---

The Jewish-ran Supreme Court of the United States is not the last chance for appeal.

For Christian justice, the People have a God-given right to an appeal directly to our God in a Christian Heaven.

Some call this prayer.

Some call this a Thomas Jefferson based justification to refresh the Tree of Liberty with the blood of Patriots and Tyrants.

---

---

It is said by Saint Paul:


How many Judeo-feminist women today are revolted when a man dare suggests that a Christian woman should fear her husband?  An instant call to 911 would result! A call, not to a minister, but to a non-religious government official.

And yet, these "empowered women" will deliberately miss the first part stating that a man should love his wife as himself.

Even more to the point of this article:


Christian Translation:
A Christian wife is not required to submit herself to a husband unless her future husband first submits himself to Christ, to the Church, and to God.

Godly translation:
A Christian wife can APPEAL TO GOD to remove herself from a hideous, non-Christian control by a sinful husband.

Christian practical translation:
If the husband is committing adultery in violation of God's law against adultery, without remorse or the asking of forgiveness, then the Christian wife has a God-given right to ask her church for a divorce.


Christian practical translation:
If the husband is constantly abusive to the wife in violation of God's law to treat his wife as he would treat himself, then the Christian wife can ask her church for a divorce.

Christian practical translation:
If the husband does not love her as Christ loves his Church, then the Christian wife can ask her church for a divorce.

Jewish practical translation:
It is evil and bad for any woman to submit herself to her husband under any circumstance and appeals to government divorce courts are not only allowed but highly suggested.


Being Judeo-lied to about the Christian sacrament of marriage, would it surprise you still to learn that you have also been Judeo-lied to about the Christian belief in the Divine Right of Kings?

In eliminating the period of kings starting with the French Revolution (1789) until the total collapse of European kings following the First World War (1917), Jews were forefront in portraying Christian Kings as tyrannically taking on all power of life and death in his Kingdom over his people who they portrayed as having no resort but to become mere slaves and serfs or else, to rise up as courageous freedom-fighters. Christian Czar Nicolas II being my favorite example of a Christian divine right being traded for Judeo-Communism under Jews.

OK, the divine right of Kings sounds good, but was itself a false set-up tangentially tied to Christianity.

Before the Protestant Revolution, a king's divine right came through the Pope.

Before England's King Henry VIII, a direct divine right of Kings did not exist.

Henry VIII threw the Pope out of England to make himself England's Pope as head of the Church of England, which eliminated the Pope as God's middle man. This belief in "give on to Caesar what is Caesar's and also give unto Caesar what is God's" of course did not sit well with the original Catholic Bible, so eventually Henry VIII's grandson was forced to commission a Biblical rewrite with the King James edition, embellishing the King (Caesar) as God's divine representative on Earth, in place of the Catholic Pope.

Jews pushed this narrative knowing all too well the obvious outcome. With absolute power over both God and Country, comes absolute abuse of power and corruption. The checks and balance of a Pope was removed in regards to the State. A separation of Church and State, where the State became the divorce judge, made for an unequal power structure. The Church was made subservient to the State.

The well-known obvious reaction to absolute abuse and corruption is revolution, as in the French and Russian Revolutions. Both advocated and pushed by Jews.

Today, the era of divine right of Kings is officially over, but in a Christian world-view, any ruler's authority over his ministers and people can be equated to a father and husband's authority over wife and children.

Following the sacramental marriage example, a king has a divine right to rule, and you must obey him, with one HUGE "But".  That is, he has a god given right to rule, BUT only so long as he rules his people in a Christian way.

The truth is the Kings of past pretty much always knew both their divine right and their divine responsibilities. The Jews would paint a much darker picture.

Our Founding Fathers understood this concept very well against an abusive tyrannical King, George II. They had seen the devastation of the Scots' attempt at freedom with the Jacobite uprising in 1745 AD, following their defeat at the Battle of Colloden in 1746 AD, resulting in permanent loss of the independence of the Scottish clan system. 

For American revolutionaries a generation later under his son George III, the first rights to the People were presented as God-given rights.

---

---

The Revolutionary War was began on April 14, 1772, in regards to the theft of pine trees on private lands by the King. Theft is a violation of Moses' 10 Commandments with no exceptions for Kings.

But Judeo-secular history books neglect to talk about "An Appeal to Heaven" as being the Godly inspiration for the American Revolution.

The New Hampshire Pine Tree Riot of 1772

New Hampshire’s oppressive pine tree laws sparked a little-known colonial uprising in 1772 called the Pine Tree Riot. An early test of British royal authority, it may have encouraged the Boston tee Party a year and a half later.

Britain had few trees big enough for the Royal Navy’s ships, and so the Crown reserved the tall white pines of northern New England for itself. The king’s surveyors traveled the woods, scoring the king’s trees with three slashes shaped like an arrow – the King’s Broad Arrow.

People honored the law far more in the breach than

In 1722, another pine tree law decreed settlers couldn’t cut any white pines bigger than a foot in diameter. The colonists then had to pay for a royal license to cut white pine trees on their own land.

The law wasn’t enforced much, probably because it wasn’t easy to. In 1736, one of the king’s surveyors seized the king’s white pine logs in Exeter. The enraged residents disguised themselves as Indians, beat up the surveying party, sank their boat and chased them into the woods, where they hid all night.

Then in 1766, the King George III appointed John Wentworth governor of New Hampshire. Wentworth’s crackdown on violators caused the Pine Tree Riot.

Scofflaws

Wentworth sent his deputy surveyor, John Sherburn, to search the sawmills of New Hampshire to find white pine trees marked for the Crown.

Sherburn found six mill owners in Goffstown and Weare who broke the law. The Goffstown mill owners paid their fines and got their logs back. The Weare mill owners refused.

On April 13, 1772, the leader of the Weare mill owners, Ebenezer Mudgett, was arrested by Sheriff Benjamin Whiting and Deputy John Quigley. Mudgett said he’d bring bail in the morning and they let him go. The sheriff and his deputy spent the night at Quimby’s Inn.

The Pine Tree Riot

According to William Little’s The history of Weare, New Hampshire, 1735-1888, Mudgett spent a busy evening with the townspeople planning the Pine Tree Riot.

At dawn the next morning, Mudgett burst into Whiting’s room and told him he had his bail. As Whiting chided him for waking him so early, 20 men with soot-blackened faces rushed into the room. They held the sheriff down on the floor, two men on each side, and beat him to their heart’s content. Wrote Little:

Getting Off Easy

In the end, eight participants in the Pine Tree Riot were identified and ordered to appear in court. They were charged with rioting, disturbing the peace and assaulting Sheriff Whiting. The judges, clearly in sympathy with the rioters, ordered them to pay a fine of 20 shillings and court costs. Some view the light fine for the Pine Tree Riot as encouraging the Boston Tea Party.

One of the judges, Meshech Weare, helped to frame New Hampshire’s constitution and served as the first president of the state. The pine tree became a symbol of colonial resistance. Patriots used it in the flags flown at the Battle of Bunker Hill, by the Massachusetts navy and by ships commissioned by George Washington for the Continental Army.

---

---

Does God require your Christian allegiance to your King when your King professes a non-Christian belief in Socialism to steal your hard earned labor from you in order to spread your wealth to others whom you have not agreed to receive your Christian charity?
 
Does God require your Christian allegiance to your King when your King sends your sons off to fight endless wars not for Christian benefit, but against historic enemies of Jesus-denying Israel?

Does God require your Christian allegiance to your King when your King is not insuring the allegiance of deep state government officials to follow our Christian laws?

Does God require your Christian allegiance to your King when your King is not protecting your borders from non-Christian invaders?

Does God require your Christian allegiance to your King when your King allows himself to be controlled by non-Christian Jews doing all of the above?

England's King George II and III were saints compared to what we have evolved into since our Revolution and we are long overdue for another God-given right to rebel against ungodly rulers.

---