as well as on earth, in proportion to the benefits that men received. Majesty was the first, and divinity the second, reward. Both were earned by services done to mankind, whom it was easy to lead, in those days of simplicity and superstition, from admiration and gratitude, to adoration and expectation.

I esteem monarchy above any other form of government, and hereditary monarchy above elective. I reverence kings, their office, their rights, their persons: and it will never be owing to the principles I am going to establish, because the character and government of a Patriot King can be established on no other, if their office and their right are not always held divine, and their persons always sacred.

Now, we are subject, by the constitution of human nature, and therefore by the will of the author of this and every other nature, to two laws. One given immediately to all men by God, the same to all, and obligatory alike on all. The other given to man by man, and therefore not the same to all, nor obligatory alike on all: founded indeed on the same principles, but varied by different applications of them to times, to characters, and to a number, which may be reckoned infinite, of other circumstances. By the first, I mean the universal law of reason; and by the second, the particular law, or constitution of laws, by which every distinct community has chosen to be governed.

The obligation of submission to both, is discoverable by so clear and so simple an use of our intellectual faculties, that it may be said properly enough to be revealed to us by God: and though both these laws cannot be said properly to be given by Him, yet our obligation to submit to the civil law is a principal paragraph in the natural law, which he has most manifestly given us. In truth we can no more doubt of the obligations of both these laws, than of the existence of the Lawgiver. As supreme lord over all his works, his general providence regards immediately the great commonwealth of mankind; but then, as supreme lord likewise, his authority gives a sanction to the particular bodies of law which are made under it. The law of nature is the law of all his subjects: the constitutions of particular governments are like the by-laws of cities, or the appropriated customs of provinces. It follows, therefore, that he who breaks the laws of his country resists the ordinance of God, that is, the law of his nature. God has instituted neither monarchy, nor aristocracy, nor democracy, nor mixed government: but though God has instituted no particular form of government among men, yet by the general laws of His kingdom He exacts our obedience to the laws of those communities, to which each of us is attached by birth, or to which we may be attached by a subsequent and lawful engagement.

From such plain, unrefined, and therefore, I suppose, true reasoning, the just authority of kings and the due obedience of subjects, may be deduced with the utmost certainty. And surely it is far better for kings themselves to have their authority thus founded on principles incontestable, and on fair deductions from them, than on the chimeras of madmen, or, what has been more common, the sophisms (arguments apparently correct in form but actually invalid) of knaves (ignorant). A human right, that cannot be controverted, is preferable, surely, to a pretended divine right, which every man must believe implicitly, as few will do, or not believe at all.

...A divine right in kings is to be deduced evidently from them: a divine right to govern well, and conformably to the constitution at the head of which they are placed. A divine right to govern ill, is an absurdity to assert it, is blasphemy. A people may choose, or hereditary succession may raise, a bad prince to the throne; but a good king alone can derive his right to govern from God. The reason is plain: good government alone can be in the divine intention. God has made us to desire happiness; he has made our happiness dependent on society; and the happiness of society dependent on good or bad government. His intention, therefore, was, that government should be good.

The office of kings is, then, of right divine, and their persons are to be reputed sacred. As men, they have no such right, no such sacredness belonging to them: as kings, they have both, unless they forfeit them. Reverence for government obliges to reverence governors, who, for the sake of it, are raised above the level of other men: but reverence for governors, independently of government, any further than reverence would be due to their virtues if they were private men, is preposterous, and repugnant to common sense. The spring from which this legal reverence, for so I may call it, arises, is national, not personal. 

...Nothing can be more absurd, in pure speculation, than an hereditary right in any mortal to govern other men: and yet, in practice, nothing can be more absurd than to have a king to choose at every vacancy of a throne. We draw at a lottery indeed in one case, where there are many chances to lose, and few to gain. But have we much more advantage of this kind in the other? I think not. Upon these, and upon most occasions, the multitude would do at least as well to trust to chance as choice, and to their fortune as to their judgment. But in another respect, the advantage is entirely on the side of hereditary succession; for, in elective monarchies, these elections, whether well or ill made, are often attended with such national calamities, that even the best reigns cannot make amends for them: whereas, in hereditary monarchy, whether a good or a bad prince succeeds, these calamities are avoided.

...We may lament the imperfections of our human state, which is such, that in cases of the utmost importance to the order and good government of society, and by consequence to the happiness of our kind, we are reduced, by the very constitution of our nature, to have no part to take that our reason can approve absolutely. But though we lament it, we must submit to it. We must tell ourselves once for all, that perfect schemes are not adapted to our imperfect state; that Stoical morals and Platonic politics are nothing better than amusements for those who have had little experience in the affairs of the world

...I think a limited monarchy the best of governments, so I think an hereditary monarchy the best of monarchies. I said a limited monarchy; for an unlimited monarchy, wherein arbitrary will, which is in truth no rule, is however the sole rule, or stands instead of all rule of government, is so great an absurdity, both in reason informed or uninformed by experience, that it seems a government fitter for savages than for civilized people.

...When monarchy is the essential form, it may be more easily and more usefully tempered with aristocracy, or democracy, or both, than either of them, when they are the essential forms, can be tempered with monarchy. It seems to me, that the introduction of a real permanent monarchical power, or any thing more than the pageantry of it, into either of these, must destroy them and extinguish them, as a greater light extinguishes a less.

I would not say God governs by a rule that we know, or may know, as well as he, and upon our knowledge of which he appeals to men for the justice of his proceedings towards them; which a famous divine has impiously advanced, in a pretended demonstration of his being and attributes. God forbid! But this I may say, that God does always that which is fittest to be done, and that this fitness, whereof neither that presumptuous dogmatist was, nor any created being is, a competent judge, results from the various natures, and more various relations of things: so that, as creator of all systems by which these natures and relations are constituted, he prescribed to himself the rule, which he follows as governor of every system of being. In short, with reverence be it spoken, God is a monarch, yet not an arbitrary but a limited monarch, limited by the rule which infinite wisdom prescribed to infinite power. 

There are limitations indeed that would destroy the essential form of monarchy; or, in other words, a monarchical constitution may be changed, under pretense of limiting the monarch.

 I will not say that the essential form of monarchy should be preserved though the preservation of it were to cause the loss of liberty.

..all the limitations necessary to preserve liberty, as long as the spirit of it subsists, and longer than that no limitations of monarchy, nor any other form of government, can preserve it, are compatible with monarchy. I think on these subjects, neither as the Tories, nor as the Whigs have thought; at least, I endeavor to avoid the excesses of both. I neither dress up kings like so many burlesque Jupiters, weighing the fortunes of mankind in the scales of fate, and darting thunderbolts at the heads of rebellious giants; nor do I strip them unclothed, as it were, and leave them at most a few tattered rags to clothe their majesty, but such as can serve really as little for use as for ornament. My aim is to fix this principle: that limitations on a crown ought to be carried as far as it is necessary to secure the liberties of a people; and that all such limitations may subsist, without weakening or endangering monarchy.

I shall be told, perhaps, for I have heard it said by many, that this point is imaginary; and that limitations, sufficient to procure good government and to secure liberty under a bad prince, cannot be made, unless they are such as will deprive the subjects of many benefits in the reign of a good prince, clog his administration, maintain an unjust jealousy between him and his people, and occasion a defect of power, necessary to preserve the public tranquility, and to promote the national prosperity.

...The limitations necessary to preserve liberty under monarchy will restrain effectually a bad prince, without being ever felt as shackles by a good one. Our constitution is brought, or almost brought, to such a point, a point of perfection I think it, that no king, who is not, in the true meaning of the word, a patriot, can govern Britain with ease, security, honour, dignity, or indeed with sufficient power and strength. But yet a king, who is a patriot may govern with all the former; and, besides them, with power as extended as the most absolute monarch can boast, and a power, too, far more agreeable in the enjoyment as well as more effectual in the operation.

...It is something to desire to appear a patriot: and the desire of having fame is a step towards deserving it, because it is a motive the more to deserve it. If it be true, as Tacitus says, contemptu famae contemni virtutem, that a contempt of a good name, or an indifference about it, begets or accompanies always a contempt of virtue; the contrary will be true: and they are certainly both true. But this motive alone is not sufficient. To constitute a patriot, whether king or subject, there must be something more substantial than a desire of fame, in the composition; and if there be not, this desire of fame will never rise above that sentiment which may be compared to the coquetry of women: a fondness of transient applause, which is courted by vanity, given by flattery, and spends itself in show, like the qualities which acquire it. Patriotism must be founded in great principles, and supported by great virtues.

...princes are easily betrayed into an error that takes its rise in the general imperfection of our nature, in our pride, our vanity, and our presumption? The bastard children, but the children still, of self love; a spurious brood, but often a favorite brood, that governs the whole family. As men are apt to make themselves the measure of all being, so they make themselves the final cause of all creation. Thus the reputed orthodox philosophers in all ages have taught, that the world was made for man, the earth for him to inhabit, and all the luminous bodies, in the immense expanse around us, for him to gaze at. Kings do no more, no, not so much, when they imagine themselves the final cause for which societies were formed, and governments instituted.

...all such men should bear constantly in mind, that the master they serve is to be the king of their country: that their attachment to him, therefore, is not to be like that of other servants to other masters, for his sake alone, or for his sake and their own, but for the sake of their country likewise.

..Attachment to a private person must comprehend a great concern for his character and his interests: but attachment to one who is, or may be a king, much more; because the character of the latter is more important to himself and others; and because his interests are vastly more complicated with those of his country, and in some sort with those of mankind. 

If he gives them those of a good reign, we may assure ourselves that they will carry, and in this case they ought to carry that applause, and those demonstrations of their confidence and affection, as high as such a prince himself can desire. Thus the prince and the people, take, in effect, a sort of engagement with one another: the prince to govern well, and the people to honor and obey him.

...when the spirit of liberty begins to flag in a free people, and when they become disposed, by habits that have grown insensibly upon them, to a base submission. But they are necessary too, even when they are easiest to be obtained; that is, when the spirit of liberty is in full strength, and a disposition, to oppose all instances of maladministration (injustice), and to resist all attempts on liberty, is universal. In both cases, the endeavours of every man who loves his country will be employed with incessant care and constancy to obtain them, that good government and liberty may be the better preserved and secured; but in the latter case for this further reason also, that the preservation and security of these may be provided for, not only better but more consistently with public tranquillity, by constitutional methods, and a legal course of Opposition to the excesses of regal or ministerial power. 

It is true that a prince, who gives just reasons to expect that his reign will be that of a Patriot King, may not always meet, and from all persons, such returns as such expectations deserve: but they must not hinder either the prince from continuing to give them, or the people from continuing to acknowledge them. United, none can hurt them: and if no artifice (cunning) interrupts, no power can defeat the effects of their perseverance. It will blast many a wicked project, keep virtue in countenance (in favor), and vice, to some degree at least, in awe. Nay, if it should fail to have these effects, if we should even suppose a good prince to suffer with the people, and in some measure for them, vet many advantages would accrue to him: for instance, the cause of the people he is to govern, and his own cause would be made the same by their common enemies. He would feel grievances himself as a subject, before he had the power of imposing them as a king. He would be formed in that school out of which the greatest and the best of monarchs have come, the school of affliction: and all the vices, which had prevailed before his reign, would serve as so many foils to the glories of it. 

Machiavel is an author who should have great authority with the persons likely to oppose me. He proposes to princes the amplification of their power, the extent of their dominion, and the subjection of their people, as the sole objects of their policy. He devises and recommends all means that tend to these purposes, without the consideration of any duty owing to God or man, or any regard to the morality or immorality of actions. Yet even he declares the affectation of virtue to be useful to princes: he is so far on my side in the present question. The only difference between us is, I would have the virtue real: he requires no more than the appearance of it.

In the tenth chapter of the first book of Discourses, he appears convinced, such is the force of truth, but how consistently with himself let others determine, that the supreme glory of a prince accrues to him who establishes good government and a free constitution; and that a prince, ambitious of fame, must wish to come into possession of a disordered and corrupted state, not to finish the wicked work that others have begun, and to complete the ruin, but to stop the progress of the first, and to prevent the last. He thinks this not only the true way to fame, but to security and quiet; as the contrary leads, for here is no third way, and a prince must make his option between these two, not only to infamy (disgrace), but to danger and to perpetual disquietude (unrest). He represents those who might establish a commonwealth or a legal monarchy, and who choose to improve the opportunity of establishing tyranny, that is, monarchy without any rule of law, as men who are deceived by false notions of good, and false appearances of glory, and who are in effect blind to their true interest in every respect

Thus far Machiavel reasons justly; but he takes in only a part of his subject, and confines himself to those motives that should determine a wise prince to maintain liberty, because it is his interest to do so. He rises no higher than the consideration of mere interest, of fame, of security, of quiet, and of power, all personal to the prince: and by such motives alone even his favourite Borgia (Cesare Borgia was the son of Pope Alexander VI ) might have been determined to affect the virtues of a patriot prince; more than which this great doctor in political knowledge would not have required of him. But he is far from going up to that motive which should above all determine a good prince to hold this conduct, because it is his duty to do so; a duty that he owes to God by one law, and to his people by another.

though Mr Locke condescended to examine those of Filmer, more out of regard to the prejudices of the time, than to the importance of the work. Upon such foundations we must conclude, that since men were directed by nature to form societies, because they cannot by their nature subsist without them, nor in a state of individuality; and since they were directed in like manner to establish governments, because societies cannot be maintained without them, nor subsist in a state of anarchy, the ultimate end of all governments is the good of the people, for whose sake they were made, and without whose consent they could not have been made. In forming societies, and submitting to government, men give up part of that liberty to which they are all born, and all alike. But why? Is government incompatible with a full enjoyment of liberty? By no means. But because popular liberty without government will degenerate into licence (permission) , as government without sufficient liberty will degenerate into tyranny, they are mutually necessary to each other, good government to Support legal liberty, and legal liberty to preserve good government.

The good of the people is the ultimate and true end of government. Governors are, therefore, appointed for this end, and the civil constitution which appoints them, and invests them with their power, is determined to do so by that law of nature and reason, which has determined the end of government, and which admits this form of government as the proper means of arriving at it. Now, the greatest good of a people is their liberty.. 

Liberty is to the collective body, what health is to every individual body. Without health no pleasure can be tasted by man: without liberty no happiness can be enjoyed by society. The obligation, therefore, to defend and maintain the freedom of such constitutions will appear most sacred to a Patriot King.

Kings who have weak understandings, bad hearts, and strong prejudices, and all these, as it often happens, inflamed by their passions, and rendered incurable by their self-conceit and presumption; such kings are apt to imagine, and they conduct themselves so as to make many of their subjects imagine, that the king and the people in free governments are rival powers, who stand in competition with one another, who have different interests, and must of course have different views: that the rights and privileges of the people are so many spoils taken from the right and prerogative of the crown; and that the rules and laws, made for the exercise and security of the former, are so many diminutions (diminishing) of their dignity, and restraints on their power.

The freedom of a constitution rests on two points. The orders of it are one: so Machiavel calls them, and I know not how to call them more significantly. He means not only the forms and customs, but the different classes and assemblies of men, with different powers and privileges attributed to them, which are established in the state. The spirit and character of the people are the other. On the mutual conformity and harmony of these the preservation of liberty depends. To take away, or essentially to alter the former, cannot be brought to pass, whilst the latter remains in original purity and vigour: nor can liberty be destroyed by this method, unless the attempt be made with a military force sufficient to conquer the nation, which would not submit in this case till it was conquered, nor with much security to the conqueror even then. But these orders of the state may be essentially altered, and serve more effectually to the destruction of liberty, than the taking of them away would serve, if the spirit and character of the people are lost.

Now this method of destroying liberty is the most dangerous on many accounts, particularly on this; that even the reign of the weakest prince, and the policy of the weakest ministry, may effect the destruction, when circumstances are favorable to this method. If a people is growing corrupt, there is no need of capacity to contrive (scheme), nor of insinuation (implication) to gain, nor of plausibility (credibility) to seduce, nor of eloquence (rhetoric) to persuade, nor of authority to impose, nor of courage to attempt (acheive). The most incapable, awkward, ungracious, shocking, profligate (wasteful), and timorous (fearful) wretches (criminal), invested with power, and masters of the purse, will be sufficient for the work, when the people are accomplices in it. Luxury is rapacious (greedy); let them feed it: the more it is fed, the more profuse it will grow. Want is the consequence of profusion (abundance), venality (selfishness) of want, and dependence of venality. By this progression, the first men of a nation will become the pensioners (funders) of the last; and he who has talents, the most implicit tool to him who has none. The distemper will soon descend, not indeed to make a deposit below, and to remain there, but to pervade the whole body.

Men are willing to excuse, not only to others but to themselves, the first steps they take in vice (wickedness), and especially in vice that affects the public, and whereof the public has a right to complain.

Old men will outlive the shame of losing liberty, and young men will arise who know not that it ever existed. A spirit of slavery will oppose and oppress the spirit of liberty, and seem at least to be the genius of the nation. Such too it will become in time, when corruption has once grown to this height, unless the progress of it can be interrupted.

orders which are proper to maintain liberty, whilst a people remain uncorrupt, become improper and hurtful to liberty, when a people is grown corrupt. To remedy this abuse, new laws alone will not be sufficient. These orders, therefore, must be changed, according to him, and the constitution must be adapted to the depraved manners of the people. 

 a free commonwealth can neither be maintained by a corrupt people, nor be established among them. 

...To preserve liberty by new laws and new schemes of government, whilst the corruption of a people continues and grows, is absolutely impossible: but to restore and to preserve it under old laws, and an old constitution, by reinfusing into the minds of men the spirit of this constitution, is not only possible, but is, in a particular manner, easy to a king. A corrupt commonwealth remains without remedy, though all the orders and forms of it subsist: a free monarchical government cannot remain absolutely so, as long as the orders and forms of the constitution subsist. These, alone, are indeed nothing more than the dead letter of freedom, or masks of liberty in the first character they serve to no good purpose whatsoever: in the second they serve to a bad one; because tyranny, or government by will, becomes more severe, and more secure, under their disguise, than it would if it was barefaced (transparent)and avowed (asserted). But a king can, easily to himself and without violence to his people, renew the spirit of liberty in their minds, quicken this dead letter, and pull off this mask.

As soon as corruption ceases to be an expedient (practical) of government, and it will cease to be such as soon as a Patriot King is raised to the throne, the panacea (remedy) is applied; the spirit of the constitution revives of course: and, as fast as it revives, the orders and forms of the constitution are restored to their primitive integrity, and become what they were intended to be, real barriers against arbitrary power, not blinds nor masks under which tyranny may lie concealed. Depravation of manners exposed the constitution to ruin: reformation will secure it. Men decline easily from virtue; for there is a devil too in the political system, a constant tempter at hand. A Patriot King will want neither power nor inclination to cast out this devil, to make the temptation cease, and to deliver his subjects, if not from the guilt, yet from the consequence, of their fall. Under him they will not only cease to do evil, but learn to do well; for, by rendering public virtue and real capacity the sole means of acquiring any degree of power or profit in the state, he will set the passions of their hearts on the side of liberty and good government. A Patriot King is the most powerful of all reformers; for he is himself a sort of standing miracle, so rarely seen and so little understood, that the sure effects of his appearance will be admiration and love in every honest breast, confusion and terror to every guilty conscience, but submission and resignation in all. A new people will seem to arise with a new king. innumerable metamorphoses, like those which poets feign, will happen in very deed: and, while men are conscious that they are the same individuals, the difference of their sentiments will almost persuade them that they are changed into different beings.

But, that we may not expect more from such a king than even he can perform, 

Absolute stability is not to be expected in any thing human; for that which exists immutably exists alone necessarily, and this attribute of the Supreme Being, can neither belong to man, nor to the works of man. The best instituted governments, like the best constituted animal bodies, carry in them the seeds of their destruction:

 All that can be done, therefore, to prolong the duration of a good government, is to draw it back, on every favorable occasion, to the first good principles on which it was founded. When these occasions happen often, and are well improved, such governments are prosperous and durable. When they happen seldom, or are ill improved, these political bodies live in pain, or in languor, and die soon.

the royal mantle will not convey the spirit of patriotism into another king, as the mantle of Elijah did the gift of prophecy into another prophet. The utmost he can do, and that which deserves the utmost gratitude from his subjects, is to restore good government, to revive the spirit of it, and to maintain and confirm both, during the whole course of his reign. The rest his people must do for themselves. If they do not, they will have none but themselves to blame: if they do, they will have the principal obligation to him. In all events, they will have been free men one reign the longer by his means, and perhaps more; since he will leave them much better prepared and disposed to defend their liberties, than he found them.

...he must begin to govern as soon as he begins to reign. For the very first steps he makes in government will give the first impression, and as it were the presage of his reign; and may be of great importance in many other respects besides that of opinion and reputation. His first care will be, no doubt, to purge his court, and to call into the administration such men as he can assure himself will serve on the same principles on which he intends to govern.

A good prince will no more choose ill men, than a wise prince will choose fools. Deception in one case is indeed more easy than in the other; because a knave may be an artful hypocrite, whereas a silly fellow can never impose himself for a man of sense. And least of all, in a country like ours, can either of these deceptions happen, if any degree of the discernment of spirits be employed to choose. The reason is, because every man here, who stands forward enough in rank and reputation to be called to the councils of his king, must have given proofs beforehand of his patriotism, as well as of his capacity, if he has either, sufficient to determine his general character.

 My Lord Bacon says, that cunning is left handed or crooked wisdom. I would rather say, that it is a part, but the lowest part, of wisdom; employed alone by some, because they have not the other parts to employ; and by some, because it is as much as they want, within those bounds of action which they prescribe to themselves, and sufficient to the ends that they propose. 

 inferior wisdom or cunning may get the better of folly: but superior wisdom will get the better of cunning. Wisdom and cunning have often the same objects; but a wise man will have more and greater in his view. The least will not fill his soul, nor ever become the principal there; but will be pursued in subserviency, in subordination at least, to the other. Wisdom and cunning may employ sometimes the same means too: but the wise man stoops to these means, and the other cannot rise above them. Simulation (pretend) and dissimulation (disguise), for instance, are the chief arts of cunning: the first will be esteemed (valued) always by a wise man unworthy of him, and will be therefore avoided by him, in every possible case; for, to resume my Lord Bacon's comparison, simulation is put on that we may look into the cards of another, whereas dissimulation intends nothing more than to hide our own. Simulation is a stiletto, not only an offensive, but an unlawful weapon: and the use of it may be rarely, very rarely, excused, but never justified. Dissimulation is a shield, as secrecy is armour (ar,pr): and it is no more possible to preserve secrecy in the administration of public affairs without some degree of dissimulation, than it is to succeed in it without secrecy. Those two arts of cunning are like the alloy mingled with pure ore. A little is necessary, and will not debase the coin below its proper standard; but if more than that little be employed, the coin loses its currency, and the coiner his credit.

We may observe much the same difference between wisdom and cunning, both as to the objects they propose and to the means they employ, as we observe between the visual powers of different men. One sees distinctly the objects that are near to him, their immediate relations, and their direct tendencies; and a sight like this serves well enough the purpose of those who concern themselves no further. The cunning minister is one of those: he neither sees, nor is concerned to see, any further than his personal interests, and the support of his administration, require. If such a man overcomes any actual difficulty, avoids any immediate distress, or, without doing either of these effectually, gains a little time, by all the low artifice which cunning is ready to suggest and baseness of mind to employ, he triumphs, and is flattered by his mercenary train, on the great event; which amounts often to no more than this, that he got into it by another. The wise distress by one series of faults, and out of minister sees, and is concerned to see further, because government has a further concern: he sees the objects that are distant as well as those that are near, and all their remote relations, and even their indirect tendencies. He thinks of fame as well as of applause, and prefers that, which to be enjoyed must be given, to that which may be bought. He considers his administration as a single day in the great year of government; but as a day that is affected by those which went before, and that must affect those which are to follow. He combines, therefore, and compares all these objects, relations, and tendencies; and the judgment he makes, on an entire not a partial survey of them, is the rule of his conduct. That scheme of the reason of state, which lies open before a wise minister, contains all the great principles of government, and all the great interests of his country: so that, as he prepares some events, he prepares against others, whether they be likely to happen during his administration, or in some future time.

To espouse (support) no party, but to govern like the common father of his people, is so essential to the character of a Patriot King, that he who does otherwise forfeits the title. It is the peculiar (unusual) privilege and glory of this character, that princes who maintain it, and they alone, are so far from the necessity, that they are not exposed to the temptation, of governing by a party; which must always end in the government of a faction: the faction of the prince, if he has ability; the faction of his ministers, if he has not; and, either one way or other, in the oppression of the people. For faction [A group of people within a political organization] is to party what the superlative [highest degree] is to the positive: party is a political evil, and faction is the worst of all parties. The true image of a free people, governed by a Patriot King, is that of a patriarchal family, where the head and all the members are united by one common interest, and animated by one common spirit: and where, if any are perverse (wicked) enough to have another, they will be soon borne down by the superiority of those who have the same; and, far from making a division, they will but confirm the union of the little state. That to approach as near as possible to these ideas of perfect government, and social happiness under it, is desirable in every state, no man will be absurd enough to deny

If his people are united in their submission to him, and in their attachment to the established government, he must not only espouse (support) but create a party, in order to govern by one: and what should tempt him to pursue so wild a measure? A prince, who aims at more power than the constitution gives him, may be so tempted; because he may hope to obtain in the disorders of the state what cannot be obtained in quiet times; and because contending (contesting) parties will give what a nation will not. Parties, even before they degenerate into absolute factions, are still numbers of men associated together for certain purposes, and certain interests, which are not, or which are not allowed to be, those of the community by others. A more private or personal interest comes but too soon, and too often, to be superadded [add on extra], and to grow predominant in them: and when it does so, whatever occasions or principles began to form them, the same logic prevails in them that prevails in every church. The interest of the state is supposed to be that of the party, as the interest of religion is supposed to be that of the Church: and, with this pretense [deception] or prepossession [impression], the interest of the state becomes, like that of religion, a remote consideration, is never pursued for its own sake, and is often sacrificed to the other. A king, therefore, who has ill designs to carry on, must endeavor to divide an united people; and by blending or seeming to blend his interests with that of a party, he may succeed perhaps, and his party and he may share the spoils of a ruined nation: but such a party is then become a faction, such a king is a tyrant, and such a government is a conspiracy.

all the good ends of government are most attainable in a united state, and as the divisions of a people can serve to bad purposes alone, the king we suppose here will deem the union of his subjects his greatest advantage, and will think himself happy to find that established, which he would have employed the whole labor of his life to bring about.

A people may be united in submission to the prince, and to the establishment, and yet be divided about general principles, or particular measures of government. in the first case, they will do by their constitution what has frequently been done by the Scripture, strain it to their own notions and prejudices; and, if they cannot strain it, alter it as much as is necessary to render it conformable to them. In the second, they will support or oppose particular acts of administrations, and defend or attack the persons employed in them; and both these ways a conflict of parties may arise, but no great difficulty to a prince who determines to pursue the union of his subjects, and the prosperity of his kingdoms independently of all parties.

When parties are divided by different notions and principles concerning some particular ecclesiastical, or civil institutions, the constitution, which should be their rule, must be that of the prince. He may and he ought to show his dislike or his favor, as he judges the constitution may be hurt or improved, by one side or the other. The hurt he is never to suffer, not for his own sake; and, therefore, surely not for the sake of any whimsical (odd ideas), factious, or ambitious set of men. The improvement he must always desire; but as every new modification in a scheme of government and of national policy is of great importance, and requires more and deeper consideration than the warmth, and hurry, and rashness (recklessness) of party conduct admit, the duty of a prince seems to require that he should render by his influence the proceedings more orderly and more deliberate, even when he approves the end to which they are directed. All this may be done by him without fomenting division: and, far from forming or espousing a party, he will defeat party in defence of the constitution, on some occasions; and lead men, from acting with a party spirit, to act with a national spirit, on others.

...Under his reign, the opportunities of forming an opposition of this sort will be rare, and the pretenses generally weak. Nay, the motives to it will lose much of their force, when a government is strong in reputation, and men are kept in good humor by feeling the rod of a party on no occasion, though they feel the weight of the scepter on some. Such opportunities, however, may happen; and there may be reason, as well as pretenses, sometimes for opposition even in such a reign:

...Grievances then are complained of, mistakes and abuses in government are pointed out, and ministers are prosecuted by their enemies. Shall the prince on the throne form a party by intrigue, and by secret and corrupt influence, to oppose the prosecution? When the prince and the ministers are participes criminis [participants in crime], when every thing is to be defended, lest something should come out, that may unravel the silly wicked scheme, and disclose to public sight the whole turpitude (corruption) of the administration, there is no help; this must be done, and such a party must be formed, because such a party alone will submit to a drudgery (difficult work) of this kind. But a prince, who is not in these circumstances, will not have recourse to these means. He has others more open, more noble, and more effectual in his power: he knows that the views of his government are right, and that the tenor (substance) of his administration is good; but he knows that neither he nor his ministers are infallible (without fault), nor impeccable (without sin). There may be abuses in his government, mistakes in his administration, and guilt in his ministers, which he has not observed: and he will be far from imputing (charging blame) the complaints, that give him occasion to observe them, to a spirit of party; much less will he treat those who carry on such prosecutions in a legal manner, as incendiaries, and as enemies to his government. On the contrary, he will distinguish the voice of his people from the clamor of a faction, and will hearken (listen) to it. He will redress (fix) grievances, correct errors, and reform or punish ministers. This he will do as a good prince: and as a wise one, he will do it in such a manner that his dignity shall be maintained, and that his authority shall increase, with his reputation, by it.

Should the efforts of a mere faction be bent to calumniate (falsely accuse) his government, and to distress the administration on groundless pretences (false appearances), and for insufficient reasons; he will not neglect, but he will not apprehend neither, the short-lived and contemptible scheme. He will indeed have no reason to do so; for let the fautors of maladministration, whenever an opposition is made to it, affect to insinuate (imply)  as much as they please, that their masters are in no other circumstances than those to which the very best ministers stand exposed, objects of general envy and of particular malice, it will remain eternally true, that groundless opposition, in a well regulated monarchy, can never be strong and durable. To be convinced of the truth of this proposition, one needs only to reflect how many well grounded attacks have been defeated, and how few have succeeded, against the most wicked and the weakest administrations. Every king of Britain has means enough in his power, to defeat and to calm opposition. But a Patriot King, above all others, may safely rest his cause on the innocency of his administration, on the constitutional strength of the crown, and on the concurrence of his people, to whom he dares appeal, and by whom he will be supported.

To conclude all I will say on the divisions of this kind, let me add, that the case of a groundless opposition can hardly happen in a bad reign, because in such a reign just occasions of opposition must of course be frequently given, as we have allowed that they may be given sometimes, though very rarely, in a good reign; but that, whether it be well or ill grounded, whether it be that of the nation, or that of a faction, the conduct of the prince with respect to it will be the same; and one way or other this conduct must have a very fatal event. Such a prince will not mend the administration, as long as he can resist the justest (morally right) and most popular opposition: and, therefore, this opposition will last and grow, as long as a free constitution is in force, and the spirit of liberty is preserved; for so long even a change of his ministers, without a change of his measures, will not be sufficient. The former without the latter is a mere banter, and would be deemed and taken for such, by every man who did not oppose on a factious principle; that I mean of getting into power at any rate, and using it as ill, perhaps worse than the men he helped to turn out of it. Now if such men as these abound, and they will abound in the decline of a free government, a bad prince, whether he changes or does not change his ministers, may hope to govern by the spirit and art of a faction, against the spirit and strength of the nation. His character may be too low, and that of his minister too odious (repulsive), to form originally even a faction that shall be able to defend them. But they may apply to their purposes, a party that was formed on far different occasions, and bring numbers to fight for a cause in which many of them would not have listed. The names, and with the names the animosity of parties, may be kept up, when the causes that formed them subsist no longer.

Reading Boilingbroke, King George would have taken notice of Sir Robert Filmer, an English political theorist who defended the divine right of kings. In his work, The Natural Power of Kings, Sir  Robert considers Liberty to be the cause of action for the Fall of Adam. An example of Liberty, would be reformulating the first sentence in a contest that fits with today's culture. The Fall of the first archetype couple (Eve and Adam)  was caused not following a command given the Creator. If we believe that the Creator is Nature, then Eve and Adam went against the Law of Nature with their given Liberty of Choice; called Reason.

The Natural Power of Kings.
By the Learned Sir Robert Filmer Baronet

Quote

Since the time that School-Divinity began to flourish, there hath been a common Opinion maintained, as well by Divines, as by divers other learned Men, which affirms, Mankind is naturally endowed and born with Freedom from all Subjection, and at liberty to chose what Form of Government it please: And that the Power which any one Man hath over others, was at first bestowed according to the discretion of the Multitude.

This Tenent was first hatched in the Schools, and hath been fostered by all succeeding Papists for good Divinity. The Divines also of the Reformed Churches have entertained it, and the Common People every where tenderly embrace it, as being most plausible to Flesh and blood, for that it prodigally destributes a Portion of Liberty to the meanest of the Multitude, who magnifie Liberty, as if the height of Humane Felicity were only to be found in it, never [[3]] remembring That the desire of Liberty (choice) was the first Cause of the Fall of Adam.

...this Vulgar Opinion hath of late obtained a great Reputation, yet it is not to be found in the Ancient Fathers and Doctors of the Primitive Church: It contradicts the Doctrine and History of the Holy Scriptures, the constant Practice of all Ancient Monarchies, and the very Principles of the Law of Nature. It is hard to say whether it be more erroneous in Divinity, or dangerous in Policy.


...the ground of this Doctrine both Jesuites, and some other zealous favourers of the Geneva Discipline (Consistory of Geneva), have built a perillous Conclusion, which is, That the People or Multitude have Power to punish, or deprive the Prince, if he transgress the Laws of the Kingdom; witness Parsons and Buchanan: the first under the name of Dolman, in the Third Chapter of his First Book labours to prove, that Kings have been lawfully chastised by their Commonwealths: The latter in his Book De jure Regni apud Scotos, maintains A Liberty of the People to depose their Prince. Cardinal Bellarmine and Calvin, both look asquint this way.


This desperate Assertion whereby Kings are made subject to the Censures and Deprivations of their Subjects, follows (as the Authors of it conceive) as a necessary Consequence of that former Position of the supposed Natural Equality and Freedom of Mankind, and Liberty to choose what form of Government it please.

.I come now to examine that Argument which is used by Bellarmine, and is the One and only Argument I can find produced by my Author for the proof of the Natural Liberty of the People. It is thus framed: That God hath given or ordained Power, is evident by Scripture; But God hath given it to no particular Person, because by nature all Men are Equal; therefore he hath given Power to the People or Multitude.


To Answer this Reason, drawn from the Equality of Mankind by Nature, I will first use the help of Bellarmine himself, whose very words are these: If many men had been together created out of the Earth, they all ought to have been Princes over their Posterity (offspring). In these words we have an Evident Confession, that Creation made man Prince of his Posterity.  And indeed not only Adam, but the succeding Patriarchs had, by Right of Father-hood, Royal Authority over their Children. Nor dares Bellarmine deny this also. That the Patriarchs (saith he) were endowed with Kingly Power, their Deeds do testify; for as Adam was Lord of his Children, so his Children under him, had a Command and Power over their own Children; but still with subordination to the First Parent, who is Lord-Paramout over his Childrens Children to all Generations, as being the Grand-Father of his People.

I see not then how the Children of Adam, or of any man else can be free from subjection to their Parents: And this subjection of Children being the Fountain of all Regal Authority, by the Ordination of God himself; It follows, that Civil Power, not only in general is by Divine Institution, but even the Assignment of it Specifically to the eldest Parents, which quite takes away that New and Common distinction which refers only Power Universal and Absolute to God; but Power Respective in regard of the Special Form of Government to the Choice of the people.

This Lordship which Adam by Command had over the whole World, and by Right descending from him the Patriarchs did enjoy, was as large and ample as the Absolutest Dominion of any Monarch which hath been since the Creation: For Dominion of Life and Death, we find that Judah the Father pronounced Sentence of Death against Thamar his Daughter-in-law, for playing the Harlot; Bring her forth (saith he) that she may be burnt. Touching War, we see that Abraham commanded an Army of 318 Souldiers of his own Family. And Esau met his Brother Jacob with 400 Men at Arms. For matter of Peace, Abraham made a League with Abimilech, and ratify’d the Articles with an Oath. These Acts of Judging in Capital Crimes, of making War, and concluding Peace, are the chiefest Marks of Sovereignty that are found in any Monarch.

As this Patriarchal Power continued in Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob, even until the Egyptian Bondage; so we find it amongst the Sons of Ismael and Esau. It is said, These are the Sons of Ismael, and these are their Names by their Castles and Towns [villages, and encampments], Twelve Princes of their Tribes and Families. And these are the Names of the Dukes [chiefs] that came of Esau, according to their Families and their Places by their Nations.

Some perhaps may think that these Princes and Dukes of Families were but some petty Lords under some greater Kings, because the number of them are so many, that their particular Territories could be but small, and not worthy the Title of Kingdoms; but they must consider, that at first, Kings had no such large Dominions as they have now adays; we find in the time of Abraham, which was about 300 years after the Flood, that in a little corner of Asia, 9 Kings at once met in Battail, most of which were but Kings of Cities apiece, with the adjacent Territories, as of Sodom, Gomorrha, Shinar, &c. In the same Chapter is mention of Melchisedeck King of Salem, which was but the City of Jerusalem. And in the Catalogue of the Kings of Edom, the Names of each King’s City is recorded, as the only Mark to distinguish their Dominions. In the Land of Canaan, which was but a small circuit, Joshua destroyed thirty one Kings; and about the same time, Adonibeseck had 70 Kings whose hands and toes he had cut off, and made them feed under his Table. A few years after this, Kings came to Benhadad King of Syria, and about 70 Kings of Greece went to the Wars of Troy. Cæsar found more Kings in France, than there be now Princes there, and at his sailing over into this Island, he found four Kings in our County of Kent. These heaps of Kings in each Nation are an Argument their Territories were but small, and strongly confirms our Assertion, that Erection of Kingdoms came at first only by Distinction of Families. [1 King. 20. 16.16 And they went out at noon. But Ben-hadad was drinking himself drunk in the booths, he and the kings, the thirty and two kings that helped him. ]

It may seem absurd to maintain, that Kings now are the Fathers of their People, since Experience shews the contrary. It is true, all Kings be not the Natural Parents of their Subjects, yet they all either are, or are to be reputed the next Heirs to those first Progenitors, who were at first the Natural Parents of the whole People, and in their Right succeed to the Exercise of Supreme Jurisdiction; and such Heirs are not only Lords of their own Children, but also of their Brethren, and all others that were subject to their Fathers: And therefore we find, that God told Cain of his Brother Abel, His Desires shall be subject unto thee, and thou shalt rule over him. Accordingly, when Jacob bought his Brother’s Birth-right, Isaac blessed him thus, Be Lord over thy Brethren, and let the Sons of thy Mother bow before thee. [Gen. 27. 29. Let peoples serve thee, and nations bow down to thee. Be lord over thy brethren, and let thy mother's sons bow down to thee. Cursed be every one that curseth thee, and blessed be every one that blesseth thee.]

As long as the first Fathers of Families lived, the name of Patriarchs did aptly belong unto them; but after a few Descents, when the true Fatherhood it self was extinct, and only the Right of the Father descends to the true Heir, then the Title of Prince or King was more significant, to express the Power of him who succeeds only to the Right of that Fatherhood which his Ancestors did Naturally enjoy; by this means it comes to pass, that many a Child, by succeeding a King, hath the Right of a Father over many a Gray-headed Multitude, and hath the Title of Pater Patriæ.

This Ignorance of the People being admitted, it doth not by any means follow; that for want of Heirs the Supreme Power is devolved to the Multitude, and that they have Power to Rule, and Chose what Rulers they please. No, the Kingly Power escheats in such cases to the Princes and independent Heads of Families: for every Kingdom is resolved into those parts whereof at first it was made. By the Uniting of great Families or petty Kingdoms, we find the greater Monarchies were at the first erected; and into such again, as into their first Matter many times they return again. And because the dependencie of ancient Families is oft obscure or worn out of Knowledge; therefore the wisdom of All or Most Princes have thought fit to adopt many times those for Heads of Families, and Princes of Provinces, whose Merits, Abilities, or Fortunes, have enobled them, or made them fit and capable of such Regal Favours. All such prime Heads and Fathers have power to consent in the uniting or conferring of their Fatherly Right of Sovereign Authority on whom they please: And he that is so Elected, claims not his Power as a Donative from the People; but as being substituted properly by God, from whom he receives his Royal Charter of an Universal Father, though testified by the Ministry of the Heads of the People.

..every Kingdom is resolved into those parts whereof at first it was made. By the Uniting of great Families or petty Kingdoms, we find the greater Monarchies were at the first erected; and into such again, as into their first Matter many times they return again. And because the dependence of ancient Families is often obscure or worn out of Knowledge; therefore the wisdom of All or Most Princes have thought fit to adopt many times those for Heads of Families, and Princes of Provinces, whose Merits, Abilities, or Fortunes, have enobled them, or made them fit and capable of such Regal Favours. All such prime Heads and Fathers have power to consent in the uniting or conferring of their Fatherly Right of Sovereign Authority on whom they please: And he that is so Elected, claims not his Power as a Donative (donated) from the People; but as being substituted properly by God, from whom he receives his Royal Charter of an Universal Father, though testified by the Ministry of the Heads of the People.

If it please God, for the Correction of the Prince, or punishment of the People, to suffer Princes to be removed, and others to be placed in their rooms, either by the Factions of the Nobility, or Rebellion of the People; in all such cases, the Judgment of God, who hath Power to give and to take away Kingdoms, is most just: Yet the Ministry of Men who Execute Gods Judgments without Commission, is sinful and damnable. God doth but use and turn mens Unrighteous Acts to the performance of his Righteous Decrees.

In all Kingdoms or Commonwealths in the World, whether the Prince be the Supreme Father of the People, or but the true Heir of such a Father, or whether he come to the Crown by Usurpation (illegal seizure), or by Election of the Nobles, or of the People, or by any other way whatsoever; or whether some Few or a Multitude Govern the Commonwealth: Yet still the Authority that is in any one, or in many, or in all these, is the only Right and natural Authority of a Supream Father. There is, and always shall be continued to the end of the World, a Natural Right of a Supreme Father over every Multitude, although by the secret Will of God, many at first do most unjustly obtain the Exercise of it.

To confirm this Natural Right of Regal Power, we find in the Decalogue (Ten Commandments, Exodus 20:1–17), That the Law which enjoys Obedience to Kings, is delivered in the terms of Honour thy Father, as if all power were originally in the Father. If Obedience to Parents be immediately due by a Natural Law, and Subjection to Princes, but by the Mediation (agency) of a Humane Ordinance (decree); what reason is there that the Laws of Nature should give place to [replace] the Laws of Men? as we see the power of the Father over his Child,  gives place, and is subordinate to the power of the Magistrate.

Because the Scripture is not favourable to the Liberty of the People; therefore many fly to Natural Reason, and to the Authority of Aristotle. 

To prove that in these words which seem to favour the Equality of Mankind, Aristotle doth not speak according to his own Judgment, but recites only the Opinion of others; we find him clearly deliver his own Opinion, that the Power of Government did originally arise from the Right of Fatherhood, which cannot possibly consist with that Natural Equality which Men dream of: for in the First of his Politiques he agrees exactly with the Scripture, and lays this Foundation of Government, The first Society (saith he) made of Many Houses is a Village, which seems most naturally to be a Colony of Families or foster-Brethren of Children and Childrens Children. And therefore at the beginning, Cities were under the Government of Kings, for the eldest in every house is King: And so for Kindred-sake it is in Colonies. And in the fourth of his Politiques, cap. 2. He gives the Title of the first and Divinest sort of Government to the Institution of Kings, by Defining Tyranny to be a Digression from the First and Divinest.

whosoever weighs advisedly these passages, will find little hope of Natural Reason in Aristotle to prove the Natural Liberty of the Multitude. Also before him the Divine Plato concludes a Commonwealth to be nothing else but a large Family. I know for this Position Aristotle quarrels with his Master, but most unjustly; for therein he contradicts his own Principles for they both agree to fetch the Orignial of Civil Government from the prime Government. No doubt but Moses’s History of the Creation guided these two Philosophers in finding out of this Lineal Subjections deduced from the Laws of the First Parents, according to that Rule of St. Chrysostom, God made all Mankind of One Man, that he might teach the World to be Governed by a King, and not by a Multitude.

The Ignorance of the Creation, occasioned several Errors amongst the Heathen Philosophers. Polybius, though otherwise a most profound Philosopher, and Judicious Historian, yet here he stumbles; for in searching out the Original of Civil Societies, he conceited, That Multitudes of Men after a Deluge, a Famine, or a Pestilence, met together like Herds of Cattle without any Dependency, until the strongest Bodies and boldest Minds got the Mastery of their Fellows; even as it is (saith he) among Bulls, Bears and Cocks.

And Aristotle himself, forgetting his first Doctrine, tells us, the first Heroical Kings were chosen by the People for their deserving well of the Multitude; either by teaching them some New Arts, or by Warring for them, or by Gathering them together, or by Dividing Land amongst them; also Aristotle had another Fancy, that those Men who prove wise of Mind, were by Nature intended to be Lords, and Govern; and those which were Strong of Body were ordained to obey, and to be Servants. But this is a dangerous and uncertain Rule, and not without some Folly; for if a Man prove both Wise and Strong, what will Aristotle have done with him? as he was Wise, he could be no Servant, and as he had Strength, he could not be a Master; besides, to speak like a Philosopher, Nature intends all things to be perfect both in Wit and Strength. The Folly or Imbecillity proceeds from some Error in Generation or Education; for Nature aims at Perfection in all her Works.

Suarez the Jusuite riseth up against the Royal Authority of Adam, in defence of the Freedom and Liberty of the people; and thus argues. By Right of Creation (saith he) Adam had only Oeconomical (household management) power, but not Political; he had a power over his Wife, and a Fatherly power over his Sons, while they were not made Free: he might also in process of Time have Servants and a Compleat Family; and in that Family he might have compleat Oeconomical Power. But after that Families began to be multiplied, and Men to be separated, and become the Heads of several Families; they had the same power over their Families. But Political Power did not begin, until Families began to be gathered together into one perfect Community; wherefore as the Community did not begin by the Creation of Adam, nor by his will alone, but of all them which did agree in this Community: So we cannot say that Adam Naturally had Political Primacy in that Community; for that cannot be gathered by any Natural Principles, because by the Force of the Law of Nature alone, it is not due unto any Progenitor, to be also King of his Posterity. And if this be not gathered out of the Principles of Nature, we cannot say, God by a special Gift or Providence gave him this Power; For there is no Revelation of this, nor Testimony of Scripture. Hitherto Suarez.

...I see no reason, but that we may call Adam’s Family a Commonwealth, except we will wrangle about Words: For Adam living 930 years, and seeing 7 or 8 Descents from himself, he might live to command of his Children and their Posterity a Multitude far bigger, than many Commonwealths and Kingdoms.

I know the Politicians and Civil Lawyers do not agree well about the Definition of a Family, and Bodin doth seem in one place to confine it to a House; yet in his Definition, he doth enlarge his meaning to all Persons under the Obedience of One and the same Head of the Family; and he approves better of the propriety of the Hebrew Word for a Family (המשפחה), which is derived from a Word that signifies a Head, a Prince, or Lord, than the Greek Word for a Family, which is derived from οɩ̂̓[Editor: illegible character, most likely οικογένεια], which signifies a House. Nor doth Aristotle confine a Family to One House; but esteems it to be made of those that daily converse together : whereas before him, Charondas called a Family Homosypioi, those that feed together out of one common Pannier. And Epimenides the Cretian, terms a Family Homocapnoi, those that sit by a Common Fire, or Smoak. But let Suarez understand what he please by Adam’s Family; if he will but confess, as he needs must, that Adam and the Patriarchs had Absolute power of Life and Death, of Peace and War, and the like, within their Houses or Families; he must give us leave at least, to call them Kings of their Houses or Families; and if they be so by the Law of Nature, what Liberty will be left to their Children to dispose of?

Aristotle gives the Lie to Plato, and those that say Political and Oeconomical Societies are all one, and do not differ Specie (appearance), but only Multitudine (multitude, many) & Paucitate (few); as if there were no difference between a Great House and a Little City. All the Argument I find he brings against them is this.

The Community of Man and Wife, differs from the Community of Master and Servant, because they have several Ends. The Intention of Nature by Conjunction of Male and Female, is Generation; but the Scope of Master and Servant, is Preservation: so that a Wife and a Servant are by Nature distinguished, because Nature does not work like the Cutlers (knife makers) of Delphos (mythological island birthplace of Apollo), for she makes but one thing for one Use. If we allow this Argument to be sound, nothing doth follow but only this, That Conjugal (joined together) and Despotical (Monarchy) Communities do differ. But it is no consequence, That therefore, Oeconomical and Political Societies do the like: for though it prove a Family to consist of two distinct Communities, yet it follows not, that a Family and a Commonwealth are distinct; because, as well in the Commonweal, as in the Families, both these Communities are found.

And as this Argument comes not home to our Point, so it is not able to prove that Title which it shews for; for if it should be granted (which yet is false) that Generation and Preservation differ about the Individual, yet they agree in the General, and serve both for the Conservation (protection and management) of Mankind; Even as several Servants differ in the particular Ends or Offices; as one to Brew, and another to Bake; yet they agree in the general Preservation of the Family. Besides, Aristotle confesses, that amongst the Barbarians (as he calls all them that are not Grecians) a Wife and a Servant are the same, because by Nature, no Barbarian is fit to Govern; It is fit the Grecians should rule over the Barbarians; for by Nature a Servant and a Barbarian is all one: their Family consists only of an Ox for a Man-Servant, and a Wife for a Maid; so they are fit only to rule their Wives and their Beasts. Lastly, Aristotle (if it had pleased him) might have remembred, That Nature doth not always make one Thing but for one Use: he knows, the Tongue serves both to Speak, and to Taste.

 But to leave Aristotle, and return to Suarez; he saith that Adam had Fatherly Power over his Sons, whilst they were not made Free. Here I could wish that the Jesuite had taught us, how and when Sons become Free: I know no means by the Law of Nature. It is the Favour I think of the Parents only, who when their Children are of Age and Discretion to ease their Parents of part of their Fatherly Care, are then content to remit some part of their Fatherly authority; therefore the Custom of some Countries do in some Cases Enfranchise the Children of inferiour Parents, but many Nations have no such Custom, but on the contrary have strict Laws for the Obedience of Children: the Judicial Law of Moses giveth full power to the Father to stone his disobedient Son, so it be done in presence of a Magistrate: And yet it did not belong to the Magistrate to enquire and examine the justness of the Cause; But it was so decreed, lest the Father should in his Anger, suddenly, or secretly kill his Son.

The Romans, even in their most Popular Estate, had this Law in force, and this Power of Parents was ratified and amplified by the Laws of the Twelve Tables, to the enabling of Parents to sell their Children two or three times over. By the help of the Fatherly Power, Rome long flourished, and oftentimes was freed from great Dangers. The Fathers have drawn out of the very Assemblies their own Sons; when being Tribunes (elected officials), they have published Laws tending to Sedition.

Memorable is the Example of Cassius, who threw his Son headlong out of the Consistory (imperial council room), publishing the Law Agraria, for the Division of Lands, in the behalf of the People; and afterwards, by his own private Judgment put him to Death, by throwing him down from the Tarpeian Rock (a steep cliff of the southern summit of the Capitoline Hill, overlooking the Roman Forum); the Magistrates and People standing there amazed, and not daring to resist his Fatherly Authority, although they would with all their Hearts, have had that Law for the Division of Land: by which it appears, it was lawful for the Father to dispose of the Life of his Child, contrary to the Will of the Magistrates or People. The Romans also had a Law, that what the Children got, was not their own, but their Fathers; although Solon made a Law, which acquitted the Son from Nourishing of his Father, if his Father had taught him no Trade, whereby to get his Living.

Suarez proceeds, and tells us, That in Process of Time, Adam had complete Oeconomical Power. I know not what this complete Oeconomical Power is, nor how, or what it doth really and essentially differ from Political: If Adam did, or might exercise the same Jurisdiction, which a King doth now in a Commonwealth, then the Kinds of Power are not distinct; and though they may receive an Accidental Difference by the Amplitude, or Extent of the Bounds of the One beyond the Other; yet since the like Difference is also found in Political Estates, It follows that Oeconomical and Political Power, differ no otherwise, than a Little Commonwealth differs from a Great One. Next, saith Suarez, Community did not begin at the Creation of Adam. It is true, because he had no body to Communicate with; yet Community did presently follow his Creation, and that by his Will alone: for it was in his power only (who was Lord of All) to appoint what his Sons should have in Proper, and what in Common; so that Propriety and Community of Goods did follow Originally from him; and it is the Duty of a Father, to provide as well for the Common Good of his Children, as the Particular.

But let us Condescend a while to the Opinion of Bellarmine and Suarez, and all those, who place Supreme power in the Whole People; and ask them if their meaning be, That there is but one and the same power in all the people of the World; so that no power can be granted, except all the Men upon the Earth meet and agree, to choose a Governor.

An Answer is here given by Suarez, That it is scarce possible, nor yet expedient, that All Men in the World should be gathered together into One Community: It is likelier, that either never, or for a very short time, that this power was in this manner, in the whole Multitude of Men collected; but a little after the Creation, men began to be divided into several Commonwealths; and this distinct power was in each of them.

...Can they show, or prove, that ever the whole Multitude met, and divided this power which God gave them in Gross, by breaking into parcels, and by appointing a distinct power to each several Commonwealth? Without such a Compact I cannot see (according to their own Principles) how there can be any Election of a Magistrate by any Commonwealth, but by a meer Usurpation upon the priviledge of the whole World. If any think that particular Multitudes at their own Discretion, had power to divide themselves into several Commonwealths; those that think so, have neither Reason nor Proof for so thinking: and thereby a Gap is opened for every petty Factious Multitude, to raise a New Commonwealth, and to make more Commonwealths than there be Families in the World. But let this also be yielded them, That in each particular Commonwealth, there is a Distinct Power in the Multitude. Was a General Meeting of a Whole Kingdom ever known for the Election of a Prince? Is there any Example of it ever found in the Whole World? To conceit such a thing, is to imagine little less than an Impossibility. And so by Consequence, no one Form of Government, or King, was ever established according to this supposed Law of Nature.

it is true, that by Politick Humane Constitutions, it is oft ordained, that the Voices of the most shall over-rule the Rest; and such Ordinances bind, because, where Men are Assembled by an humane Power; that power that doth Assemble them, can also Limit and Direct the manner of the Execution of that Power, and by such Derivative Power, made known by Law or Custom, either the greater part, or two Thirds, or Three parts of Five, or the like, have power to oversway the Liberty of their Opposites. But in Assemblies that take their Authority from the Law of Nature, it cannot be so: for what Freedom or Liberty is due to any Man by the Law of Nature, no Inferiour Power can alter, limit or diminish; no One Man, nor a Multitude, can give away the Natural Right of another. The Law of Nature is unchangeable, and howsoever One Man may hinder Another in the Use or Exercise of his Natural Right, yet thereby No Man loseth the Right of it self; for the Right and the Use of the Right may be distinguished, as Right and Possession are often distinct. Therefore, unless it can be proved by the Law of Nature, that the Majority, or some other part, have Power to over-rule the Rest of the Multitude; It must follow, that the Acts of Multitudes not Entire, are not Binding to All, but only to such as Consent unto them.

As to the point of Proxy; it cannot be showed or proved, That all those that have been Absent from Popular Elections, did ever give their Voices to some of their Fellows. I ask but one Example out of the History of the whole World, Let the Commonwealth be but named, wherever the Multitude, or so much as the Greatest part of it consented, either by Voice or by Procuration, to the Election of a Prince. The Ambition sometimes of One Man, sometimes of Many, or the Faction of a City or Citizens, or the Mutiny of an Army, hath set up or put down Princes; but they have never tarried for this pretended Order by proceeding of the whole Multitude.

Lastly, if the silent Acceptation (approval) of a Governor by part of the People, be an Argument of their Concurring (agreement) in the Election of him; by the same Reason, the Tacit (understood) Assent of the whole Commonwealth may be maintained: From whence it follows, that every Prince that comes to a Crown, either by Succession, Conquest, or Usurpation (take without right), may be said to be Elected by the People; which Inference is too ridiculous; for in such Cases, the People are so far from the Liberty of Specification (to do, or not to do), that they want even that of Contradiction.

It is plain by an Evident Text, that it is one thing to choose a King, and another thing to set up a King over the People; this latter power the Children of Israel had, but not the former. This distinction is found most evident in Deut. 17. 15. where the Law of God saith, Him shalt thou set King over thee, whom the Lord shall choose; so God must Eligere, and the People only do Constituere. Mr. Hooker in his Eight Book of Ecclesiastical Policy, clearly expounds this Distinction; the words are worthy the citing: Heaps of Scripture (saith he) are alledged, concerning the Solemn Coronation or Inauguration of Saul, David, Solomon and others, by Nobles, Ancients, and the people of the Commonwealth of Israel; as if these Solemnities were a kind of Deed, whereby the Right of Dominion is given; which strange, untrue, and unnatural conceits, are set abroad by Seed-men of Rebellion, only to animate unquiet Spirits, and to feed them with possibilities of Aspiring unto the Thrones, if they can win the Hearts of the People; whatsoever Hereditary Title any other before them may have. I say these unjust and insolent Positions, I would not mention, were it not thereby to make the Countenance of Truth more Orient. For unless we will openly proclaim Defiance unto all Law, Equity and Reason, we must (for there is no other Remedy) acknowledg, that in Kingdoms Hereditary, Birth-right [[48]] giveth Right unto Sovereign Dominion, and the Death of the Predecessor, putteth the Successor by Blood in Seisin. Those publick Solemnities before-mentioned, do either serve for an open Testification of the Inheritor’s Right, or belong to the Form of inducing of him into possession of that thing he hath Right unto. This is Mr. Hooker’s Judgment of the Israelites Power to set a King over themselves. No doubt but if the people of Israel had had power to choose their King, they would never have made choice of Joas, a Child but of seven years old, nor of Manasses a Boy of Twelve; since (as Solomon saith) Wo to the Land whose King is a Child: Nor is it probable they would have elected Josias, but a very Child, and a Son to so wicked and Idolatrous a Father, as that his own Servants murthered him; and yet all the people set up this young Josias, and slew the Conspirators of the Death of Ammon his Father; which Justice of the People, God rewarded, by making this Josias the most Religious King, that ever that Nation enjoyed.

9.) Because it is affirmed, that the People have Power to choose, as well what Form of Government, as what Governours they please; of which mind is Bellarmine, in those Places we cited at first. Therefore it is necessary to Examine the Strength of what is said in Defence of popular Common-weals, against this Natural Form of Kingdoms, which I maintain’d. Here I must first put the Cardinal in mind of what he affirms in cold Blood, in other Places; where he saith, God when he made all Mankind of one Man, did seem openly to signifie, that he rather approved the Government of one Man, than of many. Again, God shewed his Opinion, when he endued not only Men, but all Creatures with a Natural Propensity to Monarchy; neither can it be doubted, but a Natural Propensity is to be referred to God, who is Author of Nature. And again; in a Third Place, What Form of Government God confirmed by his Authority, may be gathered by that Common-weal, which he instituted amongst the [[50]] Hebrews, which was not Aristocratical, (as Calvin saith) but plainly Monarchical.

10.) Now if God, (as Bellarmine saith) hath taught us by Natural Instinct, signified to us by the Creation, and confirmed by his own Example, the Excellency of Monarchy, why should Bellarmine or We doubt, but that it is Natural? Do we not find, that in every Family, the Government of One Alone is most Natural? God did always Govern his own People by Monarchy only. The Patriarchs, Dukes, Judges, and Kings were all Monarchs. There is not in all the Scripture, Mention or Approbation of any other Form of Government. At the time when Scripture saith, There was no King in Israel, but that every Man did that which was Right in his Own Eyes; Even then, the Israelites were under the Kingly Government of the Fathers of particular Families: For in the Consultation, after the Benjamitical War, for providing Wives for the Benjamites, we find, the Elders of the Congregation bare only Sway. [[51]] Judges 21. 16. To them also were Complaints to be made, as appears by Verse 22. And though mention be made of all the Children of Israel, all the Congregation, and all the People; yet by the Term of All, the Scripture means only all the Fathers, and not all the whole Multitude, as the Text plainly expounds it self in 2 Chron. 1. 2. where Solomon speaks unto all Israel, to the Captains, the Judges, and to every Governour, the Chief of the Fathers; so the Elders of Israel are expounded to be the Chief of the Fathers of the Children of Israel, 1 Kings 8. 12. 2 Chron. 5. 2.

t that time also, when the People of Israel begg’d a King of Samuel, they were Governed by Kingly Power. God out of a special Love and Care to the House of Israel, did choose to be their King himself, and did govern them at that time by his Viceroy Samuel, and his Sons; and therefore God tells Samuel, They have not rejected Thee, but Me, that I should not Reign over them. It seems they did not like a King by Deputation, [[52]] but desired one by Succession, like all the Nations. All Nations belike had Kings then, and those by Inheritance, not by Election: for we do not find the Israelites prayed, that they themselves might choose their Own King; they dream of no such Liberty, and yet they were the Elders of Israel gathered together. If other Nations had Elected their own Kings, no doubt but they would have been as desirous to have imitated Other Nations as well in the Electing, as in the Having of a King.

Aristotle, in his Book of Politicks, when he comes to compare the several Kinds of Government, he is very reserved in discoursing what Form he thinks Best: he disputes subtilely to and fro of many Points, and Judiciously of many Errours, but concludes nothing himself. In all those Books, I find little Commendation of Monarchy. It was his Hap to live in those Times when the Græcians abounded with several Common-wealths, who had then Learning enough to make [[53]] them seditious. Yet in his Ethicks, he hath so much good Manners, as to confess in right down words, That Monarchy is the best Form of Government, and a Popular Estate the worst. And though he be not so free in his Politicks, yet the Necessity of Truth hath here and there extorted from him, that which amounts no less to the Dignity of Monarchy; he confesseth it to be First, the Natural, and the Divinest Form of Government; and that the Gods themselves did live under a Monarchy. What can a Heathen say more?

ndeed, the World for a long time knew no other sort of Government, but only Monarchy. The Best Order, the Greatest Strength, the Most Stability, and easiest Government, are to be found all in Monarchy, and in no other Form of Government. The New Platforms of Commonweals were first hatched in a Corner of the World, amongst a few Cities of Greece, which have been imitated by very few other places. Those very Cities [[54]] were first, for many Years, governed by Kings, untill Wantonness, Ambition, or Faction of the People, made them attempt new kinds of Regiment; all which Mutations proved most Bloody and Miserable to the Authors of them; happy in nothing, but that they continued but a small time.

11.) A little to manifest the Imperfection of Popular Government, let us but examine the most Flourishing Democracy that the World hath ever known; I mean that of Rome. First, for the Durability; at the most, it lasted but 480 Years (for so long it was from the Expulsion of Tarquin, to Julius Cæsar.) Whereas both the Assyrian Monarchy lasted, without Interruption, at the least twelve hundred Years, and the Empire of the East continued 1495 Years.

For the Order of it, during these 480 Years, there was not any One setled Form of Government in Rome: for after they had once lost the Natural Power of Kings, they could not [[55]] find upon what Form of Government to rest: their Fickleness is an Evidence that they found things amiss in every Change. At the First they chose two Annual Consuls instead of Kings. Secondly, those did not please them long, but they must have Tribunes of the People to defend their Liberty. Thirdly, they leave Tribunes and Consuls, and choose them Ten Men to make them Laws. Fourthly, they call for Consuls and Tribunes again, sometimes they choose Dictators, which were Temporary Kings, and sometimes Military Tribunes, who had Consular Power. All these shiftings caused such notable Alteration in the Government, as it passeth Historians to find out any Perfect Form of Regiment in so much Confusion: One while the Senate made Laws, another while the People. The Dissentions which were daily between the Nobles and the Commons, bred those memorable Seditions about Usury, about Marriages, and about Magistracy. Also the Græcian, the Apulian, and the Drusian Seditions, filled the Market-Places, [[56]] the Temples, and the Capitol it self, with Blood of the Citizens; the Social War was plainly Civil; the Wars of the Slaves, and the other of the Fencers; the Civil Wars of Marius and Sylla, of Cataline, of Cæsar and Pompey the Triumvirate, of Augustus, Lepidus and Antonius: All these shed an Ocean of Blood within Italy and the Streets of Rome.

Thirdly, for their Government, let it be allowed, that for some part of this time it was Popular, yet it was Popular as to the City of Rome only, and not as to the Dominions, or whole Empire of Rome; for no Democratie can extend further than to One City. It is impossible to Govern a Kingdom, much less many Kingdoms by the whole People, or by the Greatest Part of them.

 

In the Book of Acts we see the body of Christ (Apostles) not follow a command given by  the High Priest (Magistrate, Head of Sanhendrin, [Supreme Court]) that no Jew to mention the name of the Rabbi (Teacher), Jesus the Christ (Savior), who hung on a tree (Crucified, Cursed by the Creator). Council Member and Rabbi Gamaliel, of Hillel Pharisee of School of Law, stood up and suggested the possiblity that the Apostles may messengers of the Creator (Hashem, Allah). All Commands of the Creator should dutifully honored. If the Council was to punish the Apostles, the Creator may go against them like he did with King Saul.

Acts 5

Quote

...the high priest questioned them, 28 saying, “We gave you strict orders not to teach in this name. Look, you have filled Jerusalem with your teaching, and you intend to bring this man’s blood on us!” 29 But Peter and the apostles replied, “We must obey God rather than people. 30 The God of our forefathers raised up Jesus, whom you seized and killed by hanging him on a tree. 31 God exalted him to his right hand as Leader and Savior, to give repentance to Israel and forgiveness of sins. 32 And we are witnesses of these events, and so is the Holy Spirit whom God has given to those who obey him.”

33 Now when they heard this, they became furious and wanted to execute them. 34 But a Pharisee whose name was Gamaliel, a teacher of the law who was respected by all the people, stood up in the council and ordered the men to be put outside for a short time. 35 Then he said to the council, “Men of Israel, pay close attention to what you are about to do to these men. 36 For some time ago Theudas rose up, claiming to be somebody, and about four hundred men joined him. He was killed, and all who followed him were dispersed and nothing came of it. 37 After him Judas the Galilean arose in the days of the census, and incited people to follow him in revolt. He too was killed, and all who followed him were scattered. 38 So in this case I say to you, stay away from these men and leave them alone, because if this plan or this undertaking originates with people, it will come to nothing, 39 but if it is from God, you will not be able to stop them, or you may even be found fighting against God.” He convinced them, 40 and they summoned the apostles and had them beaten. Then they ordered them not to speak in the name of Jesus and released them. 41 So they left the council rejoicing because they had been considered worthy to suffer dishonor for the sake of the name. 42 And every day both in the temple courts and from house to house, they did not stop teaching and proclaiming the good news that Jesus was the Christ.

 

Hebrews and Christians believe and testify that the first recorded action In law, is a set of recorded events of disobeying the Creator and Master that led to their Fall. It is important to note that Muslims and Mormons and other faiths have different implicit accounts, which I plan to discuss. I also plan to define the fourth rational character known as the serpant, that testifies the implicit Liberty concept of Disobedience with the penalty of suffering mortal death.

Other serpants have been known to Jews and Christians. In Scripture we read an account where the Isrealite nation complains and is ungrateful for the help the Creator has given to them during their time time in the wilderness. Their complaint was the implicit Liberty concept of vanity, which is considered a violation of a command the Creator previously had given to the Israelites. The penalty of death by fiery serpant was judged upon them. Those who did not die immediately die, took responsibility for the their actions and asked for forgiveness. The Creator choose to give mercy to the remaining Isrealites. He gives Moses a remedy for the plague: craft a snake snake of fiery copper on pole and was cured the poisen snake bites.

Numbers Chapter 21
 

Quote

4 And they journeyed from mount Hor by the way to the Red Sea, to compass the land of Edom; and the soul of the people became impatient because of the way.

5 And the people spoke against God, and against Moses: 'Wherefore have ye brought us up out of Egypt to die in the wilderness? for there is no bread, and there is no water; and our soul loatheth this light bread.'

6 And the LORD sent fiery serpents among the people, and they bit the people; and much people of Israel died.

7 And the people came to Moses, and said: 'We have sinned, because we have spoken against the LORD, and against thee; pray unto the LORD, that He take away the serpents from us.' And Moses prayed for the people.

8 And the LORD said unto Moses: 'Make thee a fiery serpent, and set it upon a pole; and it shall come to pass, that every one that is bitten, when he seeth it, shall live.'

9 And Moses made a serpent of brass (copper), and set it upon the pole; and it came to pass, that if a serpent had bitten any man, when he looked unto the serpent of brass, he lived.

Shmuel I - I Samuel - Chapter 8

Quote

6 And the thing was displeasing in the eyes of Samuel, when they said, "Give us a king to judge us," and Samuel prayed to the Lord.

7 And the Lord said to Samuel, "Listen to the voice of the people, according to all that they will say to you, for they have not rejected you, but they have rejected Me from reigning over them.

8. Like all the deeds which they have done from the day I brought them up from Egypt, and until this day, and they forsook Me and served other gods; so are they doing to you.


1 Corinthians 12

Quote

12 For just as the body is one and yet has many members, and all the members of the body – though many – are one body, so too is Christ. 13 For in one Spirit we were all baptized into one body. Whether Jews or Greeks or slaves or free, we were all made to drink of the one Spirit. 14 For in fact the body is not a single member, but many. 15 If the foot says, “Since I am not a hand, I am not part of the body,” it does not lose its membership in the body because of that. 16 And if the ear says, “Since I am not an eye, I am not part of the body,” it does not lose its membership in the body because of that. 17 If the whole body were an eye, what part would do the hearing? If the whole were an ear, what part would exercise the sense of smell? 18 But as a matter of fact, God has placed each of the members in the body just as he decided. 19 If they were all the same member, where would the body be? 20 So now there are many members, but one body. 21 The eye cannot say to the hand, “I do not need you,” nor in turn can the head say to the foot, “I do not need you.” 22 On the contrary, those members that seem to be weaker are essential, 23 and those members we consider less honorable we clothe with greater honor, and our unpresentable members are clothed with dignity, 24 but our presentable members do not need this. Instead, God has blended together the body, giving greater honor to the lesser member, 25 so that there may be no division in the body, but the members may have mutual concern for one another. 26 If one member suffers, everyone suffers with it. If a member is honored, all rejoice with it. 27 Now you are Christ’s body, and each of you is a member of it. 

Ephesions 4

Quote

...live worthily of the calling with which you have been called, 2 with all humility and gentleness, with patience, putting up with one another in love, 3 making every effort to keep the unity of the Spirit in the bond of peace. 4 There is one body and one Spirit, just as you too were called to the one hope of your calling, 5 one Lord, one faith, one baptism, 6 one God and Father of all, who is over all and through all and in all.

 

 

 

In the the city of Jerusalem (Peace, Shalem, Salaam,) there once was a temple (tabernacle, palace) to the Creator (Hashem) of the Most High.

Tehillim - Psalms - Chapter 76

Quote

2 God is known in Judah; in Israel His name is great.

3 His Tabernacle was in Salem, and His dwelling place in Zion.

We can imagine when the Creator appeared it was like a moving thunderstorm.

47:2 "Ner" is the Hebrew word for candle; the soul is the candle of God

Tehillim - Psalms - Chapter 50

Quote

2 From Zion, perfect in beauty, God appeared

(Aramaic Targum Ps. 52:2 From Zion God has shown a glorious crown.)

(The Great Isaiah Scroll Chapter 62 : Verse 3 You will be a crown of splendor in the LORD's hand, and a royal diadem in the hand of your God.)

3 —let our God come and not fail to act! Devouring fire preceded Him; it stormed around Him fiercely.

He summoned the heavens above, and the earth, for the trial of His people.

(Jerusalem Talmud Shabbat 37a - Regulations Concerning the Sabbath and Chanukkah Light -

R. Simeon.

The question, "Is it allowed to extinguish a lamp for the sake of a sick person on the Sabbath?" was propounded to Tan'hum of Navi.

...'Who is the King of Glory?' And he said: 'The Lord strong and mighty.' ... Hence did not Solomon say well: 'I praise the dead,' etc.? ... I say this: A lamp is called 'Ner,' and the soul of man is called 'Ner.' Let rather the Ner which man has made (the lamp) be extinguished, than the 'Ner' (the soul) which belongs to the Holy One, blessed is He.")

5 “Bring in My devotees, who made a covenant with Me over sacrifice!

6 Then the heavens proclaimed His righteousness, for He is a God who judges.

7 “Pay heed, My people, and I will speak, O Israel, and I will arraign you. I am God, your God.

8 I censure you not for your sacrifices, and your burnt offerings, made to Me daily;

9 I claim no bull from your estate, no he-goats from your pens.

10 For Mine is every animal of the forest, the beasts on a thousand mountains.

11 I know every bird of the mountains, the creatures of the field are subject to Me.

12 Were I hungry, I would not tell you, for Mine is the world and all it holds.

 

 

In Jerusalem, King Machizedek High Priest at the tabernacle (temple) of God (Hashem) of the Most High. One of his duties was that a peacemaker of disputes. In this passage the reader is placed of scene of King Melchizedek shaing bread and wine to Abraham and his foe King Sodom to agree on terms of surrender and war reperation. King Melchizedek congratulates Abraham with blessing from the Creator of the most high who posseses (owns) everything. 

Note. I use the text color aquablue to represent the righteous and grey to represent the supernatural. Red denotes the adveraries (Satan)

Bereishit - Genesis - Chapter 14

Quote

18 And Malchizedek the king of Salem brought out bread and wine, and he was a priest to the Most High God.

19 And he blessed him, and he said, "Blessed be Abram to the Most High God, Who possesses heaven and earth.

20 And blessed be the Most High God, Who has delivered your adversaries into your hand," and he gave him a tithe from all.

21 And the king of Sodom said to Abram, "Give me the souls, and the possessions take for yourself."

22 And Abram said to the king of Sodom, "I raise my hand to the Lord, the Most High God, Who possesses heaven and earth.

23 Neither from a thread to a shoe strap, nor will I take from whatever is yours, that you should not say, 'I have made Abram wealthy.'

24 Exclusive of what the lads ate, and the share of the men who went with me; Aner, Eshkol, and Mamre they shall take their share."

6

Targum Jonathan on Genesis 14:18-24

Quote

18 And Malka Zadika, who was Shem bar Noah, the king of Yerushalem, came forth to meet Abram, and brought forth to him bread and wine; and in that time he ministered before Eloha Ilaha.

19 And he blessed him, and said, Blessed be Abram of the Lord God Most High, who for the righteous possesseth the heavens and the earth.

20 And blessed be Eloha Ilaha, who hath made thine enemies as a shield which receiveth a blow. And he gave to him one of ten, of all which he brought back.

21 And the king of Sedom said to Abram, Give me the souls of the men of my people whom thou hast brought back, and the substance take to thyself.

22 And Abram said to the king of Sedom, I have uplifted my hands in an oath before the Lord God the Most High, who for the just possesseth his possession of the heavens and the earth,

23 if from a thread to the latchet of a sandal I receive any thing of all that is thine; lest thou magnify thyself in saying, I have enriched Abram from mine own.

24 Have I not power over all the spoil?--Apart from what the young men have eaten, and the portion of the men who went with me, Aner, Eshkol, and Mamre, they also receiving their portion.

11

 Letter to the Hebrews Chapter 7

Quote

7 Now this Melchizedek, king of Salem, priest of the most high God, met Abraham as he was returning from defeating the kings and blessed him. 2 To him also Abraham apportioned a tithe of everything. His name first means king of righteousness, then king of Salem, that is, king of peace. 3 Without father, without mother, without genealogy, he has neither beginning of days nor end of life but is like the son of God, and he remains a priest for all time. 4 But see how great he must be, if Abraham the patriarch gave him a tithe of his plunder. 5 And those of the sons of Levi who receive the priestly office have authorization according to the law to collect a tithe from the people, that is, from their fellow countrymen, although they too are descendants of Abraham. 6 But Melchizedek who does not share their ancestry collected a tithe from Abraham and blessed the one who possessed the promise. 7 Now without dispute the inferior is blessed by the superior, 8 and in one case tithes are received by mortal men, while in the other by him who is affirmed to be alive. 9 And it could be said that Levi himself, who receives tithes, paid a tithe through Abraham. 10 For he was still in his ancestor Abraham’s loins when Melchizedek met him.

 Divrei Hayamim I - I Chronicles - Chapter 1

Quote

17 The sons of Shem:

Elam, Asshur, Arphaxad, Lud, and Aram.

The sons of Aram:

Uz, Hul, Gether, and Meshech.

18 Arphaxad was the father of Shelah, and Shelah was the father of Eber. 19 Two sons were born to Eber: the first was named Peleg, for during his lifetime the earth was divided; his brother’s name was Joktan.

20 Joktan was the father of Almodad, Sheleph, Hazarmaveth, Jerah, 21 Hadoram, Uzal, Diklah, 22 Ebal, Abimael, Sheba, 23 Ophir, Havilah, and Jobab. All these were the sons of Joktan.

24 Shem, Arphaxad, Shelah, 25 Eber, Peleg, Reu, 26 Serug, Nahor, Terah, 27 Abram (that is, Abraham).

 

Luke 3

Quote

23 So Jesus, when he began his ministry, was about thirty years old. He was the son (as was supposed) of Joseph, the son of Heli, 24 the son of Matthat, the son of Levi, the son of Melchi, the son of Jannai, the son of Joseph, 25 the son of Mattathias, the son of Amos, the son of Nahum, the son of Esli, the son of Naggai, 26 the son of Maath, the son of Mattathias, the son of Semein, the son of Josech, the son of Joda, 27 the son of Joanan, the son of Rhesa, the son of Zerubbabel, the son of Shealtiel, the son of Neri, 28 the son of Melchi, the son of Addi, the son of Cosam, the son of Elmadam, the son of Er, 29 the son of Joshua, the son of Eliezer, the son of Jorim, the son of Matthat, the son of Levi, 30 the son of Simeon, the son of Judah, the son of Joseph, the son of Jonam, the son of Eliakim, 31 the son of Melea, the son of Menna, the son of Mattatha, the son of Nathan, the son of David, 32 the son of Jesse, the son of Obed, the son of Boaz, the son of Sala, the son of Nahshon, 33 the son of Amminadab, the son of Admin, the son of Arni, the son of Hezron, the son of Perez, the son of Judah, 34 the son of Jacob, the son of Isaac, the son of Abraham, the son of Terah, the son of Nahor, 35 the son of Serug, the son of Reu, the son of Peleg, the son of Eber, the son of Shelah, 36 the son of Cainan, the son of Arphaxad, the son of Shem, the son of Noah, the son of Lamech, 37 the son of Methuselah, the son of Enoch, the son of Jared, the son of Mahalalel, the son of Kenan, 38 the son of Enosh, the son of Seth, the son of Adam, the son of God.

Matthew 5

Quote

9 Blessed are the peacemakers, for they will be called the children of God.

 

The Dead sea scroll proclaims Prince Melchizedek will return Isreali prisoners to their home and property. Prince Melchizedek will announce a special Day of Atonement where he will judge and release righteous Israelis from any debt of their sins. 

The Melchizedek Document (11Q13)
Translated by James Scott Trimm

Quote

"To proclaim the Jubilee to the captives" 

(The Israel Museum, Jerusalem, The Great Isaiah Scroll : Chapter 61 : Verse 1 The spirit of the LORD is upon me, because the LORD has anointed me; he has sent me to bring good news to the oppressed, and to bind up the brokenhearted, to proclaim freedom for the captives, and release from darkness for the prisoners.)

(...) just as (...) and from the inheritance of Melchizedek, for (... Melchizedek) ,  who will return them to what is rightfully theirs.

He will proclaim to them the Jubilee, thereby releasing them from the debt of all their sins. He shall proclaim this decree in the first week of the jubilee period that follows nine jubilee periods.

Then the "Day of Atonement" shall follow after the tenth jubilee period, when he  shall atone for all the Sons of Light, and the people who are allotted to Melchizedek. 

(...) upon them (...) For this is the time decreed for the "Year of Melchizedek's favor", and by his might he will judge Elohim's holy ones and so establish a  righteous kingdom, …as it is written about him [Melchizedek] in the Songs of David:

"Elohim has taken his place in the council of EL; in the midst of the ELOHIM he holds judgment" 
(
Ps. 82:1 A psalm of Asaph. God stands in the divine assembly; among the divine beings He pronounces judgment. )

( Ps. 50 :4-6 He summoned the heavens above, and the earth, for the trial of His people. Bring in My devotees, who made a covenant with Me over sacrifice!” Then the heavens proclaimed His righteousness, for He is a God who judges.)

(Rashi Commentary God stands in the congregation of God: to see whether they [the judges] judge fairly, and you judges, how long will you judge unjustly?

Scripture also says about him [Melchizedek]:

"Over it take your seat in the highest heaven;  EL will judge the peoples
(Ps. 7:7 Arise, O Lord, with Your wrath; exalt Yourself with anger upon my adversaries, and awaken for me the judgment that You commanded. )

(Rashi Commentary Arise, O Lord, with Your wrath: against my enemies, such as Ishbi and his brothers and the Philistines, that I should not be delivered into their hands. exalt Yourself: boast, to show me the revenge of Your anger when You become angry with them. and awaken for me: that I should be able to execute upon them the judgment of revenge that You commanded. Now where did You command [it]? “You shall break them with an iron rod." "Then I will be an enemy to your enemies”) 

(Exod. 23:20 I am sending an angel before you to guard you on the way and to bring you to the place that I have made ready.  Pay heed to him and obey him. Do not defy him, for he will not pardon your offenses, since My Name is in him; but if you obey him and do all that I say, I will be an enemy to your enemies and a foe to your foes). 

Concerning what scripture says:

"How long will you judge unjustly,  and show partiality with the wicked? 
Selah" 
(Ps. 82;2) 

the interpretation applies to Belial and the spirits predestined to him, because all 
of them have rebelled, turning from Elohim's precepts and so becoming utterly wicked. 
Therefore Melchizedek will thoroughly prosecute the vengeance required by Elohim's 
statutes. Also, he will deliver all the captives from the power of Belial, and from 
the power of all the spirits destined to him. Allied with him will be all the 
"righteous Elohim" (Isa. 61;3).

(The ...) is that whi(ch ...all) the Elohim. The visitation is the Day of Salvation that He 
has decreed through Isaiah the prophet concerning all the captives, inasmuch as Scripture says:

"How beautiful upon the mountains are the feet of the messenger who announces peace, 
who brings good news, who announces salvation, who says to Zion "Your Elohim 
reigns".
(Isa. 52;7) 

This scriptures interpretation: "the mountains" are the prophets, they who were sent 
to proclaim Elohim's truth and to prophesy to all Israel. "The messengers" is the Anointed
(Messiah) of the spirit, of whom Daniel spoke:

"After the sixty-two weeks, a Messiah shall be cut off" 
(Dan. 9;26) 

The "messenger who brings good news, who announces Salvation" is the one of whom it 
is written:

"to proclaim the year of the YHWH's favor, 
the day of the vengeance of our Elohim; 
to comfort all who mourn" 
(Isa. 61;2)


This scripture's interpretation: he is to instruct them about all the periods of 
history for eternity (... and in the statutes) of the truth. (...) (.... dominion) 
that passes from Belial and returns to the Sons of Light (....) (...) by the judgment 
of Elohim, just as t is written concerning him:

"who says to Zion "Your Elohim reigns" 
(Isa. 52;7) 

"Zion" is the congregation of all the sons of righteousness, who uphold the covenant 
and turn from walking in the way of the people. "Your Elohim" is Melchizedek, who 
will deliver them from the power of Belial. 

Concerning what scripture says:

"Then you shall have the trumpet sounded loud; 
in the seventh month . . . " 
(Lev. 25;9)

God had foretold Abraham that his offspring would become kings of many nations.

Bereishit - Genesis - Chapter 17

Quote

4 "As for Me, behold My covenant is with you, and you shall become the father of a multitude of nations. 

5 And your name shall no longer be called Abram, but your name shall be Abraham, for I have made you the father of a multitude of nations.

6 And I will make you exceedingly fruitful, and I will make you into nations, and kings will emerge from you.

God had made Abraham a powerful person, which his Hittite neighbors acknowledged 

Bereishit - Genesis - Chapter 23

Quote

2 And Sarah died in Kiriath arba, which is Hebron, in the land of Canaan, and Abraham came to eulogize Sarah and to bewail her.

3 And Abraham arose from before his dead, and he spoke to the sons of Heth, saying,

4 "I am a stranger and an inhabitant with you. Give me burial property with you, so that I may bury my dead from before me."

5 And the sons of Heth answered Abraham, saying to him,

6 "Listen to us, my lord; you are a prince of God in our midst; in the choicest of our graves bury your dead. None of us will withhold his grave from you to bury your dead."

1

The Creator's initial purpose for the Citizen of Israel to be all princes and He to be their king. 

Shemot - Exodus - Chapter 19

Quote

3 Moses ascended to God, and the Lord called to him from the mountain, saying, "So shall you say to the house of Jacob and tell the sons of Israel,

4 You have seen what I did to the Egyptians, and [how] I bore you on eagles' wings, and I brought you to Me.

5 And now, if you obey Me and keep My covenant, you shall be to Me a treasure out of all peoples, for Mine is the entire earth.

6 And you shall be to Me a kingdom of princes and a holy nation.' These are the words that you shall speak to the children of Israel."

7 Moses came and summoned the elders of Israel and placed before them all these words that the Lord had commanded him.

8 And all the people replied in unison and said, "All that the Lord has spoken we shall do!" and Moses took the words of the people back to the Lord.

9 And the Lord said to Moses, "Behold, I am coming to you in the thickness of the cloud, in order that the people hear when I speak to you, and they will also believe in you forever." And Moses relayed the words of the people to the Lord.

 

Rabbi Obadiah ben Jacob Sforno (1470-1550) wrote an important commentary on Exodus 19:6

It had been G’d’s intention to make the Jewish people immortal at the time of the revelation at Mount Sinai, giving them the status that Adam had enjoyed before he sinned. Alas, just as Adam had sinned and had become mortal in the Garden (gan) Eden, the Jewish people sinned with the golden calf and suffered the same fate as the first man. The disaster is documented in Exodus 33,6 “the Children of Israel had to divest themselves of their jewelry which had been given them at Mount Chorev.”

Mekhilta De-Rabbi Shimon Bar Yohai
Tractate Bahodesh
Chapter XLIX:IV

Quote

1.

A. "'But you shall be to Me (a kingdom of priests and a holy nation.' These are the words that you shall speak to the Children of Israel)" (Exod. 19:6)

B. [God says,] "You shall be special to Me, engaged in My Torah, engaged in My commandments!"

2.

A. "'...a kingdom'" (Exod. 19.6)

B. R. Eliezer the son of R. Yosi ha-Galili says, "In the time to come, each and every person will have [as many] children as those who left Egypt.

C. "As it says in Scripture, 'Your sons will succeed your ancestors' (Ps. 45:17)

D. "'One might think they will be poor people.

E. "Scripture states, [however,] 'You will appoint them princes throughout the land' (Ps 45:17)

F. "One might think [they will be] princes of trade.

G. "Scripture states, [however,] '...a kingdom' (Exod. 19:6).

H. "One might think [they will be] kings of war.

I. "Scripture states, [however,] '...of priests' (Exod. 19:6).

J. "If priests-one might think [they will be] unemployed, in accordance with is said in Scripture, '...and David's sons were priests' (2 Sam. 8:18).

K. "Scripture states [however,]...and a holy nation' (Exod. 19:6)

L. "Based on this, they said: [All of] Israel was worthy to eat holy food while they had not yet made the Golden Calf. Once they made the Golden Calf, it was taken from them and given to the priests."

 

Mekhilta De-Rabbi Shimon Bar Yohai
Tractate Bahodesh
Chapter XLIX: V

18. 

Quote

B. "Then Moses reported..." (Exod. 19:9)

C. And just what had Israel said to Moses that should report before God? And what had the Holy One, blessed be He, said to Moses that he should report to Israel?

D. They said, "We want to hear [it] from our king! For it is not the same to hear from the mouth of the governor as it is to hear from the mouth of the king!"

E. The Holy One, blessed be He, said to him, "I'll give them what they ask for."

F. [As it says in Scripture] "'... in order that the people may hear when I speak with you'" (Exod. 19:9).

G. They said to him, "We want to see our king! For it's not the same to both hear and see as it to hear and not see!"

H. The Holy One, blessed be He, said to him "I'll give them what they requested."

I. [As it says in Scripture] "'for on the third day the Lord will come down, in the sight of all the people'" (Exod. 19:11)

J. And in the time to come, Israel will see the face of God's presence eye to eye.

K. As it says in Scripture, "For they will see eye to eye" (Isa. 52:8) And Scripture says, "This is the Lord, in whom we trusted" (Isa. 25:9)

Vayikra - Leviticus - Chapter 19

Quote

2 Speak to the entire congregation of the children of Israel, and say to them, You shall be holy, for I, the Lord, your God, am holy.

The Creator made provision for kings to rule His people in his place.

Devarim - Deuteronomy - Chapter 17

Quote

14 When you come to the land the Lord, your God, is giving you, and you possess it and live therein, and you say, "I will set a king over myself, like all the nations around me,"

15 you shall set a king over you, one whom the Lord, your God, chooses; from among your brothers, you shall set a king over yourself; you shall not appoint a foreigner over yourself, one who is not your brother.

 

The Torah relates that the Kohen is to perform the judicial duty to resolve conflict and to assist in purifying skin disease or mildew. 

Devarim - Deuteronomy - Chapter 21

Quote

5 And the kohanim, the sons of Levi, shall approach, for the Lord, your God, has chosen them to serve Him and to bless in the Name of the Lord, and by their mouth shall every controversy and every lesion be [judged].

 

 Rashi, in his commentary to Books of Chronicles, notes that while the priests and Levites were occupied with Torah instruction and teaching

Devarim - Deuteronomy - Chapter 24

Quote

8 Be cautious regarding the lesion of tzara'ath, to observe meticulously and you shall do according to all that the Levite priests instruct you; as I have commanded them, [so shall you] observe to do.

Shmuel I - I Samuel - Chapter 8

Quote

6 And the thing was displeasing in the eyes of Samuel, when they said, "Give us a king to judge us," and Samuel prayed to the Lord.

7 And the Lord said to Samuel, "Listen to the voice of the people, according to all that they will say to you, for they have not rejected you, but they have rejected Me from reigning over them.

8. Like all the deeds which they have done from the day I brought them up from Egypt, and until this day, and they forsook Me and served other gods; so are they doing to you.

The am ha-arez in the Talmud refers to "the people of Land" to uneducated Jews, who were deemed likely to be negligent in their observance of the commandments due to their ignorance wanted a king like other nations around them.

Babylonian Talmud: Tractate Sanhedrin

Folio 20a

Quote

It has been taught: R. Eliezer said: The elders of the generation made a fit request, as it is written, Give us a king to judge us. But the am ha-arez acted unworthily, at it is written, That we also may be like all the nations and that our king may judge us and go before us.

1

Quran Surah Al-Baqarah - The Cow

Quote

2:246 Have you not considered the assembly of the Children of Israel after [the time of] Moses when they said to a prophet of theirs, "Send to us a king, and we will fight in the way of Allah "? He said, "Would you perhaps refrain from fighting if fighting was prescribed for you?" They said, "And why should we not fight in the cause of Allah when we have been driven out from our homes and from our children?" But when fighting was prescribed for them, they turned away, except for a few of them. And Allah is Knowing of the wrongdoers.

Rabbi Shlomo Yitzchaki (Rashi) from 11th century France defines the word “Cohen (Kohen)” as a prince, referencing 2nd Samuel, where it states that David’s sons were chief officers  (Cohanim or Kohanim). 

Shmuel II - II Samuel - Chapter 8

Quote

18 And Benayahu the son of Yehoyada [was over] the archers and the slingers; and David's sons were chief officers (Cohanim).

Tehillim - Psalms - Chapter 45

Quote

17 Instead of your forefathers will be your sons; you shall appoint them as princes throughout the land.

the ministers of the King where present to ascertain that the nation took their words with due respect and seriousness.

Divrei Hayamim II - II Chronicles - Chapter 17

Quote

5 And the Lord established the kingdom in his hand, and all Judah gave a gift to Jehoshaphat, and he had abundant riches and glory.

6 And his heart was uplifted in the ways of the Lord, and he further removed the high places and the asherim from Judah.

7 And in the third year of his reign, he sent his officers, Ben Hail, Obadiah, Zechariah, Nethanel, and Micaiah, to teach in the cities of Judah.

8 And with them were the Levites: Shemaiah, Nethaniah, Zebadiah, Asahel, Shemiramoth, Jehonathan, Adoniah, Tobiah, and Tob Adoniah, the Levites, and with them were Elishama and Jehoram, the priests.

9 And they taught in Judah, and with them was the scroll of the Law of the Lord and they went around throughout all the cities of Judah, and they taught among the people.

The "Mekhilta de-Rabbi Yishmael" has traditionally been ascribed to Rabbi Ishmael.  The Mekhilta (Mekilta; a collection of rules of interpretation) is divided into nine treatises (massektot).   The Massekta de-Bahodesh (quoted as "Baḥ.")

Mekhilta d'Rabbi Yishmael

19:6

Quote

"And you shall be unto Me": I am not setting up any others over you, but only "Me." And thus is it written (Psalms 121:4) "He will not slumber and He will not sleep, the (sole) Keeper of Israel." "a kingdom of Cohanim": I do not crown kings from the peoples of the world, but only from you. And thus is it written (Song of Songs 6:9) "She is one, My dove, My perfect one, etc." R. Eliezer, the son of R. Yossi Haglili says: Whence is it derived that every one of Israel will have sons like those who left Egypt? From (Psalms 45:17) "In place of your fathers will be your sons." If "sons," I might think (even) the sick and the humble. It is, therefore, written (Ibid.) "You will make the princes." If "princes," I might think merchants. It is, therefore, written (here) "a kingdom." If a king, I might think that he reverts to being a conqueror. It is, therefore, written "Cohanim," "idlers" (from war), as in (II Samuel 8:18) "And the sons of David were Cohanim." Variantly: From here ("a kingdom of Cohanim") it is derived that all of Israel were fit to eat of the offerings — until they made the golden calf. Once they made the golden calf, it (i.e., the status of Cohanim) was taken from them and given to the (official) Cohanim, as it is written (Jeremiah 50:17) "A scattered sheep is Israel, harried by lions … first it was devoured by Nevuchadnezzar, king of Bavel, etc." It (Israel) is compared to a sheep. Just as a sheep, when one of its lambs is smitten, all of its lambs feel it, so, Israel, if one of them is smitten, all of them feel it. As opposed to the nations of the world. If one of them is killed, all of them rejoice in his downfall. "and a holy nation": They are called "a holy nation," as it is written (I Chronicles 17:21) "And who is like Your nation, Israel, one nation in the land," holy of holies, separate from the peoples of the world and from their abominations. "These are the things" — not less and not more; "that you shall speak to the children of Israel" — in this order.

God purposed to bless all other nations through His theocratic reign over Israel. This was a rule that God chose to administer through divinely chosen mediators who spoke and acted for God in governing functions and who were personally responsible to Him for what they did. These vice-regents were people like Moses, Joshua, the judges (including Samuel), and the kings, but God remained the real sovereign down to the end of this kingdom in history (1 Chron. 29:25). The Shekinah cloud visibly represented God’s presence as the divine ruler. This glorious cloud entered and filled the tabernacle at the inception of the kingdom

Mekhilta de - Rabbi Shimon Bar Yohai

Bolingbroke wrote that on occasion, the Creator bestows His Holy Spirit on a few individuals born to do His Will through public service. These individuals have graced with superior talents (genius, knowledge, and experience) that make them distinct from the rest of society. These are individuals are endowed with a spirit of reason to cope with ambition, avarice, despair, and not let sensual pleasures run their life.

During the American revolution there were capable Patriots on both sides considered to be blessed with superior talents. The difference was the British heroes were ignorant, or had prejudice against the colonies loss of Liberty. Their British failure of reason would cause a misapplication talents that would be considered a crime in its nature and consequence of going against the Designs of Providence. Jefferson would have concluded to tip the balance in America's favor, it new leaders must use their God given talents and reason the good and welfare of the colonies, then Divine vengeance would surely fall upon Britain.

Following Bolingbroke's Spirit of Patriotism, the Declaration of Independence taught that America's citizens can hope to achieve the happiness attributed to the Creator by employing the greater good at the expense of lesser evil. It is up to government leaders to guard our people with the use of reason. It is up to our citizen patriots to understand that the common happiness of Liberty depends on the importance of individual duty in submitting to law and government, which  firmly opposes evil corruption and is grateful for the blessings of the Creator.

Is Virtue real? Or is the appearance of it good enough?

Monotheist have a much deeper implicit viewpoint than the Natural Diest Bolingbroke writes. 

On the Spirit of Patriotism
Henry St. John Bolingbroke

Quote

.. the author of nature has thought fit mingle from time to time, among the societies of men, a few, and but a few of those, on whom he is graciously pleased to bestow a larger proportion of the the ethereal spirit than is given in the ordinary course of his providence to the sons of men. These are they who engross almost the whole reason of the species, who are born to instruct, to guide, and to preserve; who are designed to be the tutors and the guardians of human kind. When they prove such, they exhibit to us examples of the highest virtue, and the truest piety

... When these men apply their talents to other purposes, when they strive to be great and despise being good, they commit a most sacrilegious breach of trust; they pervert the means, they defeat as far as lies in them the designs of providence, and disturb in some sort the system of infinite wisdom. To misapply these talents is the most diffused, and therefore the greatest of crimes in its nature and consequence; but to keep them unexerted, and unemployed, is a crime too.  

...there are superior spirits, men who show even from their infancy, though it be not always perceived by others, perhaps not always felt by themselves, that they were born for something more, and better. 

..I have sometimes represented to myself the vulgar [common], who are accidentally distinguished by the titles of king and subject, of lord and vassal, of noblemen and peasant; and the few who are distinguished by nature so essentially from the herd of mankind, that (figure apart) they seem to be of another species, in this manner. The former come into the world and continue in it like Dutch travellers in a foreign country. Everything they meet has the grace of novelty: and they are fond alike of everything that is new. They wander about from one object to another, of vain curiosity, or inelegant pleasure. If they are industrious, they show their industry in copying signs, and collecting mottoes and epitaphs. They loiter, or they trifle away their whole time: and their presence or their absence would be equally unperceived, if caprice or accident did not raise them often to stations, wherein their stupidity, their vices, or their follies, make them a public misfortune. The latter come into the world, or at least continue in it after the effects of surprise and inexperience are over, like men who are sent on more important errands. They observe with distinction, they admire with knowledge. They may indulge themselves in pleasure; but as their industry is not employed about trifles, so their amusements are not made the business of their lives. Such men cannot pass unperceived through a country. If they retire from the world, their splendor accompanies them, and enlightens even the obscurity of their retreat. If they take a part in public life, the effect is never indifferent. They either appear like ministers of divine vengeance, and their course through the world is marked by desolation and oppression, by poverty and servitude: or they are the guardian angels of the country they inhabit, busy to avert even the most distant evil, and to maintain or to procure peace, plenty, and the greatest of human blessings, liberty.

...Reason collects the will of God from the constitution of things, in this as in other cases; but in no case does the divine power impel us necessarily to conform ourselves to this will:

...Reason deceive us not: we deceive ourselves, and suffer our wills to be determined by other motives.  

...He who considers the universal wants, imperfections, and vices of his kind, must agree that men were intended not only for society, but to unite in commonwealths, and to submit to laws. Legum idcirco omnes servi sumus, ut liberi esse possimus. And yet this very man will be seduced by his own passions, or the passions and examples of others,  

...So he who is conscious of superior endowments, such as render him more capable than the generality of men to secure and improve the advantages of social life, by preserving the commonwealth in strength and splendor, even he may be seduced to think, or to act as if he thought, that these endowments were given him for the gratification of his ambition, and his other passions; and that there is no difference between vice and virtue, between a knave [dishonest] and an honest man, but one which a prince, who died not many years ago, asserted, 'that men of great sense were therefore knaves, and men of little sense were therefore honest'. But in neither of these cases will the truth and reason of things be altered, by such examples of human frailty. It will be still true, and reason will still demonstrate, that all men are directed, by the general constitution of human nature, to submit to government; and that some men are in a particular manner designed to take care of that government on which the common happiness depends. The use that reason will make of such examples will be only this, that since men are so apt, in every form of life and every degree of understanding, to act against their interest and their duty too, without benevolence to mankind, or regard to the divine will, it is the more incumbent on those who have this benevolence and this regard at heart, to employ all the means that the nature of the government allows, and that rank, circumstances of situation, or superiority of talents, give them, to oppose evil, and promote good government; and contribute thus to preserve the moral system of the world, at that point of imperfection at least, which seems to have been prescribed to it by the great creator of every system of beings.

...the present state of Britain. That there is no profusion [abundance] of the ethereal spirit to be observed among us, and that we do not abound with men of superior genius,

...as if nature had not done her part in our age, as well as in former ages, by producing men capable of serving the commonwealth. The manners of our fore-fathers were, I believe, in many respects better: they had more probity [strong moral principles] perhaps, they had certainly more show of honor, and greater industry. But still nature sows alike, though we do not reap alike.

...Fortune maintains a kind of rivalship with wisdom, and piques herself often in favor of fools as well as knaves. Socrates used to say, that although no man undertakes a trade he has not learned, even the meanest; yet every one thinks himself sufficiently qualified for the hardest of all trades, that of government.

... not the worst minister could do all the mischief he does by the misapplication of his talents alone, if it were not for the misapplication of much better talents than his by some who join with him, and the non-application, or the faint and unsteady exercise of their talents by some who oppose him; as well as the general remissness [negligence] of mankind in acquiring knowledge, and in improving the parts which God has given them for the service of the public. These are the great springs of national misfortunes. There have been monsters in other ages, and other countries, as well as ours; but they have never continued their devastation long, when there were heroes to oppose them. We will suppose a man imprudent, rash, presumptuous, ungracious, insolent and profligate, in speculation as well as practice. He can bribe, but he cannot seduce; he can buy, but he cannot gain; he can lie, but he cannot deceive.

...Corruption could not spread with so much success, though reduced into system; and though some ministers, with equal impudence [shameless] and folly, avowed it by themselves and their advocates, to be the principal expedient [advantage] by which they governed, if a long and almost unobserved progression of causes and effects, did not prepare the conjuncture.

...One party had given their whole attention, during several years, to the project of enriching themselves, and impoverishing the rest of the nation; and, by these and other means, of establishing their dominion under the government and with the favor of a family, who were foreigners, and therefore might believe, that they were established on the throne by the good will and strength of this party alone. This party in general were so intent on these views, and many of them, I fear, are so still, that they did not advert in time to the necessary consequences of the measures they abetted; nor did they consider, that the power they raised, and by which they hoped to govern their country, would govern them with the very rod of iron they forged, and would be the power of a prince or minister, not that of a party long. Another party continued sour, sullen, and inactive, with judgments so weak, and passions so strong, that even experience, and a severe one surely, was lost upon them. They waited, like the Jews, for a Messiah, that may never come; and under whom, if he did come, they would be strangely disappointed in their expectations of glory and triumph, and universal dominion. Whilst they waited, they were marked out like the Jews, a distinct race, hewers of wood and drawers of water, scarce members of the community, though born in the country. All indifferent men stood as it were at a gaze: and the few, who were jealous of the court, were still more jealous of one another; so that a strength sufficient to oppose bad ministers was not easy to be formed. When this strength was formed, and the insufficiency or iniquity of the administration was daily exposed to public view, many adhered at first to the minister, and others were since gained to his cause, because they knew nothing of the constitution of their own, nor of the history of other countries; but imagined wildly, that things always went as they saw them go, and that liberty has been, and therefore may be preserved under the influence of the same corruption. Others perhaps were weak enough to be frightened at first, as some are hypocritical enough to pretend to be still, with the appellations [titles] of Tory [Conservative Party] and Jacobite [political movement to restore Catholic Stuarts to the throne], which are always ridiculously given to every man who does not bow to the brazen image that the King has set up. Others again might be persuaded, that no fatal use at least would be made of the power acquired by corruption; and men of superior parts might and may still flatter themselves, that if this power should be so employed, they shall have time and means to stop the effects of it. The first of these are seduced by their ignorance and futility [worthlessness]; the second, if they are not hypocrites, by their prejudices; the third, by their partiality and blind confidence; the last, by their presumptions; and all of them by the mammon of unrighteousness, their private interest, which they endeavor to palliate and to reconcile as well as they can to that of the public: et caeca cupiditate corrupti [the blind desire corruption], non intelligunt se, dum vendant, et venire.

...The Dutch travellers I spoke of, men of the ordinary, or below the ordinary size of understanding, though they are called by caprice, or lifted any other way into power, cannot do great and long mischief, in a country of liberty; unless men of genius, knowledge, and experience, misapply these talents, and become their leaders. A ministerial faction would have as little ability to do hurt, as they have inclination to do good, if they were not formed and conducted by one of better parts than they: nor would such a minister be able to support, at the head of this trusty phalanx, the ignominious tyranny imposed on his country, if other men, of better parts and much more consequence than himself, were not drawn in to misapply these parts to the vilest drudgery imaginable; the daily drudgery of explaining nonsense, covering ignorance, disguising folly, concealing and even justifying fraud and corruption; instead of employing their knowledge, their elocution, their skill, experience and authority, to correct the administration and to guard the constitution.  

...such a conjuncture could not be rendered effectual to preserve power in some of the weakest and some of the worst hands in the kingdom, if there was not a non application, or a faint and unsteady exercise of parts on one side, as well as an iniquitous misapplication of them on the other: and I cannot help saying, let it fall where it will, what I have said perhaps already, that the former is a crime but one degree inferior to the latter. The more genius, industry, and spirit are employed to destroy, the harder the task of saving our country becomes; but the duty increases with the difficulty, if the principles on which I reason are true. In such exigencies it is not enough that genius be opposed to genius, spirit must be matched by spirit. They, who go about to destroy, are animated from the first by ambition and avarice, the love of power and of money: fear makes them often desperate at last. They must be opposed therefore, or they will be opposed in vain, by a spirit able to cope with ambition, avarice, and despair itself: by a spirit able to cope with these passions, when they are favored and fortified by the weakness of a nation, and the strength of a government. 

The service of our country is no chimerical, but a real duty. He who admits the proofs of any other moral duty, drawn from the constitution of human nature, or from the moral fitness and unfitness of things, must admit them in favor of this duty, or be reduced to the most absurd inconsistency. When he has once admitted the duty on these proofs, it will be no difficult matter to demonstrate to him, that his obligation to the performance of it is in proportion to the means and the opportunities he has of performing it; and that nothing can discharge him from this obligation as long as he has these means and these opportunities in his power, and as long as his country continues in the same want of his services. These obligations then to the public service may become obligations for life on certain persons. No doubt they may: and shall this consideration become a reason for denying or evading them? On the contrary, sure it should become a reason for acknowledging and fulfilling them, with the greatest gratitude to the Supreme Being, who has made us capable of acting so excellent a part, and of the utmost benevolence to mankind. Superior talents, and superior rank among our fellow creatures, whether acquired by birth, or by the course of accidents, and the success of our own industry, are noble prerogatives. Shall he who possesses them repine at the obligation they lay him under, of passing his whole life in the noblest occupation of which human nature is capable? To what higher station, to what greater glory can any mortal aspire, than to be, during the whole course of his life, the support of good, the control of bad government, and the guardian of public liberty? To be driven from hence by successful tyranny, by loss of health or of parts, or by the force of accidents, is to be degraded in such a manner as to deserve pity, and not to incur blame: but to degrade ourselves, to descend voluntarily, and by choice, from the highest to a lower, perhaps to the lowest rank among the sons of Adam; to abandon the government of men for that of hounds and horses, the care of a kingdom for that of a parish, and a scene of great and generous efforts in public life, for one of trifling amusements and low cares, of sloth and of idleness, what is it, my Lord?

.. The common, the sensual pleasures to which nature prompts us, and which reason therefore does not forbid, though she should always direct, are so far from being excluded out of a life of business, that they are sometimes necessary in it, and are always heightened by it: those of the table, for instance, may be ordered so as to promote that which the elder Cato calls vitae conjunctionem.

...Cato's virtue often glowed with wine: and the love of women did not hinder Caesar from forming and executing the greatest projects that ambition ever suggested. But if Caesar, whilst he labored to destroy the liberties of his country, enjoyed these inferior pleasures of life, which a man who labors to save those liberties may enjoy as well as he; there are superior pleasures in a busy life that Caesar never knew, those, I mean, that arise from a faithful discharge of our duty to the commonwealth.

...Newton in discovering and establishing the true laws of nature on experiment and a sublimer geometry, felt more intellectual joys, than he feels who is a real patriot, who bends all the force of his understanding, and directs all his thoughts and actions, to the good of his country. When such a man forms a political scheme, and adjusts various and seemingly independent parts in it to one great and good design, he is transported by imagination, or absorbed in meditation, as much and as agreeably as. they. and the satisfaction that arises from the different importance of these objects, in every step of the work, is vastly in his favor. It is here that the speculative philosopher's labor and pleasure end. But he who speculates in order to act, goes on, and carries his scheme into execution. His labor continues, it varies, it increases; but so does his pleasure too. The execution indeed is often traversed, by unforeseen and untoward circumstances, by the perverseness or treachery of friends, and by the power or malice of enemies: but the first and the last of these animate, and the docility and fidelity of some men make amends for the perverseness and treachery of others. Whilst a great event is in suspense, the action warms, and the very suspense, made up of hope and fear, maintains no unpleasing agitation in the mind. If the event is decided successfully, such a man enjoys pleasure proportionate to the good he has done; a pleasure like to that which is attributed to the Supreme Being, on a survey of his works. If the event is decided otherwise, and usurping courts, or overbearing parties prevail; such a man has still the testimony of his conscience, and a sense of the honor he has acquired, to soothe his mind, and support his courage.

... the noblest spectacle which God can behold, is a virtuous man suffering, and struggling with afflictions:

... governments have their periods like all things human; that they may be brought back to their primitive principles during a certain time, but that when these principles are worn out, in the minds of men, it is a vain enterprise to endeavor to renew them: that this is the case of all governments, when the corruption of the people comes to a great pitch, and is grown universal: that when a house which is old, and quite decayed, though often repaired, not only cracks, but totters even from the foundations, every man in his senses runs out of it, and takes shelter where he can, and that none but madmen continue obstinate to repair what is irreparable, till they are crushed in the ruin.

...the accession of the present family to the throne, has given the fairest opportunities, as well as the justest reasons, for completing the scheme of liberty, and improving it to perfection. But it seems to me, that, in our separate world, as the means of asserting and supporting liberty are increased, all concern for it is diminished. 

... In these countries, the people had lost the armor of their constitution: they were unclothed and defenseless. Ours is more complete than ever. But though we have preserved the armor, we have lost the spirit of our constitution: and therefore we bear, from little engrossers of delegated power, what our fathers would not have suffered from true proprietors of the royal authority. Parliaments are not only, what they always were, essential parts of our constitution, but essential parts of our administration too. They do not claim the executive power. No. But the executive power cannot be exercised without their annual concurrence.  

...It is become so easy by the present form of our government, that corruption alone could not destroy us. We must want spirit, as well as virtue, to perish. Even able knaves would preserve liberty in such circumstances as ours, and highwaymen would scorn to receive the wages and do the drudgery of pickpockets

.. Far from having the virtues, we have not even the vices of great men. He who had pride instead of vanity, and ambition but equal to his desire of wealth, could never bear, I do not say to be the understrapper [junior official] to any farmer of royal authority, but to see patiently one of them (at best his fellow, perhaps his inferior in every respect) lord it over him, and the rest of mankind, dissipating wealth, and trampling on the liberties of his country, with impunity. This could not happen, if there was the least spirit among us. But there is none. What passes among us for ambition, is an odd mixture of avarice [greed] and vanity. the moderation we have seen practiced is pusillanimity, and the philosophy that some men affect is sloth. Hence it comes that corruption has spread, and prevails.

... There are men among them who certainly intend the good of their country, and whom I love and honor for that reason. But these men have been clogged, or misled, or overborne by others; and, seduced by natural temper to inactivity, have taken any excuse, or yielded to any pretense that savored it. That they should rouse therefore in themselves, or in any one else, the spirit they have suffered, nay helped to die away, I do not expect. I turn my eyes from the generation that is going off, to the generation that is coming on the stage. 

... Remember that the opposition in which you have engaged, at your first entrance into business, is not an opposition only to a bad administration of public affairs, but to an administration that supports itself by means, establishes principles, introduces customs, repugnant to the constitution of our governments, and destructive of all liberty; that you do not only combat present evils, but your posterity; that if attempts to entail these evils upon you and you cease the combat, you give up the cause: and that he, who does not renew on every occasion his claim, may forfeit his right.

...The means of invading liberty more effectually by the constitution of the revenue, than it ever had been invaded by prerogative, were not then grown up into strength. 

... You owe to your country, to your honor, to your security, to the present, and to future ages, that no endeavors of yours be wanting to repair the breach that is made, and is increasing daily in the constitution, and to shut up with all the bars and bolts of law, the principal entries through which these torrents of corruption have been let in upon us. I say the principal entries; because, however it may appear in pure speculation, I think it would not be found in practice possible, no nor eligible neither, to shut them up all. As entries of corruption none of them deserve to be excepted: but there is a just distinction to be made, because there is a real difference. Some of these entries are opened by the abuse of powers, necessary to maintain subordination, and to carry on even good government, and therefore necessary to be preserved in the crown, notwithstanding the abuse that is sometimes made of them; for no human institution can arrive at perfection, and the most that human wisdom can do, is to procure the same or greater good, at the expense of less evil. There will be always some evil either immediate, or remote, either in cause or consequence. But there are other entries of corruption, and these are by much the greatest, for suffering of which to continue open no reason can be assigned or has been pretended to be assigned, but that which is to every honest and wise man a reason for shutting them up; the increase of the means of corruption, which are oftener employed for the service of the oligarchy, than for the service of the monarchy. Shut up these, and you will have nothing to fear from the others. By these, a more real and a more dangerous power has been gained to ministers, than was lost to the crown by the restraints on prerogative.

A Parliament, nay one house of Parliament, is able at any time, and at once, to destroy any corrupt plan of power. Time produces every day new conjunctures: be prepared to improve them. We read in the Old Testament of a city that might have escaped divine vengeance, if five righteous men had been found in it. Let not our city perish for want of so small a number: and if the generation that is going off could not furnish it, let the generation that is coming on furnish a greater.

Eloquence, that leads mankind by the ears, gives a nobler superiority than power that every dunce may use, or fraud that every knave may employ, to lead them by the nose. But eloquence must flow like a stream that is fed by an abundant spring, and not spout forth a little frothy water on some gaudy day, and remain dry the rest of the year. The famous orators of Greece and Rome were the statesmen and ministers of those commonwealths. The nature of their governments and the humor of those ages made elaborate orations necessary.

... Demosthenes had been neglected, in his education, by the same tutors who cheated him of his inheritance. Cicero was bred with greater advantage: and Plutarch, I think, says that when he first appeared the people used to call him, by way of derision, the Greek, and the scholar. But whatever advantage of this kind the latter might have over the former, and to which of them soever you ascribe the superior genius, the progress which both of them made in every part of political knowledge, by their industry and application, was marvellous. Cicero might be a better philosopher, but Demosthenes was no less a statesman: and both of them performed actions and acquired fame, above the reach of eloquence alone. Demosthenes used to compare eloquence to a weapon, aptly enough; for eloquence, like every other weapon, is of little use to the owner, unless he have the force and the skill to use it. This force and this skill Demosthenes had in an eminent degree. Observe them in one instance among many. It was of mighty importance to Philip to prevent the accession of Thebes to the grand alliance that Demosthenes, at the head of the Athenian commonwealth, formed against the growing power of the Macedonians. Philip had emissaries and his ambassadors on the spot to oppose to those of Athens, and we may be assured that he neglected none of those arts upon this occasion that he employed so successfully on others. The struggle was great, but Demosthenes prevailed, and the Thebans engaged in the war against Philip. 

Let us consider Tully on the greatest theatre of the known world, and in the most difficult circumstances. We are better acquainted with him than we are with Demosthenes; for we see him nearer, as it were, and in more different lights. How perfect a knowledge had he acquired of the Roman constitution of government, ecclesiastical and civil; of the original and progress, of the general reasons and particular occasions of the laws and customs of his country; of the great rules of equity, and the low practice of courts; of the duty of every magistracy and office in the state, from the dictator down to the lictor; and of all the steps by which Rome had risen from her infancy, to liberty, to power and grandeur and dominion [authority], as well as of all those by which she began to decline, a little before his age, to that servitude which he died for opposing, but lived to see established, and in which not her liberty alone, but her power and grandeur and dominion were lost? How well was he acquainted with the Roman colonies and provinces, with the allies and enemies of the empire, with the rights and privileges of the former, the dispositions and conditions of the latter, with the interests of them all relatively to Rome, and with the interests of Rome relatively to them? How present to his mind were the anecdotes of former times concerning the Roman and other states, and how curious was he to observe the minutest circumstances that passed in his own? His works will answer sufficiently the questions I ask, and establish in the mind of every man who reads them the idea I would give of his capacity and knowledge, as well as that which is so universally taken of his eloquence. To a man fraught with all this stock of knowledge, and industrious to improve it daily, nothing could happen that was entirely new, nothing for which he was quite unprepared, scarce any effect whereof he had not considered the cause, scarce any cause wherein his sagacity could not discern the latent effect. His eloquence in private causes gave him first credit at Rome, but it was this knowledge, this experience, and the continued habits of business, that supported his reputation, enabled him to do so much service to his country, and gave force and authority to his eloquence. To little purpose would he have attached Catiline with all the vehemence that indignation and even fear added to eloquence, if he had trusted to this weapon alone. This weapon alone would have secured neither him nor the senate from the poniard of that assassin. He would have had no occasion to boast, that he had driven this infamous citizen out of the walls of Rome, abiit, excessit, evasit, erupit, if he had not made it before-hand impossible for him to continue any longer in them. As little occasion would he have had to assume the honor of defeating without any tumult, or any disorder, the designs of those who conspired to murder the Roman people, to destroy the Roman empire, and to extinguish the Roman name; if he had not united by skill and management, in the common cause of their country, orders of men the most averse to each other; if he had not watched all the machinations of the conspirators in silence, and prepared a strength sufficient to resist them at Rome, and in the provinces, before he opened this scene of villainy to the senate and the people: in a word, if he had not made much more use of political prudence, that is, of the knowledge of mankind, and of the arts of government, which study and experience give, than of all the powers of his eloquence.

...They who affect to head an opposition, or to make any considerable figure in it, must be equal at least to those whom they oppose; I do not say in parts only, but in application and industry, and the fruits of both, information, knowledge, and a certain constant preparedness for all the events that may arise. Every administration is a system of conduct: opposition, therefore, should be a system of conduct likewise; an opposite, but not a dependent system.

...When two armies take the field, the generals on both sides have their different plans for the campaign, either of defense or of offense: and as the former does not suspend his measures till he is attacked, but takes them beforehand on every probable contingency, so the latter does not suspend his, till the opportunity of attacking presents itself, but is alert and constantly ready to seize it whenever it happens; and in the mean time is busy to improve all the advantages of skill, of force, or of any other kind that he has, or that he can acquire, independently of the plan and of the motions of his enemy.

...every member of either house of Parliament is a member of a national standing council, born, or appointed by the people, to promote good, and to oppose bad government; and, if not vested with the power of a minister of state, yet vested with the superior power of controlling those who are appointed such by the crown.

...they who engage in opposition are under as great obligations, to prepare themselves to control, as they who serve the crown are under, to prepare themselves to carry on the administration: and that a party formed for this purpose, do not act like good citizens nor honest men, unless they propose true, as well as oppose false measures of government. Sure I am they do not act like wise men unless they act systematically, and unless they contrast, on every occasion, that scheme of policy which the public interest requires to be followed, with that which is suited to no interest but the private interest of the prince or his ministers.

...a party who opposed, systematically, a wise to a silly, an honest to an iniquitous, scheme of government, would acquire greater reputation and strength, and arrive more surely at their end, than a party who opposed occasionally, as it were, without any common system, without any general concert, with little uniformity, little preparation, little perseverance, and as little knowledge or political capacity.

George Wythe was the first American law professor, a noted classics scholar, and a Virginia judge. The first of the seven Virginia signatories of the United States Declaration of Independence, Wythe served as one of Virginia's representatives to the Continental Congress and the Philadelphia Convention. Jefferson studied Bolingbroke's Works during his time as George Wythe's legal apprentice. Wythe remained particularly close to Jefferson, and left Jefferson his substantial book collection in his will.

We can see Jefferson was agreement with Bolingbroke on the talents and moral character of appointed Judges.

From Thomas Jefferson to George Wythe, June1776

Quote

The dignity and stability of government in all its branches, the morals of the people, and every blessing of society, depend so much upon an upright and skillful administration of justice, that the judicial power ought to be distinct from both the legislative and executive, and independent upon both, that so it may be a check upon both, as both should be checks upon that. The judges, therefore, should always be men of learning and experience in the laws, of exemplary morals, great patience, calmness, coolness and attention; their minds should not be distracted with jarring interests; they should not be dependent upon any man, or body of men. To these ends they should hold estates for life in their offices, or, in other words, their commissions should be during good behavior, and their salaries ascertained and established by law.

For misbehavior, the grand inquest of the colony, the house of representatives, should impeach them before the governor and council, when they should have time and opportunity to make their defense; but if convicted, should be removed from their offices, and subjected to such other punishment as shall be thought proper.

Bolingbroke taught that History's greatest heroes individuals are endowed with a spirit of reason to restrain to bad inclinations and habits they are addicted to the most, then focus on following the will of the Creator.

Henry St John, Lord Viscount Bolingbroke
Letters on the Study and the Use of History

Letter III

Quote

there can be dispute, concerning that share which I ascribe to the study of history, in forming our moral characters, and making us better men. The very persons who pretend that inclinations cannot be restrained, nor habits corrected, against our natural bent, would be the first perhaps to prove, in certain cases, the contrary. A fortune at court, or the favors of a lady, have prevailed on many to conceal, and they could not conceal without restraining, which is one step towards correcting, the vices they were by nature addicted to the most. Shall we imagine now, that the beauty of virtue and the deformity of vice, the charms. If a bright and lasting reputation, the terror of being delivered over as criminals to all posterity, the real benefit arising from a conscientious discharge of the duty we owe to others, which benefit fortune can neither hinder nor take away, and the reasonableness of conforming ourselves to the designs of God manifested in the constitution of the human nature; shall we imagine, I say, that all these are not able to acquire the same power over those who are continually called upon to a contemplation of them, and they who apply themselves to the study of history are so called upon, as other motives, mean and sordid in comparison of these, can usurp on other men?

If we are to implicitly believe that the Will of Our Creator is Natural law. Then we can implicitly believe it was the Will of the Creator to give mankind reason to decide what actions in life will bring us happiness or misery. It is the testimony of both prophets and philosophers that the path of happiness is making the choice to follow the greater good at the expense of lesser evil. It is up to government and religious leaders to properly guard Citizens with the use of reason over personal inclinations and be happy with the blessing our Creator has given. It is up to our citizen patriots to understand that the common happiness of Civil Liberty depends on the importance of individual duty in submitting to what the law and government permits, which  firmly opposes evil corruption and promotes the common good. Like Bolingbroke, Blackstone wrote that it is the duty of those who Nature and fortune (Creator) have bestowed abilities and time to serve their country and master their understanding of its Civil Laws.  It is the power of these Civil Laws that protects all Citizens from physical and mental injury by fellow countryman and foreigners. It is the power of these Civil laws which Civil Liberty is derived.  Liberty is what is that which those that govern the land permits. 

INTRODUCTION. Of the Study, Nature, and Extent of the Laws of England.

SECTION I.

ON THE STUDY OF THE LAW.

Quote

 

And, first, to demonstrate the utility of some acquaintance with the laws of the land, let us only reflect a moment on the singular frame and polity of that land which is governed by this system of laws. A land, perhaps, the only one in the universe, in which political or civil liberty is the very end and scope of the constitution. This liberty, rightly understood, consists in the power of doing whatever the laws permit, which is only to be effected by a general conformity of all orders and degrees to those equitable rules of action by which the meanest [small minded] individual is protected from the insults and oppression of the greatest. As therefore every subject is interested in the preservation of the laws, it is incumbent upon every man to be acquainted with those at least with which he is immediately concerned; lest he incur the censure, as well as inconvenience, of living in society without knowing the obligations which it lays him under. And thus much may suffice for persons of inferior condition, who have neither time nor capacity to enlarge their views beyond that contracted sphere in which they are appointed to move. But those, on whom nature and fortune have bestowed more abilities and greater leisure, cannot be so easily excused. These advantages are given them, not for the benefit of themselves only, but also of the public: and yet they cannot, in any scene of life, discharge properly their duty either to the public or themselves, without some degree of knowledge in the laws.

All gentlemen of fortune are, in consequence of their property, liable to be called upon to establish the rights, to estimate the injuries, to weigh the accusations and sometimes to dispose of the lives of their fellow-subjects, by serving upon juries. In this situation they have frequently a right to decide, and that upon their oaths, questions of nice importance, in the solution of which some legal skill is requisite; especially where the law and the fact, as it often happens, are intimately blended together. And the general incapacity, even of our best juries, to do this with any tolerable propriety, has greatly debased their authority; and has unavoidably thrown more power into the hands of the judges, to direct, control, and even reverse their verdicts, than perhaps the constitution intended.

Yet farther; most gentlemen of considerable property, at some period or other in their lives, are ambitious of representing their country in parliament: and those, who are ambitious of receiving so high a trust, would also do well to remember its nature and importance. They are not thus honorably distinguished from the rest of their fellow-subjects, merely that they may privilege their persons, their estates, or their domestics; that they may list under party banners; may grant or withhold supplies; may vote with or vote against a popular or unpopular administration; but upon considerations far more interesting and important. They are the guardians of the English constitution; the makers, repealers, and interpreters of the English laws; delegated to watch, to check, and to avert every dangerous innovation, to propose, to adopt, and to cherish any solid and well-weighed improvement; bound by every tie of nature, of honor, and of religion, to transmit that constitution and those laws to posterity, amended if possible, at least without any derogation. And how unbecoming must it appear in a member of the legislature to vote for a new law, who is utterly ignorant of the old! 

...the science of legislation, the noblest and most difficult of any. Apprenticeships are held necessary to almost every art, commercial or mechanical: a long course of reading and study must form the divine, the physician, and the practical professor of the laws; but every man of superior fortune thinks himself born a legislator. Yet Tully was of a different opinion: “It is necessary,” says he,“for a senator to be thoroughly acquainted with the constitution; and this,” he declares, “is a knowledge of the most extensive nature; a matter of science, of diligence, of reflection; without which no senator can possibly be fit for his office.”

 

 

By 1771, when he advised young Robert Skipwith on his book buying, Jefferson included Bolingbroke’s Political Works in his suggested of catalogue of 30 books.

From Thomas Jefferson to Robert Skipwith, with a List of Books for a Private Library 

3 August 1771

Quote

 

I sat down with a design of executing your request to form a catalogue of books amounting to about 30. 

... Peace to it’s wisdom! Let me not awaken it. A little attention however to the nature of the human mind evinces that the entertainments of fiction are useful as well as pleasant. That they are pleasant when well written, every person feels who reads. But wherein is it’s utility, asks the reverend sage, big with the notion that nothing can be useful but the learned lumber of Greek and Roman reading with which his head is stored? I answer, every thing is useful which contributes to fix us in the principles and practice of virtue. When any signal act of charity or of gratitude, for instance, is presented either to our sight or imagination, we are deeply impressed with it’s beauty and feel a strong desire in ourselves of doing charitable and grateful acts also. On the contrary when we see or read of any atrocious deed, we are disgusted with it’s deformity and conceive an abhorrence of vice. Now every emotion of this kind is an exercise of our virtuous dispositions; and dispositions of the mind, like limbs of the body, acquire strength by exercise. But exercise produces habit; and in the instance of which we speak, the exercise being of the moral feelings, produces a habit of thinking and acting virtuously. We never reflect whether the story we read be truth or fiction. If the painting be lively, and a tolerable picture of nature, we are thrown into a reverie, from which if we awaken it is the fault of the writer.

...Considering history as a moral exercise, her lessons would be too unfrequent if confined to real life. Of those recorded by historians few incidents have been attended with such circumstances as to excite in any high degree this sympathetic emotion of virtue. We are therefore wisely framed to be as warmly interested for a fictitious as for a real personage. The spacious field of imagination is thus laid open to our use, and lessons may be formed to illustrate and carry home to the mind every moral rule of life. Thus a lively and lasting sense of filial duty is more effectually impressed on the mind of a son or daughter by reading King Lear, than by all the dry volumes of ethics and divinity that ever were written.

... Of Politics and Trade I have given you a few only of the best books, as you would probably choose to be not unacquainted with those commercial principles which bring wealth into our country, and the constitutional security we have for the enjoyment of that wealth. In Law I mention a few systematical books, as a knowlege of the minutiae of that science is not necessary for a private gentleman. In Religion, History, Natural philosophy, I have followed the same plan in general.

 

Here is a  partial list of literary works that Jefferson recommended that apply to our  journey of discovering the Creative Force of Nature designs for Life and Happiness or Death and Misery
 

Quote

religion.
Locke’s conduct of the mind in search of truth. 12mo. 3/
Xenophon’s memoirs of Socrates. by Feilding. 8vo. 5/
Epictetus. by Mrs. Carter. 2 v.12mo. 6/
Antoninus by Collins. 3/
Seneca. by L’Estrange. 8vo. 5/4
Cicero’s Offices. by Guthrie. 8vo. 5/
Cicero’s Tusculan questions. Eng. 3/
Ld. Bolingbroke’s Philosophical works. 5 v. 8vo. £1.5
Hume’s essays. 4 v. 12mo. 12/
Ld. Kaim’s Natural religion. 8vo. 6/
Philosophical survey of Nature. 3/
Oeconomy of human life. 2/
Sterne’s sermons. 7 v. 12mo. £1.1
Sherlock on death. 8vo. 5/
Sherlock on a future state. 5/


law


Ld. Kaim’s Principles of equity. fol. £1.1
Blackstone’s Commentaries. 4 v. 4to. £4.4
Cuningham’s Law dictionary. 2 v. fol. £3


history. antient.


Bible. 6/
Rollin’s Antient history. Eng. 13 v. 12mo. £1.19
Stanyan’s Graecian history. 2 v. 8vo. 10/
Livy. (the late translation). 12/
Sallust by Gordon. 12mo. 12/
Tacitus by Gordon. 12mo. 15/
Caesar by Bladen. 8vo. 5/
Josephus. Eng. 1.02
Vertot’s Revolutions of Rome. Eng. 9/
Plutarch’s lives. by Langhorne. 6 v. 8vo. £1.10
Bayle’s Dictionary. 5 v. fol. £7.10.
Jeffery’s Historical & Chronological chart. 15/

 

If we are to believe that the Will of Our Creator is Natural law.

INTRODUCTION. Of the Study, Nature, and Extent of the Laws of England.

SECTION I.

ON THE STUDY OF THE LAW.

The science thus committed to his charge, to be cultivated, methodized, and explained in a course of academical lectures, is that of the laws and constitution of our own country: a species of knowledge, in which the gentlemen of England have been more remarkably deficient than those of all Europe besides. In most of the nations of the continent, where the civil or imperial law, under different modifications, is closely interwoven with the municipal laws of the land, no gentleman, or at least no scholar, thinks his education is completed, till he has attended a course or two of lectures, both upon the institutes of Justinian and the local constitutions of his native soil, under the very eminent professors that abound in their several universities. And in the northern parts of our own island, where also the municipal laws are frequently connected with the civil, it is difficult to meet with a person of liberal education, who is destitute of a competent knowledge in that science which is to be the guardian of his natural rights and the rule of his civil conduct.

...Far be it from me to derogate from the study of the civil law, considered (apart from any binding authority) as a collection of written reason. No man is more thoroughly persuaded of the general excellence of its rules, and the usual equity of its decisions, nor is better convinced of its use as well as ornament to the scholar, the divine, the statesman, and even the common lawyer. But we must not carry our veneration so far as to sacrifice our Alfred and Edward to the manes of Theodosius and Justinian; we must not prefer the edict of the prætor, or the rescript of the Roman emperor, to our own immemorial customs, or the sanctions of an English parliament; unless we can also prefer the despotic monarchy of Rome and Byzantium, for whose meridians the former were calculated, to the free constitution of Britain, which the latter are adapted to perpetuate.

Without detracting, therefore, from the real merits which abound in the imperial law, I hope I may have leave to assert, that if an Englishman must be ignorant of either the one or the other, he had better be a stranger to the Roman than the English institutions. For I think it an undeniable position, that a competent knowledge of the laws of that society in which we live, is the proper accomplishment of every gentleman and scholar; an highly useful, I had almost said essential, part of liberal and polite education. And in this I am warranted by the example of ancient Rome; where, as Cicero informs us,(a) the very boys were obliged to learn the twelve tables by heart, as a carmen necessarium or indispensable lesson, to imprint on their tender minds an early knowledge of the laws and constitution of their country.

And, first, to demonstrate the utility of some acquaintance with the laws of the land, let us only reflect a moment on the singular frame and polity of that land which is governed by this system of laws. A land, perhaps, the only one in the universe, in which political or civil liberty is the very end and scope of the constitution. This liberty, rightly understood, consists in the power of doing whatever the laws permit, which is only to be effected by a general conformity of all orders and degrees to those equitable rules of action by which the meanest individual is protected from the insults and oppression of the greatest. As therefore every subject is interested in the preservation of the laws, it is incumbent upon every man to be acquainted with those at least with which he is immediately concerned; lest he incur the censure, as well as inconvenience, of living in society without knowing the obligations which it lays him under. And thus much may suffice for persons of inferior condition, who have neither time nor capacity to enlarge their views beyond that contracted sphere in which they are appointed to move. But those, on whom nature and fortune have bestowed more abilities and greater leisure, cannot be so easily excused. These advantages are given them, not for the benefit of themselves only, but also of the public: and yet they cannot, in any scene of life, discharge properly their duty either to the public or themselves, without some degree of knowledge in the laws.

All gentlemen of fortune are, in consequence of their property, liable to be called upon to establish the rights, to estimate the injuries, to weigh the accusations and sometimes to dispose of the lives of their fellow-subjects, by serving upon juries. In this situation they have frequently a right to decide, and that upon their oaths, questions of nice importance, in the solution of which some legal skill is requisite; especially where the law and the fact, as it often happens, are intimately blended together. And the general incapacity, even of our best juries, to do this with any tolerable propriety, has greatly debased their authority; and has unavoidably thrown more power into the hands of the judges, to direct, control, and even reverse their verdicts, than perhaps the constitution intended.

Yet farther; most gentlemen of considerable property, at some period or other in their lives, are ambitious of representing their country in parliament: and those, who are ambitious of receiving so high a trust, would also do well to remember its nature and importance. They are not thus honorably distinguished from the rest of their fellow-subjects, merely that they may privilege their persons, their estates, or their domestics; that they may list under party banners; may grant or withhold supplies; may vote with or vote against a popular or unpopular administration; but upon considerations far more interesting and important. They are the guardians of the English constitution; the makers, repealers, and interpreters of the English laws; delegated to watch, to check, and to avert every dangerous innovation, to propose, to adopt, and to cherish any solid and well-weighed improvement; bound by every tie of nature, of honor, and of religion, to transmit that constitution and those laws to posterity, amended if possible, at least without any derogation. And how unbecoming must it appear in a member of the legislature to vote for a new law, who is utterly ignorant of the old! 

...the science of legislation, the noblest and most difficult of any. Apprenticeships are held necessary to almost every art, commercial or mechanical: a long course of reading and study must form the divine, the physician, and the practical professor of the laws; but every man of superior fortune thinks himself born a legislator. Yet Tully was of a different opinion: “It is necessary,” says he,“for a senator to be thoroughly acquainted with the constitution; and this,” he declares, “is a knowledge of the most extensive nature; a matter of science, of diligence, of reflection; without which no senator can possibly be fit for his office.”

...where the imperial law is much cultivated, and its decisions pretty generally followed, we are informed by Van Leeuwen that “it receives its force from custom and the consent of the people, either tacitly or expressly given; for otherwise,” he adds, “we should no more be bound by this law, than by that of the Almains, the Franks, the Saxons, the Goths, the Vandals, and other of the ancient nations.” Wherefore, in all points in which the different systems depart from each other, the law of the land takes place of the law of Rome, whether ancient or modern, imperial or pontifical.

...A copy of Justinian’s pandects, being newly discovered at Amalfi, soon brought the civil law into vogue all over the west of Europe, where before it was quite laid aside, and in a manner forgotten, though some traces of its authority remained in Italy and the eastern provinces of the empire.This now became in a particular manner the favorite of the popish clergy, who borrowed the method and many of the maxims of their canon law from this original. The study of it was introduced into several universities abroad, particularly that of Bologna, where exercises were performed, lectures read, and degrees conferred in this faculty, as in other branches of science; and many nations on the continent, just then beginning to recover from the convulsions consequent upon the overthrow of the Roman empire, and settling by degrees into peaceable forms of government, adopted the civil law, (being the best written system then extant,) as the basis of their several constitutions; blending and interweaving it among their own feudal customs, in some places with a more extensive, in others a more confined authority.

a Norman abbot, being elected to the see of Canterbury, and extremely addicted to this new study, brought over with him in his retinue many learned proficients therein; and, among the rest, Roger, surnamed Vacarius, whom he placed in the university of Oxford to teach it to the people of this country. But it did not meet with the same easy reception in England, where a mild and rational system of laws had been long established, as it did upon the continent; and though the monkish clergy, devoted to the will of a foreign primate, received it with eagerness and zeal, yet the laity, who were more interested to preserve the old constitution, and had already severely felt the effect of many Norman innovations, continued wedded to the use of the common law: King Stephen immediately published a proclamationforbidding the study of the laws, then newly imported from Italy, which was treated by the monks as a piece of impiety; and, though it might prevent the introduction of the civil law process into our courts of justice, yet did not hinder the clergy from reading and teaching it in their own schools and monasteries.

From this time the nation seems to have been divided into two parties, the bishops and clergy, many of them foreigners, who applied themselves wholly to the study of the civil and canon laws, which now came to be inseparably interwoven with each other, and the nobility and laity, who adhered with equal pertinacity to the old common laws; both of them reciprocally jealous of what they were unacquainted with, and neither of them, perhaps, allowing the opposite system that real merit which is abundantly to be found in each.

But wherever they retired, and wherever their authority extended, they carried with them the same zeal to introduce the rules of the civil, in exclusion of the municipal law. This appears in a particular manner from the spiritual courts of all denominations, from the chancellor’s courts in both our universities, and from the high court of chancery before mentioned; in all of which the proceedings are to this day in a course much conformed to the civil law: for which no tolerable reason can be assigned, unless that these courts were all under the immediate direction of the popish ecclesiastics (clergy), among whom it was a point of religion to exclude the municipal (governing) law; Pope Innocent the Fourth having forbidden(l) the very reading of it by the clergy, because its decisions were not founded on the imperial constitutions, but merely on the customs of the laity. 

...a science, which distinguishes the criterions of right and wrong; which teaches to establish the one, and prevent, punish, or redress the other; which employs in its theory the noblest faculties of the soul, and exerts in its practice the cardinal virtues of the heart; a science, which is universal in its use and extent, accommodated to each individual, yet comprehending the whole community; that a science like this should ever have been deemed unnecessary to be studied in an university, is matter of astonishment and concern.

Aristotle himself has said, speaking of the laws of his own country, that jurisprudence, or the knowledge of those laws, is the principal and most perfect branch of ethics.

experience may teach us to foretell that a lawyer, thus educated to the bar, in subservience to attorneys and solicitors,(n) will find he has begun at the wrong end. If practice be the whole he is taught, practice must also be the whole he will ever know: if he be not instructed in the elements and first principles upon which the rule of practice is founded, the least variation from established precedents will totally distract and bewilder him: ita lex scripta est(o) is the utmost his knowledge will arrive at; he must never aspire to form, and seldom expect to comprehend, any arguments drawn, a priori, from the spirit of the laws and the natural foundations of justice.

The inconveniences here pointed out can never be effectually prevented, but by making academical education a previous step to the profession of the common law, and at the same time making the rudiments of the law a part of academical education. For sciences are of a sociable disposition, and flourish best in the neighbourhood of each other; nor is there any branch of learning but may be helped and improved by assistances drawn from other arts. If, therefore, the student in our laws hath formed both his sentiments and style by perusal and imitation of the purest classical writers, among whom the historians and orators will best deserve his regard; if he can reason with precision, and separate argument from fallacy, by the clear simple rules of pure unsophisticated logic; if he can fix his attention, and steadily pursue truth through any the most intricate deduction, by the use of mathematical demonstrations; if he has enlarged his conceptions of nature and art, by a view of the several branches of genuine experimental philosophy; if he has impressed on his mind the sound maxims of the law of nature, the best and most authentic foundation of human laws; if, lastly, he has contemplated those maxims reduced to a practical system in the laws of imperial Rome; if he has done this, or any part of it, (though all may be easily done under as able instructors as ever graced any seats of learning,) a student thus qualified may enter upon the study of the law with incredible advantage and reputation. 

 

In Jefferson's 1817 letter to John Tyler, our nation's third president acknowledged the colonies use of Blackstone's common laws and the Will of the Creator in forming the the Republic of the United States.  But, America's use of English common law was fashioned into a system that was more relevant to a government without a king. It was the Republic's cause of ascension of the rights of citizens over being ruled by a king that made the Declaration of Independence a necessary document to frame the Constitution to new Rules of Law.

Thomas Jefferson to John Tyler, 17 June 1812

Quote

On the other subject of your letter, the application of the common Law to our present situation, I deride, with you, the ordinary doctrine that we brought with us from England the Common Law rights. this narrow notion was a favorite in the first moment of rallying to our rights against Great Britain. but it was that of men, who felt their rights before they had thought of their explanation. the truth is that we brought with us the rights of men, of ex-patriated men. on our arrival here the question would at once arise, By what law will we govern ourselves? the resolution seems to have been, By that system with which we are familiar, to be altered by ourselves occasionally, and adapted to our new situation. the proofs of this resolution are to be found in the form of the oaths of the judges. 1. Hening’s stat. 169. 187. of the Governor ib. 504. in the act for a provisional government ib. 372. in the preamble to the laws of 1661.2. the uniform current of opinions and decisions, and in the general recognition of all our statutes framed on that basis. but the state of the English law at the date of our emigration, constituted the system adopted here. we may doubt therefore the propriety of quoting in our courts English authorities subsequent to that adoption, still more the admission of authorities posterior to the declaration of Independence, or rather to the accession of that king, whose reign, ab initio, was that very tissue of wrongs which rendered the Declaration at length necessary. the reason for it had inception at least as far back as the commencement of his reign. this relation to the beginning of his reign, would add the advantage of getting us rid of all Mansfield’s innovations, or civilizations of the Common law. for however I admit the superiority of the Civil, over the Common law code, as a system of perfect justice, yet an incorporation of the two would be like Nebuchadnezzar’s image of metals & clay, a thing without cohesion of parts. the only natural improvement of the common law, is thro’ it’s homogeneous ally, the Chancery, in which new principles are to be examined, concocted, and digested. but when by repeated decisions & modifications they are rendered pure & certain, they should be transferred by statute to the courts of common law, & placed within the pale of juries. the exclusion from the courts of the malign influence of all authorities after the Georgium sidus became ascendant, would uncanonise Blackstone, whose book, altho’ the most elegant & best digested of our law catalogue, has been perverted more than all others to the degeneracy of legal science. a student finds there a smattering of every thing, and his indolence easily persuades him that if he understands that book, he is master of the whole body of the law. the distinction between these, & those who have drawn their stores from the deep and rich mines of Coke Littleton, seems well understood even by the unlettered common people, who apply the appellation of Blackstone lawyers to these Ephemeral insects of the law.

Whether we should undertake to reduce the common law, our own, & so much of the English, statutes as we have adopted, to a text, is a question of transcendent difficulty. it was discussed at the first meeting of the committee of the Revised code in 1776. & decided in the negative by the opinions of Wythe, Mason & myself, against Pendleton & Tom Lee. Mr. Pendleton proposed to take Blackstone for that text, only purging him of what was inapplicable, or unsuitable to us. in that case the meaning of every word of Blackstone would have become a source of litigation until it had been settled by repeated legal decisions. and to come at that meaning, we should have had produced, on all occasions, that very pile of authorities from which it would be said he drew his conclusion, & which of course would explain it, and the terms in which it is couched. thus we should have retained the same chaos of law-lore from which we wished to be emancipated, added to the evils of the uncertainty which a new text, & new phrases would have generated. an example of this may be found in the old statutes and commentaries on them in Coke’s institute; but more remarkably in the Institute of Justinian, & the vast masses, explanatory, or supplementory of that which fills the libraries of the Civilians. we were deterred from the attempt by these considerations, added to which, the bustle of the times did not admit leisure for such an undertaking.

 

 

Locke, Bolingbroke, Blackstone, and Jefferson were well versed on Cicero, a Roman Philosopher that walked Earth 50 years before Jesus Christ.
 
Thomas Jefferson to John Adams, 5 July 1814

Quote

Cicero did not wield the dense logic of Demosthenes, yet he was able, learned, laborious, practiced in the business of the world, & honest. he could not be the dupe of mere style, of which he was himself the first master in the world.

On the Spirit of Patriotism
Henry St. John Bolingbroke

Quote

 Cicero might be a better philosopher, but Demosthenes was no less a statesman: and both of them performed actions and acquired fame, above the reach of eloquence alone. Demosthenes used to compare eloquence to a weapon, aptly enough; for eloquence, like every other weapon, is of little use to the owner, unless he have the force and the skill to use it. This force and this skill Demosthenes had in an eminent degree.

Cicero theorized how the moral sense of law bestowed by the Creator has enabled man to discern by reason what is virtue (good) and what is vice (evil).

In The Political Works of Marcus Tullius Cicero, vol. 2 (Treatise on the Laws). Cicero defined the Law of Nature as the governing power of the Creator as both an equitable distribution of goods and discrimination of good and evil.
 

Quote

According to the Greeks, therefore, the name of law implies an equitable distribution of goods: according to the Romans, an equitable discrimination between good and evil. The true definition of law should, however, include both these characteristics. And this being granted as an almost self–evident proposition, the origin of justice is to be sought in the divine law of eternal and immutable morality. This indeed is the true energy of nature, the very soul and essence of wisdom, the test of virtue and vice.

Marcus Cicero believed in a Actively Involved Creator (Divine Providence) over a Do Nothing Creator (Prime Mover) defined by the Greek Philosopher Epicurus that walked this earth 200 years before him. Epicurus taught that pain and death are not evil unto themselves. Cicero believed in the immortality of the soul, and the tranquility of the good after death, and the punishment of the wicked defined by Plato.

 

Epicurus also believed in divine beings, but man cannot be divine and should not expect anything good or bad to come from the gods. Epicurus taught that if one understands that he or she is not immortal, then one can be free of the fear of death and the pain caused from its coming.
 
Epicurus
Letter to Menoeceus
 

Quote

Accustom yourself to believing that death is nothing to us, for good and evil imply the capacity for sensation, and death is the privation of all sentience; therefore a correct understanding that death is nothing to us makes the mortality of life enjoyable, not by adding to life a limitless time, but by taking away the yearning after immortality. For life has no terrors for him who has thoroughly understood that there are no terrors for him in ceasing to live. Foolish, therefore, is the man who says that he fears death, not because it will pain when it comes, but because it pains in the prospect. Whatever causes no annoyance when it is present, causes only a groundless pain in the expectation. Death, therefore, the most awful of evils, is nothing to us, seeing that, when we are, death is not come, and, when death is come, we are not. It is nothing, then, either to the living or to the dead, for with the living it is not and the dead exist no longer.

 Marcus Cicero agreed with Epicurus that death and pain are not evil unto themselves. But, he maintained that it was reason that links us to the Creator. It is this Provident Creator that generated man to transcend over the other creatures by reason and thought. And it is the right (successful) reason between the Creator and Man we find self evident, which we call Law.  Epicurus believed that circumstance was the Prime Mover and Natural Order of matter. While Cicero maintained that through right reasoning we can take notice of the natural link between our indestructible spirit and our Creator through natural and morally just laws that derive from loving our associates.  Epicurus taught that some outcomes happen out of necessity, others by chance, and our own through our own agency (course of action). Epicurus considered Law to be Truth as long as through Prudent Reasoning it is considered to be useful (Natural Justice and Honorable) and successful (pleasurable) to all parties (self evident). The chain of Epicurian reasoning has led us to now consider the infinite outcome reality of quantum self interest over one outcome reality of an outside Creative force of nature watching and interacting with us. It is in only the successful outcome of our decisions that those that believe in either a Provident Creator, a Prime Mover, or No God can agree.

50 years before Epicurus, a sage by the name of Aristotle tutor of Alexander the Great, argued that is through contrary outcomes that we can find Natural Justice.
 
Nicomachean Ethics
By Aristotle

Quote

Now often one contrary state is recognized from its contrary, and often states are recognized from the subjects that exhibit them; for ( A ) if good condition is known, bad condition also becomes known, and ( B ) good condition is known from the things that are in good condition, and they from it. If good condition is firmness of flesh, it is necessary both that bad condition should be flabbiness of flesh and that the wholesome should be that which causes firmness in flesh. And it follows for the most part that if one contrary is ambiguous the other also will be ambiguous; e.g. if 'just' is so, that 'unjust' will be so too.

 
Another great orator that both born and died the same years as Aristotle (384 - 322 BC) by the name of Demosthenes led a failed revolt against Alexander the Great and took his life rather than being arrested. Demosthenes believed that unjust actions to be wicked and just actions to be good and honest. 
 
Demosthenes
Against Aristocrates Section 75
 

Quote

The defendant, however, admitted no exception; he simply makes an outcast of any man who kills Charidemus, even though he kill him justly or as the laws permit. And yet to every act and to every word one of two epithets is applicable: it is either just or unjust. To no act and to no word can both these epithets be applied at the same time, for how can the same act at the same time be both just and not just? Every act is brought to the test as having the one or the other of these qualities; if it be found to have the quality of injustice, it is adjudged to be wicked, if of justice, to be good and honest.—But you, sir, used neither qualification when you wrote the words, “if any man kill.” You named the mere accusation, without any definition, and then immediately added, “let him be liable to seizure.” Thereby you have evidently ignored this tribunal and its usages as well as the other two.

 
Demosthenes argued that those who fail to see and act upon god given opportunities during their lifetime will be judged their denial of the divine good in them.
 
Demosthenes
Olynthiac 1 Section 11
 

Quote

I suppose it is with national as with private wealth. If a man keeps what he gains, he is duly grateful to fortune; if he loses it by his own imprudence, he loses along with it the sense of gratitude. So in national affairs, those who fail to use their opportunities aright, fail also to acknowledge the good that the gods have given; for every advantage in the past is judged in the light of the final issue. It is therefore our duty, men of Athens, to keep a careful eye on the future, that by restoring our prosperity we may efface the discredit of the past.

 
Demosthenes and Aristotle would have known Socrates, the Great Greek philosopher that proceeded them. In Joeseph Priestly's work, Socrates and Jesus Compared, Socrates devout religious belief to help citizens and others to be good was greatly admired. He taught the one Law of Nature is to do good in return for good received; or face the penalty of being deserted by your friends in you time of need. Priestly also writes that taught of a decisive power superior to man. And Unlike Epicurus belief that the gods were unconcerned spectators of the plight of man, Socrates reasoned the gods were concerned and interceded in the affairs of man. At his trial Socrates said that he had often heard a Daemon (divine voice) who was frequently present within him. He trusted the judgement of his personal reason and the wisdom of the gods over people. During his trial,Socrates listened to his Daemon repeated commands not to make any defense to the accusations, which led to his demise against tyrants. During Socrates sentencing he pleaded a justifiable reason of vanity that he if was executed, Athens would find no other man like him. Ultimately Socrates execution made him even more famous as a martyr for morality.

To Priestly it appears that Socrates had little or no faith in the sanction of virtue in the doctrine of a future state. But, believed in the pleasure received during life and the chance of honored by the living after death. Priestly writes, "Socrates, according to Plato, generally speaks of a future state, and the condition of men in, as the popular belief, which might be true or false. Priestly does mention that Socrates taught that there was a privilege given by the gods to only a select group humans initiated in the right manner into a philosophy of meditation of a pure mind over their body to live with them. Socrates did not know whether or not he had succeeded in this endeavor or not.
 
SOCRATES AND JESUS
COMPARED
 
BY JOSEPH PRIESTLY
 
page 22
 

Quote

"If" says he "what is said to be true, we shall in another "state die no more. In death "he says to his judges "we either lose all sense of things, or as it is said, go into some other place; and if it be so, it will be much better; as we shall be out " of the power of partial judges, and come before "those that are impartial."

 
Priestly maintained Socrates theorized that the substance of man's power of thinking, or mental action may remain when the corporeal body ceases to exist. Priestly then added the Greek general belief of an afterlife during the time of Socrates could have been similar to the Jews idea of afterlife, but the record of this Future State revelation had been long lost.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 


 600 years before Socrates, Aristotle and Demosthenes, the Israelite King Solomon wrote and shared words of wisdom to his people that a perfect weight on honest scales and balances are the Creator's will.

Mishlei - Proverbs - Chapter 11
 

Quote

1 Deceitful scales are an abomination of the Lord, but a perfect weight is His will.

Proverbs 16

Quote

16:9 A person plans his course,
but the Lord directs his steps.
16:10 The divine verdict is in the words of the king,
his pronouncements must not act treacherously against justice.
16:11 Honest scales and balances are from the Lord;
all the weights in the bag are his handiwork.

The Egyptian scale and balance concept of 'Ma’at' predated the Torah by 2000 years, but had a similar meaning of an active Creative Force of Nature involved in the scales and balances of Justice. Ma’at originated as a concept and evolved into belief in a goddess that was a manifestation of the Creator and Sun god, Amun Ra (Amun Re, Yamānu, Hidden One) to maintain truth, justice and natural universal order by balancing the flow of Ka (vital energy, life force, magic) from opposing powers. Ma’at is also a blatant counter force to the Egyptian term isfet (disorder). As a goddess, through the activation of the Ka (Heka) Ma’at was created by Amun Ra and opponent of Apepi  (Aapep) the giant serpent and Lord of Chaos. Egyptians had no concept of Hell after death, Judgement came to those that followed Apepi and heart was not pure during life, their punishment was to devoured by the female demon Ammit into non-existence. In the Egyptian Book of the Dead, Maat represents the ethical and moral principle of truth and honor that every citizen was expected to follow throughout their daily lives.  The soul, ka (vital energy, and Chu (Shu, breath of life) originated on earth and were connected to immortality.

300 hundred years before Solomon, the Egyptian Royal scribe, Hunefer made a copy of the funerary Egyptian Book of the Dead for Pharaoh Seti I. 

Hunnifer.jpg
 
Like the Creator in Judaism, Thoth gives long life on earth and the promise of eternal life in the after world to those who are just.  

Book of the Dead of Hunefer
 
Chapter CLXXXIII
Papyrus of Un'neferu

Quote

Life is with thee, abundance is attached to thee. I offer Maat before thee; grant that I may be in the train of thy majesty like one who is on the earth. May thy name be called upon, may it be found among the just ones.
 
I have come to this god, to the city of god, to the region of old time; my soul, my ka, my Chu are in this land. The god of it is the lord of justice, the lord of abundance, the great and the venerable one, who is towed through the whole earth; he journeys to the South in his boat, and to the North driven by the winds, and his oars, to be entertained with gifts according to the command of the god, the lord of peace therein, who left me free of care. The god therein rejoices in who practices justice; he grants an old age to him who has done so; he is beloved, and the of it is a good burial and a sepulture in Ta-Tsert.
 
I have come to thee; my hands bring Maat, my heart does not contain any falsehood, I offer thee Maat before thy face, I know her; I swear by her; I have done no evil thing on earth; I have never wronged a man of his property. I am Thoth, the perfect and pure writer; my hands are pure. I have put away all evil things; I write justice and I hate evil; for I am the writing-reed of the Inviolate god, who utters his words, and whose words are written in the two earths.
 
I am Thoth, the lord of justice, who gives victory to him who is injured and who takes the defense of the oppressed, of him who is wronged in his property. I have dispelled darkness; I have driven away the storm; I have given air to Unneferu, and the sweet breezes of the North when he comes out of the womb of his mother.

 

 

The relief portrait of Hammurabi can be found in the House Gallery in the United States Capitol Building.

6240603267_d72909fee1_b.jpg

Hammurabi Code of Laws Stele.

800px-P1050763_Louvre_code_Hammurabi_face_rwk.JPG

 

500 hundred years before Hunefer,  the Babylonian King ,Hammurabi (Khammurabi. Awil Kurda) inscribed his code of law on a stone stele. 

The Sky god Anu (An) is considered the Chief Justice of the seven gods ( Anunnaki) who reside in the underworld and judge the fate of mankind. It was It was Ea (Enki), the god of righteousness, who proposed to the council that a mortal man should be created to serve the gods. Anu and Ea assigned the Bel Marduk (Ea's son) to oversee the decrees of Anu on the fate of mankind with his Imhullu (divine wind storm weapon). The "Bel" title became associated with the Babylonian patron god Marduk, first as "Bel Marduk", but eventually being commonly used by itself, "Bel."  Ea and his son, Lord (Bel) Marduk assigned lesser gods to oversee particular regions on earth and represent the mortals in the council of gods. Anu and Ea who bestowed on King Hammurabi the power to rule over the mortals with righteousness judgement over the wicked. 

Code of Hammurabi

Prologue 1

Quote

When Anu the Sublime, King of the Anunaki, and Bel, the lord of Heaven and earth, who decreed the fate of the land, assigned to Marduk, the over-ruling son of Ea, God of righteousness, dominion over earthly man, and made him great among the Igigi, they called Babylon by his illustrious name, made it great on earth, and founded an everlasting kingdom in it, whose foundations are laid so solidly as those of heaven and earth; then Anu and Bel called by name me, Hammurabi, the exalted prince, who feared God, to bring about the rule of righteousness in the land, to destroy the wicked and the evil-doers; so that the strong should not harm the weak; so that I should rule over the black-headed people like Shamash, and enlighten the land, to further the well-being of mankind.

Bêlit means lady or mistress in Akkadian language.

Belet-Seri (also spelled Beletseri, Belit-Sheri, Belit-Tseri) in Babylonian and Akkadian mythology is an underworld goddess. The recorder of the dead entering the underworld, she is known as the "Scribe of the Earth". It is Belet-seri who keeps the records of human activities so she can advise the queen of the dead,  Erishkigal, on their final judgement. Married to Amurru, the God of Nomads, she's known as 'Queen of the Desert. She is also known as Erua. She may be the same as Gamsu, Ishtar,  Sarpanit

Quote

Hammurabi, the king of righteousness, on whom Shamash has conferred right (or law) am I. My words are well considered; my deeds are not equaled; to bring low those that were high; to humble the proud, to expel insolence. If a succeeding ruler considers my words, which I have written in this my inscription, if he do not annul my law, nor corrupt my words, nor change my monument, then may Shamash lengthen that king's reign, as he has that of me, the king of righteousness, that he may reign in righteousness over his subjects. If this ruler do not esteem my words, which I have written in my inscription, if he despise my curses, and fear not the curse of God, if he destroy the law which I have given, corrupt my words, change my monument, efface my name, write his name there, or on account of the curses commission another so to do, that man, whether king or ruler, patesi, or commoner, no matter what he be, may the great God (Anu), the Father of the gods, who has ordered my rule, withdraw from him the glory of royalty, break his scepter, curse his destiny. May Bel, the lord, who fixes destiny, whose command can not be altered, who has made my kingdom great, order a rebellion which his hand can not control; may he let