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

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.

The above introduction gives you a point in my road map to understanding and accepting Truth as more than just a word. 
I have chosen to research the Didache of the 12 Apostles because it is honored as the 'first catechism' (articles of faith) of the Christian church.  The Didache (dee-da-ke, Greek word for teaching) of the 12 Apostles is 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. For nonChristians the Didache is a code of conduct without references to angels, prophecy and miracles.The principles of right living by the golden rule apply to everyone regardless of culture or creed. in life. For those in Behavior Sciences and religious naturalist the Didache is 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. 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  and Unitarianism.
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 in the Didache of the 12 Apostles. 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


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.

 I will follow the 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 a particular Apostolic teaching. 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 altruism 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.
 In our pursuit for the truth of happiness I shall begin my essay with a quote from the United States Declaration of Independence.


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.

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.  In my opinion, Jefferson rightly stated that a good leader puts the People he serves first.  It is my opinion, Jefferson and America's Founding Fathers considered supreme happiness from having faith that Nature has given us a sense of justice through the cherrishment of others. It is also my opinion, that Jefferson also also reasoned selfish false teachings that man bestowed aristocracy the heriditary right to govern and judge one's fate. It will be through the false teaching of fearing others without sound reason that as consequence will destroy law and order built by free men. 

From Thomas Jefferson to William Johnson, 12 June 1823


...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


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.

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. We can see the seeds of understanding equity and justice through the Teachers of the monotheistic faiths.

Hillel the Elder

Shabbat 31a


...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 explained that that our Creator has taught us treats us the way we should treat others. Good conduct starts by cheerishing others as equals to your own self.

Matthew 7


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 Prophet Mohamed taught how to put aside our our personal inclinations and be fair and impartial when dealing with people.

An-Nisa (The Women) 


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!

After reading the above I asked my son Luke how is it we find happiness? He responded, "Happiness to me is found within ourselves." 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, love of others? And is happiness tied to our self esteem?

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 virture. Jefferson believed the primal emotional pleasure of happiness orginates from reaslization that is our duty to help others escape the primal emotional pain of misery.  It is our imprefection of senses limit our ability to see what is truly good.

Thomas Jefferson to Thomas Law, 13 June 1814


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 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. 

After reading the above passage 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 others are good to you, then you feel happy. If others are bad to you, then you will feel sad. If you only interact with yourself, then you will not understand how others define good and bad." I am very proud of him.

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


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

Chapter I

Of the Mind Relatively to Society

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, 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 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.

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 assemblege 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.

...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.

Chapter II

...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

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

Chapter V

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

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, and that of stupidity to truth, which it there considered at at least as a folly, and must be considered as much.

It is there dangerous; and 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 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. 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, 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.

Essays on the Principles of Morality and Natural Religion

Henry Home, Lord Kames


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



12 I have concluded that there is nothing better for people

than to be happy and to enjoy

themselves as long as they live,

13 and also that everyone should eat and drink, and find enjoyment in all his toil,

for these things are a gift from God.


Philippians 2


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.


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


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


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)


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


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


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


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


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


17 ...“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


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


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


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


 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
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
Of the Nature of Laws in General.


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


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


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


"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. Unfortunetely the Spirit of Liberty, or more importantly the the Spirit of the Creator becomes unknown to Citizens who willingly submit their Freedom for Tryanny. No mortal man can be compared to a God with infinite wisdom and power. 

Declaration of Independence


Prudence (caution), indeed, will dictate that Governments long established should not be changed for light and transient causes; and accordingly all experience hath shewn, 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. 

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



...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

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.

hirdly, 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

...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

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



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


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


...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.



Share this post

Link to post
Share on other sites

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


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


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


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."


Targum Jonathan on Genesis 14:18-24


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.


 Letter to the Hebrews Chapter 7


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


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


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


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


"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? 
(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 
(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


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


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."


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

Shemot - Exodus - Chapter 19


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



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!"


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



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


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


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


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


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


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


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.


Quran Surah Al-Baqarah - The Cow


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


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


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


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



"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


.. 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


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


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.





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



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


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/


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.



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


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


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


 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.


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.
Letter to Menoeceus


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


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. 
Against Aristocrates Section 75


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.
Olynthiac 1 Section 11


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.
page 22


"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


1 Deceitful scales are an abomination of the Lord, but a perfect weight is His will.

Proverbs 16


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. 

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
Papyrus of Un'neferu


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.


Hammurabi Code of Laws Stele.



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


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


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 the wind of the overthrow of his habitation blow, may he ordain the years of his rule in groaning, years of scarcity, years of famine, darkness without light, death with seeing eyes be fated to him; may he (Bel) order with his potent mouth the destruction of his city, the dispersion of his subjects, the cutting off of his rule, the removal of his name and memory from the land. May Belit, the great Mother, whose command is potent in E-Kur (the Babylonian Olympus), the Mistress, who hearkens graciously to my petitions, in the seat of judgment and decision (where Bel fixes destiny), turn his affairs evil before Bel, and put the devastation of his land, the destruction of his subjects, the pouring out of his life like water into the mouth of King Bel. May Ea, the great ruler, whose fated decrees come to pass, the thinker of the gods, the omniscient, who makes long the days of my life, withdraw understanding and wisdom from him, lead him to forgetfulness, shut up his rivers at their sources, and not allow grain or sustenance for man to grow in his land. May Shamash, the great Judge of heaven and earth, who supports all means of livelihood, Lord of life-courage, shatter his dominion, annul his law, destroy his way, make vain the march of his troops, send him in his visions forecasts of the uprooting of the foundations of his throne and of the destruction of his land. May the condemnation of Shamash overtake him forthwith; may he be deprived of water above among the living, and his spirit below in the earth. May Sin (the Moon-god), the Lord of Heaven, the divine father, whose crescent gives light among the gods, take away the crown and regal throne from him; may he put upon him heavy guilt, great decay, that nothing may be lower than he. May he destine him as fated, days, months and years of dominion filled with sighing and tears, increase of the burden of dominion, a life that is like unto death. May Adad, the lord of fruitfulness, ruler of heaven and earth, my helper, withhold from him rain from heaven, and the flood of water from the springs, destroying his land by famine and want; may he rage mightily over his city, and make his land into flood-hills (heaps of ruined cities). May Zamama, the great warrior, the first-born son of E-Kur, who goeth at my right hand, shatter his weapons on the field of battle, turn day into night for him, and let his foe triumph over him. May Ishtar, the goddess of fighting and war, who unfetters my weapons, my gracious protecting spirit, who loves my dominion, curse his kingdom in her angry heart; in her great wrath, change his grace into evil, and shatter his weapons on the place of fighting and war. May she create disorder and sedition for him, strike down his warriors, that the earth may drink their blood, and throw down the piles of corpses of his warriors on the field; may she not grant him a life of mercy, deliver him into the hands of his enemies, and imprison him in the land of his enemies. May Nergal, the might among the gods, whose contest is irresistible, who grants me victory, in his great might burn up his subjects like a slender reedstalk, cut off his limbs with his mighty weapons, and shatter him like an earthen image. May Nin-tu, the sublime mistress of the lands, the fruitful mother, deny him a son, vouchsafe him no name, give him no successor among men. May Nin-karak, the daughter of Anu, who adjudges grace to me, cause to come upon his members in E-kur high fever, severe wounds, that can not be healed, whose nature the physician does not understand, which he can not treat with dressing, which, like the bite of death, can not be removed, until they have sapped away his life.

May he lament the loss of his life-power, and may the great gods of heaven and earth, the Anunaki, altogether inflict a curse and evil upon the confines of the temple, the walls of this E-barra (the Sun temple of Sippara), upon his dominion, his land, his warriors, his subjects, and his troops. May Bel curse him with the potent curses of his mouth that can not be altered, and may they come upon him forthwith.

Yirmiyahu - Jeremiah - Chapter 50


1 The word that the Lord spoke concerning Babylon, concerning the land of the Chaldeans, by Jeremiah the prophet.

2 Tell among the nations and let it be heard and raise a standard; let them hear and do not hide it. Say, "Babylon has been taken, Bel has been shamed, Merodach is dismayed, her images have been shamed, her idols have been dismayed.

3 For a nation has marched against her from the north; he shall make her land a desolation, and no one shall dwell therein; both man and beast have wandered, yea they have gone.

4 In those days and in that time, says the Lord, the children of Israel shall come, they and the children of Judah together; they shall go along weeping, and they shall seek the Lord their God.

5 They shall inquire of Zion; their faces are directed hitherward. "Come and join the Lord [with] an everlasting covenant that shall not be forgotten."

6 My people were lost sheep, their shepherds caused them to stray, [to the] mountains [they] led them astray; from mountain to hill they went, they forgot their resting place.

7 All who found them devoured them, and their adversaries said, "We are not to blame because they sinned against the Lord, the habitation of justice and the hope of their forefathers-the Lord."

8 Wander out of Babylon and go out of the land of the Chaldeans, and be like the he-goats before the flocks.

9 For behold I am arousing and bringing up upon Babylon an alliance of great nations from the north land, and they shall set themselves in array against her, from there she shall be taken; his arrows are like [those of] a mighty man who bereaves, it shall not return empty.

10 And the [land of the] Chaldeans shall become a prey; all who prey upon it shall be sated, says the Lord.

11 As you rejoice, as you jubilate, O spoilers of My heritage, as you become fat like a threshing heifer, and you neigh as strong horses,

12 your mother has been exceedingly shamed, she who bore you has been embarrassed; behold the end of the nations is desert, wasteland, and a barren plain.

13 Because of the wrath of the Lord, she shall not be inhabited, and all of her shall be desolate; whoever passes by Babylon shall be amazed and hiss about all her plagues.

14 Set yourselves in array against Babylon all around, all you who bend the bow, shoot at her, spare no arrow, for she has sinned against the Lord.

15 Shout against her all around; she gave her hand, her foundations have fallen, her walls are torn down, for it is the Lord's vengeance; wreak vengeance upon her: as she did, do to her.

16 Cut off a sower from Babylon and one who grasps a sickle at the time of harvest; because of the intoxicating sword, every man shall turn to his people, and every man shall flee to his land.

17 A scattered sheep is Israel which lions have driven away. First the king of Assyria devoured him, and this last one broke his bones, Nebuchadrezzar the king of Babylon.

18 Therefore, so said the Lord of Hosts, the God of Israel; Behold I visit retribution upon the king of Babylon and upon his land, as I visited upon the king of Assyria.

19 And I will return Israel to his dwelling and he shall pasture in the Carmel and the Bashan, and in Mount Ephraim and Gilead shall his soul be sated.

Yirmiyahu - Jeremiah - Chapter 51


42 The sea has ascended upon Babylon; with the multitude of its waves it has been covered.

43 Her cities became desolate, a dry land and a desert, a land where no man dwells, neither does any man pass through them.

44 And I will visit retribution on Bel in Babylon, and I will take what he has swallowed out of his mouth, and nations shall no longer stream to him: even the wall of Babylon has fallen.

45 Go out of its midst, My people, and each one save his life, from the burning wrath of the Lord.

Daniel - Chapter 5


18 You are the king [because] the Most High God gave your father, Nebuchadnezzar, kingdom, greatness, honor, and glory.

19 And through the greatness that He gave him, all peoples, nations, and tongues were quaking, and they feared him; whomever he wished he would slay, and whomever he wished he would let live; whomever he wished he would exalt, and whomever he wished he would humble.

20 And when his heart became haughty and his spirit was toughened so that he dealt wickedly, he was deposed from his royal throne, and the honor was removed from him.

21 And he was banished from mankind, and his heart was just like that of the beasts, and his dwelling was with the wild asses. They fed him grass like the cattle, and his body was drenched with the dew of the heavens, until he realized that the Most High God rules over the kingdom of man, and whomever He wishes He sets up on it.

22 But you, his son, Belshazzar, you did not humble your heart in view of the fact that you know all this.

23 But over the Lord of heaven you exalted yourself, and the vessels of His House they brought before you, and you, your dignitaries, your queen, and your concubines drank wine in them, and you praised gods of silver and gold, copper, iron, wood and stone, which neither see nor hear nor know, but the God in Whose hand is your soul and all your ways - He you did not glorify.

24 Then from before Him the palm of a hand was sent forth, and it inscribed this writing.

25 And this is the writing that it inscribed: MENE MENE TEKEIL UFARSIN.

26 This is the interpretation of the matter: MENE-God has counted your kingdom and has brought it to an end.

27 TEKEIL-You were weighed on the scales and found wanting.

28 UFARSIN-Your kingdom has been broken up and given to Media and Persia."

29 Then Belshazzar ordered, and they attired Daniel with purple and the golden chain on his neck, and they announced about him that he should rule over a third of the kingdom.

30 On that very night, Belshazzar, the Chaldean king, was assassinated.

Nabonidus suffered from a mental disease and insulted the Babylonian clergy by his monotheistic ideas.

4Q242 Prayer of Nabonidus


Words of the prayer, said by Nabonidus, king of Babylonia, the great king, when afflicted

with an ulcer on command of the most high God in Tayma:

"I, Nabonidus, was afflicted with an evil ulcer

for seven years, and far from men I was driven, until I prayed to the most high God

And an exorcist pardoned my sins. He was a Jew from among the children of the exile of Judah, and said:

"Recount this in writing to glorify and exalt the name of the most high God."

Then I wrote this: "When I was afflicted for seven years [by the most high God] with an evil ulcer during my stay at Tayma, 

I prayed to the gods of silver and gold, bronze and iron, wood, stone and lime,

because [I thought and considered] them gods

Daniel - Chapter 6


1 And Darius the Mede received the kingdom at the age of sixty-two.

2 It pleased Darius, and he set over the kingdom one hundred and twenty satraps, who should be in the entire kingdom.

3 And over them three viziers, one of which was Daniel, that these satraps should give them counsel, and the king should not suffer any injury.

4 Then this Daniel surpassed the viziers and the satraps because he had a superior spirit, and the king contemplated setting him up over the entire kingdom.

5 Then the viziers and the satraps sought to find a pretext against Daniel regarding the kingdom, but they could find no pretext or fault because he was trustworthy, and no error or fault was found about him.

6 Then those men said, "No pretext can be found about Daniel, but we shall find [a pretext] against him concerning the law of his God."

7 Then these viziers and satraps assembled about the king, and so they said to him: "O King Darius, may you live forever!

29 And this Daniel prospered in the time of the kingdom of Darius and in the kingdom of Cyrus the Persian.

Darius gives homage to the god Ahuramazda for protecting him

DSe, foundation tablet from Susa


A great god is Ahuramazda, who created this earth, who created the distant sky, who created man, who created happiness for man, who made Darius king, one king of many, one lord of many.

I am Darius, the Great King, King of Kings, the king of people all origins, the king of this great land, the son of Hystaspes, the Achaemenid, a Persian, son of a Persian, Aryran of Aryan descent.

And Darius, the king says:

By the grace of Ahuramazda  here are the peoples that I have conquered outside Persia. They obey me; they bring me tribute. What I order them to do they accomplish. They respect my law in Media, Elam, Parthia, Aria, Bactria, Segdiana, Shoramia, Drangiana, Arachosia, Sattagydia, the Macians, Gandhara, India, the Amyrgian Scythians, the Tigrakhanda Scythians, Babylonia, Assria, Arabia, Egypt, Armenia, Cappodocia, Lydia, the Greeks who guard the seas, the Scythians accross the sea, the Carians  

Darius the King says:

Much of the harm that has been done, I transformed into good. The nations which fought among each  other, whose people killed each other, these, by the grace of Ahuramazda I ensured that their people did not kill each other any more and I reinstalled each in their own country. Presented with my decisions, they respected them so that the strong did not strike or rob the poor.

And Darius, the king says:

By the grace of Ahuramazda, many enterprises which beforehand hand not been accomplished, I made good.                                                                                               

I saw that the fortifications which once had been built at Susa had gone to ruin. But, I raised them up. They are in fact new works that I have built.

May Ahuramazda protect me, with all the gods, as well as my house and this text that been written!

This palace which I built at Susa, from afar its ornamentation was brought. Downward the earth was dug, until I reached rock in the earth. When the excavation had been made, then rubble was packed down, some 40 cubits in depth, another part 20 cubits in depth. On that rubble the palace was constructed.

In 539 B.C. the great Persian king Cyrus conquered Babylon. His government was a Zoroastrian theocracy. Cyrus had a history of pretending to adopt a religion and then subverting it. King Cyrus had become popular among the residents of Babylon by posing as the one who would restore Marduk to his rightful place in the city. In Babylon his first act was to worship Marduk, claiming Marduk had sought a righteous prince and Cyrus was he. As far as the Babylonians were concerned, and evidently Cyrus concurred, Marduk was Ahuramazda. Zoroastrianism was monotheistic. Ahuramazda was the only god, but there was nothing that proclaimed that Ahuramazda was the Creator's only name. Cyrus was happy to adapt all the “Great Lords” of his empire into the one Great Lord. 

Later Cyrus mocked Marduk and had his image carted off. 

Cyrus Cylinder

The Tyranny of Nabonidus


An incompetent person known as Nabonidus was installed to exercise lordship over his country.

He imposed upon them a counterfeit of Esagila (temple of Marduk) he made for Ur and the rest of the worship centers, unholy rituals which were improper to them. 

He put an end to the regular offerings (and) he interfered  in the worship centers.

By his own plan, he did away with the worship of Marduk, the Enil (King) of the gods,

He continually did evil against Marduk's city without interruption,

He imposed forced labor upon his people unrelentingly, ruining them all.

Enlil of the gods became extremely angry at their complaints, and their territory

The gods who lived within the shrines left, angry that he had made them enter into Shuanna, (a quarter of Babylon).

Angry at what [Nabonidus] had done to BabylonMarduk, the exalted, the Enil of the gods, turned towards all the settlements and sanctuaries that were abandoned and in ruins.

The people of Sumer and Akkad had become corpses.

He was reconciled and had mercy upon them. He examined and checked all the entirety of all the lands,

he searched everywhere and then he took a righteous king, his favorite, by the hand, he called out his name: Cyrus, king of Anšan; he pronounced his name to be king all over the world.

He made the land of Gutium and all the Umman-mandanote (the Medes.) bow in submission at his feet. And Cyrus shepherded with justice and righteousness all the black-headed people, over whom he had given him victory.

Marduk, the great lord, guardian of his people, looked with gladness upon his good deeds and upright heart.

The separation of church and state and freedom of religion Cyrus’s rule caught Thomas Jefferson’s attention. 

To Thomas Jefferson
From Anne Cary Randolph Edgehill

Jan. 21 1804


I recieved my Dear Grand Papa’s letter but it was too late to answer it’ Jefferson will not let Ellen catch him for he is now translating the history of Cyrus by Xenophon I will very gladly untertake to raise a pair of Bamtams for Monticello if you will send them to me I am very sorry to inform you that the plank house is burnt down John Hemming’s was here last night and he told us that the floor of the hall and the Music gallery was burnt up and that it was as full of plank as it could of which not one inch was saved your ice house will be full by ten oclock today I suppose you have heard of Aunt Bolling’s death Aunt Virginia is engaged to Cousin Wilson Cary and Aunt Hariet to a Mr Hackley of New York adieu My Dear Grand Papa your affectionate Grand daughter


Cyropaedia: Education of Cyrus I by Xenophon
Translated by Walter Miller

Book 3


[3.3.49] "How would it do, Cyrus," Chrysantas then asked, "for you to get your men together, too, while yet you may, and exhort them, and see if you also might make your soldiers better men."

[3.3.50] "Do not let the exhortations of the Assyrian trouble you in the least, Chrysantas," Cyrus answered; "for no speech of admonition can be so fine that it will all at once make those who hear it good men if they are not good already; it would surely not make archers good if they had not had previous practice in shooting; neither could it make lancers good, nor horsemen; it cannot even make men able to endure bodily labor, unless they have been trained to it before.

[3.3.51] "But, Cyrus," answered Chrysantas, "it is really enough if you make their souls better with your words of exhortation." "Do you really think," returned Cyrus, "that one word spoken could all at once fill with a sense of honor the souls of those who hear, or keep them from actions that would be wrong, and convince them that for the sake of praise they must undergo every toil and every danger? Could it impress the idea indelibly upon their minds that it is better to die in battle than to save one's life by running away?

[3.3.52] "And," he continued, "if such sentiments are to be imprinted on men's hearts and to be abiding, is it not necessary in the first place that laws be already in existence such that by them a life of freedom and honor shall be provided for the good, but that upon the bad shall be imposed a life of humiliation and misery which would not be worth living?

[3.3.53] "And then again, I think, there must be, in addition to the laws, teachers and officers to show them the right way, to teach them and accustom them to do as they are taught, until it becomes a part of their nature to consider the good and honorable men as really the most happy, and to look upon the bad and the disreputable as the most wretched of all people. For such ought to be the feelings of those who are going to show the victory of training over fear in the presence of the enemy.

[3.3.54] "But if, when soldiers are about to go armed into battle, when many forget even the lessons oft learned of old, if then any one by an oratorical flourish can then and there make men warlike, it would be the easiest thing under heaven both to learn and to teach the greatest virtue in the world.

Wrong choice has its evil consequences, but as soon as one becomes wise enough to realize the folly, it is over. One is thereafter safe to learn how to replace wrong with right.

Ahunavaiti Gatha

Song 3


6. Between these two,
the seekers of false gods did not decide correctly,
because delusion came to them in their deliberations.
Therefore, they chose the worst mind,
rushed in wrath,
and afflicted the human existence.

7. But to the person who chooses correctly,
comes endurance of body
and steadfast serenity
through strength, good mind, and righteousness.
Of all these, such a person shall be Yours,
because he has come fully out of the
fiery test.

8. And when the sinners undergo their punishment,
O Wise One, the dominion will be realized
for them through good mind.

God, then they shall be taught
how to deliver
the wrong into the hands of righteousness.

9. And may we be among those
who make this life fresh!
lords of wisdom,
who bring happiness through righteousness,
come, let us be single-minded
in the realm of inner intellect.

10. Then, indeed, the power of wrong
shall be shattered.

Then those who strive with good name
shall immediately be united
n the good abode of good mind
and righteousness of the Wise One

11. If you understand the two principles
of prosperity and
established by the Wise One,
which are a
long suffering for the wrongful
and a lasting good for the righteous;
you shall, then, enjoy radiant happiness.


Cyrus Cylinder

The Prince of Peace


[23] I took up my lordly abode in the royal palace amidst rejoicing and happiness. Marduk, the great lord, /established as his fate (šimtu)\ for me a magnanimous heart of one who loves Babylon, and I daily attended to his worship.

[24] My vast army marched into Babylon in peace; I did not permit anyone to frighten the people of [Sumer] /and\ Akkad.

[25] I sought the welfare of the city of Babylon and all its sacred centers. As for the citizens of Babylon, [x x x upon wh]om henote imposed a corvée which was not the gods' wish and not befitting them,

[26] I relieved their weariness and freed them from their service. Marduk, the great lord, rejoiced over [my good] deeds.

Religious Measures
[28] and in peace, before him, we mov[ed] around in friendship. [By his] exalted [word], all the kings who sit upon thrones

[29] throughout the world, from the Upper Sea to the Lower Sea, who live in the dis[tricts far-off], the kings of the West, who dwell in tents, all of them,

[30] brought their heavy tribute before me and in Babylon they kissed my feet. From [Babylon] to Aššur and (from) Susa,

[31] Agade, Ešnunna, Zamban, Me-Turnu, Der, as far as the region of Gutium, the sacred centers on the other side of the Tigris, whose sanctuaries had been abandoned for a long time,

[32] I returned the images of the gods, who had resided there,note to their places and I let them dwell in eternal abodes. I gathered all their inhabitants and returned to them their dwellings.

[33] In addition, at the command of Marduk, the great lord, I settled in their habitations, in pleasing abodes, the gods of Sumer and Akkad, whom Nabonidus, to the anger of the lord of the gods, had brought into Babylon.



Ezra 1


1 And in the first year of Cyrus, the king of Persia, at the completion of the word of the Lord from the mouth of Jeremiah, the Lord aroused the Spirit of Cyrus, the king of Persia, and he issued a proclamation throughout his kingdom, and also in writing, saying:

2 "So said Cyrus, the king of Persia, 'All the kingdoms of the earth the Lord God of the heavens delivered to me, and He commanded me to build Him a House in Jerusalem, which is in Judea."

Ezra 7


6 This Ezra ascended from Babylon, and he was a fluent scholar in the Law of Moses, which the Lord God of Israel had given, and the king granted him his entire request, according to the command of the Lord his God upon him.

7 And there ascended from the Children of Israel, from the priests, and the Levites, and the singers, and the gate-keepers, and the Nethinites to Jerusalem in the seventh year of King Artaxerxes.

8 And he came to Jerusalem in the fifth month, which was in the seventh year of the king.

9 For on the first of the first month was the commencement of the ascent from Babylon, and on the first of the fifth month, he arrived to Jerusalem according to the good hand of his God upon him.

10 For Ezra had prepared his heart to seek the Law of the Lord and to perform and teach in Israel statute and ordinance.  

 11 And this is the interpretation of the writ that King Artaxerxes gave to Ezra the priest, the scholar, the scholar of the words of the Lord's commandments and His statutes to Israel.

12 "Artaxerxes, king of the kings, to Ezra the priest, the scholar who has mastered the Book of the Law of the God of heaven, and Ke'eneth.

13 An order is issued by me that whoever of my kingdom of the people of Israel, its priests and Levites, who volunteers to go to Jerusalem with you, may go.

14 Because of this, before the king and his seven advisors you are sent to search out Judea and Jerusalem according to the law of your God, which is in your hand.

King Hammurabi prayed at the temple of Siggil (Marduk) and asked his Lord (Bel) Marduk to increase the riches of Babylonia and the main temple of Sin (god of the moon and the one who created Hammurabi) called Gish-shir-gal ; reestablish the sacred city of Eridu dedicated Lord (Bel) Ea; and purify Apsu (a god encompasses all fresh drinking water) that eternally sleeps due to a spell Ea placed upon him. 

The weighing of souls method of divine determination was found in the religion of the Kingdom of Elam, which covered the present Iranian southeastern part of Kosu (Khūzestān) and Faros (Fārs).

Elamite states were among the leading political forces of the Ancient near East around 2000 BC. The "Elamites" spread their empire to west under King Chedorlaomer. The Elamites had struggled with the Assyrians for domination of Babylon. The great Babylonian dynasty of UR was brought to an end about 1950 BC by the Elamites, who destroyed the city and took its king prisoner. Many scholars believe that the Elamites empire boundaries included present day Taxila and the areas of Baluchistan and Sindh.

When an individual was living in the light and on the earth, that person was loyal to the sun god Nahhunte. As soon as a person died, the two gods, Ishine Karab (Isme-karab) and Logmal (Lakamar, Lakamal, Laḫmal, Lagamar)  would meet the individual in the realm of the shadows, and bring forth the being before Inshushinak who executed judgment on the soul. Ninsusinak (Inshushinak) was the national god of the Elamite  Emprire and judge of the dead. The Assyrians and other Akkadian-speaking people knew him as Susinak.  Nahhunte and  Inshushinak are referred to as the gods of light and darkness, in other words, the earth and the realm of the dead. In the texts of the tribunal that are left of Elam , witnesses are almost always introduced by two gods: the devotees who were the god of the sun Nahhunte and the god of shadows inshushinak. The word "devotee" means the creator of the day, which was also the god of the execution of sentences.

Encyclopedia Iranica

ELAM vi. Elamite religion


Lagamal is indeed an infernal deity, and, on the relief from Kūrāngūn, Napiriša is identifiable by his throne, formed from a human-headed serpent; he also holds as attributes of power the disk and the rod (forerunners of the orb and scepter of Western monarchies), from which gush forth the living waters. He thus seems the equivalent of Ea, Mesopotamian god of the waters...

Although many gods were associated with the cult of the dead, three played a particularly important role: Inšušinak, the weigher of souls, and his two assistants, Išnikarab and Lagamal. A few small funerary tablets (Bottéro, pp. 393-401), though very badly preserved, give some idea of the passage into the other world: The dead person, preceded by Išnikarab or Lagamal or both presents himself in the haštu (in the Akkadian texts šuttu, a synonym for haštu) before Inšušinak, who decides his fate. This scene seems to be illustrated on a number of cylinder seals, where it is commonly identified as a “presentation scene,” even though it is more probably a depiction of the last judgment (Vallat, 1989).

A few small funerary tablets (Bottéro, pp. 393-401), though very badly preserved, give some idea of the passage into the other world: The dead person, preceded by Išnikarab or Lagamal or both presents himself in the haštu (in the Akkadian texts šuttu, a synonym for haštu) before Inšušinak, the weigher of souls, who decides his fate. This scene seems to be illustrated on a number of cylinder seals, where it is commonly identified as a “presentation scene,” even though it is more probably a depiction of the last judgment (Vallat, 1989

The image below shows the god Lagamal holding the Disc and Rod

Image source: Plate 6.5, p.185. The Archaeology of Elam: Formation and Transformation of an Ancient Iranian State (Cambridge World Archaeology)



In the 1902 book, The Old Testament In the Light of The Historical Records and Legends of Assyria and Babylonia, Theophilus G. Pinches, writes that the Akkadian King Kudur-laḫmal (Kutir-Lagamar, Kudur-laḫ(gu)mal), is a translation variant of the Bible's King Chedorlaomer of Elam. The Kingdom of Elam was located in present day Iran, Northeast of Babylon and Southwest of Ur. In the 2015 book Moses and the Exodus Chronological, Historical and Archaeological Evidence, author Gerard Gertoux states that Lagamar is an Elamite deity. The 1995 article, Theology and Worship in Elam and Achaemenid Iran, Heidemarie Koch concurs with Gertoux that the name Lagamar is found in middle Elamite texts is Akkadian in meaning the god that shows "No Mercy" that accompanies the god Ishme-karab meaning "He who grants the prayer." In the 1971 book, The Cambridge Ancient History by Geredigeerd Door, two goddesses Ishine Karab and Logmal supported the god of oaths In-Shushinak (Insusiank, Nin-Suvina(k), Su'inak) in his position as 'judge of the dead.' Lakamar appeared in the later Elam middle period. In a legal context Lagamal would be the Prosecution, Ishmekarub would the Defense, and In Insusiank would be the Judge.

The inscription is a standard one that celebrates Untash-Napirisha, king of Elam, in what is now Southwest Iran, from ca. 1275–1240 BCE. As translated, it
reads (following Dan Potts [1999]):


“I, Untash-Napirisha, son of Humban-Numena, king of Anshan and Susa, desirous that my life be continually one of prosperity, that the extinction of my lineage not be granted when it shall be judged (?), with this intention I built a temple of baked bricks, a high temple of glazed bricks; I gave it to the god Inshushinak of the Sacred Precinct. I raised a ziggurat. May the work which I created, as an offering, be agreeable to Inshushinak!”

Another temple in Chogha Zanbil complex would be a "temple of the grove" (Holy Garden, Husa. Siyan Husame) dedicated to either In-Shushinak, Lagamal, or other underworld deities. The temple of the dead would face east as the sun rises with a sculpture of In-Shushinak in the front of the gate adorned with with a copper-covered cedar bar (Potts, Archaeology of Elam). The temple of the grove would act as a transition passage of the dead spirit to separate from the body to the underworld through sacred grove of fragrant trees with edible fruits, flowering plants, sculptures, and tombs that would surround the Ziggurat. The gateway may have symbolized the entrance of the dead person into the next world.  

From the Foundations to the Crenellations 

Essays on Temple Building in the Ancient Near East  and Hebrew Bible 

Page 56


in the Middle Elamite Period, there were a number of temples dedicated to Insusinak and  another deity. These included a temple {siyan) and a high temple (kukkunum) to Napirisa ( d GAL) and Insusinak, a temple called "light of the universe" (Akk. nur kibrat) which was sacred to Napirisa ( d GAL) and/or Insusinak, a temple-of-the- grove (siyan husame) built by unknown predecessors for Insusinak and Lagamar(?) and restored by Silhak-Insusinak, and a temple (siyan) to Kiririsa and Insusinak rebuilt by Silhak-Insusinak. Similarly, during the Neo-Elamite Period, a temple of Napirisa ( d GAL) and Insusinak with glazed bricks is attested in the reign of Sutruk- Nahhunte II. 

 A tablet unearthed in 1854 by Austen Henry Layard in Nineveh reveals Ashurbanipal as an "avenger", seeking retribution for the humiliations the Elamites had inflicted on the Mesopotamians over the centuries. Ashurbanipal dictates Assyrian retribution after his successful siege of Susa:


“    Susa, the great holy city, abode of their gods, seat of their mysteries, I conquered. I entered its palaces, I opened their treasuries where silver and gold, goods and wealth were amassed... I destroyed the ziggurat of Susa. I smashed its shining copper horns. I reduced the temples of Elam to naught; their gods and goddesses I scattered to the winds. The tombs of their ancient and recent kings I devastated, I exposed to the sun, and I carried away their bones toward the land of Ashur. I devastated the provinces of Elam and on their lands I sowed salt.

Although many gods were associated with the cult of the dead, three played a particularly important role: Inšušinak, the weigher of souls, and his two assistants, Išnikarab and Lagamal.

death seems to have been the principal preoccupation of the Elamites. Most religious buildings were connected with the cult of the dead, and the principal gods were closely associated with the passage of the dead into the next world. The association of the grove with the funerary cult is certain from Aššurbanipal’s narration of the sack of Susa:

(Aynard, 1957, pp. 56-57).


Their secret groves, where no foreigner had penetrated, where no foreigner had trampled the underbrush, my soldiers entered and saw their secrets; they destroyed them by fire. The tombs of their kings, ancient and recent … I have devastated, I destroyed them, I exposed them to the sun, and I carried off their bones to the country of Aššur


The Musée du Louvre

Department of Near Eastern Antiquities: Mesopotamia

A prism of the Assyrian king Ashurbanipal recounting his campaigns against Elam and the sacking of Susa


These holy gardens were also the location where the sacrificial feast was held. In Europe they were the Celts, Germans, and Saxons, also had holy groves where they performed their religious rituals. A stele of Šilḫak-Inšušinak mentions there were nineteen  Holy gardens across the entire Elamite empire.

The one represented on the Nineveh relief is surmounted by three figures in the posture of prayer, which recalls an epithet of Kiririša: “lady of life, who has authority over the grove, the gateway, and he who prays” 

Brick with an inscription by Šilḫak-Inšušinak dedicated to the goddess Kiririša “lady of life." (published in Grillot & Vallat 1984) 

Collection    National Museums Scotland, Edinburgh, Scotland, UK
Museum no.    NSM A.1960.228

Catalogue:    20140524 wagensonner

CDLI no.    P464356



I, Šilḫak-Inšušinak, son of Šutruk-Naḫḫunte, beloved servant of Kiririša and Inšušinak, king of Anzan and Susa: Ḫumban-Numena has built the temple of Kiririša-of-Liyan with fired bricks, and when it was about to collapse, I restored it. With fired brick(s) I rebuilt. And for the sake of my life and those of Naḫḫunte-Utu, Ḫuteluduš-Inšušinak, Šilḫina-ḫamru-Lakamar, Kutir-ḫuban, Išnikarab-ḫuḫun, Urutuk-el-ḫalaḫume and Utu-eḫiḫi-Pinigir, for this purpose and for our continuity I bestowed it upon my deity Kiririša.




National god of the Elamite Empire and consort of the mother goddess Pinikir.


Inchushinak goddess: This temple, which is presented to the Goddess of Inchushinak, has 5 rooms, all of which are in a row. At the entrance to the temple, there is a crescent hinged of clay and mortar. Below the entrance to the gate of the temple, known as the "Gate Gate", there are bricks and windows that are located on either side of the gate.

serpent deities
Ninaza, Ningizzida, Tišpak, Ištaran and Inšušinak. 




hoghaznbil was built in the early 13th century by the Elamite king "Ontas Nepiriha" near the river Dez, and was called "Dorovanes".

Choghazenbil Temple is the largest architectural work left over from the Elamite civilization ever known

The meaning of Darwin is Castle Ontash. Of course, in some of the texts, the cuneiform of this city, called "Al-Ontas", means the city of Ontash.

In the center of the city, a huge temple is built in a state of the art, which today has two floors.

This temple is called Dhiquarat, donated to two great Elamite gods, "Inchshinak" and "Nepiriha"


At first, Inshushinak was given the title of the father of the weak and the king of the gods, but in the 12th century BCE, he was named by the names of the great servant, the great city servant, the great temple's supporter, the patron and the nurse, and eventually in the 8th century BC The title of the protectors of the gods of heaven and earth is called. The same text that is seen on many of the bricks of Choghazanbil's writings is: "May God Almighty come near, wishing to forgive his gifts, He spoke his words." 

he Elamite (Elamite) was used by Elam people in the Elam kingdom (Between 3200 BC and 539 BC), , An agglutinative word whose language lineage is unknown. The Elam language, an isolated word, was written in three kinds of letters. The oldest one is Elam pictograms, it

assite kings often married off their daughters to the pharaoh in Egypt. In Chapter2 we saw that messengers mediated such a contract and that the girl could beanointed in Babylon as a token of her betrothal. In far-off Armenia a curious car-nelian cylinder seal was found in a grave.

We can implicitly conclude that Chedorlaomer the king of Elam was a Servant of the god Lagamar.

Abraham and Chedorlaomer: Chronological, Historical and Archaeological Evidence

last Elamite king of
the Awan I dynasty was Kudur-Lagamar (1990-1954). Ashurbanipal, after his conquest of Elam and
Susa ransacking, exposed (in 646 BCE) the capture of the goddess Nanaya (in Uruk) by Kudur-Lagamar
which occurred around 1300 years earlier (in 1968 BCE).


Chedoloamer. most likely resided in the Elamite Ziggurat complex Chogha Zanbil (Dur Untash) approximately 30 km (19 mi) south-east of Susa. Chogha Zanbil is one of the few existent Ziggurats outside Mesopotamia. A Ziggurat is the largest building in the center of town and part of a multi temple complex. The Chogha Zanbil Ziggurat originally measured 105.2 m on each side and about 53 m in height, in five levels, and was crowned with a temple

Chedorlaomer’s vassal cities—Sodom, Gomorrah, Admah, Zeboyim and Zoar—had become rebellious against him and it was time to exact vengeance.


Kiten (Akkadian kidinnu) denotes a protective shielding power that radiates from all dieties. With legal matters the kiten of the god In-shushinak united with the ruler judge violations of the law were committed. Any Elamite breaking an agreement would forfeit the protection of In-Shushinak will be outlawed and 'he shall pass by the graven image of the god and of the king' to be executed.

https://books.google.com/books?id=FF5-7JVj4jYC&lpg=PA276&ots=Gem9XdejaO&dq="kiten" (protection)&pg=PA275#v=onepage&q="kiten" (protection)&f=false


Now, what was Abraham doing hanging out near the oaks of Mamre near Jerusalem when news arrived that Lot was taken captive (v. 13)?  He was in the area because he was likely a nomadic vassal to Melchizedek, king of Jerusalem. 


http://geekychristian.com/biblical-insights-from-archaeology/Understanding of the Elamite religion requires isolation in the Susian documentation of elements that can be compared with what is otherwise known from the Persian plateau and adjacent areas.


.  Tidal is a Hittite name.   The original name Tudhaliya also appears in the Ugarit archives, and in Kimron’s opinion Tidal was the same as Tudhaliya II who conquered Syria.   Onkelos translated Goyim not as a specific city but as meaning various nations; Ibn Ezra wrote likewise in his second commentary.  In other words, Tidal ruled over several peoples.  Rabbi Hertz claims that Tidal is the same as Tadgula, king of the Kurdish tribes, and Goyim is Gutium in Kurdistan.  

The gateway may have symbolized the entrance of the dead person into the next world. The one represented on the Nineveh relief is surmounted by three figures in the posture of prayer, which recalls an epithet of Kiririša: “lady of life, who has authority over the grove, the gateway, and he who prays” (Grillot and Vallat, 1984, p. 22). The gods to whom these gateways were dedicated were those most closely associated with the netherworld: Inšušinak (König, nos. 35, 36, 40), Išnikarab (König, no. 37), Lagamal (König, no. 30), and Napiriša and Inšušinak together (König, no. 79). It was also at the gateway of Inšušinak that Puzur-Inšušinak ordered the sacrifice of a sheep accompanied by chants, morning and evening (Scheil, 1902, p. 5).

Some gods, particularly Inšušinak (whose name in Sumerian means “lord of Susa”), seem to have been specifically attached to Susa or Susiana; they include Išnikarab (Išmekarab, a god, not a goddess; W. G. Lambert, 1976-80), Lagamal (Lagamar; for variant signs, see Hinz and Koch), and Manzat (W. G. Lambert, 1989).




Around 1767 B.C.E, Siwe-Palar-Khuppak formed a coalition with Zimri-Lim of Mari and Hammurabi of Babylon. He led this coalition against Eshnunna, conquering it and imposed direct rule from his sukkal Kudu-zulush in Susa.[2] This coalition turned against him as he attempted to expand his power into Babylon. Hammurabi, allied with Zimri-Lim, expelled the Elamite's forces from Eshnunna[2]

In a clay tablet, Siwe-Palar-Khuppak refers to himself as "Governor of Elam" and "Enlarger of the Empire". It is speculated that the tablet was made after Siwe-Palar-Khuppak's defeat by Hammurabi's coalition, and that the title "Enlarger of the Empire" refers to conquests made to west in modern Iran to offset his defeat.[

Siwe-Palar-Khuppak - universally respected father of Elam

Traces have been found on the inscribed bricks in Chaldea of a king Kudur mapula, who bears also the title of “ravager of the West.” Even nearer to the name is that of Kedar-el-Ahmar, or the red, a great hero in Arabian tradition. He was king of Elam. He appears as a settled king of great power, able to make war 2000 miles from his country, and holding other kings, among whom is the king of Babylon, under his supremacy. 

Tidal king of Goiim Tidal has been considered to be a transliteration of Tudhaliya 

In the Book of Genesis it is recorded that King Hammurabi (Amraphel) joined coalition of kings from Mesopotamia invaded Canaan and, in the process, took Lot captive. Amraphel is aligned with King Arioch (Eri-Aku),  King Chedorlaomer (Kudur-laḫmal) and King Tidal (Tudhaliya ). Like allied coalitions (ie. Desert Storm) today, it was common practice for allied tribes and city states to accompany a powerful king during their conquests.  Below is an excerpt from King Zimri-Lim of Mari.

Formerly Keeper of Egyptian Antiquities, The British Museum



But Zimrilim's policy was to impose his tutelage on the petty monarchs of the 'High Country', or even simply to draw them into alliance with him, rather than to annex their countries—no doubt because he had not the resources to do so. This line of conduct was fairly general.We have only to listen to the report of one of Zimrilim's correspondents:

No king is powerful by himself: ten or fifteen kings follow Hammurabi, king of Babylon, as many follow Rim-Sin, king of Larsa, as many follow Ibalpiel, king of Eshnunna, as many follow Amutpiel, king of Qatna, twenty kings follow Iarimlim, king of Iamkhad. . .. Grouping their vassals about them, the' great powers' of the time entered in their turn into wider coalitions, aiming at supremacy, but these formed and broke up as circumstances and the interests of the moment dictated.

Zimri-Lim was allied with Hammurabi in his wars against Elam, Eshnunna, and Larsa. Zimri-Lim lent troops to Hammurabi's campaigns, and although the two kept extensive diplomatic contacts, there are no records that ever met in person.

After the defeat of Elam, there was no outside force to keep the precarious balance of power between the Kings of Mesopotamia. The alliance between Zimri-Lim and Hammurabi deteriorated after Babylon's conquest of Larsa.  In 1762 BC, Hammurabi unified Babylonia, he conquered and sacked Mari (though it may be that the city had surrendered without a fight), despite the previous alliance. 



The alliance of four states would have ruled over kingdoms that were spread over a wide area: from Elam at the extreme eastern end of the Fertile Crescent to Anatolia at the western edge of this region. Because of this, there is a limited range of time periods that match the Geopolitical context of Genesis 14. In this account, Chedorlaomer is described as the king to whom the cities of the plain pay tribute. Thus, Elam must be a dominant force in the region and the other three kings would therefore be vassals of Elam and/or trading partners.

some scholars have concluded that Abraham's family may have been Amorites, a Semitic tribe that began to migrate out of Mesopotamiaaround 2100 B.C. The Amorites' migration destabilized Ur, which scholars estimate collapsed around 1900 B.C.



 Zimri-Lim's court were the communications from the
gods. During his time. the variety of paths by which th e opinion of the gods was coaxed
multiplied dramalically, and some exceptionally creative methods were launched in

Zimri-Lim's own household. As a result of Charpin's insight, it became possible to imagine
that when kings were predisposed for it, gods readily dispensed advice in channels other
t han exti!\flicy. (Something similar occurred, for example, in the court of Esarhaddon and
Assurbanipal of Assyria and probably also in the court of Zakkur of Hamatll.) If so, then
prophecy need not origina le in a single area or period and need not follow a linear
development. hut it could burst spontaneously and periodically. whenever rulers had
doubts about the stability of their rule and whenever courtiers and administrators felt
encouraged to comment on them. Not linearity, but opportunity.
In a paper for the Birot memorial volume [FM 2], I explored the interplay between
a divine message and those who were asked to communicate it to Zimri-Lim: in the palace,
in the province, and beyond Mari's border. When they are transmitted from the palace,
mostly through his wife, his sister, and his aunt (perhaps his mother), there is a tendency
to also comment on them, frequently betraying a heightened sense of imminent danger
that must be deflected by the king. This sort of fervor seems to dissipate as we move to the
provinces, where bureaucrats dutifully (and mostly lackadaisically for that matter) transmitted
divine messages to t he king. 

Yet we have no reason to believe that Zimri-Lim, despite his drive to know the will
of god from as many sources as possible. ever felt obligated to follow the god's directives
as channeled by prophets, visionary and dreamers. In fact, there is no evidence t hat he
received their messages directly, but seemed content to ask people in diverse regional
centers to keep their ears open (A RM 26 196), or to dispatch a trusted llpilum to investigate
for him (via extispicy) oracles by Dagan of Terqa (ARM 26 199:8-9). But when
Zimri-Lim really needed to learn what god wanted of h im at any particular moment, he
turned to his resident-scholars, the b~rll-divin ers.76 And here is where I need to take a
Durand's pages in 26/1 on Mari divin ation are rich in documents as in comments.1l
When diviners inspected the innards of a sheep for signs, what they saw was no longer a
cluster of bloodied orgllns, but a tapestry of divine signs. Their perspective, therefore,
was closest to that of astrologers of later times who drew insights from the shifting
correspondences of heavenly orbs. 


There were periods when Elam was allied with Mari through trade.[16] Mari also had connections to Syria and Anatolia, who, in turn, had political, cultural, linguistic and military connections to Canaan.[17] The earliest recorded empire was that of Sargon, which lasted until his grandson, Naram Sin.[

we must keep in mind the possibility, that if the Babylonian king considered that disaster had in any way overtaken his arms, he may not have recorded it at all. Then there is the fact, that the expedition was undertaken in conjunction with allies—Chedorlaomer, Tidal, and Arioch—for none of whom, in all probability, Ḫammurabi had any sympathy. The Elamite was a conqueror from a land over which the Babylonians of earlier ages had held sway, and Arioch had dominion over a neighbouring tract, to which Ḫammurabi himself laid claim, and over which, as the texts above translated show, he afterwards ruled. Ḫammurabi, moreover, claimed also the West-land—mât Amurrī, the land of Amurrū—as his hereditary possession, and he found himself obliged to aid Chedorlaomer, Tidal, and Arioch to subjugate it—indeed, it was Chedorlaomer whom the five kings had acknowledged for twelve years as their overlord, and against whom, in the thirteenth, they rebelled. It is, therefore, likely that Ḫammurabi regarded himself as having been forced by circumstances to aid Chedorlaomer to reconquer what really belonged to Babylonia, and the probability that he would cause it to be used as one of the events to date by, is on that account still less, even if the news of any success which he might have considered himself entitled to reached his own domain in time to be utilized for such a purpose.

when two tablets were referred to at the Congress of Orientalists held at Geneva in 1894 as containing the names Tudḫula, Êri-Eaku (Êri-Ekua), and another name read doubtfully as Kudur-laḫ(gu)mal, no publicly-expressed objection to their possible identification with Tidal, Arioch, and Chedorlaomer [pg 223] was made. The names were placed before the Semitic section of the Congress of Orientalists referred to, as recent discoveries, which were certain as far as they went, their identification being a matter of opinion.

spelled Eri-e-a-ku in the Babylonian cuneiform script, stood for the original Sumerian ERI.AKU, meaning "Servant of the god Aku," Aku being a variant of the name of Nannar/Sin. It is known from a number of inscriptions that Elamite rulers of Larsa bore the name "Servant of Sin

There's only one Hamor mentioned in the Bible and he was a Hivite ruler (נשיא, nasi') and father of Shechem (in Acts 7:16 Stephen equates Hamor with Ephron). When Jacob returned from Paddan-aram and wanted to settle in Canaan, he bought land from Hamor and built the altar named El-Elohe-Israel (Genesis 33:19).

At some point, Jacob's only daughter Dinah, the sister of the twelve tribal patriarchs of Israel, went to the nearby town of Shechem to visit the Hivite women. She was noticed by prince Shechem, who fell in love with her and decided to express his feelings by raping her (34:2). Still, Hamor went to Jacob to ask for Dinah as a wife for Shechem, but Jacob's sons told Hamor that he and his people would have to be circumcised for their two families to intermarry.

I was curious about this expression, especially in light of the fact that it is in this city that we find the remains of the temple of Baal Berith (“Lord of Covenant”), the chief deity of Shechem during most of the Bronze Age. 

The name Hamor is the same as the noun חמור (hamor), meaning ass or donkey, or more literal: red-one, from the root חמר (hamar III), meaning to be red:

It appears to us here at Abarim Publications that to the Hebrews the color red denoted the rudiments or principal beginnings of civilization (and see our article on the Red Sea for a discussion on how the ancients saw the color red), whereas muddy substances metaphorized the transitional phase between ignorance (water) and understanding (dry land).

or a meaning of the name Hamor, both NOBSE Study Bible Name List and Jones' Dictionary of Old Testament Proper Names read Ass and BDB Theological Dictionary has He-Ass. Most literally, however, the name Hamor means Red One.

Note that the color red signified the first stage of human civilization, and is connected to both Israel's Hivite nemesis as to Israel's national brother Edom (from Esau, Jacob's brother).

Shechem /ˈʃɛkəm/, also spelled Sichem (/ˈsɪkəm/; Hebrew: שְׁכָם‬ / שְׁכֶם‬ Standard Šəḵem Tiberian Šeḵem, "shoulder"), was a Canaanite city mentioned in the Amarna letters, and is mentioned in the Hebrew Bible as an Israelite city of the tribe of Manasseh and the first capital of the Kingdom of Israel.[1] Traditionally associated with Nablus,[2] it is now identified with the nearby site of Tell Balata in Balata al-Balad in the West Bank.

Shechem first appears in the Hebrew Bible in Genesis 12:6-8, which says that Abraham reached the "great tree of Moreh" at Shechem and offered sacrifice nearby. Genesis, Deuteronomy, Joshua and Judges hallow Shechem over all other cities of the land of Israel.[6] According to Genesis (12:6-7) Abram "built an altar to the Lord who had appeared to him ... and had given that land to his descendants" at Shechem. The Bible states that on this occasion, God confirmed the covenant he had first made with Abraham in Harran, regarding the possession of the land of Canaan. In Jewish tradition, the old name was understood in terms of the Hebrew word shékém — "shoulder, saddle", corresponding to the mountainous configuration of the place.

On a later sojourn, two sons of Jacob, Simeon (Hebrew Bible) and Levi, avenged their sister Dinah's rape by "Shechem the son of Hamor the Hivite, the prince of the land" of Shechem. Shimon and Levi said to the Shechemites that, if “every male among you is circumcised, then we will give our daughters to you and take your daughters to ourselves.”[7] Once the Shechemites agree to the mass circumcision, however, Jacob's sons repay them by killing all of the city's male inhabitants.[8]

Following the settlement of the Israelites in Canaan after their Exodus from Egypt, according to the biblical narrative, Joshua assembled the Israelites at Shechem and asked them to choose between serving the god who had delivered them from Egypt, the gods which their ancestors had served on the other side of the Euphrates River, or the gods of the Amorites in whose land they now lived. The people chose to serve the god of the Bible, a decision which Joshua recorded in the Book of the Law of God, and he then erected a memorial stone "under the oak that was by the sanctuary of the Lord" in Shechem.[9] The oak is associated with the Oak of Moreh where Abram had set up camp during his travels in this area.[10]

Shechem and its surrounding lands were given as a Levitical city to the Kohathites.[11]

Owing to its central position, no less than to the presence in the neighborhood of places hallowed by the memory of Abraham (Genesis 12:6, 7; 34:5), Jacob's Well (Genesis 33:18-19; 34:2, etc.), and Joseph's tomb (Joshua 24:32), the city was destined to play an important part in the history of Israel.[citation needed] Jerubbaal (Gideon), whose home was at Ophrah, visited Shechem, and his concubine who lived there was mother of his son Abimelech (Judges 8:31). She came from one of the leading Shechemite families who were influential with the "Lords of Shechem" (Judges 9:1-3, wording of the New Revised Standard Version and New American Bible Revised Edition).[12]

A form of Ba'al-worship prevailing in Israel (Judges viii. 33), and particularly in Shechem (Judges ix. 4). The term "Ba'al" is shown by the equivalent "El-berith" (Judges ix. 46, R. V.) to mean "the God of the Covenant." In considering what the covenant (or covenants) was over which this Ba'al presided, it must not necessarily be concluded that certain definite treaties of the time were alone referred to, such as the Canaanitic league of which Shechem was the head, or the covenant between Israel and the people of Shechem (Gen. xxxiv.). The term is too abstract to have been occasioned by a single set of conditions. Moreover, the temple of the god (Judges ix. 4, 46) in Shechem implies a permanent establishment. Probably the name and the cult were wide-spread and ancient (see Baalim), though it happens to have been mentioned only in connection with the affairs of Shechem.

—In Rabbinical Literature:
The idol Baalberith, which the Jews worshiped after the death of Gideon, was identical, according to the Rabbis, with Baal-zebub, "the ba'al of flies," the god of Ekron (II Kings i. 2). He was worshiped in the shape of a fly; and so addicted were the Jews to his cult (thus runs the tradition) that they would carry an image of him in their pockets, producing it, and kissing it from time to time. Baal-zebub is called Baal-berith because such Jews might be said to make a covenant (Hebr. "Berit") of devotion with the idol, being unwilling to part with it for a single moment (Shab. 83b; comp. also Sanh. 63b). According to another conception, Baal-berith was an obscene article of idolatrous worship, possibly a simulacrum priapi (Yer. Shab. ix. 11d; 'Ab. Zarah iii. 43a). This is evidently based on the later significance of the word "berit," meaning circumcision.

“Those who were bound under the covenant having participated in this ritual became ‘sons of Hamor’ (‘sons of the ass’). The covenant of Hamor ‘was almost certainly related to Baal-Berith, who was the chief god of the city’…

 Toorn, K. Van Der, Bob Becking and Pieter Willem Van Der Horst. 1999. Dictionary of Deities and Demons in the Bible. Leiden; Boston; Grand Rapids: Brill ; Eerdmans. p.143


And given Shechem (שכם) means “shoulder”, the expression “Hamor, father of Shechem”(חמור אבי שכם), can also be read “Hammurabi’s shoulder” (חמוראבי שכם). This expression therefore suggests that Shechem was the ally of Babylon when it formed a covenant with king Hammurabi. In fact, standing “shoulder to shoulder” is something one does in times of a deadly threat and against an enemy. And I do explain in the book how Hammurabi was motivated to make a covenant with Abraham in order to secure control over the remote Valley of Siddim. Finally, the name Dinah (דינה) is the feminine of “din” (דין), which means “law” in reference to the Tanakh or Hebrew Bible, which includes the Torah (i.e. the original five books of the Old Testament).

Clearly, the Shechemites wanted to continue serving the family of “Hamor, Shechem’s father” or “Hammurabi’s shoulder” (חמוראבי שכם), which presumably could be referring to the legitimate descendants of Abraham, Hammurabi’s ally, and still referred to as the “father” of the faith to this day.



 Jacob's acquisition of land at Shechem (Gen. 33:19; cf. 48:22) and the connubium between the sons of Jacob and the sons of Hamor (as the Shechemites were then called) imply certain covenant agreements. Moreover, the strange name, "sons of Hamor" ( benei hamor, "sons of the ass"), who is said to be the "father of Shechem" (Gen. 34:6), seems to have something to do with covenant making. From the *Tell-el-Amarna Letters (c. 1400 B.C.E.) it is known that there was a strong Hurrian element in Shechem. The Septuagint is therefore probably correct in reading hhry ("the Horite," i.e., the Hurrian) instead of hhwy ("the Hivite") of the Masoretic Text in describing the ethnic origin of "Shechem" (Gen. 34:2); moreover, the uncircumcised Shechemites (Gen. 34:14, 24) were most likely not Semitic Canaanites (see E. A. Speiser, op. cit., 267). It is also known that the slaughtering of an ass played a role among the Hurrians in the making of a covenant. Thus, Baal-Berith or El-Berith may have been regarded by the Shechemites as the divine protector of covenants.

Did the early Israelites perhaps regard El-Berith as the God of the covenant made between YHWH and Israel? It is a noteworthy fact that Joshua, who had apparently been able to occupy the region of Shechem without force because Israelites who - many scholars believe - had never been in Egypt were already iiving there, renewed the Covenant of Sinai with all Israel precisely at Shcchem, the city sacred to El-Berith, " the God of the Covenant" (Josh. 8:30-35; 24:1-28). Therefore, even though the late Deuteronomist editor of the Book of Judges (it is conjectured by the adherents of the documentary hypothesis) considered Baal-Berith one of the pagan Canaanite Ba'alim, this term may well have been regarded in early Israel as one of the titles of YHWH.

 Other terms such as "killing an ass" sheds light on customs which prevailed in patriarchal times and later. The idiom "to kill an ass," khayaram qatalum, is not Akkadian at all, but both words occur in Hebrew and indicated the sacrifice which accompanied the oath of alliance. The connection between sacrificing as ass and concluding a covenant seems to have been preserved by the Shechemites, with whom Jacob and his sons had such unpleasant dealings (Gen. 33:19; 34:1-31). Called the Bene Hamor, "sons of the ass" (Josh. 24:32), their tribal deity was Baal-Berith, "Lord of the covenant" (Judg. 9:4). Later, at the time of Conquest the Bene Hamor of Shechem were, it seems, like the four towns of the Gibeonite confederacy (Josh 9:1ff.), added to Israel by treaty, to judge from various early references to them and their god Baal-Berith."


Joseph Vicek Kozar, who reads the narrative as supporting the brothers’ actions,
suggests that the significance of interethnic relations is substantiated by symbolic imagery
within the story. He points out that the homonym of Hamor’s name (rwmx) is donkey, an
animal that “lives among the herd but is not one of them, lacking cloven hooves and not
chewing the cud.”
486 This, coupled with the fact that “[a]t the time of Dinah’s rape, her
brothers are out with the cattle (34:5),”
487 illumines the resultant confrontation:
“The…clash of cultures (and slaughter) shows that the sons of herds and flocks cannot
conduct social intercourse with the sons of the ass. This symbolism underlies the group or
tribal nature of the events behind the story.”
488 Like Sternberg, Kozar also retrojects later
narrative concerns of Israelite interethnic relations onto the clash between the ancestral
family and the Hivites. He concludes that Dinah symbolizes Israel and Shechem
represents the larger Canaanite culture, and that the story illustrates the danger of Israel’s 

“being absorbed by the larger Canaanite culture.”
489 Douglas Earl echoes this symbolic
thinking in his own analysis, according to which “Dinah symbolizes Israel and Shechem
the nations.”
490 The narrative, Earl suggests, “serves to evoke affectually the disastrous
consequences of exogamy and mingling, and the zeal with which exogamy is to be

Shechem’s act is evaluated as disgraceful and
unacceptable. This transfer is presented as a pretext for the text to come.”
492 The
narrator’s repeated use of )m+, furthermore, invokes a “cultic and ritual cognitive
493 (again an Israelite domain) that suggests that Shechem and the Hivites threaten
the ancestral family with their outsiders’ impurity. Finally, the continuation of the
narrative in Gen 35, in which Jacob commands his household to rid itself of its foreign
gods, strengthens the negative socioreligious associations of Shechem. Where Jacob goes
next, Bethel, stands in stark contrast: “Bethel, the place where Jacob met his God,
represents the ideal of one place, one people and one God. It is opposed to the other place,

Shechem, with alien people and alien gods, who have to be buried.”
494 Thus the Dinah
interlude is the “hinge” of the ideological reversal from the preceding narrative’s “context
of peace and mutual understanding with the Canaanites” to “a mono-ethnic position
embedded in a mono-religious position.”
495 Indeed, as van Wolde notes, in Gen 35 the
ancestral blessing undergoes a notable revision, as “the blessing of other people is not
mentioned any more,” implying that the ancestral family is now the exclusive inheritor of
the land


(Baʹal-beʹrith) [Owner of a Covenant; once, at Jg 9:46, El-berith, God of a Covenant].

The Baal of Shechem, whom the Israelites began worshiping after the death of Judge Gideon. (Jg 8:33) The designation “Baal-berith” may denote that this particular Baal was believed to watch the keeping of covenants.

A kind of treasury was evidently attached to the house or temple of Baal-berith at Shechem. (Jg 9:4) In connection with the grape harvest, the Shechemites apparently held a festival in honor of Baal-berith, climaxed by a kind of sacrificial meal in the temple of their god. It was in the temple of Baal-berith on the occasion of their eating and drinking and cursing Abimelech, likely under the influence of wine, that Gaal incited the Shechemites to revolt against King Abimelech. (Jg 9:27-29) Later, when threatened by Abimelech, the landowners of the tower of Shechem (Migdal-Shechem, AT) sought refuge in the vault of the house of El-berith (Baal-berith), only to perish in the conflagration when Abimelech and his men set the vault on fire.—Jg 9:46-49.



Solomon understood that being submissive to the Creator and generous to other will be blessed with long life. 

Mishlei - Proverbs - Chapter 22



1 A name is chosen above great wealth; good favor over silver and gold.

2 A rich man and a poor man were visited upon; the Lord is the Maker of them all.

3 A cunning man saw harm and hid, but fools transgressed and were punished.

4 In the wake of humility comes fear of the Lord, riches, honor, and life.

5 Troops [and] snares are in the way of the perverse; he who preserves his soul will distance himself from them.

6 Train a child according to his way; even when he grows old, he will not turn away from it.

7 A rich man will rule over the poor, and a borrower is a slave to a lender.

8 He who sows injustice will reap violence, and the rod of his wrath will fail.

9 He who has a generous eye will be blessed, for he gave of his bread to the poor.

10 Banish a scorner, and quarrel will depart, and litigation and disgrace will cease.

11 He who loves one pure of heart with charm on his lips-the King is his friend.

12 The eyes of the Lord preserve knowledge and He will frustrate the words of a treacherous man.

13 The lazy man says, "There is a lion outside; I will be murdered in the middle of the streets."

14 The mouth of strange women is [like] a deep pit; the one abhorred by the Lord will fall therein.

15 Foolishness is bound in a child's heart; the rod of discipline will drive it far from him.

16 He who exploits a poor man to increase for himself will give to a rich man only to want.

17 Incline your ear and hearken to the words of the wise, and put your heart to my knowledge,

18 for it is pleasant that you guard them in your innards; they will be established together on your lips.

19 That your trust shall be in the Lord, I have made known to you this day, even you.

20 Have I not written to you thirds with counsels and knowledge,

21 to make known to you the certainty of the true words, to respond with words of truth to those who send you?

22 Do not rob a poor man because he is poor, and do not crush the poor man in the gate.

23 For the Lord will plead their cause and rob those who rob them, of life.

24 Do not befriend a quick-tempered person, neither shall you go with a wrathful man;

25 lest you learn his ways and take a snare for your soul.

26 Do not be one of those who give their hands, who stand surety for debts.

27 If you do not have what to pay, why should he take your bed from under you?

28 Do not remove an ancient boundary that your forefathers set.

29 Have you seen a man quick in his work? He will stand before kings; he will not stand before poor men.

Hammurabi ruled as king of Babylonia

Marduk's original character is obscure but he was later associated with water, vegetation, judgment, and magic   - Religions of The Ancient Near East

Sīn /ˈsiːn/ or Suen (Akkadian: ?? Su'en, Sîn) or Nanna (Sumerian: ??? DŠEŠ.KI, DNANNA) was the god of the moon in the Mesopotamian religions of Akkad, Assyria and Babylonia.  - He is commonly designated as En-zu, which means "lord of wisdom". Sīn was also called "He whose heart can not be read" and was told that "he could see farther than all the gods". It is said that every new moon, the gods gather together from him to make predictions about the future. - Nana - Babylonian Moon God.


Utu[a] later worshipped by East Semitic peoples as Shamash, was the ancient Mesopotamian god of the sun, 

. Anu was believed to be the supreme source of all authority, for the other gods and for all mortal rulers,

The local god was Zamama, the Tammuz-like deity, who, like Nin-Girsu of Lagash, was subsequently identified with Merodach of Babylon.

Ninazu in Sumerian mythology was a god of the underworld, and of healing.


the divine king of the city; the
White, Wise; who broadened the fields of Dilbat, who heaped
up the harvests for Urash; the Mighty, the lord to whom come
scepter and crown, with which he clothes himself; the Elect of
Ma-ma; who fixed the temple bounds of Kesh, who made rich
the holy feasts of Nin-tu; the provident, solicitous, who provided
food and drink for Lagash and Girsu, who provided large sacrificial
offerings for the temple of Ningirsu; who captured the enemy,
the Elect of the oracle who fulfilled the prediction of Hallab, who
rejoiced the heart of Anunit; the pure prince, whose prayer is accepted
by Adad; who satisfied the heart of Adad, the warrior, in
Karkar, who restored the vessels for worship in E-ud-gal-gal; the
king who granted life to the city of Adab; the guide of E-mach;
the princely king of the city, the irresistible warrior, who granted
life to the inhabitants of Mashkanshabri, and brought abundance
to the temple of Shidlam; the White, Potent, who penetrated the
secret cave of the bandits, saved the inhabitants of Malka from
misfortune, and fixed their home fast in wealth; who established
pure sacrificial gifts for Ea and Dam-gal-nun-na, who made his
kingdom everlastingly great; the princely king of the city, who
subjected the districts on the Ud-kib-nun-na Canal to the sway
of Dagon, his Creator; who spared the inhabitants of Mera and
Tutul; the sublime prince, who makes the face of Ninni shine; who
presents holy meals to the divinity of Nin-a-zu, who cared for its
inhabitants in their need, provided a portion for them in Babylon
in peace; the shepherd of the oppressed and of the slaves; whose
deeds find favor before Anunit


By making
a persuasive art-historical case for beginning their study with our earliest
civilizations, they demonstrate the cross-cultural, cross-temporal
universality of some persistently compelling themes, such as the image of
the scales, a judicial motif attested in both ancient Mesopotamia and
ancient Egypt.2 Picked up as well in ancient Greece, the scales are hefted
aloft in the hands of embodied goddesses, who in the seventeenth century
C.E. acquired a blindfold, s

 Law Stele of Hammurabi, 

Literally thousands of clay tablets documenting legal transactions have
survived from ancient Mesopotamia. 

from around 1792 to around
1750 B.C.E. His reign is distinguished for political consolidation of
territories neighboring his city-state of Babylon, which he brought under
control through a combination of successful military engagements and the
calculated making and breaking of diplomatic treaties."

The "laws" that are probably the best known are those that seem to
offer strong parallels to the Biblical precepts of justice, and are held up as
exemplifying the principle of retributive justice, for example:
§ 196 If a freeman has blinded the eye of another freeman,
his eye shall be blinded.
§ 197 If he has broken the bone of another freeman, his bone
shall be broken.
§ 198 If he has blinded the eye of a dependent or broken the
bone of a dependent, he shall pay sixty shekels of silver.
§ 199 If he has blinded the eye of a slave of a freeman, or
broken the bone of a slave of freeman, he shall pay one-half his
value in silver.22
It is this section that generally receives the most attention from legal
and Biblical scholarship interested in ancient legal codes and covenants.23
Compare the Book of Exodus, 21:22: "If any harm follows, then you shall
give life for life, eye for eye, tooth for tooth, hand for hand, foot for foot,
burn for burn, wound for wound, stripe for stripe." 

C. The Relief Sculpture
The sculpted relief depicts Shamash, the Mesopotamian sun god, seated

facing left, and king Hammurabi, who, standing, faces right.26 Shamash is
identified as a divinity by the stylized horned crown he wears and as the
sun god by the wavy-line "rays" emanating from his shoulders and the
surface detail of his footstool evoking mountainous terrain-the eastern
and western locales of his rising and setting. As sun god, Shamash is the
Mesopotamian deity of light and illumination, and by logical extension,
the god of justice who illuminates the true situation. In addition to "rays,"
his frequent attribute is a saw, with which he opens the mountains at
daybreak and sunset and with which he separates truth from falsehood.
Here, instead, he extends or displays to Hammurabi the so-called "Rod
and Ring," which occupies the center of the visual field.
Opposite the god, Hammurabi is marked by his hea

In the voice of Hammurabi, the Epilogue summarizes Hammurabi's
purpose in erecting the monument:
In order that the mighty not wrong the weak, to provide just ways
for the orphan and the widow, I have inscribed my precious
pronouncements upon my stele and set [them] before my image,
the just king, in the city of Babylon . . .. By the order of [the god]
Marduk, my lord, may my engraved design not be confronted by
someone who would remove it. May my name always be
remembered faithfully in the Esagil temple which I love. 32

Let any man who has a lawsuit come before my image, the just
king, and have my words read out loud; let him hear my precious
words, let my monument reveal to him the case. Let him see his
judgment, let his heart become soothed [reciting the following
short prayer]:
"Hammurabi, lord, who is like a father and begetter to his people,
submitted himself to the command of (the god) Marduk, his lord,
and achieved victory everywhere. He gladdened the heart of
Marduk, his lord, and he secured the eternal well-being of the
people and provided just ways for the land. "3

In one Akkadian period cylinder seal, Shamash sits enthroned before a set of scales, tipping the balance of justice (presumably) in accordance with the petitions of his worshippers, who bring an animal offering before the god (Black 1992: 182-4)


 throne. Shamash and his wife, Aya, had two important children. Kittu represented justice, and Misharu was law. Every morning, the gates in the East open up, and Shamash appears. He travels across the sky, and enters the gate in the West. He travels through the Underworld at night in order to begin in the East the next day

 the god Misharu, whose name means "Justice".

Holland 2009, p. 115.

The Phoenician Sydyk was equated with Roman Jupiter, and hence it has been suggested that Sydyk was connected to the worship of the planet Jupiter as the manifestation of justice or righteousness.

the Babylonian Shamash has two sons called respectively Kettu (which, like Sedeq, means "righteousness") and Misharu ("rectitude"). These two deities are mentioned also in the Sanchoniatho fragments of Philo Byblios under the names of Sydyk and Misor, as culture-heroes who have discovered the use of salt. Phoenician inscriptions have Sedeqyathan, "Sedeq gave," as a personal name, as well as combinations of Sedeq with Ramman and Melek. Fr. Jeremias thinks that Sydyk and Misor were respectively the spring and autumn sun in sun-worship and the waxing and waning moon in moon worship.

 translated as truth, equity, justice

kittu as truth

Shamas often had a special saw

Shamash the judge of heaven and earth had 
a special saw, call the shasharu.

Mesopotamian Scales circa 2350

O Sun, when though goes to rest in mid-heaven
May the bars of bright heaven speak peace to thee,
May the gateway of of heaven approach thee
May Misharu, they loving herald, direct thy pathway

Of course Babylonian and Assyrian words may not always have the same content as our words "righteousness" and "truth," but the words kittu and misharu, which we render by "righteousness" and "truth", are derived from kanu, "to be firm," and eshem, "to be straight," respectively; and judging from what was considered "right" and "true," or kittu and misharu, there is no reason for that the standard was very hight

misharu, represented the law

May Misharu, thy well-beloved servant, guide aright thy progress, so that ebarra

The West Semitic name Ammi-Saduqa is translated into Akkadian as Kitum-kittum showing an equivalence of meaning between the West Semitic ṣ-d-q  and the Akkadian kittu. Kittu was similarly paired with the god Misharu whose name is a cognate of Misor, meaning "justice".

Shamash and the mother of Misharu (god of law and order) and Kittu (god of justice). 
Aa (A, Anunit, Aya) In Near Eastern mythology (Babylonian-Assyrian), consort of the sun god Shamash, sometimes called Makkatu (mistress; queen). Originally Aa may have been a local male sun god whose gender was changed when the worship of the major sun god, Shamash, took precedence, the minor god becoming the female consort of Shamash. Her attendants were Kittu (truth) and Misharu (righteousness).

Misharu, ---, God of law. Son of Aa.

instead he became the spokesman for the nation (kemit), heavily indebtedto fairness and truth (maat in Egypt, kittu and misharu in Mesopotamia)

Truth or Right was personified and deified as the god Kittu (‘Truth’, ‘Right’; from the Akkadian root kanu. Kittu was often invoked together with the god Misharu (‘Justice’). One or both of these deities was described as ‘seated before Shamash’, i.e. Shamash’s attendant, or as ‘the minister of (Shamash’s) right hand.’ Depictions of Shamash show him holding a ring of coiled rope and a rod, objects ascribed to surveyors and therefore, when linked to rulership, denoting the act of setting things right. The Akkadian words kittu and misharu, translated into English as “truth,” “equity,” or “justice,” describe the “straightening out” of a situation whose equilibrium, put out of balance, had become “crooked.” 2

Shamash is associated with two divinities personifying justice and equity, Kittu and Misharu, which are in fact two deified conceptions of "justice", the exact meaning of which is debated.

According to D. Charpin, Hammu-Rabi of Babylon , Paris, 2003, p. 206-207, kittum would be "justice as guardian of public order", and mišarum "justice as restoration of equity"

mi-ish-ri-c(!) ish-ru-16%-6-shd. Mi-ish-ri-e I take as a plural of misharu = mishru
(ef. cpiru, epru; gimiru, gimru; Delitesch, Gram., p. 105, $45), “righteousness" (hence not of meshril, "riches," H. B. W.,
p. F88a), and dumqi, on nceount of the pardlclism, in the sense 0

The Egyptian goddess of truth and justice was Maat, who represented “the order which rules
ANCIENT DEITIES 298 (Oxford Univ. Press 2001) (2000). The Sumerian god of truth was Kittu, but,
interestingly, his job title did not include justice; that job was his brother’s, Misharu. See James W.
Bell, Sumerian Gods, Demons & Immortals Whose Names Start with “K”,
http://www.jameswbell.com/geog0050knames.html (last visited March 29, 2007). Addanari is the
Hindu goddess of truth, nature, and religion. TURNER & COULTER, supra, at 14. Shiva, among her many
other jobs, is also associated with truth. Id. at 427.

They were believed to have two offspring: the goddess Kittu, whose name means “Truth”, and the god Misharu, whose name means “Justice”. Utu’s charioteer Bunene is sometimes described as his son. Bunene was worshipped independently from Utu as a god of justice in Sippar and Uruk during the Old Babylonian Period.

n the Hebrew Bible, and Kittu in the Babylonian pantheon, who is often invoked with
 768 Both of these Babylonian deities are described as being seated before Shamash or the minister of
Shamash’s right hand.769 M

Shamash and his wife Sherida (Aya for Akkadians and Babylonians) had two important sons. Kittu represented justice, and Misharu was the law. Its main sanctuary was in the city of Sippar. Every morning, the eastern doors opened, and Shamash appeared. He traveled around the sky, and entered the west gate

Shamu / Kittu, Truth revealed (Shamu), Truth understood (Kittu) 
Misharu, Justice at work in view of truth, 
Dayyanu, Judgment that discerns truth 

Truth or Right was personified and deified as the god
Kittu (‘Truth’, ‘Right’; from Akk root kânu, cf. Heb root KWN). Kittu was often
invoked together with the god Misharu (‘Justice’)… One or both of these deities

were described as ‘seated before Shamash’, i.e. Shamash’s attendant, or as ‘the
minister of (Shamash’s) right hand’. . . it appears that the deity known as Kittu in
Babylonia was known further to the West under the names Išar and Ṣidqu/
Zedek—all three names having essentially the same meaning but operative in
different linguistic communities… West Semitic personal names containing the
root SDQ are attested at m

Fortress Press, 1998] 66-67). Also, the Babylonian gods Kittu “Righteousness” and Misharu “Justice”
parallel to the West Semitic gods Sedheq and Misor

In this function Shamash is associated with gods personifying justice and equality, and Kittu Misharu, who actually deifies two notions of "justice", the exact meaning of which is discussed and Dayyanu god. The Great Hymn to Shamash already explicitly mentioned the role of the god of justice, the guardian of good decisions and honest behavior and punishments of unjust and dishonest behavior:

Great Hymn to Shamash, translation MJ Seux.






Share this post

Link to post
Share on other sites

 Rulers established their legacy not only by building great structures, they also passed on Wisdom Sebayt  (Teaching, Didache) to their offspring and future leaders on the concepts divinity and virtue.  The Maxims of Ptahhotep or Instruction of Ptahhotep (2500 - 2400 BC) is considered the oldest collection of wisdom literature in the world written by composed by the Vizier Ptahhotep, during the rule of King Izezi of the Fifth Dynasty.  James Henry Breasted credited Amenemope with having a profound influence on Western ethical and religious development due to his Instruction being read by the Hebrews and portions of it being included, sometimes verbatim, in various books of the Bible
Ptahhotep considered the heart (ka) the way to measure life, prosperity and health.  Those with the strongest heart are those that listen, understand and follow the laws given to keep order (Ma'at) in ones life.  The one who listens to to those that do not follow law and order other, but looks for only pleasures to the body will grow a weak heart and only know death, punishment and appear foolish to others. 
Sabayt Ptahhotep


8 (column 6, lines 3-6)
The one who overlooks laws is punished;
that is what is overlooked in the sight of the greedy.
It is the small-minded that seize riches,
but crime never managed to land its rewards.
Whoever says 'I snare for myself'
does not say 'I snare for my needs'.
The final part of what is right is its endurance;
of which a man says 'that is my father'
14 (column 7, lines 9-10)
Follow your heart as long as you live.
Do not make a loss on what is said,
do not subtract time from following the heart.
Harming its time is an offence to the ka.
Do not deflect the moment of every day
beyond establishing your heart.
As things happen, follow (your) heart.
There is no profit in things if it is stifled.
17 (column 8, lines 6-11)
The great of heart is the gift of god,
the one who obeys his body belongs to the enemy.
22 (column 9, line 13 to column 10, line 5)
If you wish your conduct to be good
and to save yourself from all evil,
resist the opportunity of greed.
It is a sore disease of the worm,
no advance can come of it.
It embroils fathers and mothers,
with mother's brothers.
It entangles the wife and the man,
it is a levy of all evils,
a bundle of all hatefulness.
The man endures whose guideline is Right,
who proceeds according to his paces.
He can draw up a will by it.
There is no tomb for the greedy hearted.
25 (column 11, lines 1-4)
The spirit of the correct man is the spirit that brings happiness.
28 (column 11, line 12 to column 12, line 6)
Do not have your heart too high, or it will be brought down.
42 (column 16, lines 3-13)

The hearer is one whom God loves.
The one whom God hates does not hear.
The heart is the creator of its master.
Do not hear from the one who does not hear.

A man's heart is his life, prosperity and health.
2 (column 5, lines 4-6)
Then the Power of this god said:
Teach him then the speech from the past
that he may provide the example for the children of the great.
May hearing enter into him, the measure of every heart.
Speak to him. For none can be born wise
44 (column 17, lines 4-9)

As for the fool unable to hear,
nothing can ever be done for him.
He sees wisdom as ignorance,
and what is good as what is painful.
He commits every error,
to be accused of it each day.
He lives on what one dies of,
corrupt speech is his food.
His character in this is well-known to the officials,
saying 'living death' each day.
His faults are passed over
from the sheer number of faults on him each day.

The Sebayt of Amenemope (Didache of Amenomope or Teaching of Amenemope) is pharonic wisdom literature thought to have been written by the Egyptian Pharoah Usermaatre Amenemope of the 21st Dynasty. This coincided during the time when the tribes of Israel first became a unified nation.  In the prologue that Amenomope considered it extremely important for a ruler to know how to properly respond to his subjects and foreigners and follow the path of prosperity in life. 

Sabayt Amenemope



Beginning of the teaching for life,

The instructions for well-being,

Every rule for relations with elders,

For conduct toward magistrates;

Knowing how to answer one who speaks,

To reply to one who sends a message,

So as to direct him on the paths of life,

To make him prosper upon the earth;

To let his heart enter its shrine,

Steering clear of evil;

To save him from the mouth of strangers,

To let (him) be praised in the mouth of people.

It important that one seeking Sabayt pay strict attention to what is stated and learn how to control your tongue.

Teaching of Amenemope

Chapter I - The Sabayt


He says
... Give your ears, hear the sayings,

Give your heart to understand them; 

It profits to put them in your heart,

Woe to him who neglects them!

Let them rest in the casket of your belly,

May they be bolted in your heart;

When there rises a whirlwind of words,

They be a mooring post for your tongue.

If you make your life with these in your heart,

You will find it a success;

You will find my words a storehouse for life,

Your being will prosper upon earth 

Give your ears and hear what is said,

 Give your mind over to their interpretation:

The Chokhmah  (Chinukh, Didache, Teaching) Meshlei (Proverbs)  is Israelite wisdom literature thought to been written by King Solomon during his reign from 970 to 931 BCE. Solomon stressed wisdom begins with fearing our Creator. And understanding the teachings of the holy people brings insight on how to discern and respond to events around you. The knowledge you recieve it.

Mishlei - Proverbs - Chapter 9


10 The beginning of wisdom is the fear of the Lord, and the knowledge of the holy ones is understanding.

11 For with me shall your days increase, and they will add to you years of life.

12 If you have become wise, you have become wise for yourself, and if you scorn, you will bear it alone.

Similar to Amenemope,  Solomon taught that a ruler should be on guard against seductive words of flattery that can influence unwanted actions.

Mishlei - Proverbs - Chapter 5


1 My son, hearken to my wisdom; incline your ear to my understanding,

2 to watch [your] thoughts, and your lips shall guard knowledge.

3 For the lips of a strange woman drip honey, and her palate is smoother than oil.

4 But her end is as bitter as wormwood, as sharp as a two-edged sword.

.5 Her feet descend to death; her steps come near the grave.

6 Lest you weigh the path of life, her paths have wandered off and you shall not know.

Solomon's father David taught that our Creator is the Shepherd of Creation like he was as a boy. It is our Creator's wisdom, not human that lead to a path of righteousness during our lives. If we stay on the Creator's path no evil shall fall upon us. 

Tehillim - Psalms - Chapter 23



1 A song of David. The Lord is my shepherd; I shall not want.

2 He causes me to lie down in green pastures; He leads me beside still waters.

3 He restores my soul; He leads me in paths of righteousness for His name's sake.

4 Even when I walk in the valley of darkness, I will fear no evil for You are with me; Your rod and Your staff-they comfort me.

5 You set a table before me in the presence of my adversaries; You anointed my head with oil; my cup overflows.

6 May only goodness and kindness pursue me all the days of my life, and I will dwell in the house of the Lord for length of days.



In ancient Egyptian beliefs, serpents were considered both protectors and enemies of the people. The cobra is most often represented as the Uraeus, the fiercely protective serpent seen guarding the foreheads of Deities, kings, and queens. East of Alexandria,  in the city of Dep the Uraeus was known as Wadjet, the serpent goddess often depicted as a cobra. The Ancient Egyptian word Wadj signifies blue and green. Wadjet is also the name for the well-known Eye of the Moon.  Indeed, in later times, she was often depicted simply as a woman with a cobra's head, or as a woman wearing the Uraeus. The Uraeus originally had been her body alone, which wrapped around or was coiled upon the head of the pharaoh or another deity. She became the patroness of the Nile Delta and the protector of all of Lower Egypt. The Uraeus was the protector of the pharaoh and was believed to spit fire at enemies from its place on the forehead.

Wadjet had a twin sister known as Nekhbet, who was the patron of the city of Nekheb (her name meaning of Nekheb) and later became the patron of Upper Egypt. She takes the form of woman with the head of a vulture, a woman with a vulture headdress or simply just white vulture symbolizing purity.


Together, they represented the Uraeus – the two ladies (nebty) protecting the pharaoh and all of Egypt. When Egypt became one, these goddesses were believed to be present during the crowning of a pharaoh and their symbols were found the front of the crown itself. In this light, her role as a protector extended to common people as well.

and one of the two patron deities for all of Ancient Egypt when it was unified.

Apophis (Apep) was the ancient Egyptian deity who embodied chaos (ı͗zft in Egyptian) and was thus the opponent of light and Ma'at (order/truth). He appears in art as a giant serpent. 

Teaching of Amenemope

Chapter 8 : speak no evil


Set your deeds throughout the world

That everyone may greet you;

They make rejoicing for the Uraeus,

And spit against the Apophis.

Keep your tongue safe from words of detraction,

And you will be the loved one of the people,

Then you will find your (proper) place within the temple

And your offerings among the bread deliveries of your lord;

You will be revered, when you are concealed in your grave,

And be safe from the might of God.

Do not accuse a man,

When the circumstance of (his) escape is unknown.

Whether you hear something good or bad,

Put it outside, until he has been heard;

Set a good report on your tongue,

While the bad thing is concealed inside you.

The Literature Of Ancient Egypt

The Story of Sinuhe


The crown of Upper Egypt will go northward, and the crown of Lower Egypt will go southward that they may unite and come together at the word of Your Majesty, and the cobra goddess Wadjet will be placed on your forehead. As you have kept your subjects from evil, so may Re, Lord of the Two Lands, be compassionate toward you. Hail to you. And also to the Lady of All. Lay to rest your javelin, set aside your arrow. Give breath to the breathless. Give us this happy reward, this bedouin chief Simehyet, the bowman born in Egypt.

Khnum was originally a water god who was thought to rule over all water, including the rivers and lakes of the underworld. He was associated with the source of the Nile, and ensured that the inundation deposited enough precious black silt onto the river banks to make them fertile. Khnum was similar to the the Creator's Holy Spirit as the Lord of Life of the body and the "ka" (spirit) of each newborn child.

(52) his emotions & passions are constantly in a state of arousal ;

Chapter 9 : avoid the heated 


08  and take care not to {vex}. 

09  Swift is speech when the heart is hurt,

10  more than wind {over} water.

23  If only Khnum came to him !

25  so as to knead his {states of mind}. 50

28  he causes brothers to quarrel,  

32  {he gathers himself together, crouched.}

34  A fire burns in his belly.




Do not fraternize with the hot-tempered man,

Nor approach him to converse.

Safeguard your tongue from talking back to your superior,

And take care not to offend him.

Do not allow him to cast words only to entrap you,

And be not too free in your replies;

With a man of your own station discuss the reply;

And take care of speaking thoughtlessly;

When a man’s heart is upset, words travel faster

Than wind over water.

He is ruined and created by his tongue,

When he speaks slander;

He makes an answer deserving of a beating,

For his freight is damaged.

He sails among all the world,

But his cargo is false words;

He acts the ferryman in twisting words:

He goes forth and comes back arguing.

But whether he eats or whether he drinks inside,

His accusation (waits for him) outside.

The day when his evil deed is brought to court

Is a disaster for his children.

Even Khnum will straightway come against him, even Khnum will

straightway come against him,

The potter of the ill-tempered man,

For he sets families to argue.

He goes before all the winds like clouds,

He changes his hue in the sun;

He crocks his tail like a baby crocodile,

He curls himself up to inflict harm,

His lips are sweet, but his tongue is bitter,

And fire burns inside him.

Do not fly up to join that man

Not fearing you will be brought to account.


Chapter 10 : say what You think without injuring




Do not address an intemperate man in your (unrighteousness)
Nor destroy your own mind;
Do not say to him, ‘‘May you be praised,’’ not meaning it
When there is fear within you

Do not converse falsely with a man,
For it is the abomination of God.
Do not separate your mind from your tongue,
All your plans will succeed.
You will be important before others,
While you will be secure in the hand of God.
God hates one who falsifies words,
His great abomination is duplicity


Chapter 11 : abuse no poor


06  his heart is misled by his belly.60

16  when the stick attains him.

Chapter 17 : do not corrupt the measure


04  nor let its belly be empty.76

09  The bushel is the Eye of Re,77

10  it abhors him who trims. 

Chapter 21 : be reticent


01  Do not say : 'Find me a strong superior, 

05  Indeed You do not know the plans of god,92

07  Settle in the arms of the god,93

11  Do not empty your belly 94 to everyone,

14  nor join with one who bares his heart.95

15  Better is one whose speech is in his belly,96

18  one does not create (it) to harm it.

Like the Egyptian concept of Ma'at (Order) and Apepi (Disorder),  In the Talmud (Tractate Berakoth Folio 5a) Jews believe that the soul of person has both a good spirit (Yezter hatov, impulse, inclination, instinct, genii) and a evil spirit (Yezter hara, impulse, inclination instinct, genii) battling for control.The problem, however, arises when one makes a willful choice to "cross over the line," and seeks to gratify the evil spirits.  Rabbi Levi explains the meaning to King David's wisdom on how to maintain Selah (balance, Ma'at) in one's life by praying to the Creator for help to transform our Yezter hara into a good force in our life.

Tractate Berakoth Folio 5a


R. Levi b. Hama says in the name of R. Simeon b. Lakish:
A man should always incite the good impulse in his soul to fight against the evil impulse. For it is written: Tremble and sin not.  If he subdues it, well and good. If not, let him study the Torah. For it is written: 'Commune with your own heart'.  If he subdues it, well and good. If not, let him recite the Shema'. For it is written:
'Upon your bed'. If he subdues it, well and good. If not, let him remind himself of the day of death. For it is written:
[ Tehillim - Psalms 5: 1 To the conductor with melodies, a song of David. 2 When I call, answer me, O God of my righteousness; in my distress You have relieved me, be gracious to me and hearken to my prayer. 3 Sons of man, how long will my honor be disgraced? [How long] will you love futility? [How long] will you constantly seek lies? 4 You shall know that the Lord has set apart the pious man for Himself; the Lord shall hear when I call out to Him. 5 Quake and do not sin; say [this] in your heart on your bed and be forever silent. 6 Offer up sacrifices of righteousness and trust in the Lord. 7 Many say, "Who will show us goodness?" Raise up over us the light of Your countenance, O Lord. 8. You gave joy into my heart from the time that their corn and their wine increased. 9 In peace together, I would lie down and sleep, for You, O Lord, would make me dwell alone in safety.]
'And be still, Selah'.



(especially the sentence literature of chs. 10ff. ) shows "a general parallelism of
thought" with Egyptian and Babylonian Instruction. 

Sebayt (Manuel de Codage transcription: sbA.yt)[1] is the ancient Egyptian term for a genre of pharaonic literature. The word literally means 'teachings' or 'instructions'[2] and refers to formally written ethical teachings focused on the "way of living truly".

he book of Proverbs was principally written by King Solomon, David’s son, around 900 BC. 

 Wisdom literature is
one of the most important classes of texts from the ancient
civilizations of Egypt and Mesopotamia and sufficient
examples survive to illustrate both the different national or
cultural preferences and, at the same time, the underlying
similarity of thought and expression

says, "that Proverbs 22:17-23:11 is largely dependent on the
Teaching of Amenemope is now generally accepted".27

 Erman demonstrated that the Teaching of
Amenemope was closely parallel with the portion of Proverb
sometimes subtitled "Words of the Wise" (22:17-24:22)

the belly is the home of our passions, emotions, feelings and states of arousal & rest - our sage promotes tranquility ;

He has mastered the "inner" conflict between his passions and his mind, namely between the icons of emotions and the symbols of proto-rational cognition, between "belly" and "heart".
 Egyptian Instructions (both pre-Demotic
and Demotic) present collections of maxims and teachings on moral living, these



Amun is first mentioned in the Pyramid Texts (c. 2400-2300) as a local god of Thebes along with his consort Amaunet.
Amun as "The Obscure One" left room for people to define him according to their own understanding of what they needed him to be. A god who represented darkness could not also represent light, nor a god of water stand for dryness, etc. A god who personified the mysterious hidden nature of existence, however, could lend himself to any aspect of that existence; and this is precisely what happened with Amun.  
During the Twelfth dynasty, the New Kingdom the god Amun rose to prominence. In the city of Thebes. Atum was fused with Ra into Amun-Ra. 
. In his role as Amun-Ra, the god combines his invisible aspect (symbolized by the wind which one cannot see but is aware of) and his visible aspect as the life-giving sun. In Amun, the most important aspects of both Ra and Atum were combined to establish an all-encompassing deity whose aspects were literally every facet of creation.
Ashmolean Museum, University of Oxford
This life-sized statue of a ram, the sacred animal of the god Amun, was one of a pair that flanked a threshold in Taharqa’s temple at Kawa c. 680 BC. The base is carved with a hieroglyphic inscription proclaiming the king to be the son of the god Amun. A small figure of Taharqa stands protected under the ram’s chin. 
Wonderful Ethiopians
of the Ancient Cushite Empire
Drusilla Dunjee Houston


Let us seek to trace who Amen-Ra was. He was originally the god of Ethiopia. Amen-Ra was Cush, the son of Ham from whom the Cushites sprang. He was not one of the oldest deities of Egypt because he was preceeded by the gods of the ages of Noah (Saturn) and Ham. About the time of the rise of Thebes his name from his worldwide conquests must have been entered into the cycle of gods; for Africans deified their dead kings. Undoubtedly descendants of the great Cush sat upon the throne of Egypt This is why his name and form appear in the 11th Dynasty and its line of kings assumed his name.

His became the predominent shrine of Egypt and its enrichment became the chief object of the Pharaohs. Amen or Cush was recognized by Egypt as its chief god. All the mummery of the world which tries to resolve the gods of old into anything else presents the height of folly. The ancients looked upon Zeus, Apollo and Osiris as persons. Amen-Ra was the Zeus of Greece, that was why they said the gods banqueted with the Ethiopians. He was the Jupiter of Rome. Zeus was king of kings because he was chief ruler in Ethiopia and over the lesser kings in his wide domains stretching from India to farther Norway. Horus, Apollo, Belus and Nimrod his son, were recognized and worshipped by all Cushite colonies. In the sculptures the Negro types of Africa are the assistants at the festivals in Amen's honor. He, himself, was of the same ancestry. In the later chapters of the Egyptian ritual his name is in the language of the Negroes of Punt.


Relief depicting the ram-headed Amun-ra on a shrine erected by Kushite King Taharqa in the court of the Temple of Amun built by him at Kawa in Nubia. Late Period, 25th Dynasty, 690-64 BC.


Diodorus is an invaluable source on
the history of Egypt and Ethiopia. What does he say about the Ethiopians?
“Now the Ethiopians, as historians relate, were the fi rst of all men and proofs
of the statement are manifest. For they did not come into their country as
immigrants from abroad but were the natives of it and so justly bear the name
of Autochone...Th ey that dwell beneath the noonday sun were in all likelihood
the fi rst to be generated by the earth... it is reasonable to suppose that the region
which was nearest was the fi rst to bring forth living creatures. And they say that
they were taught to honor the gods and to hold sacrifi ces and processions and
festivals and other rites by which man honors the deity: and that in consequences
their piety was published abroad among all men... they state by reason of their
piety towards the deity they manifestly enjoy the favor of the gods, inasmuch as
they have never experienced rule of an invader from; for from all time they have
enjoyed a state of freedom abroad and peace with the other and though many
powerful rulers have made war upon them, not one of them succeeded in this
Th e fi rst Ethiopians who were mentioned in the bible
were from the land of Kush (Cush), which according to the biblical tradition was a territory on
the Upper Nile, south of Egypt; it was also later known as Nubia. Kush is the name of the eldest
son of Noah and the territory inhabited by his descendants. Th e Kushites are the descendants
of Noah who produced the sons: Shem, Ham, and Japhet, each with their own language, clan,
and nation. According to Gen. 9:18, the three sons peopled the rest of the earth, which was
indicative of the unity of humanity in the ancient mind. Ham’s son, Cush, went to Ethiopia;
his son, Mizraim, went to Egypt; Canaan went to Canaan; Phut (Pwnt) went to Punt, which in
Egyptian records, the fabulous land on the East coast of Africa, source of myrrh (which included
present-day Somaliland, perhaps also Arabia. 
 e Nag Hammadi Library is a collection of religious texts written by early Christians, known
as Gnostics, who were excluded from the church as heretics. It is an invaluable source of Coptic
lore, buried since 400AD in Nag Hammadi near Luxor in Egypt and discovered in 1945. Th e 
Apocalypse of Adam (v.5), one of the Nag Hammadi tracts cast a new light in the treatment of
the fl ood biblical genealogy.
“And God will say to Noah- whom all generations will call DeucalonBehold
I have protected you in the ark. Th erefore I will give the earth to you
and your son.”
“Th en Noah will divide the whole earth among his sons Ham and Japhet and
Shem. He will then say to them, “My sons listen to my words. I have divided
the earth among you. But serve Him with all the days of your life. Let not your
seed depart from the face of the Almighty.”
“Th en others from the seed of Ham and Japhet will come
Four thousand men, and enter another land and sojourn with those who come
from the eternal knowledge. Th en the seed of Ham and Japhet will form twelve
kingdoms of another people.”3

Th e strength of the Ethiopians or Kushites was detested to such a great degree, the prophet
Isaiah, an agent of Yahweh (God), issued a proclamation to all:
Disaster! Land of the whirring locust
beyond the rivers of Cush,
who send ambassadors by sea,
in little reed- boats across the waters!
to a nation tall and bronzed,
a mighty and masterful nation.33
We are told in the Old Testament when the Queen of Sheba heard of the fame of
Solomon concerning the name of the lord; she came to him with questions. Kings 10:11
Th e queen, who was a virgin and pure, learning about the history of the world, heard of
Solomon’s wisdom and was curious to see what she had heard about, set on a long journey
from Axum to Jerusalem, in those days when land and sea were not controlled by easy
transportation. She proved his wisdom both material and spiritual.
4. And God gave her what she desired... and this gift was a conception of Menelik I, the
son of Solomon who is from the tribe of Judah, the descendant of Abraham, and this
Menelik was to rule after her, hence the motto “Th e conquering Lion of the Tribes of
Judah” which motto is the basis of the country’s faith and key to their ancestry. I Kings
5. We are told in the New Testament that our Lord ...has praised her journey she made to
hear the Wisdom of Solomon. Luke 11: 13.
The Temple of Wadi es-Sebua
“Es Sebua (“Th e Lions”) was the third temple built by Rameses II ninety- three moles from
Aswan. Part of the temple is cut from rock. Rameses II dedicated the temple to Re- Harakhte
and to Amun as he considered he was a god, by this time. He also worshiped in the temple. Th e
entrance to the temple was formed by an avenue of Sphinxes (from which es-Sebua derives its
name) that led up to the south pylon before which stood two colossal statues of Rameses II. At
the far end of the sanctuary and above the solar bark on which the beetle-headed Re-Harakhte,
the solar god is seated under a canopy while he is seated under a canopy while he is being adored
on the left by the king and on the right by three baboons. Below is a niche that still shows traces
of the three chiseled statues of the temples. Th ree principal gods are painted over the picture of
St. Peter.92
Queen Hatshepsut (1479-1457) also campaigned in Nubia. Th utmose III, her youthful coregent
and stepson supplanted her. Th e Queen ruled as a king with ceremonial beard and a fi rm
hand for twenty years. Th e temple built at Deir el Bahri was the outstanding monument of her
reign. Th e walls display her important trading expedition to Punt. However, it was Th utmose
III who extended the Egyptian frontier to the foot of the Holy Mountain at Gebel Barkal at the
Fourth Cataract in his 47th regal year. His victory stele at Napata marked his triumph and the
extent of the Egyptian frontier and in his temple of Amun-Re, he could boast of his satisfaction
in both Egypt and Asia.
Amenhotep IV (Akhnaten) (1352-1336) was a coregent with his father, Amenhotep the III,
during his later reign. Amenhotep changed his name during his reign to Akhnaten, signifying
his new devotion to the Sun god Aten, which was in confl ict with the Th eban god Amun, and
the priesthood. Th e center of government remained at Th ebes while Akhnaten moved to Amarna
with his beautiful wife Nefertari, and the adherents to the new religion that was a forerunner of
Monotheism. Akhnaten built a temple at Karnak in honor of Aten. Th e gains made abroad were
gradually diminished by lack of attention on the home front. Th e agreement of the factions of
Aten and Amun seem to have begun under Semenekhara (1335-1332), who was coregent with
Akhnaten for a short period. He was succeeded by Tutankhamon (1332-23) who was successful
in returning the splintered worship of Amun to Th ebes. Th e death of Tutankhamon while still
a youth made a place for an elderly noble named Ay (1323-1319) who legitimized his claim by
marrying the widow of the deceased
Alara’s prayer preserved in the Kawa VI relief refl ects his piety and his
belief in the providence of the God Amun:
O benefi cent god, swift, who calls upon him, look
Upon my sister for me, a women born with me in one womb.
Act for her (even) as you have acted for him [Alara] that acted
For you , as a wonder, unpremeditated, and not disregarded by refl ective people. For
you put a stop to him that plotted evil against me after you set me up as king
A stela from Kawa, now located in the Ny Carlsberg Glypotek in Copenhagen, shows Alara
making off erings to the god. Th e temple B at Kawa depicts the earliest post new Kingdom
temple and affi rms that Alara was the fi rst signifi cant restorer of the Nubian Amun cult. Th e
fi rst surviving sculptures of the dynasty are a series of ram sphinxes of heavy cut stone placed
by Kashta by its pylon when he enlarged the mud-brick temple of Alara (B800) at Jebel Barkal. 
Kashta’s legitimacy as king was established through the installation of Alara’s sister as princess
of Amun, which created the justifi cation for royal succession and facilitated the shared concepts
of traditional Kushite practice with Egyptian concepts of kingship. 
Kashta was married to his sister Pebtatma indicated by her Abydos stela. Her roles are also
given as Sistrum-player of Amen Re, King of the Gods, King’s sister, king’s daughter, mother of
the Divine Adoratrice (Amenerdis I). Kashta was affi rmed king by the priests of Amun when he
arrived in Th ebes. Adams posits that there was no suggestion of military activity connected with
this visit.
Pianhki (Piye) : conqueror and deliverer
It was Pianhki, the son of Kashta, who completed the submission of Egypt. Th e Sandstone
Stela of Piye (747 B.C.) records that Pianhki was appointed by Amun as lord of the Th rones of
the Two Lands. Pianhki’s mother was Pebatma; sister was “Sistrum-player of Amun Re, King
of the Gods and Mother of the Divine Adoratrice (Amenerdis I). Pianhki married Tabiry, sister
of Kashta. Pianhki’s daughter was Shepenwepet II whom he installed when he became king, as
God’ Wife of Amun Elect. His other daughters were Tabekenamun, Naparaye and Arty. His
brother, Prince Pakartror, was buried at Abydos with the Kushite Royal wives of Kashta and
Pianhki. Pianhki also had three sons: Khaluit, Taharqa and Piye-Har.
Pianhki’s genius as titular King of Egypt, liturgical wizard in the synthesis of Egyptian
and Kushite concepts of order as priest, and military might as general is captured in his Great
Triumphal Stela from the Gebel Barkal Temple of Amun in the year 727 B.C. which is now in
Pianhki (Piye) : conqueror and deliverer
It was Pianhki, the son of Kashta, who completed the submission of Egypt. Th e Sandstone
Stela of Piye (747 B.C.) records that Pianhki was appointed by Amun as lord of the Th rones of
the Two Lands. Pianhki’s mother was Pebatma; sister was “Sistrum-player of Amun Re, King
of the Gods and Mother of the Divine Adoratrice (Amenerdis I). Pianhki married Tabiry, sister
of Kashta. Pianhki’s daughter was Shepenwepet II whom he installed when he became king, as
God’ Wife of Amun Elect. His other daughters were Tabekenamun, Naparaye and Arty. His
brother, Prince Pakartror, was buried at Abydos with the Kushite Royal wives of Kashta and
Pianhki. Pianhki also had three sons: Khaluit, Taharqa and Piye-Har.
It has been noted in recent studies of horse skeletons from el Kurru by Bokonyi (1993) and
the textual evidence of use of horses in Kushite warfare indicates that the fi nest horses used in
contemporary Egypt and Assyria were bred and exported from Nubia.
Th is splendid large stela of pink granite with a rounded top has a lunette relief which gives
a pictorial summary of the event in the text that describes his wars fought under the protection
of Amun bringing him the victory he envisioned. At the left of the lunette is Amun sitting on
the throne with Mut the goddess standing behind Amun and Pianhki standing before him.
King Namlot, of Hermopolis, is leading a horse in front of Pianhki shaking a sistrum in order
to pacify him. 
Pianhki in the tradition of the pharaohs donated his tribute of war to the god
Amun which was vast:
“a mass of copper or turquoise as large as yourself, fi nest horses, gold, silver, lapislazuli,
property of all kinds, suits of apparel made of byssus of every quality, and
couches and coverlets of linen, and anti perfume, vases of unguent, metal vessels
or gold ornaments for the neck, crowns for your head, gold vases for ceremonies
of purifi cation, precious inlaid stones...”
At Kawa, Pianhki added a colonnaded forecourt where his stelae could be erected and pylons
to the temple of Amun and built a paved processional road. On the walls of the temple, the
ancient thirty-year Sed festival is depicted showing the king restoring his powers. At Kurru, he
is entombed in a pyramid with subterranean chamber accessed by a stairway, and his wife Tabiry
is buried nearby. Th e horses that he loved were buried as well at Kurru with elaborate trappings
of silver and gold. Th e reign of the conqueror lasted 30 years.
Pianhki is also remembered from the Sandstone Stela by his speech:
‘Th e Son of Re, lord of Diadems, “beloved of Amun,
Pi(anh)ki says:
Amun of Napata has granted me to be ruler of every foreign country.
He to whom I say, you are chief, he is to be chief.
He to whom I say ‘You are not king !’ he is not King .
Amun in Dominion (Th ebes) has granted me to be ruler of Black-land.
...Gods make a king, men make a king,
But it is Amun who has made me
Th e earliest throne name of Pianhki, as Lord of Two Lands was indicative of his godship
and kingship.
Shabataka assumed the reign of the Kingdom of Kush and Egypt, following the death of his
father. His attested wife was Arty, a daughter of Pianhki. Shabataka was enthroned at Th ebes
in the great temple of Amun. His titulary included “Whose appearances -endure, Beloved of
Ptah and Beloved of Amun.
Th is ‘shadowy king’ falls through the cracks of history as so little has been found to affi rm his
reign. Th e Karnak Nile level record, year three of Shabataka, records that he arrived at Th ebes,
the compound of Amun on the fi fth day of the fi rst month of summer in his third regal year. 


Hedjkheperre Setepenre Shoshenq I  (reigned c. 943–922 BC)—also known as Sheshonk or Sheshonq I is presumed to be the Shishak (Shishak, Shishaq or Susac) mentioned in the Hebrew Bible. Sheshonq I was the son of Nimlot A, Great Chief of the Ma, and his wife Tentshepeh A, a daughter of a Great Chief of the Ma herself. The Meshwesh (often abbreviated in ancient Egyptian as Ma) were an ancient Libyan tribe of Berber origin from beyond Cyrenaica. According to Egyptian hieroglyphs, this area is where the Libu and Tehenu inhabited. 

Melachim I - I Kings - Chapter 3


1 And Solomon became allied by marriage to Pharaoh king of Egypt, and took Pharaoh's daughter, and brought her into the city of David, until he had completed building his own house, and the house of the Lord, and the wall of Jerusalem round about.

2Only the people sacrificed in the high places, because there was no house built unto the name of the Lord, until those days.

3And Solomon loved the Lord, walking in the statutes of David his father; only he sacrificed and burnt incense in the high places.

4And the king went to Gibeon to sacrifice there; for that (was) the great high place; a thousand burnt offerings did Solomon offer upon that altar.

5In Gibeon the Lord appeared to Solomon in a dream by night; and God said, "Ask what I shall give you."

6And Solomon said, "You have done Your servant David my father great kindness, as he walked before you in truth, and in righteousness, and in uprightness of heart with You; and You have kept for him this great kindness, that You have given him a son to sit on his throne, as (it is) this day.

7And now, O Lord my God, You have made Your servant king instead of David my father; and I (am but) a little child; I do not know (how) to go out or come in.

8And your servant (is) in the midst of Your people which you have chosen, a great people, that cannot be numbered nor counted for multitude.

9Give (therefore) Your servant an understanding heart to judge Your people, that I may discern between good and bad; for who is able to judge this Your great people?"

10And the speech pleased the Lord, that Solomon had asked this thing.

11And God said to him, "Because you have asked this thing, and have not asked for yourself long life; neither have you asked riches for yourself, nor have you asked the life of your enemies; but have asked for yourself understanding to discern judgment.

12Behold, I have done according to your word; behold, I have given you a wise and understanding heart; so that there was none like you before you, nor after you shall any arise like you.

13And I have also given you that which you have not asked, both riches and honor, so that there shall not be any among the kings like you all your days.

14And if you walk in My ways, to keep My statutes and My commandments, as your father David did walk, then I will lengthen your days."

All humans have been given the knowledge of good and evil. Our Creator bestowed Solomon the gift discerning whether the actions of others are good or evil. In return, the Creator had only the request that Solomon keep His statutes and My commandments.

Melachim I - I Kings - Chapter 5


9 And God gave Solomon wisdom and understanding exceedingly much, and largeness of heart, as the sand that (is) on the seashore.

10 And Solomon's wisdom was greater than the wisdom of all the children of the east, and all the wisdom of Egypt.

11 And he was wiser than all men, than Ethan the Ezrahite, and Heman, and Chalcol, and Darda, the sons of Mahol, and his fame was in all the nations round about.

12 And he spoke three thousand proverbs, and his songs were a thousand and five.

13 And he spoke of trees, from the cedar tree that (is) in Lebanon and to the hyssop that springs out of the wall, and he spoke of the beasts, and of the fowl, and of the creeping things, and of the fishes.

14 And they came of all peoples to hear the wisdom of Solomon, from all kings of the earth, who had heard his wisdom. 

 Melachim I - I Kings - Chapter 9


3 And the Lord spoke to him: "I have heard your prayer and your petition, which you have petitioned before Me. I have consecrated this Temple which you have built to place My name there forever, and My eyes and My heart shall be there at all times.

4 As for You, if you go before Me, as David your father went wholeheartedly and with uprightness to do in accordance with all that I have commanded you [and] you will keep My statutes and laws.

5 I will establish the throne of your kingdom over Israel forever as I have spoken to David your father, saying: A man will not fail you upon the throne of Israel.

6 But if you and your children turn away from following Me, and you will not adhere to My commandments and My statutes, which I have placed before you, but go and worship other gods and bow before them.

7 Then I will cut Israel off, from the land which I have given to them, and this house which I have made sacrosanct for My Name will I dismiss from My presence, and Israel shall be for a proverb and a byword among all nations.

8 And this Temple [which] is exalted, [shall become forlorn] and every passerby shall be astounded and will hiss, and they will say: "Why has the Lord done this to this country and to this Temple?"

9 They will be told, "Because they abandoned the Lord, their God, Who delivered their forefathers out of the Land of Egypt; and took hold of other gods and bowed to them and served them. Therefore, has the Lord brought all this retribution upon them. "

Ecclesiastes is presented as an autobiography of "Kohelet" (or "Qoheleth", meaning "Gatherer", but traditionally translated as "Teacher" or "Preacher"). Kohelet's story is framed by voice of the narrator, who refers to Kohelet in the third person, praises Solomon's wisdom, but reminds the reader that wisdom has its limitations and is not man's main concern. 

One reason the Kohelet is identified as Solomon is that at one time Solomon was the king of Israel, and Ecclesiastes 1:1 identifies the Preacher as “king in Jerusalem.” Also in agreement with Ecclesiastes 1:1, Solomon was a “son of David.”

Kohelet - Ecclesiastes - Chapter 1


1 The words of Koheleth son of David, king in Jerusalem.

2 Vanity of vanities, said Koheleth; vanity of vanities, all is vanity.

3 What profit has man in all his toil that he toils under the sun?

4 A generation goes and a generation comes, but the earth endures forever.

 Abraham Lincoln quoted Ecclesiastes 1:4 in his address to the reconvening Congress on December 1, 1862, during the darkest hours of the American Civil War

President Abraham Lincoln

Second Annual Message
December 1, 1862


On the 22d day of September last a proclamation was issued by the Executive, a copy of which is herewith submitted. In accordance with the purpose expressed in the second paragraph of that paper, I now respectfully recall your attention to what may be called "compensated emancipation."

A nation may be said to consist of its territory, its people, and its laws. The territory is the only part which is of certain durability. "One generation passeth away and another generation cometh, but the earth abideth forever." It is of the first importance to duly consider and estimate this ever-enduring part.

Egyptian influence on Israel was particularly strong in the reign of Solomon who became the son-in-law to an Egyptian Pharaoh. 

It has been suggested that Neterkheperre or Netjerkheperre-setepenamun Siamun was the unnamed pharaoh of the Bible who gave in marriage his daughter to king Solomon in order to seal an alliance between Israel and Egypt. Neterkheperre was the sixth pharaoh of Egypt during the Twenty-first dynasty. He built extensively in Lower Egypt for a king of the Third Intermediate Period and is regarded as one of the most powerful rulers of the 21st Dynasty after Psusennes I. Netjerkheperre-Setepenamun, means "Divine is The Manifestation of Ra, Chosen of Amun" while his name means 'son of Amun (also Amon, Ammon, Amen).'

Melachim I - I Kings - Chapter 9


16 Pharaoh, king of Egypt, had gone up and conquered Gezer and burnt it with fire, and slayed the Canaanites who inhabited the city; and he gave it as a gift to his daughter, Solomon's wife.

King  Solomon incorporated the teachings of Israel  Egypt's Vizier Ptahhotep on how to keep good moral sense when making decisions.

Ecclesiastes 10

10:2 A wise person’s good sense protects him, 
but a fool’s lack of sense leaves him vulnerable.
10:3 Even when a fool walks along the road he lacks sense,
and shows everyone what a fool he is.
10:4 If the anger of the ruler flares up against you, do not resign from your position, 
for a calm response can undo great offenses.
10:5 I have seen another misfortune on the earth: 
It is an error a ruler makes.
10:6 Fools are placed in many positions of authority, 
while wealthy men sit in lowly positions.

Scripture presents Solomon had access to Egyptian and Babylonian literature.

King Solomon's actions caused Israel to fall from the Creator's grace.

Melachim I - I Kings - Chapter 11


1 King Solomon loved many foreign women and the daughter of Pharaoh; Moabites, Ammonites, Edomites, Zidonians, and Hittites.

2 Of the nations about which the Lord had said to the Children of Israel, "You shall not go (mingle) among them and they shall not come among you, for certainly they will sway your heart after their dieties." To these did Solomon cleave to love [them]

3 And he had seven hundred royal wives and three hundred concubines, and his wives turned away his heart.

4 And it was at the time of Solomon's old age, that his wives turned away his heart after other gods, and his heart was not whole with the Lord, His God, like the heart of David his father.

5 And Solomon went after Ashtoreth, the goddess of the Zidonians and after Milcom the abomination of the Ammonites.

6 And Solomon did what was displeasing to the Lord, and he was not completely devoted to the Lord as was David his father. 

7 Then did Solomon build a high place for Chemosh, the abomination of Moab on the mountain that is before Jerusalem and for Molech, the abomination of the children of Ammon.   

8 And so he did for all of his alien wives who offered incense and slaughtered sacrifices to their deities.

9 And the Lord became angry with Solomon because his heart had digressed from the Lord, God of Israel, Who had appeared to him twice.

10 And had commanded him pertaining this matter, not to follow other gods; however, he did not keep what the Lord had commanded.

11 And the Lord said to Solomon, "For as this has been with you, and you have not observed My covenant and My statutes which I have commanded you, I will surely tear the kingdom from you, and I shall give it to your servant.

12 However, in your days I will not do this, for the sake of David your father; from the hands of your son I shall tear it.

13 But I shall not tear the entire kingdom away from you; one tribe I shall grant to your son for the sake of David My servant, and for the sake of Jerusalem, the city which I have chosen.

14And the Lord raised up an adversary against Solomon, Hadad, the Edomite; he was of the royal lineage in Edom.

15And it was when David was in Edom that Joab, the commander of the army had gone up to bury the slain, since he had slain every male in Edom.

16For Joab and all of Israel remained [stationed] there for six months until he had killed every male in Edom.

17Adad fled, he and some Edomite men, of his father's servants with him, to go to Egypt; Hadad being yet a small child.    

18And they set out from Midian and came to Paran, and they took men with them from Paran and they arrived in Egypt and came before Pharaoh, the king of Egypt, He granted him a home and assigned him sustenance and gave him land.

19And Hadad pleased Pharaoh very much so that he gave him in marriage the sister of his wife, the sister of Tachpenes, the queen.

20And the sister of Tachpenes bore him Genubath his son, whom Tachpenes weaned in Pharaoh's house, and Genubath was in Pharaoh's house among Pharaoh's children.

21Hadad heard in Egypt that David slept with his fathers and that Joab, the commander of the army had died. And Hadad said to Pharaoh, "Give me leave, and I shall go to my country."

22And Pharaoh said to him, "What do you lack with me that you desire to go to your country?" And he said, "Nevertheless, give me leave."

23And God raised up against him an adversary, Rezon, the son of Eliada, who had fled from Hadadezer, the king of Zobah, his master.

24And he assembled men around him, and he became commander over a battalion when David slew them, and they went to Damascus and settled there and ruled in Damascus.

25 And he was an adversary to Israel all of Solomon's days with the evil that was caused by Hadad, and he detested Israel and ruled over Aram.

26 And Jeroboam the son of Nabat an Ephraimite of Zeradah, whose mother's name was Zeruah, a widow; he was Solomon's servant, he raised his hand against the king.

27And this was the matter [concerning] which he raised his hand against the king; Solomon built up the Millo and closed up the breach of the city of David, his father.

28 And the man Jeroboam was a mighty man of valor; and Solomon saw this young man, that he was a diligent worker, and he appointed him in charge of all the burdens of the House of Joseph.

29And it came to be at that time when Jeroboam had left Jerusalem, that Ahijah, the Shilonite, the prophet, found him on the way, and he was wearing a new garment, and the two of them were alone in the field.

30And Ahijah grasped the new garment that was upon him and tore it into twelve pieces.

31And he said to Jeroboam, "Take for yourself ten pieces, for so has the Lord, the God of Israel, said, "I shall tear the kingdom out of Solomon's hands and I shall give you the ten tribes.

32But he will have one tribe, for My servant David's sake and for Jerusalem's sake, the city which I have chosen of all the tribes of Israel.

33Since they have deserted Me and have prostrated themselves to Ashtoreth, the goddess of the Zidonians, to Chemosh, the god of Moab, and Milcom, the god of the children of Ammon, and they have not walked in My ways, to do what is right in My eyes to keep My statutes and judgments as did David his father.

34However, I will not take any part of the kingdom away from him but I will make him a king all the days of his life for the sake of David My servant, whom I chose, for he kept My commandments and My statutes.

35However, I will take the kingdom away from his son and will give it to you, the ten tribes

36And his son I shall give one tribe so that David My servant may have a kingdom before Me in Jerusalem, the city which I chose for Myself to place My name there.

37And I shall take you, and you shall rule over all that your soul desires, and you shall be king over Israel.

38And it will be, if you heed all that I shall command you and will walk in My ways and do what is righteous in My eyes, to keep My statutes and My commandments as did David My servant, and I shall be with you and build for a lasting dynasty as I have built for David My servant, and I shall give Israel to you.

39And I shall afflict David's descendants because of this, but not for all times."

40Solomon sought to put Jeroboam to death, but Jeroboam arose and fled to Egypt to Shishak, the king of Egypt, and remained in Egypt until Solomon's death.    

Kohelet - Ecclesiastes - Chapter 12

While Solomon did pay for his transgressions here on earth, his last word of wisdom does offer hope for his possible Salvation.


1 And remember your Creator in the days of your youth, before the days of evil come, and years arrive, about which you will say, "I have no desire in them."

2 Before the sun, the light, the moon, and the stars darken, and the clouds return after the rain.

3 On the day that the keepers of the house tremble, and the mighty men are seized by cramps, and the grinders cease since they have become few, and those who look out of the windows become darkened.

4 And the doors shall be shut in the street when the sound of the mill is low, and one shall rise at the voice of a bird, and all the songstresses shall be brought low.

5 Also from the high places they will fear, and terrors on the road, and the almond tree will blossom, and the grasshopper will drag itself along, and sexual desire will fail, for man goes to his everlasting home, and the mourners go about in the street.

6 Before the silver cord snaps, and the golden fountain is shattered, and the pitcher breaks at the fountain, and the wheel falls shattered into the pit.

7 And the dust returns to the earth as it was, and the spirit returns to God, Who gave it.

8 "Vanity of vanities," said Koheleth; "all is vanity."

9 And more [than this], Koheleth was wise, he also taught knowledge to the people; he listened and sought out, he established many proverbs.

10 Koheleth sought to find words of delight and properly recorded words of truth.

11 The words of the wise are like goads, and like well-fastened nails with large heads, given from one shepherd.

12 And more than they, my son, beware; making many books has no end, and studying much is a weariness of the flesh.

13 The end of the matter, everything having been heard, fear God and keep His commandments, for this is the entire man.

14 For every deed God will bring to judgment-for every hidden thing, whether good or bad.


Shishak, Shishaq or Susac (Hebrew: שישק, Tiberian: [ʃiʃaq], Ancient Greek: Σουσακίμ, translit. Sousakim) was, according to the Hebrew Bible, an Egyptian pharaoh who sacked Jerusalem in the 10th century BCE. He is usually identified with the pharaoh Shoshenq I.

Sheshonq I campaign against the Kingdom of Judah and his sack of Jerusalem is contained in the Hebrew Bible (1 Kings 14:25 and 2 Chronicles 12:1-12).

According to these books of the Hebrew Bible, Shishak had provided refuge to Jeroboam during the later years of Solomon's reign, and upon Solomon's death, Jeroboam became king of the tribes in the north, which became the Kingdom of Israel. In the fifth year of Rehoboam's reign (commonly dated ca. 926 BCE[2]), Shishak swept through the Kingdom of Judah with a powerful army of 60,000 horsemen and 1,200 chariots, in support of his ally Jeroboam, the king of Israel. According to 2 Chronicles 12:3, he was supported by the Lubim (Libyans), the Sukkiim, and the Kushites ("Ethiopians" in the Septuagint). Shishak took away treasures of the Temple of Yahweh and the king's house, as well as shields of gold which Solomon had made;[3] Rehoboam replaced them with brass ones.

According to Second Chronicles,

Egyptian military conquests against Assyria and Israel, aided by Ethiopians are recorded in
the Books of Kings, Acts, and the Chronicles. Mention is made of an Ethiopian army assisting
Shishak ( Sheshonk) who ruled Egypt during the reign of Rehoboam, the King of Judah and the
Son of Solomon. Shishak’s army swept across the land of Judah, with twelve hundred chariots and
sixty thousand men, leaving in his wake fi re and destruction. Th e people of Lubim and Sukkim,
and the Ethiopians are further described as a host with many horses and chariots. Subduing the
Judeans in the south, Shishak continued north to Jerusalem, taking away the treasures of the king
which included all of the gold shields which Solomon had made.31

Melachim I - I Kings - Chapter 14


21 And Rehoboam the son of Solomon ruled in Judah; forty-one years of age was Rehoboam when he became king and seventeen years he reigned in Jerusalem, the city that the Lord had chosen to place His Name there out of all the tribes of Israel, and his mother's name was Naamah the Amonitess.

22 And Judah did what displeased the Lord, and they angered Him more than their forefathers had done with their sins that they sinned.

23 And they, too, built for themselves high places, monuments and trees for idol worship on every high hill and under every green tree.

24 And also adultery was in the land; they did as all the abominations of the nations that the Lord had driven out from before the Children of Israel.

25 And it came to pass in the fifth year of king Rehoboam, that Shishak, the king of Egypt, came up against Jerusalem.

26 And he took the treasures of the House of the Lord and the treasures of the king's palace, and he took everything; and he took all the golden shields that Solomon had made.

Divrei Hayamim II - II Chronicles - Chapter 12



1 Now it came to pass when Rehoboam's kingdom was established and when he became strong, he abandoned the Law of the Lord, and all Israel with him.

2 And it came to pass in the fifth year of King Rehoboam, that Shishak the king of Egypt marched against Jerusalem, for they had betrayed the Lord.

3 With a thousand and two hundred chariots and with sixty thousand horsemen, and there was no number to the people who came with him from Egypt: the Lubim, the Sukkiim, and the Cushites.

4 And he seized Judah's fortified cities, and he came until Jerusalem.

5 And Shemaiah the prophet came to Rehoboam and the princes of Judah who had gathered to Jerusalem because of Shishak, and he said to them, "So said the Lord: You have forsaken Me; so I too have forsaken you in the hand of Shishak."

6 And the princes of Israel and the king humbled themselves, and they said, "The Lord is just."

7 And when the Lord saw that they had humbled themselves, the word of the Lord came to Shemaiah, saying, "They have humbled themselves; I shall not destroy them, but I shall grant them some measure of deliverance, and My wrath will not be poured out in Jerusalem by the hand of Shishak.

8 For they will be his slaves, and they will know My service and the service of the kingdoms of the lands.

9 And Shishak, the king of Egypt, marched against Jerusalem, and he took the treasures of the House of the Lord and the treasures of the king's palace; everything he took, and he took the golden shields that Solomon had made.






Share this post

Link to post
Share on other sites

The Breath of the Father (Holy Spirit) is an supernatural living force known by the movement by which he reveals the eternal Living Word to us and disposes us to welcome him in faith


De Principiis (Book I)
Chapter 3. On the Holy Spirit


Of the existence of the Holy Spirit no one indeed could entertain any suspicion, save those who were familiar with the law and the prophets, or those who profess a belief in Christ. For although no one is able to speak with certainty of God the Father, it is nevertheless possible for some knowledge of Him to be gained by means of the visible creation and the natural feelings of the human mind; and it is possible, moreover, for such knowledge to be confined from the sacred Scriptures. But with respect to the Son of God, although no one knows the Son save the Father, yet it is from sacred Scripture also that the human mind is taught how to think of the Son; and that not only from the New, but also from the Old Testament, by means of those things which, although done by the saints, are figuratively referred to Christ, and from which both His divine nature, and that human nature which was assumed by Him, may be discovered.

Now, what the Holy Spirit is, we are taught in many passages of Scripture, as by David in the fifty-first Psalm, when he says, And take not Your Holy Spirit from me; and by Daniel, where it is said, The Holy Spirit which is in you. And in the New Testament we have abundant testimonies, as when the Holy Spirit is described as having descended upon Christ, and when the Lord breathed upon His apostles after His resurrection, saying, Receive the Holy Spirit; and the saying of the angel to Mary, The Holy Spirit will come upon you; the declaration by Paul, that no one can call Jesus Lord, save by the Holy Spirit. In the Acts of the Apostles, the Holy Spirit was given by the imposition of the apostles' hands in baptism. From all which we learn that the person of the Holy Spirit was of such authority and dignity, that saving baptism was not complete except by the authority of the most excellent Trinity of them all, i.e., by the naming of Father, Son, and Holy Spirit, and by joining to the unbegotten God the Father, and to His only-begotten Son, the name also of the Holy Spirit. Who, then, is not amazed at the exceeding majesty of the Holy Spirit, when he hears that he who speaks a word against the Son of man may hope for forgiveness; but that he who is guilty of blasphemy against the Holy Spirit has not forgiveness, either in the present world or in that which is to come!

The Spirit of God, therefore, which was borne upon the waters, as is written in the beginning of the creation of the world, is, I am of opinion, no other than the Holy Spirit, so far as I can understand; as indeed we have shown in our exposition of the passages themselves, not according to the historical, but according to the spiritual method of interpretation.

Some indeed of our predecessors have observed, that in the New Testament, whenever the Spirit is named without that adjunct which denotes quality, the Holy Spirit is to be understood; as e.g., in the expression, Now the fruit of the Spirit is love, joy, and peace; and, Seeing you began in the Spirit, are you now made perfect in the flesh? We are of opinion that this distinction may be observed in the Old Testament also, as when it is said, He that gives His Spirit to the people who are upon the earth, and Spirit to them who walk thereon. For, without doubt, every one who walks upon the earth (i.e., earthly and corporeal beings) is a partaker also of the Holy Spirit, receiving it from God. My Hebrew master also used to say that those two seraphim in Isaiah, which are described as having each six wings, and calling to one another, and saying, Holy, holy, holy, is the Lord God of hosts, were to be understood of the only-begotten Son of God and of the Holy Spirit. And we think that that expression also which occurs in the hymn of Habakkuk, In the midst either of the two living things, or of the two lives, You will be known, ought to be understood of Christ and of the Holy Spirit. For all knowledge of the Father is obtained by revelation of the Son through the Holy Spirit, so that both of these beings which, according to the prophet, are called either living things or lives, exist as the ground of the knowledge of God the Father. For as it is said of the Son, that no one knows the Father but the Son, and he to whom the Son will reveal Him