Tuesday, December 31, 2013

Real Bills Doctrine --- Part 7

Is the Real Bills Doctrine Inherently Inflationary
Thomas Allen

    Opponents of the real bills doctrine claim that it is inherently inflationary. Mises defines inflation as “an increase in the quantity of money (in the broader sense of the term, so as to include fiduciary media as well), that is not offset by a corresponding increase in the need for money (again in the broader sense of the term), so that a fall in the objective exchange-value of money must occur [i.e., general prices rise].”[1] Hazlitt gives a more succinct and clearer definition: “an increase in the supply of money that outruns the increase in the supply of goods.”[2] Most economists, very few of whom are supporters of the real bills doctrine, define inflation similarly to Mises and Hazlitt. Thus, inflation occurs when the supply of money increases faster than the supply of goods.

    According to these definitions, inflation cannot occur under the real bills doctrine. Money supply grows as new consumer goods enter the markets and contracts as these new goods are removed, consumed, from the markets. Thus, the money supply cannot exceed the supply of new goods.

    Opponents also claim that the real bills doctrine leads to an inflationary spiral. When a bank lends money to a holder of a bill of exchange using the bill as collateral, it injects additional new money into the economy. This new money causes a rise in consumer prices. Thus, the monetary denomination of the next round of bills will be higher because of higher prices. As higher prices lead to higher monetary denominated bills, evermore additional new money needs to be injected into the economy. The process continues and causes an unsustainable inflationary boom.

    This argument errors in that it confuses lending with clearing. Real bills of exchanges are clearing instruments and do not involve lending or borrowing.

    Moreover, this argument overlooks an important function of the gold standard accompanying the real bills doctrine. Gold regulates credit. If prices of consumer goods begin to rise, gold becomes cheap compared to consumer goods. People begin buying fewer goods. They begin converting their credit money, bank notes and checkbook money, into gold. As a result, sellers lower their prices, if they want to move their goods, until supply and demand are again in equilibrium.

    Furthermore, banks conserve their gold. They buy fewer bills and by that reduce the issuance of bank notes and checkbook money. Thus, the discount rate rises to encourage banks to buy more bills. (This action shows that the propensity of consumers to spend sets the discount rate. It shows that the discount rate is not an interest rate. The propensity to save sets interest rates.)

    Another reason that the real bills doctrine cannot lead to an inflationary spiral is that consumer goods are priced in gold and outside the bills market. The price of goods covered by the bill of exchange are independent of the bills market. With their demand, consumers set the prices of goods. Bills do not generate demand for consumer goods and therefore cannot cause prices to rise.

    Another version is that banks create and inject new money into the economy when it buys a bill. However, as bills are money in their own right, banks are merely substituting one form of money for another. They are not adding any new money. If a manmade or natural accident did lead to a rise in prices, gold would prevent an inflationary spiral as described above.

    Not only is inflation not likely to occur under the real bills doctrine, but an inflationary spiral is even less likely. Gold regulates credit and prevents an artificial boom from occurring. (Another importance of gold is that a bill needs to mature into that which is no one’s obligation, gold.) Gold keeps everyone honest. Without the gold standard or another commodity standard, the real bills doctrine becomes so dysfunctional that it collapses.

End Notes
1. Ludwig von Mises, Theory of Money and Credit, new ed., tr. H.E. Batson (Irvington-on-Hudson, New York: The Foundation for Economic Education, Inc., 1971), p. 240.

2. Henry Hazlitt, The ABC of Inflation (Lansing, Michigan: Constitutional Alliance, Inc., 1964), p. 6.

[This article first appeared in The Gold Standard, issue 11, 15 November 2011.]

Copyright © 2011 by Thomas Coley Allen.

 More articles on money.

Monday, November 25, 2013

Real Bills Doctrine -- Part 6

How Will Bills of Exchange Be Paid?
Thomas Allen

    Normally merchants will pay their bills of exchanges with checks, either paper or electronic. When customers buy goods covered by a bill of exchange, they will pay with gold coins, bank notes, gold certificates, or checks. (Credit cards are not a final payment since the customer still has to pay the credit card bill with check or some other form of money.) Merchants deposit all these moneys in their checking accounts. All paper moneys deposited will be returned to the bank that issued them or on which they are drawn through clearing houses. All paper moneys not cancelled with other paper moneys are redeemed in gold.

    When the bill comes due, the merchant most likely uses a check to pay the bill. If the owner of the bill is the bank holding the merchant’s checking account, the bank transfers gold from the merchant’s account to itself. If the bill is owned by another bank, that bank will send the check to the merchant’s bank for cancellation. If the merchant’s bank does not hold enough liabilities of the bank receiving the merchant’s check, the merchant’s bank sends the bank owning the bill gold to make up the difference. Gold in the amount of the bill cancelled is transferred from the merchant’s account to his bank. If the owner of the bill is not a bank, the owner receives the merchant’s check and deposits it in his (the bill owner’s) bank, and the process just described is followed.

    The above description shows the importance of the gold-coin standard accompanying the real bills doctrine. All paper moneys (bank notes, checkbook money, and gold certificates) connected with the bill and the bill itself convert into gold and are extinguished with the maturity of the bill. Gold regulates the whole process and prevents excessive paper money from being produced.

[This article first appeared in The Gold Standard, issue #10, 15 October 2011.]

Copyright © 2011 by Thomas Coley Allen.

More articles on money. 

Friday, November 8, 2013

Real Bills Doctrine -- Part 5

Do Banks Create Money Under the Real Bills Doctrine?
Thomas Allen

    One reason that proponents of a 100-percent gold standard give for rejecting the real bills doctrine is that it creates money out of nothing via fractional reserve banking. Fractional reserve banking is a fraudulent activity. Therefore, when a bank creates money to lend using a real bill of exchange as collateral, it is practicing fraud. (This statement is incorrect. The real bills doctrine deals with clearing and not lending. If one starts with a false premise, he most likely will arrive at a wrong conclusion.)

    When a bank buys a bill of exchange, it converts commercial money into bank money. It does not create any additional money. This conversion of commercial money into bank money removes the commercial money from circulation and places it in the bank’s vault until it matures into gold and is cancelled or until the bank sells it for gold.

    This process is analogous to a person depositing a gold coin in a checking account. When a gold coin is deposited, the bank removes the coin from circulation by placing it in its vault. It creates checkbook money to exchange for, or buy, the gold coin. As with commercial money, the bank has converted one form of money into another form. In both cases, it has created bank credit money to substitute for another type of money. In both cases, the bank has converted market-created money into bank money. For both situations, market-created money backs the money created by the bank. Either commercial money or gold coins are backing the bank notes and checkbook money that the bank issues.

    The major difference between the two is that the checkbook money into which gold coins are converted represents gold directly. The money into which the bill is converted is in the process of becoming gold as the goods represented by the bill are sold. It becomes gold as the bill is paid in gold or bank money that almost immediately becomes gold.

    Moreover, these opponents of the real bills doctrine confuse discount rates with interest rates. They are not the same as Professor Fekete has explained. Also, they confuse lending instruments with clearing instruments.

    Like an investor, a bank buys a bill. It becomes the owner of the bill and receives the payment when the bill is paid. It does not lend money to the drawer of the bill with the bill as collateral for a loan. Again, a bill is like a check. The final recipient collects directly from the signer without the money having to pass through all the intermediaries.

    Rist notes, “. . . bills are an addition to metallic money; they are a commercial money spontaneously created to supplement the circulation of coin.”[1] Thus, when a bank buys a bill, it does not monetize it. The bill is already money. A bank is no more monetizing a bill than it monetizes gold when it buys gold with notes.

    If the opponents of the real bills doctrine want to prevent money in addition to gold, they need to suppress bills of exchange. They need to direct their opposition away from banks buying bills with bank money instead of gold. As shown above, banks do not create any additional money when they buy a bill. They convert one form of money (commercial money) to another form (bank money, i.e., bank notes and checkbook money). These opponents need to direct their opposition to the creation of the bill of exchange, which is the heart of the real bills doctrine. They must prohibit either its creation or its use as money, i.e., prohibit its use to pay debt or purchase goods and services. (The recipient of a bill in payment receives it at the same discount as a bank does.) Either choice causes them to oppose a spontaneous market activity.

End Note
1. Charles Rist, History of Monetary and Credit Theory from John Law to the Present Day, trans. Jane Degras (New York, New York: Augustus M. Kelley, 1966), p. 96.

[This article first appeared in The Gold Standard, issue #9, 15 September 2011.]

Copyright © 2011 by Thomas Coley Allen.

More articles on money. 

Wednesday, October 23, 2013

Real Bills Doctrine -- Part 4

Should Bills of Exchange Be Allowed as Money?
Thomas Allen

    One argument against the real bills doctrine is that a bill of exchange is credit, and such credit should not be used as money. Most people presenting this argument do not object to all types of credit being used as money. They accept some types of credit money, but object to other types of credit money.

    Under the true gold standard, only full-bodied coins are true money. All other purchasing media are types of credit money.

    Most who present this argument against the real bills doctrine seem to accept the use of token coins. Token coins are needed to buy low valued items like a box of matches, which is worth less than a speck of gold. Token coins are a form of credit that function as money.

    Most seem to allow the use of checks and gold certificates. Checks and gold certificates are forms of credit that function as money. A check is an order to a bank to transfer gold from one account to another or to transfer gold from an account to cash in gold coins. A gold certificate is essentially a warehouse receipt for gold and can be converted to gold at anytime.

    However, they object to using bills of exchange as money. A bill of exchange is a spontaneously market-generated form of credit money that some call commercial money. So why discriminate against this type of credit money? Commercial money is more like gold than other forms of credit money in that it is a spontaneous market creation. To prevent the use of bills of exchange as money requires using political forces to overrule a natural market function.

[This article first appeared in The Gold Standard, issue #8, 15 August 2011.]

Copyright © 2011 by Thomas Coley Allen.

More articles on money. 

Monday, October 7, 2013

Real Bills Doctrine -- Part 3

Can Credit Instruments Function as Money?
Thomas Allen

    Some opponents of the real bills doctrine claim that credit instruments are not money and presumably cannot be used as money.

    Mises defines money as “the thing which serves as the generally accepted and commonly used medium of exchange.”[1] According to his definition, anything that a community accepts and uses as a medium of exchange, i.e., a purchasing medium, is money.

    His definition does not preclude bank notes, gold certificates and checkbook money as money. All are credit instruments. All promise to pay in gold in the future. Moreover, all are used as media of exchange. All are used to pay debt.

    A real bill of exchange is no different. It can be, and has been, used as a medium of exchange. It can be used to pay debts. Like bank notes, gold certificates, and checkbook money, it promises payment in gold in the future. The major difference between the bill and the others is that the bill promises payment in gold by a specified date. The others do not; they just promise payment in gold when demanded.

    As for debt being used as money, the irredeemable federal reserve note, which is a credit instrument and debt, has been used as money since 1933. Granted, it is poor quality money that cannot extinguish debt. All it can do is discharge debt by transferring it to another. Nevertheless, it has function as a medium of exchange since 1933.

    Under the gold standard, the only true money is gold. It is the only money that is not another’s obligation. All other forms of money (bank notes, certificates, checkbook money, real bills, and token coins) are representative money. They represent something besides themselves. They represent that something is due. That something is gold. As such, they are all credit money and debt instruments. Real bills do not differ functionally from bank notes, checkbook money, or certificates. The difference among all these forms of money is technical.

End Notes
1. Ludwig von Mises, Human Action: A Treatise on Economics (3rd revised edition. Chicago, Illinois: Henry Regnery Company, 1963), p. 401.

[This article first appeared in The Gold Standard, issue #7, 15 July 2011.]

Copyright © 2011 by Thomas Coley Allen.

More articles on money. 

Monday, September 9, 2013

Real Bills Doctrine -- Part 2

Are Real Bills Real Money?
Thomas Allen

    Rothbard, Mises, and most other economists of the Austrian school claim that real bills of exchange are not money in the true sense, i.e., they are not true money substitutes. “The endorsement of the bill is in fact not a final payment; it liberates the debtor to a limited degree only. If the bill is not paid, then his liability revived in a greater degree than before.”[1]

    A bill of exchange is similar to a check except that one private individual draws it on another private individual rather than himself, or, more correctly, the bank that holds his checking account. Checkbook money, which most economists recognize as money in the true sense, has the same feature as bills of exchange. If the person who signs the check fails to honor it after the endorser cashes or deposits it at a bank, the bank comes after the endorser to refund the money. If the check bounces, the liability of the debtor, i.e., the signer, is “revived in a greater degree than before.” The two differ only in degree.

    Bills of exchange are a spontaneous creation of markets to facilitate the movement of goods. Under the real bills doctrine, a real bill of exchange is created when the retailer (drawee or acceptor) accepts a bill exchange drawn by the supplier (drawer). When the retailer accepts the bill, he creates commercial money. The bill now functions as money similar to the way that a check functions as money. Commercial money can be, and frequently is or was, used to pay debt and buy goods. It serves as a highly marketable store of value until it matures. As a store of value, it is superior to a check because its value increases daily. Moreover, it is usually more liquid than a check. Whereas a check seldom pass through more than one or two hands before it is return for payment in gold, a bill may pass through several hands before payment in gold. Like a check, it can be used as a medium of exchange. However, its use as a medium of exchange is limited because bills are written in irregular amounts and generally for large sums. Commercial money (real bills of exchanges) is money in the same sense that bank money (bank notes and checkbook money) is money.

    Unlike checks, bills of exchange often circulate especially in the arena of foreign exchange involving different currencies.

    Although bills of exchange are used as money, their use is cumbersome. Bank notes come in convent denominations and are more versatile. They can easily convert bills of exchange into smaller pieces. Unlike bills, which have expiration dates, bank notes do not. Bank notes can circulate indefinitely. People accept bank notes more readily than commercial money, i.e., bills of exchange. Therefore, bills are usually sold to banks and converted into bank money, bank notes and checkbook money, which functions as money in the sense that most people generally accept bank money as final payment.

End Notes
1. Ludwig von Mises, Theory of Money and Credit, new ed., tr. H.E. Batson (Irvington-on-Hudson, New York: The Foundation for Economic Education, Inc., 1971), p. 285.

[This article first appeared in The Gold Standard, issue #6, 15 June 2011.]

Copyright © 2011 by Thomas Coley Allen.

More articles on money. 

Monday, August 26, 2013

Real Bills Docrtine -- Part 1

What Is the Real Bills Doctrine?
Thomas Allen

[Note: This discussion and those that follow on the real bills doctrine assumes the true gold-coin standard accompanied by a decentralized competitive banking system without special privileges.]

    Antal Fekete describes a real bill as follows:
A real bill is a bill of exchange drawn by the producer (the drawer of the bill) on the distributor (the acceptor of the bill) specifying the kind, quality and quantity of merchandise shipped by the former to the latter, and specifying the sum (the face value of the bill) and the date on which the bill is payable (the maturity date of the bill, in any event, not more than 91 days after the date of billing). In order to be valid, the bill has to be accepted by the acceptor, by writing across its face and over his signature “I accept.”[1]
    Nelson Hultberg describes real bills as “temporary bills of exchange that appear simultaneously with goods that are being produced to aid such goods in further transportation along the production/consumption chain. These bills of exchange then go out of existence once the goods have cleared the market.”[2] Real bills are clearing instruments because they allow time for merchandise to be sold to the ultimate customer.

    The heart of the real bills doctrine is the real bill of exchange. A real bill of exchange (a real bill) is drawn on real goods that are ready to be sold (sitting on the retailer’s shelf) or are on the way to the retailer to be sold. A real bill of exchange is a self-liquidating, short-term credit instrument. It is self-liquidating in that when the consumer buys the product, the consumer provides the money for the seller to use to pay the bill. It is short-term in that the bill has to be paid off in 91 days or less.

    When the retailer accepts the bill of exchange, a real bill or commercial money has been created. Now the supplier can use the bill to pay his creditors or sell it to a bank or an investor. If a bank buys the bill, it converts the bill to bank notes or checkbook money.

    For example, when a supplier sells his goods to a retailer, the retailer usually does not pay for the merchandise then. Instead, the suppler draws a bill of exchange (a real bill) on the retailer to pay within 91 days. When the retailer accepts the bill, commercial money has been created. The supplier can now use this bill to pay the manufacturer. He can sell it to an investor or a bank. If the supplier needs money immediately to pay his employees and utility bills, he sells the bill to a bank at a discount. The bill becomes the property of the bank, and the retailer pays the amount due at maturity to the bank. If he sells it to a bank, the bank converts it to bank notes or checkbook money. A bank never creates money; it only converts one form of money (commercial money) to another form (bank notes and checkbook money). In effect, the bank has converted the bill into conveniently denominated money recognized and accepted in the community.

    When people buy the products represented by the bill, the retailer pays the holder of the bill. When the bill is paid off, it ceases to exist. If a bank has bought the bill and has converted it to bank notes or checkbook money, that bank money is removed from circulation and cancelled when the bill is paid. Thus, the money created when the retailer accepts the bill goes out of existence when the retailer pays off the bill.

    Banks do not create any money. Banks merely convert it from one form (real bills or commercial money) to another (bank notes and checkable deposits) as they do when they put gold coins in their vaults and issue gold certificates in place of the coins. All money creation is left directly in the hands of the people. Although credit is involved, no borrowing or lending is involved in the creation of this money.

End Notes
1. Antal E. Fekete, “Monetary Economics 101: The Real Bills Doctrine of Adam Smith,” Lecture 2, July 8, 2002, http//www.shoemakerconsulting.com/GoldisFreedom/PVFfiles/ lecture101-2pvf.htm, Sept. 12, 2007.

2. Nelson Hultberg, “Cranks in the Gold Community,” July 11, 2005, http://www.finacialsense.com/editorials/hultberg/2005/0711.htm, July 12, 2005.

[This article first appeared in The Gold Standard, Issue #5, 15 May 2011.]

Copyright © 2011 by Thomas Coley Allen.

More articles on money. 

Tuesday, July 9, 2013


Deborah Mortensen

Museum Apprenticeship
Mrs. Weber
November 19, 1974


    Our museum is a large contemporary museum with a very high budget. It’s located in the heart of a large city. It’s the only art museum in that city. We have lots of community support from the rich people living in apartments all around us. There are three main galleries in our museum. One houses the permanent collection, another, the costume and textile collection, and biggest gallery is for temporary exhibitions. The temporary exhibition gallery will be used for the Bicentennial exhibit because it has plenty of floor space and a nice high ceiling.

    The museum has fifty trustees, all of whom vote on almost everything (even changing light bulbs). Luckily the vote is usually tied, and I'm called in to break the tie. This bicentennial exhibition on American stone sculpture was voted in after 2 months of debate. One of the men who pushed hardest for the exhibit had a great grandfather who was a stone cutter. The man still has his great grandfather's tools and wants to donate them to the museum. I told him to wait and just loan them for the exhibit. I’m waiting until after the show to tell him the tools really don’t belong in an art museum. Another one of our trustees is chairman of the board at Forest Lawn cemetery, which has lots of very old and interesting gravestones. Anyway, this man has a hobby of making gravestone rubbings. He’s agreed to loan us his 150 gravestone rubbings. He is also photographing all the stones in his cemetery that date before 1776.

    Our receptionist knows a good friend of Henry Moore and has heard rumors that Moore has a new series of sculptures he wants to exhibit. I told her I’d have to see them first before accepting them.

    I got in touch with a local historical society which is trying to preserve old New England stone sculpture. They gave me pamphlets and loaned me a speaker to give a lecture every week for the next 6 months.

    We have many small stone sculptures done by local artists in our permanent collection. We also have rare photos of the carving of Mount Rushmore. We also have an old Calder mobile made of drift wood and beach stones. I thought it would look nice over the low lying Moores. But the insurance company was afraid it might fall apart and damage one of the Moores insured for 100,000 dollars. So I hung it over the receptionist’s desk; the insurance company said it was the only place they’d allow us to hang it. (It appears damaging a receptionist cost less.)

    The catalog for the show is now being printed. On its cover we put a photo of the most impressive piece in the show, a 25-foot Moore loaned to us by a private donor. The private donor doesn’t want his name to be given in connection with the piece. I asked why; he said “It would be embarrassing to him if people heard that he bought a 25-foot sculpture for his apartment on the 8th floor that only has a ten-foot high ceiling.” Our high budget allowed us to put photos of every piece in the show in the catalog and twenty color plates.

    The museum’s education department has planned two courses on stone rubbing. One for children and the other for adults. The courses are free to senior citizens. They’ve also planned to have a local sculptor to come in every Sunday to give demonstrations. They are also going to show a series of films made of interviews with American stone sculptors.

    The museum’s travel department has planned of American stone sculpture. They also plan to have tours of artists studios.

    We’ve planned the opening for July 4th, 1976, but if we receive too many negative R.S.V.P.’s, we will have to change it. The exhibit will last 6 months. In total there are 1,700 pieces. Good thing the gallery is on the first floor.

Copyright © 1974 by Deborah Mortensen and 2011 by Thomas Coley Allen.

More articles on Deb.

Monday, June 3, 2013

Some Stories About Deb

Some Stories About Deb
Thomas Allen

    In 1981 Deb came to visit me the day after Christmas. Fortunately, for me once she got here, she never left. Her flight was due around 2:00 p.m. I got to the airport around 1:00. Was I excited to see her! As 2:00 approached, her flight was moved down the list to around 3:00. Each time her flight approached the top of the arrival list, it was moved down to near the bottom. About 10:00 that night, she finally arrived. She had flown from Connecticut to Pittsburgh where she was to connect with a flight from Detroit to Raleigh-Durham. Because of snow, the Detroit flight was delayed.

    After I met Deb, we went to get her luggage. We could not find it. Then we learned that her luggage had gone to St. Louis. So, I took her to my parent’s house where she stayed until we married. Around midnight, her luggage arrived at the house.

    The first week that Deb was in Raleigh, I took her to see the place where she would spend the next 29 years of our lives. (Later we named this place “Marigold Plantation” after the pseudonym that she used for her advertisement.) Also, I took her to the office where I worked and introduced her to the people who were there. At that time, I worked in the Archdale Building. We went up to the heliport. One can get a good view of Raleigh from there. Years later I learned that she was terrified of being up there. As it was a clam day, there was no danger.

    On Thursday, the 31st, we drove to Dillion, South Carolina to marry. When we applied for our license, we learned that South Carolina had a 24-hour waiting period. Back to Raleigh we drove. We returned on the 1st and married. After the wedding, they took a couple of pictures of us. In the first one, we had a “what have we done” look. In the second on, we had a happy look.

    That night, Deb stayed with me instead of going to my parent’s house. I do not know if they ever missed her. They never said anything about her absence. The next day my parents had a dinner to which they had invited a few relatives. We did not tell anyone that we were married. While we were eating, my aunt Isabel kept looking at us. Finally, she asked if we were married. She had noticed our wedding rings. We admitted that we were. (I think that my aunt was proud of herself for being the first to notice.)

    Materially, Deb did not bring much into the marriage. Along with her clothes and some artwork and supplies, she had a rocking chair, a camera, a stereo, and a typewriter, but not much more. If I recall correctly, she had less than $100 in the bank. However, she brought a great deal into the marriage. What she brought into our marriage cannot be measured and is beyond measure.

    When Deb became pregnant with our first child, we were living in my apartment. We had a gas stove. Deb’s pregnancy heightened her sense of smell. She started smelling gas and complaining to me about it. She was convinced that the gas stove was leaking. So, I had to take it apart to see if it were leaking. Although it occurred to me, I doubt that it did to her, if the stove were leaking gas, there was a good chance of a fire and perhaps an explosion. My disassembling the stove (actually, I only removed the top cover) seemed to satisfy her. However, she did continue to complain about smelling gas.

    The fall before we moved to Marigold Plantation, I had a new lawn sowed. We bought the trailer and moved to Marigold Plantation in April 1982. Somehow I managed to get the plumber, electrician, and power company to arrive the same day as the trailer. Thus, we got the trailer set up, the pump in the well and connected to the trailer, the trailer connected to the power line, and electricity turned on in one day. Before the sunset, the trailer was ready for us to move in. However, the sewer line to the septic tank was not completed until the next day because another section of pipe was needed.

    We did not buy a lawnmower before the end of May. By then, we had a good stand of grass when I got around to mowing it. Around the first of June, I started mowing. As I was mowing, I notice that I was stirring up field rats and mice. I went into the trailer and got Deb and my shotgun. Deb drove the mower while I walked behind her with the shotgun to shot the rats and mice. Later, I wondered what the neighbors must have thought when they drove down the road and saw me walking behind Deb with a shotgun. I wondered if they thought I was one heartless man who had to use a shotgun to force his wife to mow the grass.

    When our first son was born, Deb’s water broke about 9:00 Saturday night. I carried her to the hospital that night. We spent the night in the labor ward since the doctor did not want to send her home because we lived so far from the hospital. Our first son was born about 2:00 Sunday afternoon.

    Just before our daughter was born, we went to the beach during the last week in June. Deb’s mother and youngest brother went with us. The doctor told Deb that it was all right for her to go since she was not due until the first week in August. On July 6 our daughter was born. The nurses had fun kidding the doctor about our daughter being the largest 32-week baby that they had ever seen. Obviously, the doctor had calculated incorrectly.

    When our third child was born, the State was experimenting with a new style of health plan. We could not go directly to a specialist. We had to go to our primary physician, and he would refer us to a specialist. During Deb’s pregnancy with our third child, she developed diabetes. The obstetrician gave her a blood test for diabetes. When she reported to her primary physician, he said that he was supposed to give her that test, not the obstetrician. So, he gave her the same test that she had a few days earlier. He was not going to lose the fee for that test.

    Fortunately, Deb went into labor with our youngest son just before I left for work, so I could quickly take her to the hospital. He was born a few hours after we arrived. While in the labor room, Deb kept calling the nurse and telling her that the baby was coming. The nurse looked at her and told her that she had not dilated enough. Around the fifth time that Deb called the nurse, the nurse looked at her and told that she was right. The baby’s head was showing. The nurse asked the doctor if he wanted to deliver in the labor room. After answering no, the doctor said that Deb could make it to the delivery room. Deb was in the delivery room for only a few minutes before our second son was born.

    For all three of our children, I was in the labor and delivery rooms with Deb. I think my presents comforted her. I got to hold our children before she did.

    After we married, we never bought a Christmas tree. We always cut one on our land. Until our white pine trees got big enough to harvest, we used a cedar. Usually, I found the cedar. A few times Deb found one. I always cut the tree and drug it to the house. After I got it to the house, most of the time we had to cut some off because the tree grew from the time that I cut it to the time that I got it to the house. We put the tree up, and then Deb decorated it. Later, the children helped decorate it. Usually, I put the angel or star on top as I was the tallest. Over the years, we had accumulated ornaments for a big tree. So the tree was loaded with ornaments.

    When we started using white pines, Deb helped me saw it. She pulled the tree away from the saw to keep it from binding the saw. Later, the children took over that job. They liked having the tree fall on them. After the children left home, Deb returned to her job of pulling the tree.

    The trees that I grew were much rounder than most sold on lots. Deb said that I used her as my model for pruning the trees. Perhaps I did. Moreover, they did not look nearly as large standing in the field as they did in a small room.

    One year after cutting down a tree and decorating it, I came home and found a new tree up. After the first tree had been in the house for a few days, the hibernating aphids came out. Aphids were everywhere, or so it seemed. Deb had thrown that tree into the yard and fetched another one.

    When we had goats, we usually fed the tree to them after Christmas. (Deb liked taking the tree down within two or three days after Christmas.) For that reason, we never sprayed anything on the tree.

    When Deb was pregnant with our first child, I often left her with my parents. My stepmother took Deb to her doctor’s appointment. Once when I left Deb with my stepmother, my stepmother’s friend was visiting her. My stepmother must have convinced her friend that we lived in the wilderness miles away from civilization. Her friend asked Deb what she did if she were cooking and needed an ingredient. Deb told her that she went to the Piggy Wiggly, which was a mile from the house. The friend seemed surprised that she did not have to drive 20 some miles to Raleigh.

    My stepmother also told Deb that I knew nothing and not to pay any attention to me. I was especially ignorant when investing. I admit that as far as investing is concern, I am a novice who flies by the seat of his pants. However, I did manage to get enough return to pay the loan on our mobile home and land so that we could use our land as the down payment for our house. Fortunately, Deb was intelligent and wise enough to ignore my stepmother.

    We bought a Johnny Walker house. The company built 90 percent of the house, and we did the rest. We were responsible for the heating system. We contracted putting in the heat pumps, which freed up the closet where the heating system was to go. That closet became our second pantry. I wired the telephone. Deb put fiberglass installation under the house. Except our bedroom, which we had carpeted, we laid tile on all the floors. When we laid the tile, we discovered how out of square the house really was. Also, we painted the interior walls. The carpenters left enough lumber behind to provide shelves for the closets, the second pantry, and the utility room.

    Deb got to see the house go up as our mobile home was about 120 feet away. One of her favorite stories was hearing the “oops” and “don’t worry about that, the Sheetrock man can cover it up.” She told that to the Sheetrock man. He said that carpenters thought that Sheetrock men could work miracles.

    In March 1989, we moved into the house. We had not quite finished all the work. However, I figured if we waited until we were through, we would never move.

    Deb wanted a house, and I think that she was pleased with it although she would like to have had a bigger front porch and a bigger and better kitchen. It was her nest. If it were not for her, it would never have been built. Unfortunately, she could not live her last days here.

    Except for me, everyone in the family ate cheese and drink milk. When the kids were growing up, they consumed about two gallons of milk each week. Before I retired, we usually had one major grocery shopping each month. Most of the time that was a family affair. Then each week we went to pick up items that we ran out of, such as milk and eggs, and to get some meat that was on sale. For the first several years of marriage, I often stopped by the grocery store on the way home and bought those weekly items. Occasionally, I bought cheese for the Deb and kids. To me cheese is cheese, so for awhile I bought  cheddar cheese. The cheese kept disappearing, so I assumed that they were eating. Therefore, I kept buying it. After a few months, Deb told me to stop buying it. They did not like it and were not eating it. They were feeding it to the cat.

    In the mid 1980s, I read an article that said that a husband should surprise his wife occasionally with an unexpected gift. Thus, I gave Deb a gift unexpectedly. Big mistake! She became highly suspicious. What terrible thing had I done causing me to give her a gift? Had I had an affair and was my conscience bothering me? Weeks were required to ease her fears and assure her that I had done nothing wrong.

    I forget what the gift was, but it was not expensive. Naturally, never again did I give her an unexpected gift. I waited for our anniversary, Valentine’s Day, her birthday, or Christmas. If I want to give her something at other times, either I told her before the purchase or we went to the store together to get it.
    One of the few places of friction between me and Deb was disciplining the children. We were both mostly laissez faire type parents — Deb more so than I. Usually, she waited until the kids pushed her to the breaking point before she reacted. I tried to keep things from getting to that point.

    Occasionally, Deb got on me about yelling at the kids; they complained about me yelling at them. I told Deb that if the children did what I told them to do when I told them to do it, I would not yell. I had to yell to get their attention. Then I heard them say, “Dad’s not serious yet. He’s not yelling.” We were fortunate that for the most part our children were fairly well behaved and did not get into too much trouble.

    One thing that I tried to impress on Deb was that when one of us disciplined a child, the other should not object — at least not in front of the children. Any disagreement should be done in private. We needed to support each other and stand united. Over time she came around to that view. Most of the time we supported each other, or at least did not oppose each other when disciplining the children.

    My oldest son got into trouble at school for throwing a rock and hitting a car. The principal paddled him. When he got home, Deb gave him such a tongue lashing that I felt sorry for the boy.

    On Christmas morning, the children never went downstairs to play with their gifts until we got up and went with them. I do not know what Deb did to keep the  children from going downstairs and start playing with their toys before we got up. Around five or six in the morning, we started hearing subtle, and at times not so subtle, bumps against our door and little voices. We heard things like “Are they up yet,” “Wake them up,” etc. We heard reports from the one that the other two sent to peek around the steps, such as, “Did you see anything?”, “What did you see?”, etc. Usually, the report was that nothing was seen. Whatever she told them to keep them under control and not to go downstairs without us worked because they never went downstairs on Christmas morning without us.

    One winter we had a snow that stayed around for about a week. After a few days, Deb and the kids came down with a severe case of cabin fever. They just had to get out. So, they got into my car (I was using the four-wheel-drive Blazer to commute to work) and tried to drive it out. The driveway was clean. However, the car slipped off to the side when she drove it from its parking space. She managed to get it stuck up to the axle of the wheel that was turning. I had to wait about a week for the ground to dry enough for me to jack up the car and file the hole with bricks and rocks. Then I drove the car out.

    Once Deb came close to getting sued for libel. Deb thought that the art council should support and promote all forms of art in the county. She did not like the way that the man who ran the art council ran it. Even when he was not the formal head of the council, he continued to control it from behind the scene. He was using the council to promote and support the whistler’s convention, which was his baby and real joy. Deb was not happy about that. So, she wrote a letter-to-the-editor expressing her dissatisfaction with him and his management, or mismanagement from her perspective, of the art council. She was not shy about stating her opinion of him and how he ran the council. She saw him as egotistical, opinionated and autocratic.

    He had his lawyer write her a letter threatening to sue her unless she apologized. As I knew that she was not up to writing such a letter, I wrote one for her to send to the newspaper apologizing. I ended the letter with a sentence thanking him for proving her point.

    About a year before she became ill, the whistler’s convention was divorced from the art council. The art council was reorganized under new management. It was set up the way that Deb would have approved.

    We used to have chickens. However, the dogs and racoons finished off what we had. We got started with chickens in the early 1990s when my oldest son brought some home from school. His teacher had a class project using chickens. As we lived in the country, he got about half the chickens. Deb with a little help from the kids built a chicken tractor. I did not help much on this project as most of it was done while I was at work. She used scrap lumber left over from building the house. That was one heavy chicken tractor. We learned about chickens with them. One important lesson was always to make sure that they had plenty of water especially during the summertime. Dogs finally killed the last of those chickens. How that last chicken survived that attack, I do not know. The dog had pealed the skin off its back; I had to kill that chicken to put it out of its suffering.

    From these chickens we moved onto others. I ordered some chickens and built a chicken coop in the woods behind the house so the chickens would be shaded during the summer. Later I built a second coop near that one and made some changes based on what I learned from the first one. At our peak, we had about 30 chickens. Later I built a new chicken tractor. Deb really helped me with that one. I messed up on the door, which really frustrated me. Deb stepped in and built the door. At our peak, we had a refrigerator full of chicken and duck eggs. When we had an over abundance of eggs, Deb boiled one or two dozen every week for me to take to work.

     In the mid 1990s, we got our first ducks. I order one of those assortments of ducks and geese. We finally gave the geese to my uncle as they were eating up my greens. We got a few eggs from these ducks. Later I order some more ducks of different breeds. These were more productive egg layers. Deb preferred duck eggs to chicken eggs for  baking.The ducks did rid the yard of Japanese beetles. I seldom see any now.

    When Deb and I were away from the house for much of the day, we left the ducks shut in their pen. When we returned home, we frequently checked for eggs. I lifted up a corner of the pen, and Deb gathered the eggs.

    Once when we came home, we decided to get the eggs before we went into the house. As we approached the pen, I noticed that the ducks were huddled in a corner in the front of the pen. This was peculiar I thought. After I lifted up a corner, Deb reached in to fetch the eggs. Instead of grasping an egg, she felt something strange. She withdrew her hand. When she withdrew her hand, a snake slithered toward the front of the pen. It was at least four feet long and had eaten the eggs. Naturally, I was at fault for her grabbing the snake. For weeks after that, I had to make sure no snake was in the pen before she would help me gather the eggs.

    Deb and the children camped several times near Nags Head between the mid 1990s and 2010.

    The first and last time that I went camping with Deb and the children was to Hanging Rock in 1999. Cinda, our dog, also went. We had a station wagon full with the dog, three children, and the camping gear. We used a two-room tent. Deb and I slept in the back room. The children slept in the front room. As we went just after the children had gotten out of school for the summer, the campground was crowded.

    In 2000, Deb and I began camping without the children. They were now old enough to leave at home alone. Our first such trip was to Stone Mountain. This was in the spring of 2000. This campground was the most crowded one at which we ever camped. When we arrived, only two or three sites were vacant. After this experience, we tried to time our camping trips such that few or no other campers were at the campground.

    In the fall of 2000, Deb and I camped at Pilot Mountain. We used a bicycle tent that we had bought for about $15. I put a tarp under the tent and one over it. The whole rig cost no more than $20.

    When we arrived at the park, only three or four of the nearly 60 campsites were occupied. We selected one away from everyone.

    Just before the gate closed, a family moved into the campsite across the road from us. They were towing a large camping trailer that appeared to be fully equipped. I guess that their rig cost between $20,000 and $30,000.

    I have always thought about how funny it would have been for someone walking down the road. He would look to one side and see a $20 outfit. On the other side, he would see a $20,000 outfit.

    Deb called that family Malcolm in the Middle. They seem to show up everywhere that we went.

    In November 2001, we camped at Merchant Mill Pond. By now I had bought a larger tent for us to use. We also had gotten a sleeping bag that held two people, so we could sleep together. At this time the water in the pond was down about six to eight feet. We took pictures of each other standing by a tree with our heads below the waterline. We canoed around the pond. Because the water was so low, we could not do much canoeing.

    In November 2002, we returned to Merchant Mills Pond. This time the pond was full. When we went canoeing, I thought that we would canoe around the pond for two hours. For four hours we canoed. We even went up a feeder stream. Both times that we camped at Merchant Mill Pond, we were the only campers there most nights.

    The reason that we camped at Merchant Mill Pond in November was that we did not have to pay the camping fees. The department for which I worked suspended fees for its employees camping at a state campground during the first week in November.

    Our last camping trips were at Medoc Mountain. On one of these trips, we forgot to pack towels. We went to two close-by stores  — not much exists within five miles or more of Medoc Mountain. Neither had towels. We ended up using a sweatshirt for a towel.

    I managed to arrange most of our camping trips so that we often had the campground to ourselves. Nearly every night we stayed at Medoc Mountain, we were the only people camping. When no one else was at the campground, we showered together. We enjoyed showering with each other. At the campground, we showered in the men’s room. We figured that if she were caught in the men’s room, there would be less commotion than if I got caught in the women’s room.

    Only once did we come close to being caught. Once at Medoc Mountain, we were showering together. When we went into the shower, on one else was at the campground. However, as I was getting out of the shower to dry off, a man walked in. I think I was in a greater state of panic than Deb was. Deb stayed in the shower until he left. An RV had parked at the campground while we were in the shower. That was the only time that we came close to being caught.

    Once at Medoc Mountain, we got caught in a thunderstorm during the night. Although the tent flapped a good deal in the storm, it remained up, and we stayed dry.

    When Deb was doing her gourd art, she used a copper scrubbing pads to clean the husk off gourds after they cured. To make sure that she had an ample supply of pads, I put some in the cart nearly every time that we went grocery shopping. (For most of our marriage, we shopped for groceries together.) After a while she told me to stop getting them. She was afraid that people would think that we were manufacturing drugs.

    Deb usually wrote a list of things that she would like to receive for Christmas and posted it on the refrigerator. One year her list contained a bathroom scale. For that Christmas, I bought her a bathroom scale. She must not have had any confidence in me getting her the scale, because she gave me one that same Christmas. Since then we have had two scales.

    One Christmas Deb gave me an air compressor. At that time she was spray painting and wanted to do some airbrush art. The airbrush art that she did was mostly on her art car. So, she gave me an air compressor.

    I used it mostly for the tires and grease gun. Deb used it for art and to paint other things. The children and I teased her about buying the air compressor for me for her to use. That accusation made her defensive to the point of later saying that when she bought me a gift, it was for me and not her. As for me, I did not care if she used it every day. I seldom used it. Her using it was better than it just sitting idle.

    Several years ago, I bought a Grundig Satellite 800 shortwave radio — mostly at Deb’s urging as it was not cheap. I had set the radio to turn itself off just before midnight and to turn itself on just after midnight on the station that played Amos and Andy and then turn itself off in 15 minutes. This was the original Amos and Andy, which lasted about 10 minutes. I had set it to play Amos and Andy so that I could hear it if I happened to be awake at that time of night.

    Once I went on a business trip and was gone over night. I forgot to fix the radio so that it would not turn itself on.

    When I returned home, Deb told me that she had awakened in the middle of the night and heard voices. At first she was frightened because she thought someone was in the house. Then she realized that the radio was playing.

    Her experience was somewhat funny. At the same time, I regretted not turning the timer off so that the radio would not come on. I regret the radio frightening her.

    I have been to Mt. Mitchell several times. The last time that I went was in 2004. I took Deb with me to my division’s annual supervisor’s retreat. She got to tour the arboretum and sketch some plants (I posted the sketches that I found), while I sat in those exciting meetings. We left the third day so that we could go by the community college in Lenior, which our youngest son was thinking about attending. On the way there we went by the Vance homestead historical park and to Mount Mitchell. All that we saw when we reached the top of the mountain were cloud tops. That may have been her first time there.
    The only other supervisor’s retreat that I took Deb to was at Atlantic Beach. It was held at one of the better motels. That was Deb’s first encounter with a bedbug. Fortunately, it was dead. While I attended meetings, she some seagulls. (I posted these sketches.)

    We did not have a guest room to junk up and then clean out. We had a three-bedroom house. Our two sons had one room, and our daughter, the other. When our daughter left home for college, we moved our youngest son into her room and converted his room to our computer room and mail room. When our youngest son left for college, Deb converted his room into her sewing room and drawing room. She wanted to discourage any of the kids returning home. Later he did come back home, and Deb lost her sewing and drawing room. Shortly before she became ill, our youngest son moved to Philadelphia. Deb got her room back, but it was short-lived. After she became ill, she invited our oldest son to move in and that room became his.

    Deb never seemed to suffer from empty-nest syndrome. She was glad that the children had left home. It was a fulfillment for her as she felt as though she had achieved her goal of rearing her children so that they could stand on their own. I think that I regretted seeing them leave more than she did.

    We used to be in a Meet-up group that discussed preparedness for disasters, i.e., what to do when disaster, either natural or man-made, occurs, things to have on hand, etc. One lady often brought a cake for the group to eat during break. Deb decided that she should take something to a meeting. So, she baked blueberry muffins. Her muffins were a big hit. All the muffins were eaten. The other lady had to carry home about half her cake. Deb was really happy and puffed up about that. People preferred her muffins to the cake.

    After I retired, Deb and I went to Raleigh about once a month. Sometimes the traffic was heavy when we returned home, but nothing like what it was when I came home from work. At times she commented that she did not know how I put up with all that traffic for all those years that I drove to and from work. I hope that it made her appreciate a little more what I did to support her and the children and the love that I had for them to do it.

    Deb had a problem of cleaning out the refrigerator. Things got pushed to the back. After a while, she became afraid to touch it. It remained there longer because she did not want to touch it. She was afraid that it had all sorts of fury things growing on it. Sometimes it did get that bad. At times I had to take matters in my own hands and throw the  item away.

    Deb was not much of a house cleaner. The longer we were married, the less she did. In later years, I did about as much as she did, which was not all that much. When she was in the hospital, I got my daughter, who is a house cleaner, to come and clean the house. It took her two trips. When I told Deb that our daughter was cleaning the house, she replied that she wondered where our daughter got her cleaning genes. She certainly did not get them from her mother.

    Although Deb was not a house cleaner, she was not a slob. She hated to vacuum, and even more she hated dusting. When we first moved into the house, she did make an effort to mop the floors about once each month. Sometimes she vacuumed. As time when on she did less, and I did more. However, she usually kept her kitchen under control. Except when canning, she managed to stay on top of keeping the kitchen clean. She also did the toilets from time to time as I seldom did them. I usually cleaned the tub. We both struggled with clutter. Keeping things in neat stacks with cats around who cannot tolerate neat stacks is hard.

    One thing that I learned was that the longer I was with Deb, the more I loved her. The more I loved her, the less important her housekeeping flaws and shortcomings became. Eventually, they became an essential part of her to be loved and cherished along with the rest of her.

    A woman, whom I learned later was a mail carrier, had an ad in the same Mother Earth News as Deb. When I sent Deb a letter, I also sent this woman a letter. About six months later, I received a letter from her. She sent her picture and asked for its return if I were not interested. Along with returning her picture, I sent a letter informing her that I had already found someone, was married, and had a child on the way. (I never told Deb about this woman.) She must have thought that I was a fast worker. I was not a fast worker. I just hit the yotta-lottery jackpot. After fourteen years of struggle and failure and eight years of existing with a broken heart, I finally won the lottery. And I won big; I won the septillion dollar jackpot.

Copyright © 2013 by Thomas Coley Allen.

More articles on Deb. 

Tuesday, May 21, 2013

Freedom of Opinion in Democratic America

Freedom of Opinion in Democratic America
Thomas Allen

    More than one hundred and fifty years ago, Alexis de Tocqueville wrote, “I know of no country in which there is so little independence of mind and real freedom of discussion as in America. In America, the majority raises formidable barriers around the liberty of opinion: within these barriers, an author may write what he pleases; but woe to him if he goes beyond them.” The United States have become much more democratic since he wrote these words, and the liberty of opinion has shrunk even more.

    In this land of freedom where variety of diverse opinions are published, intolerance of dissent grows. A person who proclaims that one race, especially the white race, is innately more intelligent than another, especially the black race, he will meet an impregnable barrier of intolerance and ostracism — and if he is in the public eye, he will loose his job. (Jimmy the Greek lost his job when he made the unforgivable mistake of arguing racial inequality when he proclaimed that blacks were superior to whites as athletes.) Likewise, one needs only to aver the virtue of apartheid or advocate denying the right to vote to women or blacks to discover the intolerance of the American mind. To denounce Martin Luther King is an unforgivable sin. Other examples are questioning the commitment of the United States to Israel (fortunately, this is becoming less unforgivable), not maintaining one’s yard to the standards desired by one’s neighbors (hence, this a principal reason for zoning), and advocating the abolish of the public school system (the public school system is essential to a democracy for it indoctrinates the right way of thinking, i.e., thinking the thoughts and doing the acts of the mediocre majority, and to become a docile subject of the majority). To condemn homosexualism is now becoming unacceptable, for homosexuals are becoming part of the majority coalition. If a person’s opinion differs significantly from that of the majority, he expresses it with peril.

    In a democracy there is one subject that can never be discussed openly and honestly. That subject is democracy itself. Criticizing democracy cannot be tolerated. It is forever forbidden.

    An honest writer in the United States suffers a fate similar to that of an honest writer in the Soviet Union. He is not banished to Siberia or a mental institute — at least not yet — as is his Soviet counterpart. His books and articles are not published by any publisher of note. He does not acquire tenure at any eminent university. He is snubbed by his colleagues. All of this is done while the hypocrites who ostracize him are preaching the glory and virtue of freedom of speech, freedom of the press, freedom of expression, and the free circulation of ideas.

    If a person is politically inclined, he ought never express his opinion when it differs from the majority. To freely express opinions contrary to those of held by the rulers, that is the majority, will end his political career. (For this reason, in the South, candidates prior to 1960 who advocated integration seldom won, and candidates after 1970 who advocated segregation seldom won. Also this explains why nearly all presidents of the United States since the Jacksonian revolution have been mediocre at best.) It denies him his chance to be a celebrity and many other forms of compensation. He faces scorn, ridicule, and ostracism.

    As the United States become more democratic, the expression of opinions that deviate significantly from the majority’s opinion becomes more hazardous. Expressing dissenting opinions becomes more difficult. Freedom of opinion eventually dies. Free thinkers become strangers in their own land and among their own people.

Copyright © 1988 by Thomas Coley Allen.

More articles on politics.

Wednesday, May 1, 2013

United States Department of Agriculture

United States Department of Agriculture
Thomas Allen

    The United States Department of Agriculture (USDA) was founded in 1862, shortly after the War for Southern Independence began. Its purpose during the War was to make the North agriculturally independent of the South. Its purpose following the War, which continuous to be its purpose today, was to destroy Southern agriculture and the agrarian way of life and to remake the South and Southerners into the image of Yankeedom.

    When the War broke out, cotton, sugar, and molasses stopped flowing northward. Congress reacted by creating the USDA to develop substitutes for these Southern staples. The objective of the USDA was to make the North independent of Southern agriculture. Thus began the USDA's telling farmers what to plant.

    To obtain the biologists, chemists, and other technical personnel that the new department would need, Congress began to subsidize colleges. Thus, began federal control of education.

    With the end of the War came Reconstruction. The USDA was a principal weapon used to finish destroying the South. Its objective was to ensure that the South would never rise again. So far it has been successful in achieving this objective.

    Congress saw cotton as the symbol for all that Congress despised: States’ rights, limited government, and free trade. The North had won the war. The North had fought for a strong central government with ultraconstitutional powers and managed trade for the benefits of the politically powerful. During and after the War, the North transferred the powers, rights, and duties of the State governments to the federal government. Industry was now protected from foreign competition.

    The Southern States were reorganized to make them fit into the new world order. The USDA was used to diminish the importance of cotton in the South and to force farmers to diversify or abandon the growing of cotton altogether. The USDA would transform the Southern mind.

    One step in this war was to confiscate (a euphemism for steal) the cotton plantations and divide them into small farms. Another was to force redistribution of crops geographically — especially cotton. (Today farmers in the South are taxed to subsidized irrigation water for farmers in California, Arizona, and other semiarid regions to grow crops, such as cotton, that can be grown economically in the South without the subsidy. Southerners are forced to subsidize their competitors.) Furthermore, Southerners were to be forced to grow crops other than cotton. Non-Southerners, either Northerners or European immigrants, were to raise cotton grown in the South.

    The USDA was to reconstruct Southern farmers by reforming the Southern mind. This reformation required farmers to abandon cotton and to plant other crops. In the name of relieving the destitute conditions in the South following the War, the United States government forced Southern farmers to grow new crops in the place of cotton. (In the Northern mind cotton excited Southerners to racism and rebellion and caused slavery and secession; therefore, Southerners could not be trusted to grow cotton.)

    Congress encouraged Northerners to migrate to the South. These Northerners would grow the cotton. Moreover, the presence of these “enlightened” Northerners with their “progressive” ideals would reform these Southern “racists” and defuse their rebellious nature.

    To provide farms for these Yankee migrants, hundreds of thousands of acres of farms were stolen. The large plantations, along with many yeoman farms, were ceased and sold under the guise of paying off tax liens. They were sold mostly to Northerners. In 1860 301,940 farms were in the South Atlantic States and 370,373 farms in the South Central States. By 1900 the number of farms in the South Atlantic States had grown to 962,295 while in the South Central States the number had grown to 1,658,166. Over this 40-year period the average size of farms decreased by more than a third in the South Atlantic States and over half in the South Central States.

    Another weapon used to destroy the South was foreign immigrants. The United State government relaxed its immigration policy and promoted emigration from Europe. (For worshipers of a powerful central government, massive foreign immigration also had the benefit of shifting more political power from State governments to the United States government. The immigrants came from countries that had strong central governments. Thus, they were accustomed to strong central government. Furthermore, they would be inclined to owe their allegiance to the United States instead of to a State because they would perceive themselves as citizens of the United States instead of a State.)

    Another part of the United States government’s plan to destroy the South was to force Southerners to migrate to the North. If Southerners dwelt in the midst of “progressive” ideals of Yankeedom, their small bigoted, prejudice minds would become educated and enlightened. They would learn to think the right thoughts. With the lost or destruction of their farms and livelihood, many Southerners had little choice but to move to the North.

    Perhaps the most powerful weapon used to finish destroying the South was public education. After the War, the United States government coerced the Southern States to adopt new constitutions with provisions for tax-supported “free” schools. These schools, like schools today, were in effect under the control of the federal government. These schools were to use “progressive” textbooks to mold Southerners into the image of Yankeedom and prepare them for the new world order. The source of these textbooks was the USDA. The present and practical were to be emphasized, and the past and philosophy were to be avoided. Public education would enlighten backward racist Southerners to become like progressive Northerners. To this day public schools are being used to destroy the remnants of the South. (This weapon has been so successful it has made itself sacrosanct. It has made itself the state church. To seek the abolition of public education is blasphemy.)

    All the weapons used by the United States government to finish destroying the South after the War are still being used to complete the destruction of the South. The USDA has destroyed the family farm and the agrarian life of the South. The United States government allows virtually unrestricted immigration of foreigners into the South — especially the immigration of people from cultures most alien to the South. The United States government has manipulated the economy to force Northerners and Northern manufacturers to move south. Then it manipulated these manufacturers to move in foreign countries once the South became depended on them. The United States will continue the war against the South until the last remnant of the South is destroyed. The only hope for the South is in a free and independent confederation of free and independent Southern States.

Copyright © 1995 by Thomas Coley Allen.

More articles on the South. 

Friday, April 5, 2013

An Early Historicist Interpretation of Revelation

An Early Historicist Interpretation of Revelation
Thomas Allen

    After writing “A Historicist Interpretation of Revelation,” the author came across a much earlier historicist explanation of Revelation than that described in the previous article. John Wesley gives this earlier explanation in his notes (1754)  on Revelation. Wesley’s notes are based on the works of Bengelius. The following summarizes this historicist interpretation.

    For Wesley’s explanation of the symbolism used in Revelation, the reader should consult his notes. In several places, Wesley’s explanation differs significantly from the description given by the authors reviewed in the previous article.

    The first four seals (Rev. 6:1-8) cover the time from which John writes (96 A.D.) to the end of Trajan’s reign (117). The horsemen represent a swift power that brings (1) a flourishing state (white), (2) bloodshed (red), (3) scarcity of provisions (black), and (4) public calamities (pale). The first horseman is a conqueror (conquers in the East); the second is a warrior (wars in the West); the third controls the production of the land (food crisis in the South); the fourth is death (enormous lost of life).

    The first seal, the white horse (Rev. 6:1-2), represents conquest. This seal covers the reign of Trajan (98-117). It describes the conquest of the East.

    The second seal, the red horse (Rev. 6:3-4), covers the years following Vespasian’s dedication of a temple of peace in 75. These years are filled with wars in the western portion of the Empire. Peace is taken from the world with Trajan’s ascension to the throne.

    The third seal, the black horse (Rev. 6:5-6), describes food shortages. A dearth of food production occurs during Trajan’s reign, especially in Egypt.

    The fourth seal, the pale horse (Rev. 6:7-8), refers to the large lost of life during Trajan’s reign. During his reign, perhaps a fourth of the inhabitants of the Roman Empire die of war, famine, pestilence, natural disasters, and wild beasts.

    Events on earth and in heavens are described in the fifth, sixth, and seventh seals. Thus, they refer to the invisible and visible. The fifth seal (Rev. 6:9-11) refers to happy death. It depicts the martyrdom of Christians at the hands of Rome. This seal pertains to Pagan Rome and Papal Rome persecuting and killing Christian. It covers from Trajan’s persecution beginning in 98 to the first crusade against the Waldenses in 1209 (a “time” or 1111 years).

    The sixth seal (Rev. 6:12-17) refers to unhappy death. It shows God’s judgment of the wicked dead.

    The seventh seal is divided into seven trumpets. Covering the first, second, third, and fourth centuries are the first, second, third, and fourth trumpets, respectively. Each of the last three trumpets is a woe with an interval between each woe.

    The first trumpet (Rev. 8:7) depicts conflicts and wars between Rome and the Jews during the first century. God sends vengeance against the Jewish enemies of Christ’s Kingdom.

    The second trumpet (Rev. 8:8-9) covers the European part of the Roman Empire during the second century. It depicts the barbarian invasion of the Roman Empire.

    The third trumpet (Rev. 8:10-11) pertains to the African part of the Roman Empire, primarily Egypt, during the third century. It depicts the rise of Arianism and the conflicts and wars between the Arian Christians and non-Arian Christian. Arius is the “great star” in verse 10.

    The fourth trumpet (Rev. 8:12) describes the barbarian invasions of the fourth century and the breakup of the Roman Empire following the death of Theodosius. In 476, Odoacer captures Rome and disposes the emperor. Thus, ends the Roman Empire.

    Accompanying each of the next three trumpets is a prelude. A prelude comes before each woe. For the first woe, the prelude begins in Persia (now called Iran) in 454 when Isadegard II seeks to abolish the Jewish Sabbath and continues with Phiruz’s persecution of the Jews in 474.

    The fifth trumpet, first woe (Rev. 9:1-12) takes place between 510 and 589. This woe begins with a holy angel (“a star falls from heaven”) opening the bottomless pit. “Locusts” are the Persians, who zealously push their false idolatrous doctrine. These verses depict the Persian persecution of Jews during the sixth century. Persecution lasts 79 years, i.e., five prophetic months (“tormented five months”).

    For the second woe, the prelude is the rise of the Saracens, Islamic Arabs. This prelude falls between 589 and 634.

    The sixth trumpet, second woe (Rev. 9:13-21) takes place between 634 and 840. This woe begins with the loosing of “the four angels which are bound in the great river Euphrates.” These verses describe the rise and expansion of Islam, which bloodshed accompanies. Corresponding with the four angels are Islam’s first and most eminent caliphs: Ali, Abu Bekr (Abubeker), Omar, and Osman. In verse 15, the prophetic hour, day, month, and year equal 212 years. These 212 years begin with the ending of Abu Bekr’s reign in 634 and end with Leo IV’s repulse of the Muslims at Rome in 847.

    In Revelation 10:6, “time no more” refers to a period slightly less than a chronos. A chronos is a whole time or 1111 years. This period begins in 800 when Charlemagne begins a new line of emperors in the West. It ends in 1836. Contained within this period are the “short time” of the third woe, the “three times and a half” of the woman in the wilderness, and the duration of the beast.

    For the third woe, the prelude covers 840 to 947. During this era, Innocent I and his successors strive to expand their episcopal jurisdiction beyond all bounds and to expand greatly their temporal power.

    The seventh trumpet, third woe (Rev. 11:19) takes place between 947 and 1836. It begins with the dragon, Satan, being cast out of heaven. This trumpet contains the seven vials. In heaven, the seventh trumpet is celebrated with great joy. On earth it heralds dreadful events until Christ comes and establishes his Kingdom.

    In Revelation 12:6, the 1260 days equal 777 years. It covers the years 847 to 1524. The woman represents the true Church, which is centered around Bohemia during this time.

    In Revelation 12:12, “a short time” is probably about four-fifth of chronos or 888 years. Therefore, the “little time” begins with Satan coming to earth in 947 after being cast out of heaven and lasts until 1836. Shortly after 864 begins the war in heaven in Revelation 12:7.

    In Revelation 12:14, “a time, and times, and half a time” is 777 years. It begins in 1058 after which Christianity is soon brought to the parts of Europe that are still pagan. It ends 777 years later or 1836. The “time” is when “the earth helped the woman,” and runs from 1058 to 1208. During this period, the Turks are powerful, but the emperors check their movements northward. Consequently, they protect the woman, i.e., the Church from the Turks. The “two times” is from 1280 to 1725. During this time Turkish power expands. Again the rulers of Europe, “earth,” helped the woman by repulsing Turkish advancement northward. The “half time” covers 1725 to 1836. Now the Turks focus on Persia and become less involved with Christendom.

    Chapter 13 pertains to the Papacy. “Wild beast” is the Papacy. “The sea” is Europe. In 1077, the beast comes “out of the sea.” That is when Pope Gregory VII claims authority over all Christian rulers. The mark of the beast and the number of the beast, 666, refer to the Pope.

    In Revelation 13:5, the 42 months are 666 years. They fall between the beginning and the ending of the three and a half times of Revelation 12:14. They begin in 1143 and end in 1810. In 1143, the Pope takes over government of Rome, and the cardinals alone now select the Pope.

    Wesley gives no time frame or events specifically associated with the first four vials. From Wesley’s perspective, all the vials are poured out in the future. They come quickly. The first (Rev. 16:2) affects the land; the second (Rev. 16:3), the sea; the third (Rev. 16:4-7), rivers; the fourth (Rev. 16:8-9), the sun. They begin at the end of the 42 months in 1810. These four vials primarily affect that part of the world under the Papacy.

    The fifth vial (Rev. 16:10-11) concerns the Papacy. The sixth vial (Rev 16:12-16) concerns the Muslims. The seventh vial (Rev. 16:17-21) concerns the heathens. Pouring out of the fifth, sixth, and seventh vials occur consecutively instead of concurrently.

    In Revelation 17:8, the beast ascends “out of the bottomless pit” in 1832. This beast is the Papacy. In 1836, the Papacy is finally overthrown (Rev. 18:20).

    The Millennia begin in 1836 or shortly afterwards. Two Millennia, two thousand- year periods, are mentioned in Chapter 20. One of the thousand years covers the time that Satan is bound (verse 2, 3, 7). This thousand years occurs before the  end of the world. During these thousand years occurs the flourishing of the Church (Rev. 10:7). The other thousand-year period is when the saints reign with Christ. It comes after the first thousand years and goes to the general resurrection.

    At the end of the first thousand years, Satan is released for a small time (Rev. 20:7). Also, at the end of the first thousand years, the first resurrection begins. After the end of the second thousand years come the new earth and new heavens.

    The following table summarizes Wesley’s time line.

Copyright ©2011 by Thomas Coley Allen.

 More articles on religion.

Thursday, March 21, 2013

A Historicist Interpretation of Revelation — Continued – Part 2

A Historicist Interpretation of Revelation — Continued – Part 2
Thomas Allen

Decline of the Papacy
    Chapter 14 describes the decline and fall of the Papacy and the entire Babylonian system and the establishment of the Kingdom.

    Revelation 14:1. “An hundred forty and four thousand” is not an actual number. It symbolizes completeness; Christ’s reign, his government, is complete. It also represents Israel, Protestant Europe in general and Britain in particular, coming out of the dark age into the light. The 144,000 are the ones who are completely in accord with God’s will (“Father’s name written in their foreheads”) and, therefore, who reign with Christ.

    Mount Sion, Zion, is associated with the kings of Israel and with Jesus Christ, King of kings. It is associated with God’s righteous Kingdom on earth (Isa. 62:1). It is the seat of administration for the law of the Israel Commonwealth.

    “Father’s name written in their foreheads” shows that they have surrendered their minds, intellect, and whole being to God. They understand and execute God’s will. Consequently, they are fit to rule with Christ.

    Revelation 14:2-3. These verses show that the restoration of the Kingdom has been accomplished with Jesus as King and Jehovah as God.

    “Harp” refers to David or the House of David (II Sam. 6:5). Thus, it represents the royal house of Great Britain, which is of the House of David. The lost kingdoms of Israel and Judah are restored. Moreover, via the Protestant Reformation, they are liberated from spiritual darkness. Thus, they sing “a new song before the throne.”

    Revelation 14:4-5. These verses refer to a people or nation that was not defiled by Papal Rome’s pagan idolatry, such as the worship of the Mother of God. This nation or people is Protestant Britain-Israel. Others hold that the virgin described here is the 144,000 or the true Church, whom the Papacy has not corrupted.

    Revelation 14:6-7. Great Britain opposes Rome. Having escaped from the power of Rome, Great Britain expands into a great empire and spreads the gospel throughout the world. The true Israel Church warns of God’s coming judgement.

    Revelation 14:8. God now judges Papal earth and destroys the Pope’s power, power acquired with the claim of Divine authority. “Babylon” symbolizes the political, economic, and religious world system that wars against God. “Wine of . . . fornication” refers to spiritual fornication, e.g., the worship of images, holy pictures, holy relics, and demons, through Biblical names, characters, and associations, such as Jesus, Mary, angels, and saints. The Great Depression was the beginning of the judgement against the Babylonian economic system.

    Revelation 14:9-11. Those who follow Papal Rome suffer along with Papal Rome in its destruction. They fall under the punishment of God’s judgement. This judgement starts with the French Revolution and Napoleonic Wars.

    Revelation 14:12-13. Encouragement is given to the true Church and to Israel (not Jewry) — to everyone who has rejected at the mark of the beast, Romish rule.

    Revelation 14:14-20. Christ, the Son of Man, comes to bring God’s judgement on Papal Rome (Matt. 13:30) — the political, economic, and ecclesiastical Roman world.

    “Clusters” are the people of Israel who have obeyed God’s will and, therefore, who are “harvested” and protected from God’s wrath. The “vine” is most of Israel, who have disobeyed; they along with Judah are cast into the winepress where they are purified.

    The Soviet Union is the sickle used to punish much of Papal Europe.

    In verse 20, “city” could be Rome itself. If so, this verse is describing World War I and especially World War II. “City” could also refer to Papal Europe. If so, it suggests that God lead the European armies out of their own countries to destroy them. Such an event happens when the Soviet army defeats the Nazi army. If “city” refers to the holy city, it suggests that the destruction of the armies of Roman Europe take place outside Israel-Britain or the Anglo-Saxon nations.

Defeat of the Papacy
    Chapter 15 describes the victory over the Papacy (the beast). It shows Israel freeing itself from the Papacy and then the fall and defeat of the Papacy. It introduces pouring out of the seven vials in Chapter 16.

    Revelation 15:1-4. “Gotten the victory over the beast” depicts British Israel freeing herself from the Papacy (the beast). This liberation is completed by Queen Elizabeth’s reign.

    Two songs of Moses are given in the Bible. One is in Chapter 15 of Exodus, which was sung after Israel’s deliverance from Egypt. The second is in Chapter 32 of Deuteronomy, which was sung when Moses gave Israel the Law of Sinai.

    Revelation 15:5-8. These verses reveal the temple. “The temple of the tabernacle” (verse 8) symbolizes the center of God’s heavenly judgement and the reigning of the resurrected Church.

    In verse 6, “white linen” depicts God’s perfect righteousness in judgement. Unlike the normal position around the waist, here the girdle is around the heart (“breasts girded with golden girdles”). This shows loving restraint.

    The end of the age is reached with God pouring out his righteous judgement (verse 8). The seven plagues, seven vials, end with God’s Son establishing his Kingdom and the resurrection of the Church occurring (the first resurrection). The temple symbolizes Christ’s government with the Church (Body of Christ) ruling with him.

The Millennium and Beyond
    The last three chapters of Revelations describe the Millennium and Post-Millennium Age. Chapter 20 describes the Millennium. The “Little Season” occurs just before the Millennium begins. Chapter 21 describes the new heaven and new earth. Chapter 22 describes the Post-Millennium Age.

Little Season
    Revelation 20:1-3. The dragon, old serpent, devil, and Satan refer to the Roman System of Papal Europe (see Rev. 12:3, 9; Rev. 17:8) The dragon or the “revived fourth beast” has its origin from the “bottomless pit.” Here the Papal Roman System is relegated back to the bottomless pit from which it came. Most identify the “old serpent” as the serpent that beguiled Eve in the Garden of Eden.

    The present age ends in two 40-year cycles or generations. These cycles start with World War I in 1914-1918. They end in 1994-1998 when the millennial kingdom begins. The “Little season” may be the last 40 years of the Millennium.

    “Loosing of the ‘Adversary’ for a little season” may mean that the Roman earth (Roman Continental Europe) reverts to self-centered rule and shows manmade unrighteousness again. Or it may symbolically depict a final worldwide challenge to return to manmade rule. According to others, Satan is bound for a thousand years to give mankind the opportunity to receive the Gospel during Jesus’ Kingdom rule without interference from Satan.

The Millennium: The First Resurrection and the Kingdom Age
    Revelation 20:4. Jesus transforms those who have proved themselves sufficiently in love with him to be worthy to share his glory and to be transformed into his image at the first resurrection. They are the overcomers, who are the true Church. They “lived and reigned with Christ a thousand years.”

    Revelation 20:5. All the rest of the dead, good or bad, Jew or Gentile, who failed to become chosen or elected by God for the “prize of the high calling of God in Christ Jesus,” i.e., the first resurrection, will not reappear until after the Millennium when the general resurrection of all mankind takes place (see John 5:28).

    Revelation 20:6. Those who are in the first resurrection are free from the second death.

End of the Millennium
    Revelation 20:7-9. At the end of the Millennium, Satan is released to test mankind. Through his temptations, he separates true born-again followers from those who have only been pretending to be followers. Thus, the adversary-system attacks the “beloved city.” God now comes to destroy and finally eradicate all opposition to His Son’s earthly rule of righteousness.

    “Gog and Magog” may symbolically refer to a general worldwide uprising at the end of the millennial age of all who have not given wholehearted allegiance to Jesus. Here Gog and Magog are not the Gog and Magog of Ezekiel 38 and 39, who fought in the Battle of Armageddon.

    Revelation 20:10. This final insurrection is judged as the “beast and the false prophet” were dealt with a thousand years earlier. Satan, the devil, is cast into the lake of fire. The lake of fire symbolizes destruction (Dan. 7:11).

    Revelation 20:11. The “great white throne” is the throne of Jesus. Jesus judges the world in righteousness for a period (see Acts 17:31, John 5:22). “White” represents purity and holiness.

    Revelation 20:12. The resurrection of all people who are not resurrected in the first resurrection occurs. It may take place in stages instead of all at once. They do not stand before God, but before the Throne (the KJV is a mistranslation). This is the great white throne of Christ.

    At the close of the Millennium the names and deeds of all men are found “written in the books.” One set of books contains all the good and bad deeds that each person has done. Another book, the “book of life,” is opened. This book contains the names of the saved.

    Revelation 20:13. All the dead are raised whether they lie in the earth or in the sea. Jesus has been ordained to restore all to life by resurrection (John 5:28). Christ judges all according to their works.

    Revelation 20:14-15. All that is contrary to God and to life is cast into the lake of fire. Even death and the grave are conquered and finally annihilated by God. 

    The second death cannot hurt these who have put on perfection in the first resurrection. They have already died unto sin and by perfect resurrection become clothed in Christ’s image; there is nothing left in them which the Spirit of God can oppose. 

    All others are imperfect and therefore come under God’s fire of righteousness and holiness (see Deut. 4:24, Heb 12:29). Anyone whose name is not written in the book of life is cast into the lake of fire. What happens to these people then is greatly disputed.

    According to the universalists, they are not tormented “forever and ever” but are tried “unto the ages of the ages” until all things are put under Christ’s feet, and he hands his perfected Kingdom to his Father (see I Cor. 15:24). During these ages, Christ corrects and perfects people who have opposed the building of his Kingdom (see Col. 1:19-20; Eph. 1:10).

    Like the universalists, the annihilationists claim that those cast into the lake of fire are not tormented forever and ever. They cease to exist. Thus, man is not innately immortal. He becomes immortal through faith in Christ.

    Most follow the Romanist teaching that those cast into the lake of fire are really tormented forever and ever. Although Catholicism offers away out of eternal torment through Purgatory, Protestantism denies this out. This belief is based on the pagan doctrine that man is innately immortal independent of God and Christ.

New Heaven and New Earth
    Revelation 21:1. The new heaven and new earth occur at the beginning of the Millennium. Therefore, the events described in Chapter 21 fall between Revelation 20:6 and 20:7.

    None remain to oppose God and His Son as symbolized by “no more waters (or seas).” Agitation, turmoil, and strife are absent from the new earth.

    Three “heavens” are mentioned in the Bible: the atmosphere, outer space, and God’s abode, which is beyond the first two. The new heaven of Revelation 21:1 deals with the first two.

    The world is not destroyed. It is cleansed and restored.

    Revelation 21:2. This verse depicts the new-glorified “Israel” with all nations. Here “bride” symbolizes Israel. New Jerusalem, the holy city, is the capital of the Kingdom over which Christ rules.

New People
    Revelation 21:3. God’s new covenant is announced to Israel. He will again “be their God” (Heb. 8:10). He also fulfills his promise and sets His sanctuary in their midst (Ezek. 37: 26-28).

    Revelation 21:4. Those in God’s Kingdom are immortal and without sorrow. This promise applies first to converted racial Israel and then to people of other nations who have entered the Kingdom through the new birth (Isa. 51:11, 65:19). This verse covers from the beginning of the Millennium to its end and beyond.

    Revelation 21:5-6. Jesus becomes not only the “Alpha,” the first, but also the “Omega,” the last: In the fulness of his resurrection and glory, Jesus is truly “the first-born of every creation” (Col. 1:5,18). This verse also affirms that Jesus gives life and makes all things anew.

    Revelation 21:7. “He that overcometh” refers to Israel (not Jewry). (In Revelation 3:21-22, it refers to the Church or first elect.) Overcoming means obedience to God. Jesus not only shares his glory with his true Church; he also shares it with overcoming Israel.

    Revelation 21:8. All sins are destroyed in the lake of fire as part of the second death. Some of the worst sins are listed. “Fearful” heads the list. It even surpasses unbelief, which is second. Thus, those who fear man more than God are the most despicable and are cast into the lake of fire (see Matt. 10:32-33).

New Jerusalem and New Light
    Revelation 21: 10-22. A description of new Jerusalem is given. “The holy Jerusalem, descending out of heaven from God” (Rev. 21:10) symbolizes the rebirth of Israel as a nation. The description of the gates in Revelation 21:13 parallels Israel’s order around the tabernacle in Numbers 2 (see also Ezek. 48:30-35).

    Twelve is the number of completion and perfect rule or government. It also identifies New Jerusalem with Israel, “names of the twelve tribes of the children of Israel” (Rev. 21:12).

    Revelation 21:23-26. These verses describe the new light, which is eternal. Saved nations will dwell in the light of the new Jerusalem (see Mic. 4:2 and Isa. 49:18).

    Revelation 21:27. God justifies His covenant to Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob.

Glory of the Post-Millennium Age: Paradise Restored

    Revelation 22:1-6. These verses describe the glory of the Post-Millennium Age. They illustrate that God has kept His promise. Through Israel (not Jewry), the gentile nations have been blessed. Like Israel (Amos 3:2, Hos. 1:10, John 10:34-46, and Rom. 8:29), they can become sons of God (1 John 2:2). The curse that Adam brought upon creation is forever removed (Rev. 22:3). Man is now immortal. He has obtained physical and spiritual perfection.

    (Others place Chapter 22 in the Millennium Age and as a continuation of Chapter 21. Things described in Chapter 22 are pertinent to the Millennium and not the Post-Millennium Age.)

    Revelation 22:7-11. These verses contain the last message of the Bible. God never compels anyone to love or obey Him. He offers His love to all. His door is open to all to come in.

Satisfied Savior
    Revelation 22:13. Jesus is the “first-born of the dead,” the “resurrection and the life,” and the “door” of the sheepfold. From the time of his resurrection, he is the perfect immortal “image of the invisible God,” the “first-born of every creature” (see Col. 1:15,18).

    Revelation 22:14. God blesses those who obey Him. His blessings are available to all.

    Revelation 22:15. Those who do not turn from their sinful ways remain outside the City. Thus, no pardon can be given without repentance.

    Revelation 22:16. Jesus declares himself to be both the root (ancestor) and offspring (descendant) of David.

    Revelation 22:17. “Bride” refers to Israel (not Jewry). God through His Spirit and Israel (not Jewry) invites all men to come into the Kingdom.

    Revelation 22:18-19. These verses declare the unchangeable nature of God (see also Isa. 66:22). They warn against following manmade systems and laws.

Closing Remarks
    One of the many problems of the historicist explanation of Fox, Neser, and Rand is that they focus on the Papacy. Babylon probably refers to Jerusalem instead of Rome.

    Although the Papacy is probably part of the beast, dragon, etc. that Revelation condemns and casts into the lake of fire, it is most likely a minor part. The major part is the descendants of Pharisaism. Judaism, Jewry, is the primary descendant of Pharisaism. Other descendants and close relatives of Pharisaism are Freemasonry, most new age religions, the occult, secular humanism, Marxism, communism, fascism, socialism, welfare-warfare statism, Zionism, etc.

    Historicism suffers from many of the flaws that futurist explanation suffers. So far, both have failed at predicting the Second Coming. Whereas futurists interpret Revelation based on newspaper headlines, historicists interpret Revelation based on history books. Moreover, historicists, like futurists, must continuously update their explanation as more time passes (history occurs) without the end of the age arriving.

    The historicists whose explanations given in this article are adherents of the British-Israel doctrine (the Anglo-Saxon and other Germanic people are the lost tribes of Israel). They claim that the royal house of Great Britain is the House of David, i.e., it is a line of kings and queens descended from David. It may be. However, history of the last 250 years strongly suggests that the royal house of Great Britain is anti-Christ and has been in the forefront of man’s war against God and His Christ. One cannot be steeped as deeply in Freemasonry and other descendants of the Mysteries as members of the royal house are and be part of God’s true Church.

    The royal family of Great Britain may or may not be the blood kindred of the ancient kings of Israel. One thing that is sure is that they are the spiritual kindred of Israel’s kings. Instead of being practitioners and followers of the religion that God revealed to and through Noah, Abraham, Moses, and the prophets, the kings of Israel were practitioners and followers of the Mysteries. Likewise, the religion that the royal family practices and follows is a descendant of the Mysteries.

Copyright © 2011 by Thomas Coley Allen. 

Part 1 

 More articles on religion.