Real History- Christian Founding of America by Divine Providence in 1620 |
| Pilgrims came in 1620, ANTI SLAVERY Rewriting American History as Starting in Jamestown in 1619 aka Merica' is Racist |
 |
| NYT 1619 Project Sees Jamestown and Slavery As America's Founding |
A Tale of Two Cities Jamestown Vs Plymouth
Time to Fix The Rewriting of America's History
Pilgrims Came in 1620
The Pilgrims weren't headed for Plymouth, MA, but by Divine Providence God led them first to what would come to be known as Providence, MA on the very tip of Cape Cod, and then to settle on the shores of Plymouth, MA, miles north of their target in the Virginia Colony.
Last year the New York Times set out to overshadow the beautiful, wonderful, founding of America and replace it with all the darkness of sin that inevitably lies within the heart of man. Instead of Pilgrims who fled religious persecution being Divinely inspired to leave the known world for the unknown, you get racists and slave traders. Instead of the TRUE STORY that the Pilgrims and those with them, known as strangers, crafted the first known document based on Godly principles and representative rule, you get a twisted portrayal of white privilege and anti Christian bias
Black Lives Matter, Riots, Statues Being Torn Down, The New York Times 1619 Project...What do these all have in common? They refuse to acknowledge God's hand and Divine Providence in Human History, especially American History. They distort history in a way that wipes out God's Divine Providence, his hand in the movement of events, his plan he puts into the hearts of men and women.
2020-2021 Are the Years We are to CELEBRATE the 400th yr Anniversary that the Pilgrims and a band of Strangers left Holland and made their way to the Americas. God's hand that Divinely led them AWAY from the Virginia Colony and to Plymouth, MA where the very first experiment of self government was instituted, and the group of mixed faiths chose Pilgrim John Carver.
Providence
PROV'IDENCE, noun [Latin providentia.]
1. The act of providing or preparing for future use or application.Providence for war is the best prevention of it. [Now little used.]2. Foresight; timely care; particularly, active foresight, or foresight accompanied with the procurement of what is necessary for future use, or with suitable preparation. How many of the troubles and perplexities of life proceed from want of providence!
3. In theology, the care and superintendence which God exercises over his creatures. He that acknowledges a creation and denies a providence involves himself in a palpable contradiction; for the same power which caused a thing to exist is necessary to continue its existence. Some persons admit a general providence but deny a particular providence not considering that a general providence consists of particulars. A belief in divine providence is a source of great consolation to good men. By divine providence is often understood God himself.
PROV'IDENCE, noun [Latin providentia.]
1. The act of providing or preparing for future use or application.Providence for war is the best prevention of it. [Now little used.]2. Foresight; timely care; particularly, active foresight, or foresight accompanied with the procurement of what is necessary for future use, or with suitable preparation. How many of the troubles and perplexities of life proceed from want of providence!
3. In theology, the care and superintendence which God exercises over his creatures. He that acknowledges a creation and denies a providence involves himself in a palpable contradiction; for the same power which caused a thing to exist is necessary to continue its existence. Some persons admit a general providence but deny a particular providence not considering that a general providence consists of particulars. A belief in divine providence is a source of great consolation to good men. By divine providence is often understood God himself.
PROVIDEN'TIAL, adjective Effected by the providence of God; referable to divine providence; proceeding from divine direction or superintendence; as the providential contrivance of things; a providential escape from danger. How much are we indebted to God's unceasing providential care!
In 2019 Kanye West Came out with an album that shook the world and proclaimed Jesus is KING!
If you want to see a man changed, if you want to experience what the founding of America is all about, check out Kanye West's Sunday Service Rendition of his anointed album
JESUS IS KING!
God has been moving on Kanye West, he has been changed and convicted, and was dropping more truth bombs in 2019 the the US in Iraq...
Check out his interview... getting off the plantation, abortion, not voting Democrat just because he's black, and so much more!
Now enter 2020, Coronavirus, lockdowns, economy tanks, people stuck inside their homes, then a black man is wrongfully killed by the police, and the world seems to be set on fire. But was this all organic, just a natural response to the world's problems, or were the riots planned by people lying wait to jump on anything that would further their cause of cultural Marxism?
The Co-founder of Black Lives Matters admits to being a "Trained Marxist"!!!
Go to the BLM websitehttps://blacklivesmatter.com/ and read what they believe, it's total marxism, and one of their stated goals is the destruction of the Nuclear Family
Go to the BLM websitehttps://blacklivesmatter.com/ and read what they believe, it's total marxism, and one of their stated goals is the destruction of the Nuclear Family
Now, fast forward to riots, tearing down minority owned businesses, tearing down monuments, and attacking the police...
The founders of BLM Admit, they don't merely want to move funding away from the police to social workers, they want to ABOLISH THE POLICE
Now, enter 2020, Beyonce and Jay Z have long been know for their witchcraft/illuminati music and videos. They used to be really close to Kanye. Kanye took the world by storm pointing people to the Gospel of Jesus Christ as He is the Way, the Truth, and the Life, and now with the riots and Marxist, anti cop, violent, anti family Black Lives Matter movement, they are coming out with the devil's response to Kanye West's JESUS is King
BLACK IS KING
“Black Is King” pays tribute to voyages of Black families throughout time. The visual album tells the story of a young king’s “transcendent journey through betrayal, love and self-identity.” His ancestors help guide him toward his destiny, and with his father’s teachings and guidance from his childhood love, he earns the virtues needed to reclaim his home and throne.
“These timeless lessons are revealed and reflected through Black voices of today, now sitting in their own power,” according to the announcement. “‘Black Is King’ is an affirmation of a grand purpose, with lush visuals that celebrate Black resilience and culture. The film highlights the beauty of tradition and Black excellence.”
Now, for one idiotic moment, imagine someone came out with "white is king...white voices, white resilience, white excellence...." that would be gross and racist.
What Beyonce and others are doing is black supremacy. Most people forget that the biggest slave traders in Africa were BLACK and/or Muslim. Slavery was not started in America, and certainly not the slavery of black people. This is the re-writing of American history to wipe out God's Divine hand in founding America.
Our favorite historian who happens to now be a good friend and brother is Christ is Leo Martin, he and his wife Nancy have been operating tours of Plymouth from the Jenny Museum for several years. He joined the Glenn Beck show to explain the Godly founding of America and his hand in leading the Pilgrims to land on Plymouth Rock.
The National Monument to the Forefathers is a fitting tribute to the TRUTH of America's founding.
Pastor Paul Jehle works with Leo Martin to share the TRUTH of our great forefathers
"After the separatists left England to head towards Spain, and Holland, they realized, "if many Europeans come into strange land to conquer; why can't we, as Christians go into new land and do the opposite?". The opposite being, start a new civil government. A new Compact in hopes of preaching The Gospel, enlightening and bettering the people around, and not lording over them. With this new idea they purchased the Mayflower, and the Speedwell. After many troubles, they finally arrived at their destination... Provincetown, wait, what? Oh boy..
Compact: Starting a New Civil Government | with Dr. Paul Jehle"
Modern historians want to take out the hand of God, his Divine Providence, his moving of the Holy Spirit to set of a government of the people, by the people, for the people
Learn the REAL HISTORY of America's first governor, who made friends with the local Native Americans, I mean REAL friends. They didn't steal any land, but made a 50 treaty with the Wampanog who lived as neighbors and friends and many became Christians as a result of the way the Pilgrims lived and interacted with each other and treated them as equals.
Just as one small candle may light a thousand, so the light here kindled hath shone unto many."
When William Bradford penned those immortal words, he couldn’t have known that almost 400 years later, they would spark an idea to unite people all over the world.
Bradford was elected as the first governor when the Pilgrims landed in Cape Cod, Massachusetts, in November 1620, and documented his experience in the timeless Of Plymouth Plantation.
Now, enter the Abominable 1619 project, devised by Satan, in the bowels of hell to twist and contort America's founding until Christians APOLOGIZE FOR CHRIST, FOR GOD'S DIVINE HAND AND PROVIDENCE.
Christians, STOP apologizing for God's Divine hand in creating and founding America.
I've compiled several links exposing the vile lies behind this re-writing of American history to take God out and give the devil a staring role. Certainly man with evil intentions came to America and prospered off of the Divine blessings devout Christians brought upon this nation.
Fact Checking the NYT 1619 Projects Factcheckers
From the American Thinker:
The Project’s creator, Nikole Hannah-Jones, is a black reporter employed by the white-owned New York Times. She holds a 2017 fellowship with the MacArthur Foundation, which was founded and endowed by a white man, in which she received a $625,000 no-strings-attached grant. She’s doing pretty well as a black woman in what she claims is a white, racist America. And, ironically, even though she condemns white America for its alleged systematic discrimination against blacks, she demanded that whites be excluded from the Project. She had previously stated that whites are as racist today as our forefathers, but that we’ve adapted over time to cover our racism with a “sheen of deniability,” and that from Jamestown to today, racial inequality is an intentional act by whites against blacks. The major premise of the Project is based upon a lie. It claims America was birthed in slavery in 1619 when the first 20 African slaves disembarked at Jamestown. It claims America was not a nation, “conceived in liberty,” as Abraham Lincoln intoned, but instead a white, racist state begat through the original sin of slavery. However, Jamestown was founded by a British company over a decade before the introduction of slaves; its purpose was to search for gold and establish trade to enrich its owners, not give freedom to anyone. America was born in 1776 when we declared our independence to free the American people, including blacks, from British rule.
The Project’s creator, Nikole Hannah-Jones, is a black reporter employed by the white-owned New York Times. She holds a 2017 fellowship with the MacArthur Foundation, which was founded and endowed by a white man, in which she received a $625,000 no-strings-attached grant. She’s doing pretty well as a black woman in what she claims is a white, racist America. And, ironically, even though she condemns white America for its alleged systematic discrimination against blacks, she demanded that whites be excluded from the Project. She had previously stated that whites are as racist today as our forefathers, but that we’ve adapted over time to cover our racism with a “sheen of deniability,” and that from Jamestown to today, racial inequality is an intentional act by whites against blacks. The major premise of the Project is based upon a lie. It claims America was birthed in slavery in 1619 when the first 20 African slaves disembarked at Jamestown. It claims America was not a nation, “conceived in liberty,” as Abraham Lincoln intoned, but instead a white, racist state begat through the original sin of slavery. However, Jamestown was founded by a British company over a decade before the introduction of slaves; its purpose was to search for gold and establish trade to enrich its owners, not give freedom to anyone. America was born in 1776 when we declared our independence to free the American people, including blacks, from British rule.
Even the Project’s claim that the blacks at Jamestown were enslaved by whites is based upon a half-truth. It states, “The pirates had stolen [the slaves] from a Portuguese slave ship that had forcibly taken them from what is now the country of Angola.” But these Africans were likely captured and enslaved with considerable assistance from blacks. In 1619, the Portuguese allied themselves with the Imbangala, a fierce African tribe that lived by marauding other villages and enslaving other Africans. The Portuguese used the Imbangala to attack, defeat, and enslave the neighboring Ndongo tribe. The Portuguese then sold the enslaved Ndongo to the Americas.
Concerning the African slaves disembarked in Jamestown, Hannah-Jones writes, “They were no longer Mbundu or Akan or Fulani. These men and women… Just a few months earlier… [t]hey were free.” Yet, it’s highly unlikely that they had been free. The Mbundu were part of the Ndongo kingdom, which had a large slave population. About a third of the population of the Akan states were slaves or serfs. By the late 19th century, slaves still constituted about 50 percent of the Fulani Emirate. In African society, which was based upon the caste system, the upper castes did not sell their sons and daughters to the Portuguese, they sold their slaves.
The Common Thread In the BLM Movement and the 1619 Project is Anti-Capitalism
The 1619 Project is not history: it is polemic, born in the imaginations of those whose primary target is capitalism itself and who hope to tarnish capitalism by associating it with slavery. Slavery made cotton profitable; but profitability is not capitalism.
The proslavery apologist, George Fitzhugh, frankly declared that slavery was a form, not of capitalism, but feudal socialism; the antislavery president, Abraham Lincoln, explained the war on slavery as a war on behalf of free labor.
It claims that the American Revolution was staged to protect slavery
It behaves as though the Civil War never happened, that the slaves somehow freed themselves, and that a white president never put weapons into the hands of black men and bid them kill rebels who had taken up arms in defense of bondage. The 1619 Project forgets, in other words, that there was an 1863 Project, and that its name was emancipation. https://www.city-journal.org/1619-project-conspiracy-theory
1619 Project Says that The Revolution Was Fought to Keep Slavery...Nothing Could Be Further From the Truth
According to Hannah-Jones, “conveniently left out of our founding mythology is the fact that one of the primary reasons the colonists decided to declare their independence from Britain was because they wanted to protect the institution of slavery.”This is preposterous. It isn’t left out of our “founding mythology” because it’s inconvenient, but because it’s untrue
Distorting the ConstitutionUnderstandably, Hannah-Jones spends a lot of time on the compromises related to slavery at the Constitutional Convention. “The Constitution,” she writes, “protected the ‘property’ of those who enslaved black people.”
This is shamefully dishonest. With the quote marks around “property,” she effaces, 250 years later, the work of the Founders who specifically insisted on excluding that word in any reference to slavery.
The Constitution refers to slaves not as property, but as “persons held in service,” a subtle distinction although one with profound implications.
As James Oakes recounts, during the deliberations, Roger Sherman opposed a tax on slave imports “because it implied that they were property.” James Madison took Sherman’s side, elaborating in his notes from the convention, that he believed it “wrong to admit in the Constitution the idea that there could be property in men.” He added, “Slaves are not like merchandise, consumed, &c.”
Sean Wilentz explains in his appropriately titled book, No Property in Men, that “the convention took care to ensure that while the Constitution would accept slavery where it already existed, it would not validate slavery in national law; that is, the Constitution would tolerate slavery without authorizing it.”“After 1815,” he continues, “as antislavery agitation became much more formidable, the distinction — and, specifically, the framers’ exclusion of property in man — became the constitutional basis for the politics that in time led to slavery’s destruction.”Consider a passage in the argument of John Quincy Adams before the Supreme Court in the famous Amistad case in 1841:
The Constitution of the United States recognizes the slaves, held within some of the States of the Union, only in their capacity of persons — persons held to labor or service in a State under the laws thereof — persons constituting elements of representation in the popular branch of the National Legislature — persons, the migration or importation of whom should not be prohibited by Congress prior to the year 1808. The Constitution no where recognizes them as property. The words slave and slavery are studiously excluded from the Constitution. Circumlocutions are the fig-leaves under which these parts of the body politic are decently concealed. Slaves, therefore, in the Constitution of the United States are recognized only as persons, enjoying rights and held to the performance of duties.
Hannah-Jones, in effect, implies a counterfactual history in which the Constitution explicitly recognized “property” in men.
The American Revolution Led Many to Question the Long held Belief that Men Could Be Slaves
. It was a key element of the revolutionary period, driven by the obvious tension between the Founders’ ringing calls for liberty — and their worry that the British wanted to reduce them to “slaves” — and the slave system itself Kolchin writes:
The Revolutionary era witnessed the first major challenge to American slavery. Almost overnight, it seemed, an institution that had long been taken for granted came under intense scrutiny and debate: critics questioned its efficacy and morality, proponents rushed to its defense, and thousands of slaves took advantage of wartime turmoil to flee their bondage. Tangible results of this challenge included the abolition of slavery in the North, a sharp increase in the number of free blacks in the upper South, and the ending of the African slave trade.
Vermont began a gradual abolition in 1777, with Pennsylvania, Rhode Island, Connecticut, New York, and New Jersey following suit between 1780 and 1804. How can any remotely honest account of America and slavery leave these acts out, and not even mention them in a clause or parenthetically? Sean Wilentz calls it, “to that point, the largest emancipation in modern history and the crucial departure from which all later antislavery activity would follow.” In 1776, the second Continental Congress passed a resolution opposing slave imports, and around this time several states banned them; Virginia, Maryland, and Delaware loosened restrictions on manumission; and Congress in 1784 came within one vote of prohibiting slavery in the Western territories. “It appeared for a while,” Kolchin writes, “as if the very survival of slavery in the new nation was threatened.”
5 Historians Write the NYT to ask them tocorrect the historical falsifications upon which the 1619 Projectto https://www.wsws.org/en/articles/2019/12/28/nytr-d28.html
he Times also does not mention the established fact that thousands of freed blacks and slaves served in the racially integrated Continental Army after January 1, 1777, when the ban on black conscription was lifted. Baron Von Closen, a German officer serving in the French Royal Deux-Ponts, estimated that up to a quarter of the Revolutionary army was black. In 1783, the Virginia legislature passed an Emancipation Act granting freedom to all slaves who had “faithfully served agreeable to the terms of their enlistment, and have thereby of course contributed towards the establishment of American liberty.” [12]
You can Read the 1619 Projects Racist Screed Against White People here...beware, it's ugly https://pjmedia.com/news-and-politics/tyler-o-neil/2020/06/25/nyt-1619-project-founder-demonized-the-white-race-as-barbaric-devils-bloodsuckers-in-1995-n578774
Here are a few more articles unveiling the lies behind this horrible "project" led by a racist
Countering the Racist screed of the 1619 Project are a group of prominent Black leaders who have created the 1776Unites Project. "A group of predominantly black scholars, journalists, entrepreneurs, clergy, and community leaders, led by Robert Woodson Sr., a respected anti-poverty activist, have launched “1776 Unites” to counter the false and harmful narrative promoted by the New York Times’ “1619 Project.”
Woodson and his colleagues are very concerned about the “lethal” impact of this race grievance ideology on children who are being taught that blacks are forever second-class American citizens, lacking agency to improve their lives.
You can find their correcting of American history here https://1776unites.com/
Finally, I want to end with a link to the amazing story of an escaped slave who took over the Confederate Navy ship he was on, picked up his wife, children, four other women, and three men, snuck through two Confederate check points, and delivered this Navy gunship the the Union Army. Lincoln was so impressed he made him captain of the ship he had stolen. After the war he purchased the very home he was born a slave in!
Following the war, Smalls continued to push the boundaries of freedom as a first-generation black politician, serving in the South Carolina state assembly and senate, and for five nonconsecutive terms in the U.S. House of Representatives (1874-1886) before watching his state roll back Reconstruction in a revised 1895 constitution that stripped blacks of their voting rights. He died in Beaufort on February 22, 1915, in the same house behind which he had been born a slave and is buried behind a bust at the Tabernacle Baptist Church. In the face of the rise of Jim Crow, Smalls stood firm as an unyielding advocate for the political rights of African Americans: “My race needs no special defense for the past history of them and this country. It proves them to be equal of any people anywhere. All they need is an equal chance in the battle of life.”
Following the war, Smalls continued to push the boundaries of freedom as a first-generation black politician, serving in the South Carolina state assembly and senate, and for five nonconsecutive terms in the U.S. House of Representatives (1874-1886) before watching his state roll back Reconstruction in a revised 1895 constitution that stripped blacks of their voting rights. He died in Beaufort on February 22, 1915, in the same house behind which he had been born a slave and is buried behind a bust at the Tabernacle Baptist Church. In the face of the rise of Jim Crow, Smalls stood firm as an unyielding advocate for the political rights of African Americans: “My race needs no special defense for the past history of them and this country. It proves them to be equal of any people anywhere. All they need is an equal chance in the battle of life.”
