The Presidents Code – Ron Paul

The Presidents Code – Ron Paul

Ron Paul

Although Ron Paul has not held any of the offices which would make him an “official” part of the Presidents Code (such as President, Speaker of the House, etc.), he has played a significant part in the code.

Ron Paul rose to national prominence during the Presidential election of 2008, the same year that Barack Obama was elected to the Presidency.  In the Presidents Code, Obama’s Presidency is a portrayal of the days of Jesus the Messiah.  This is a time period in which the American people have grown tired of the corruptness of those in government, corresponding with the time period in the Biblical narrative of Israel flocking to John the Baptist and Jesus Christ who stood against the corruption of the religious leaders (government) of their day.  Ron Paul has played the role of John the Baptist in this great parable.

During the first century, the religious leaders of Israel had inherited a zealousness for the law from the Maccabees and saw their religion as that which defined them (1 Maccabees 2:19; 2 Maccabees 8:1; 14:38). The message of John the Baptist and Messiah was not that of religion, but of relationship with God through covenant (Acts 5:20; Luke 3:8; 13:25-29; Matthew 7:21-23; 18:3; 21:31; Luke 6:46).

The Founders of the United States did not envision Americans defining themselves according to political parties. They envisioned Americans defining themselves as freemen, given this liberty by their Creator. They were to be defined by their walk with God.

It is during the Presidency of Barack Obama that an identical political message, led by a Texas Congressman named Ron Paul, was brought forth to the people. A return to the true intent of the Constitution. A return to the Founders who ‘preached’ the ‘Gospel of Liberty.’

Amazingly, Ron Paul has been characterized in similar terms as John the Baptist. He has been described as a ‘Voice in the wilderness’ for his many years of standing against corruption in Washington despite being, many times, the only person voting against un-constitutional legislation (Isaiah 40:3; Matthew 3:3; Mark 1:3; Luke 3:4; John 1:23). In September 2011, Time magazine published an article on Ron Paul entitled ‘The Prophet’ as many of Dr. Paul’s warnings which were scoffed at in the past, have come true in recent years (Luke 7:28).

Ron Paul: The Prophet – TIME 9/5/11

The Prophet Elijah came from Gilead and John the Baptist, who came in his spirit, ministered in this land which was located on the Jordan river (1 Kings 17:1; Matthew 3:5-6; 177:10-13). Gilead was a land of doctors (Jeremiah 8:22) as Gilead was famous for healing rosin that dropped from trees which grew near the Jordan river.  Ron Paul’s profession before getting into politics was that of a doctor.

Yet another interesting connection is that the name Gilead comes from the ‘witness heap’ which Jacob and Laban set up to certify their covenant (Genesis 31:46-48). In the Presidents Code, this period was portrayed in the Presidency of Grover Cleveland. Cleveland was considered the ‘last Libertarian President’ who vetoed any legislation passed by Congress which he saw as unconstitutional. This led him to be called the ‘veto president.’

His Presidency parallels the political work of Ron Paul who has been given the nickname ‘Dr. No’ for the scores of legislation he voted against which he deemed as unconstitutional. Dr. Paul has also said that Grover Cleveland is the President he most admires most and even has a picture of him in his office.

Just as John the Baptist was sent with a message to return the people to the the law and their fathers (Malachi 4:4-6), Ron Paul has been raised up to deliver the message of returning to the Constitution and the ideology of the Founders. Theirs was a  message that God is the true source of freedom and the rights upon which this government is based.  Ron Paul’s words echo that of the Founders.

“It is God Who gave us life. As He is free, so are those He created in His image. Our rights to life and liberty are inalienable.”

“…My record of public service reflects my reverence for the Natural Rights with which we have been endowed by a loving Creator.”

“We have, as a people, lost our confidence and our understanding of what true liberty is all about and where it comes from …It doesn’t come from the government. Our liberties come from our Creator.”

“There is only one kind of freedom and that’s individual liberty. Our lives come from our creator and our liberty comes from our creator. It has nothing to do with government granting it.”

Ron Paul’s message has been so influential that a movement has been formed around it, dubbed the ‘Ron Paul Revolution.’ This movement has been especially influential amongst the youth of America. Former White House correspondent, Juan Williams, describes the movement as bringing about a ‘political age of Republican Ron Paul.’  This “political age of Ron Paul” will eventually lead to a new era in American politics (6th Party System) which will coincide with the days of the Apostles.

This ‘Ron Paul Revolution’ or ‘Liberty movement’ corresponds with the message of Jesus and John the Baptist and their disciples who carried forth the Gospel even after they were gone. What was their message? A return to the ‘faith once delivered to the saints’ (Jude 1:3), walking in the old paths wherein is the good way (Jeremiah 6:16; Matthew 11:28-29). This corresponds with the message of returning to the message of the Founders of this country, proclaimed in the Declaration of Independence.

The Gospel is a message of reconciliation between God and man through Jesus Christ where man is returned to his original state in the Garden (1 Corinthians 15:47-49; Romans 5:12-21), walking in the true intent of the law, the perfect law of liberty (John 8:31-32; Isaiah 8:16; Psalm 119:42-45; James 1:25; 2:10-12; Galatians 5:1, 13-14; 2 Corinthians 3:17), working out ones salvation with fear and trembling (Philippians 2:13). These concepts are paralleled in Ron Paul’s message of individual liberty. At one debate, when asked how he would use the ‘bully pulpit’ of the Presidency if elected, Ron Paul said he would use it to continue spreading the “Gospel of Liberty”.

“…The right to freedom being the gift of God Almighty…’The Rights of the Colonists as Christians’…may be best understood by reading and carefully studying the institutes of the great Law Giver and Head of the Christian Church, which are to be found clearly written and promulgated in the New Testament.” {Samuel Adams – Rights of the Colonists}

Ron Paul ran for President in 2008 and 2012 bringing a message which contradicted the establishment, just as John the Baptist and Jesus Christ contradicted the establishment of their days. Dr. Paul brought forth a message of returning to the Constitution and Bill of Rights which is based upon the unalienable rights given to man by his Creator. This is the ‘natural law’ which was defined by John Locke as the Law of God.

“…the Law of Nature stands as an Eternal Rule to all Men, Legislators as well as others. The Rules that they make for other Men’s Actions, must, as well as their own, and other Men’s Actions, be conformable to the Law of Nature, i.e. to the Will of God.” {John Locke – Of Civil Government}

The Ron Paul Revolution led to the forming of the ‘Tea Party.’ The foundations of the Tea Party trace back to December 2007 when Ron Paul supporters raised a record 6.5 million dollars in a single day in a ‘money bomb’ which was called the ‘Boston Tea Party 07.’ It was based upon the message of Ron Paul that the Tea Party formed, advocating a strict adherence to the U.S. Constitution.

However, the Tea Party in many ways departed from the message of Ron Paul and joined forces with the Republican party of whom Dr. Paul had chastised in 2008 as having gone astray from the principles of the Constitution. The Tea Party led the Republican party to landslide victories in the 2010 midterm elections resulting in a regain of control in the House of Representatives in 2011.

This division between followers of Ron Paul and those who would rally behind politicians like Sarah Palin and Michelle Bachmann depict the division between those who followed Messiah and those who followed Him not yet proclaimed His name (Luke 9:49-50; Mark 9:38-40). The primary difference between the ‘Paulites’ and the ‘Palinites’ is foreign policy. Ron Paul preaches the message of non-interventionism which was advocated by Washington and Jefferson. Sarah Palin and Michelle Bachmann preach a foreign policy which is more in line with the Neo-Conservative movement and the concept of ‘American Exceptionalism.’  This view is a corruption of the concept of a ‘shining city upon a hill.’

At the time of writing this article Ron Paul’s son, Rand Paul, had been raised up as the leader of the Tea Party movement and was a favorite in the Republican party to run for President in 2016. However, in the 2016 election Rand Paul has not turned out to be a front-runner for the nomination.  Anti-establishment candidates, Donald Trump, Ben Carson and Ted Cruz have taken up this mantle of Dr. Paul.

 

The corruption of government, the movement against the Federal Reserve and fiat currency, and the “messianic” fervor which followed Ron Paul in 2012 and his battle against Mitt Romney are all aspects which are in line with the parable of the Presidents Code.

 

In the code, Mitt Romney’s role pointed to the life of Herod. Willard, is Romney’s real first name. It is a Germanic name derived from the elements ‘wil’ which means will or desire and ‘hard’ which means hardy or cruel. A strong, hard will. Jesus, referring back to the words of Isaiah, applied this to the religious leaders who rejected Him. Their unrepentant heart kept their hearts far from Him (Isaiah 29:10-13; 6:9-10; Matthew 15:7-9; Mark 7:6-13). Cruelty was also a characteristic of these false shepherds of Israel (Ezekiel 34:4; Isaiah 56:11).

A mitt is a glove that fits on either hand. The word ‘mitt’ comes from the Middle English ‘myten’ which means the middle or center. This corresponds with Romney’s character of being a ‘flip-flopper’ who changed his mind on many major issues throughout his political career. This is also pointing to the Pharisees who attempted to serve two masters, God and mammon (Luke 16:13-14; 20:47; Matthew 23:14).

Romney is of Old Welsh origin and refers to a winding, meandering river. Again, this depicts the changing or meandering positions of Romney during his political life. His name is a portrayal of a double minded man who is unstable in all his ways (James 1:8).

It is not the purpose of this article to go into a condemnatory treatise on the Mormon faith. It is important to note however, that the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints proclaims to be a Christian church, yet has separated itself from mainstream Christendom. This corresponds to Herod who, although set up as King of the Jews, was not a Jew but an Edomite.

Former Mormon President and ‘prophet’ Gordon B. Hinckley even went so far as to say that the Jesus of Mormonism is different from the Jesus of mainstream Christianity.

The LDS Church News, in June 1998, reported the following:
“In bearing testimony of Jesus Christ, President Hinckley spoke of those outside the Church who say Latter-day Saints ‘do not believe in the traditional Christ. No, I don’t. The traditional Christ of whom they speak is not the Christ of whom I speak. For the Christ of whom I speak has been revealed in this the Dispensation of the Fulness of Times’”

However, Hinckley maintained he is a Christian.

“Am I Christian?” Hinckley asked rhetorically, “Of course I am. I believe in Christ. I talk of Christ. I pray through Christ. I’m trying to follow Him and live His gospel in my life”.

In 37 BC Marc Antony set up Herod as king of the Jews, yet in reality he was an Edomite. He was a false king. Herod knew of his illegitimacy which is why he attempted to kill Jesus when He was born as Jesus was the true King of Israel (Matthew 2:1-18).

Another important connection to note between Mitt Romney and King Herod is the ‘god-man’ concept. Mormons are known for their belief that they will become gods. Here a few examples from Mormon writings which proclaim this doctrine of man becoming god.

Joseph Smith, the Founder of the Mormon religion said:
“God himself was once as we are now, and is an exalted Man, and sits enthroned in yonder heavens. That is the great secret…Here, then, is eternal life—to know the only wise and true God; and you have got to learn how to be Gods yourselves, and to be kings and priests to God, the same as all Gods have done before you.” {Journal of Discourses 6}

The fifth LDS prophet Lorenzo Snow said in 1840, “As man is, God once was; as God is, man may become.”

Brigham Young also said, “The Lord created you and me for the purpose of becoming Gods like Himself” (Journal Of Discourses 3:93).

This idea of man being a god corresponds with Herod who was also proclaimed as such.

Acts 12:21 And upon a set day Herod, arrayed in royal apparel, sat upon his throne, and made an oration unto them.
Acts 12:22 And the people gave a shout, saying, It is the voice of a god, and not of a man.

 

Ron Paul & Mitt Romney

Another link between Herod and Mitt Romney is the beheading of John the Baptist (Matthew 14:10).  This relationship was seen, in parable form, in the 2012 Republican primaries between Mitt Romney and Ron Paul.  In the code, Ron Paul is a portrayal of John the Baptist.

In the 2012 race for President there were numerous parallels between Herod’s relationship with John the Baptist and Mitt Romney’s relationship with Ron Paul.

Scripture declares that Herod imprisoned John the Baptist and wanted him killed but would not do so openly because of fear (Matthew 14:5). Eventually, on his birthday he did have John beheaded at the behest of his wife (Matthew 14:6-11). Romney’s campaign never went on a full scale attack against Ron Paul during the 2012 campaign but during the Republican convention, or it could be said Romney’s ‘birthday,’ his true intentions were seen.

In the 2012 primaries, Mitt Romney made a conscious effort not to attack Ron Paul openly because, presumably, he feared him and the following he had attained.  So too, Herod feared John the Baptist (Mark 6:20).

A good example of why Romney feared Dr. Paul is seen in the 2008 primaries, Ron Paul had made a mockery of Mitt Romney’s response to a foreign policy question asked by Chris Matthews during a debate. Matthews asked:

“If you were President of the United States, would you need to go to Congress to get authorization to take military action against Iran’s nuclear facilities?”

Romney responded:
“Uh, you sit down with your attorneys to tell you what you have to do. But obviously the President of the United States has to do what is in the best interest of the United States to protect us against a potential threat. The President did that as he was planning to move into Iraq and received the authorization of Congress…”

Matthews interrupted with the question, “did he need it?”

“Uh, you know we are gonna let the lawyers sort out what he needed to do and what he didn’t need to do, but certainly what you want to do is have the agreement of all the people in leadership of our government as well as our friends around the world where the circumstances are available…”

Ron Paul was asked the same question, “do you believe the President needs authorization from Congress to attack strategic targets in Iran?”

“Absolutely. This idea of going and talking to attorneys totally baffles me. Why don’t we just open up the Constitution and read it? You’re not allowed to go war without a declaration of war!”

 

In the above video, Ron Paul was referring to Article One, Section Eight of the Constitution which says that only Congress is given the power to declare war. The last time that Congress formally declared war was in 1941 after Pearl Harbor was attacked. This means that since World War II, virtually none of the wars fought by the United States have been authorized by the Constitution.

 

In 1973, Congress passed the War Powers Resolution to prevent un-constitutional wars.  However, nearly every President since Gerald Ford has openly defied these War Powers Resolutions.  In the “Presidents Code” this displays the theme of kings ruling over Israel unto the the time of Caesar ruling over Israel.

In the 2012 Primaries, Romney avoided the same mistakes by referring to Ron Paul as the ‘constitutionalist.’ During a debate, Romney was asked by George Stephanopoulos if states had the right to ban contraception.

” I don’t know of any candidate that wants to do so, you’re asking could it constitutionally be done? We can ask our constitutionalist here [gesturing to Ron Paul]”

 

In the 2012 Primaries, the only person left between Mitt Romney and the nomination was Ron Paul. Through a strong grassroots movement, Ron Paul had amassed an estimated 500 or more delegates and won the majority of delegates in more than 5 states which would have given him at least a speaking spot at the Convention. There were even rumors of numerous ‘stealth’ delegates which would have voted for Ron Paul to cause a brokered convention. While a brokered convention was unlikely, the fear of chaos at the convention was foreseen by the Romney campaign and the Republican party.

Although Mitt Romney had been already been declared the presumptive nominee, these delegates could have caused an embarrassing situation to occur on the floor of the Republican convention where Romney would not have appeared as having the entire Republican party behind him. Perception is important in politics and the Republican party did not want to have Romney appear weak as he ran against an incumbent President.

To prevent this embarrassment, numerous rule changes were passed on the convention floor which caused much controversy. After taking a floor vote on the new rules, there was an obvious audible split between the ‘ayes’ and the ‘nays’ with some observers saying the ‘nays’ had the majority, but Speaker John Boehner proclaimed that the ‘ayes have it’ leading to a plethora of boos coming from the crowd. This is significant as after the clear display of opposing votes, Republican Party protocol declares that a roll call vote should have been made. The next day it came out why that roll call was not made. Speaker Boehner was reading off of a teleprompter and disregarded completely the delegates who opposed the new rules.

This is important to note as it reveals that the Republican party had already decided to pass the new rules regardless of any opposition on the floor.

The new rules that were passed bound delegates to the winner of the primary vote for each state. For instance, Ron Paul had the majority of delegates in states like Iowa and Maine but due to the new rules, these delegates would not be allowed to vote for Paul at the convention because he didn’t win the Primary vote. This unjust rule change even caused the Maine delegates to walk out in protest.

During the first day of the convention, Ron Paul made an appearance on the floor which caused a resounding round of applause and chants of ‘Let him speak.’ Days before the convention Ron Paul gave an interview with the New York Times and said that the convention organizers offered him a speaking role, but only if he gave a ‘full-fledged endorsement’ of Mitt Romney and agreed to have his remarks pre-approved. Ron Paul said ‘it wouldn’t be my speech’ and that to compromise ‘would undo everything I’ve done in the last 30 years.” Consequently, Dr. Paul did not endorse Mitt Romney and was not given a speaking spot at the Republican Convention.  However, the weekend before the ‘official’ convention a Ron Paul rally was held where he got to speak for over an hour to a sold out crowd of nearly 10,000 people.

These things are mentioned to give a small picture of how Mitt Romney obtained the Republican nomination and show how Ron Paul was unfairly treated.  Michael Alford documents this in more detail in his book “Swindled: How the GOP Cheated Ron Paul and Lost Themselves the Election“.

In essence, the 2012 primaries were a display of John the Baptist being imprisoned. The 2012 Republican Convention was a display of Herod beheading John. During the convention, Ron Paul adviser Doug Wead, spoke of Mitt Romney threatening Ron Paul during the 2012 primaries. Wead said that Romney threatened Ron Paul with a ‘PR A Bomb’ using his massive amounts of money to ‘destroy the name Ron Paul forever.’ Many had wondered why the two did not debate each other in the Spring of 2012 after the rest of the Presidential candidates dropped out of the race and why Ron Paul did not go on the attack against Romney during the campaign. This response by Wead, seemed to answer these questions.

These threats by Romney were a type of ‘binding’ of Ron Paul, corresponding with the imprisonment of John the Baptist (Mark 6:17). Televised debates between Ron Paul and Mitt Romney would have clearly displayed their differences and brought forth Dr. Paul’s message to a larger audience. A speaking spot at the Republican convention would have given Ron Paul even more influence as a large majority of Americans do not pay attention to Presidential races until the conventions. The actions of the Republican party at their convention and their refusal to allow Dr. Paul to speak at the convention, corresponds with the beheading or “silencing” of John the Baptist.

There is a lot more to this story but this should suffice for now to display the Herod – John the Baptist, Mitt Romney – Ron Paul parallel.  These events surrounding Ron Paul and the unjust actions by the Republican party may turn out to play a significant role in the shaping of America’s politics in the years to come. This is spoken of in more detail in the article: The Presidents Code – Sixth Party System

In the “code,” the Pharisees correspond with the Democratic party of today and the Sadducees correspond with the Republican party.  Historians even spoke of Pharisees as the “Liberals” and Sadducees as the “Conservatives” of their time.  As of yet, a major third party corresponding with the Apostles has not yet risen to power in the country but the ‘Liberty movement’ led by Ron Paul began pushing the nation in that direction.  In the code, Ron Paul portrays John the Baptist.  There are multiple minor parties (“third parties”) already in the country, the major one being the Libertarian party. However, as of now, the ‘Liberty movement’ has not fully embraced any of these parties so it remains to be seen if the Libertarian party will rise to prominence or if a new group will be formed entirely.

Note to the reader, this was an insight I saw based upon the code when this book was first put together in 2012.  I thought that the “Liberty movement” would be the catalyst in pushing this nation into a new era but the 2016 election has shown that this is not turning out to be the fullness of this move.  The primary theme of the 2016 election has been about establishment candidates versus anti-establishment candidates with the support of anti-establishment candidates rising to an historical level.

The large crowds and the almost ‘messianic fervor’ which was seen for Barack Obama in 2008, and Ron Paul in 2012 are indicative of the state of the people in this country.  This fervor has transitioned today to Donald Trump and Bernie Sanders.  The people are desperate for change.  They are tired of the corruption seen in their government.  This was seen during the days of Messiah as well.  The corruption of the religious leaders was seen by many in the nation so they flocked to John the Baptist and later to Jesus Christ.

This movement continued into the days of the Apostles recorded in the book of Acts where God’s dealings with His people began to change.  The focus of believers would change from the Temple system and a desire to rule in the Promised land, to spreading the Gospel of salvation to all of mankind.  This corresponds with the political change which is occurring in America.

The Presidents Code

The Presidents Code

blessing 4

Comments

comments

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *