The "Christian Nation" myth is one that I haven't covered very often on my blog, though I have written about it a few times in the past and have also given it fairly extensive treatment in my refutation of David Aikman's book The Delusion of Disbelief. However, many of the facts can be hard to find throughout these many posts and long reviews so I decided to create a series of posts bringing together all the facts which debunk this lie of a christian nation.
With many christian apologist websites claiming the opposite, it can often be hard for the average person surfing the internet to figure out what to believe. From big time frauds and hucksters like David Barton to lesser known individuals, many christians are knowingly and unknowingly spreading this revisionist history (some even claim that those trying to correct these distortions are the revisionists!!!). It's time to sort out fact from fiction.
Having lost the legal battles to get Creationism/Intelligent Design into schools, many Christian apologists have begun to use a new tactic, and that is trying to distort history and claim this is a “Christian Nation”, or a country founded upon Christian principles and founded by Christians. Many of these apologists are commonly called historical revisionists. Two examples of this breed of apologist are David Barton, author of Original Intent, [1] and Stephen K. McDowell, author of America's Providential History, co-authored by Mark A. Beliles.
If pseudo-historians can fool enough people about this country being founded upon Christian principles and by Christians than perhaps they will allow religion taught in schools (ie. Creationism/Intelligent Design).The sad part is that many judges have even fallen for this ploy and they are the ones who are supposed to uphold the constitution!
For example, in 1985 Justice William H. Rehnquist said:
"The wall of separation between church and state is a metaphor based on bad history; a metaphor that has proved useless as a guide to judging. It should frankly and explicitly abandoned." [2]
Two of the most common claims spread is that this was a country founded upon “Christian principles” and the other, that this country was founded by Christians. Both of these are false.
In this first part I will tackle the claim that this country was founded upon “Christian principles.” [3]
When defenders of the faith are trying to convince people of their claims they often say that the United States was originally founded by pious Christians and was meant to be a “city upon a hill.” It is true that the original settlers did intend this land to be a “Christian” nation, a nation full of hope and new beginnings, but something that many seem to overlook is the fact that the actual United States was not founded with the Mayflower Compact as some historical revisionists would have it. They do this because the Mayflower Compact used much religious language, which the revisionists try to fool those less knowledgeable of history into thinking that the country was founded with christianity in mind with the Mayflower Compact. [4] In truth, the United States was actually founded over 150 years later, in 1787, while the Mayflower was signed in 1620.
This is important because the Constitution includes no religious wording other than "no religious test shall ever be required as a qualification to any office..." and that "congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion..." The United States of America and the colonies that were set up in present day Massachusetts and other places are two separate entities.
Failing with that argument, many revisionists claim that the Bible had much influence over the Founding Fathers and greatly inspired them, leading them to the conclusion that this was founded upon “Christian” principles. Once again, the facts cast serious doubt upon this claim as well, though they often use deception to fool people into believing this was the case.
One such example is David Aikman who, in his book The Delusion of Disbelief, wrote that “It is hard to ignore the evidence that the Jewish and Christian Bible provided the clearest sources of inspiration to [the Founders]. Scholars have looked at what the original source material was of the quotations in the Founder's writings, and they have discovered that by far the largest percentage came from the Bible: 34 percent. The next largest source, 22 percent, were the Enlightenment authors...” [5]
Mr. Aikman does not cite which “scholars” came to that conclusion, so I'm unsure of his exact source, however, I happened to come across a chart in a book by Donald S. Lutz titled The Origins of American Constitutionalism and on page 141 is likely the chart that Aikman referenced. [6]
On page 140 of The Origins of American Constitutionalism Lutz explains these percentages:
"If we ask which book was most frequently cited in that literature [the public political literature], the answer is, the Bible. Table 1 shows that the biblical tradition accounted for roughly one-third of the citations in the sample. However, the sample includes about one-third of all significant secular publications, but only about one-tenth of the reprinted sermons. Even with this undercount, Saint Paul is cited about as frequently as Montesquieu and Blackstone, the two most-cited secular authors, and Deuteronomy is cited about twice as often as all of Locke's writings put together. A strictly proportional sample with respect to secular and religious sources would have resulted in an abundance of religious references.
About three-fourths of all references to the Bible came from reprinted sermons. The other citations to the Bible came from secular works and, if taken alone, would represent 9 percent of all citations - about equal to the percentage for classical writers. Although the citations came from virtually every part of the bible, Saint Paul was the favorite in the New Testament, especially parts of the Epistle to the Romans in which he discusses the basis for and limits on obedience to political authorities."
So, the three-quarters of that 34% total came from a sub-category of one of the categories of the documents in the study. This would cause the bible (as Lutz explains above) to be knocked down to about nine percent, more in agreement with another historian in Frank Lambert, who says that “almost 90 percent of the references are to European writers who wrote on Enlightenment or Whig themes or who commented on the English common law. Only about 10 percent of the citations were biblical, with most of those coming from writings attributed to Saint Paul." [7]
In the second part I will tackle the beliefs of the Founding Fathers and expose the claim that they were all pious Christians.
References:
1. Wikipedia.org - David Barton; accessed 10-9-09
2. Wallace v. Jaffree, 105 U.S. 2479 (1985); accessed 10-9-09
3. One historical revisionist making this claim can be found at Examiner.com:
America: Was it founded on Christian beliefs and principals? (Part one)
4. http://arizonaatheist.blogspot.com/2009/05/delusion-of-david-aikman-revised-at_16.html; accessed 10-9-09
5. The Delusion of Disbelief: Why the New Atheism Is a Threat to Your Life, Liberty, and Pursuit of Happiness, by David Aikman, Tyndale House Publishers, Inc., 2008; 156
6. Because Aikman did not cite his source for this information I must assume that he either read Lutz's study and didn't not look deep enough into what Lutz said on the issue or he read another historical revisionists' work and simply trusted that the information was accurate.
7. The Founding Fathers and the Place of Religion in America, by Frank Lambert, Princeton University Press, 2003; 246
I give you points for determination and work ethic.
ReplyDeleteHowever Im not sure you know where the idea of a free country comes from.
What is your opinion on why freedom of religion was the first item mentioned in such a groundbreaking document?
Did you know?
Every original grammar school, hospital, orphanage, library and homeless shelter were All started by Christians.
All original universities were started as seminaries. Princeton, Harvard, Yale etc..
You are only Free to have this website because we have inalienable rights endowed by our creator. In God we trust was placed on our currency during the cold war to separate ourselves from the soviets who thought that the government could take rights away. We trusted in God...more specifically in the Lord.
In the "original" America the government was put in place to protect these rights and that there was a transcendent truth that went beyond our everyday lives.
George Washington required his soldiers to attend church services weekly.
I could keep going but I think you wont get it no matter the amount of facts I throw at you.
I suppose you believe that the government gives us our rights.
Every free piece of land in the entire world was founded with the leading of the gospel.
YOu cant change history.
I as well as you, enjoy genuine discussions.
Ps... YOu should be embracing Americas heritage. It is the only reason you are able to do what you do.
bbrandis33@gmail.com
Hi Brian,
ReplyDeleteThanks for the comment. However, I'm not sure what your points have to do with the point of this series. My goal was to demonstrate that the U.S. was not founded by Christians or Christian principles. I think I demonstrated this beyond a shadow of a doubt. So, what do you argue instead? It seems that, rather than try to rebut the case I made, you'd like to discuss things that Christians did and where freedom comes from. You make several points so allow me respond to each in turn.
First, I'd like to say that prior to the Enlightenment I would likely have been persecuted by Christians for writing “blasphemy.” It was only with the social advances of the age of Enlightenment that these values became to dominate. Otherwise, I likely would have been thrown in front of an Inquisitor.
Second, freedom came, in part, from the the Greek and Roman societies, particularly the idea of democracy.
Yes, Christians developed hospitals and facilities for education but what does this have to do with supposedly inventing the idea of freedom, and how is it a response to the fact that this is not a Christian nation? It's not. I should point out, however, that these universities were not built for the sole purpose of eduction, but indoctrination into their belief system. For example, the purpose in founding Harvard University in 1636, for instance, was – according to the earliest known document – so that “every one shall consider the Mayne End of his life & studyes to know God & Jesus Christ, which is Eternall life.”
As with most Christian endeavors, their goals were not so much humanitarian, but propagation of their belief system.
On the contrary, Christianity borrowed (or should I say stole?) the idea of natural rights from Aristotle. And these views were also prevalent throughout the Enlightenment and it was the Enlightenment, which was the Founders' inspiration for such language. You might be interested in reading The Natural Rights Republic by Michael P. Zuckert, on this subject.
I could keep going and explain to you why this was never a “Christian” nation, and why Christianity didn't contribute hardly anything to society that was not already created by someone else. However, I've already refuted each of your points and I think this series (and other posts on this blog) does a pretty good job of doing that for me.
Thanks.
I never said Christians invented anything.
ReplyDeleteYou are talking about apples and oranges.
A couple of major attempts at democracy were the Greeks in the 6th centuryBC, and the Romans in the 2nd centuryBC. In Greece the lawgiver drew up a legal system that would allow people to make their own laws. Plato and Aristotle thought that a just society was one where every man is moved by concern for the common good. The Romans then took this idea and came up with a system of laws based on natural law......However... these rights were often only given to the upper classes and royalty....... this is much different than
what Christ taught and what the founding fathers adopted.
The United States is the first country to make the man superior to the state!
The founding fathers adopted the idea that Man was created in the divine image of God, and in the eyes of God all men are created equal. This set the standard that gave the individual independent value.
The Declaration of Independence states these Christian ideas this way........
"We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all Men are created equal.........YOU KNOW THE REST.
This is really a non-issue and there is really no debate.
IT is, what it is .........You cant change history!
Brian,
ReplyDeleteOnce again, how does this discussion relate to the matter at hand, namely whether or not the U.S. is a Christian nation?
As to the religious character or the level to which god (which one you do not specify) had a hand in inspiring the creation of the U.S., this was responded to decades ago by one of the men who actually helped found the U.S. John Adams, in his A Defence of the Constitutions of Government of the United States of America, wrote the following:
“The United States of America have exhibited, perhaps, the first example of governments erected on the simple principles of nature: and if men are now sufficiently enlightened to disabuse themselves of artifice, imposture, hypocrisy, and superstition, they will consider this event as an era in their history. Although the detail of the formation of the American governments is at present little known or regarded either in Europe or America, it may hereafter become an object of curiosity. It will never be pretended that any persons employed in that service had any interviews with the gods, or were in any degree under the inspiration of heaven, any more than those at work upon ships or houses, or labouring in merchandize or agriculture: it will for ever be acknowledged that these governments were contrived merely by the use of reason and the senses.” (emphasis mine)
This decisive quote soundly refutes your argument. One of the founders says explicitly that the U.S. was formed with nothing but “the use of reason and the senses” and says that there was no religious or godly inspiration whatsoever when he writes how no person having a hand in the founding of the country “had any interviews with the gods, or were in any degree under the inspiration of heaven,” which is implying that religion had no hand in the foundation of the U.S. In another document, called the Treaty of Tripoli, in article 11, it states clearly that “the Government of the United States of America is not, in any sense, founded on the Christian religion.” Here are two documents saying that the U.S. was not founded upon any concept of any god or religion, let alone the specific religion of Christianity.
The Declaration of Independence is not a founding document. It is merely a historical one given to George III, the King of England saying that the U.S. wishes to break away from his rule and lays out the reasons why. This is not a legal document in any way. What the U.S.'s foundation was built upon was the Constitution and this document contains nothing that even hints at Christianity, let alone any other religion, or any gods, having a part in the founding of the country. As a matter of fact, had you read beyond this first part, in the second part I quote Thomas Jefferson's autobiography when he recalls the time when explicitly Christian religious views were to be placed within the first amendment that Jesus Christ was the source of religious liberty, and how this was “rejected by the great majority, in proof that they meant to comprehend, within the mantle of its protection, the jew and the gentile, the christian and mohammedan, the hindoo and infidel of every denomination."
Continued from above:
ReplyDeleteI honestly believe you need to brush up on your history. I think I can say the same thing to you: You can't change history, no matter how hard you might try. The U.S. was not founded upon Christianity, nor any other religious idea. In fact, one last fact I will cite is this. While doing comparisons on the literature of the founding era historian Frank Lambert, in his book The Founding Fathers and the Place of Religion in America, writes that “almost 90 percent of the references are to European writers who wrote on Enlightenment or Whig themes or who commented on the English common law. Only about 10 percent of the citations were biblical, with most of those coming from writings attributed to Saint Paul.” This fact is backed up by other studies by Donald S. Lutz, when he did a similar comparison and found that only 9 percent of citations to the bible could be found by the founders, while a whopping ninety percent of citations of Enlightenment thinkers and writers. I think your case has been thoroughly dismantled.
Thanks.
I don't feel that you have dismantled my case....although you are a skilled debater I see.
ReplyDeleteYou say that America has nothing to do with Christianity?....yet you also say that 9-10% of citations could be found to be biblical...which is it?
In your argument there should be No biblical references.
This supports my point.
I am not trying to dismantle your argument...as I don't believe there is one.
I have a library of books and quotes from Christopher Columbus all the way up to Abraham Lincoln on this subject....(as do you, I'm sure)...however.... I don't want to go back and fourth with quotes. I think we will be here all day if we do that.
I will agree to disagree.
We both have the same evidence....the difference is what part we choose to highlight.
I feel that I cant make my point any more clear.
This being said....even though we don't agree on this subject. I am very impressed with the amount of time and effort you have put into your website.
It is just a shame that your agenda tends to take the drivers seat.
I can tell you are very smart, articulate and driven.
I wish you were on the right side! hehe
Have a nice day, Im sure you will hear from me again....Brian
ITs me again.
ReplyDeleteI just read your entry again and I found a apparent contradiction. Maybe I am reading something wrong....what do you think?
You said in your first post that "Natural law"
was not new to a Government.....
Yet......your quote from John Adams says " the united states have exhibited, perhaps, the first example of governments erected on the simple principles of nature"
IM not trying to be a smart ass, Im really asking you what you think....
Brian
Ok I guess I wasn't really done!
ReplyDeletesorry if my multiple posts are annoying.
I found a couple more things that I disagree with you on.
1)The constitution says " the year of our Lord"
There are many gods....but only one Lord!
The founding fathers were brilliant and well versed in history and Christianity. They knew very well what they were doing with this statement. At the time of the writing of the constitution the calendar that was used...was known as the Gregorian calendar. This calendar was a Christian calendar due to the fact that the Birth of Christ is the starting point. This is the same calendar that we use today.
2) I think I disagree with your interpretation of the quote from John Adams. When interpreting a quote sometime you have to look at other quotes the same person made....other wise known as taking out of context.
Our second president also said." It is the will of heaven that the two countries should be sundered forever; It may be the will of heaven that America shall suffer calamities still more wasting and distresses yet more dreadful"
so.....Is John Adams confused?
probably not.
You left out the part where he says " anymore than those at work upon ships and houses"
In this quote what he is saying is that, The founding fathers and the founding documents did not have any special revelation from God more than the ordinary person.
It is written on common sence because it is for all men, great or small.
Im sure I will be hearing from you soon!
Hi Brian,
ReplyDeleteMost people aren't convinced when their arguments go against the facts, but that's the truth. You can either accept it or not. Personally, I think one ought to go where the facts lead, or else I think one is just fooling oneself if not.
I've demonstrated that the bible wasn't much of an inspiration at all, and one of the founders explicitly stated that religion played no part in the forming of the U.S. Furthermore, I even cited another founder as saying when it was proposed that religious wording be placed in the Constitution, this idea was quickly voted down by the majority. If, as you say, this was really a Christian nation, why all of the explicit denials and outright dismissals when the subject comes up? Surely, if the founders meant to found the country upon religious principles they'd speak up and say, “Yes, we based it upon such and such religious doctrine.” But we don't see this. We see the complete opposite.
You write, ”You say that America has nothing to do with Christianity?....yet you also say that 9-10% of citations could be found to be biblical...which is it? In your argument there should be No biblical references. This supports my point.”
No, that's not my argument that there are no biblical references because there obviously is. Yes, I said that Christianity had nothing to do with the founding of the U.S. because I was going by what the founders themselves said. The studies having to do with biblical references examined all of the founders' writings, and had nothing specifically to do with their ideas on the founding of the U.S. as far as I'm aware. Given the fact that the founders were religious, it's no surprise that there are biblical references peppered throughout their writings. This is why I don't believe this fact supports your case in any way.
You write, ”I am not trying to dismantle your argument...as I don't believe there is one.
I have a library of books and quotes from Christopher Columbus all the way up to Abraham Lincoln on this subject....(as do you, I'm sure)...however.... I don't want to go back and fourth with quotes. I think we will be here all day if we do that. I will agree to disagree. We both have the same evidence....the difference is what part we choose to highlight. I feel that I cant make my point any more clear.”
I think I already made my argument in the three posts I've written on the subject, demonstrating how each of the common arguments that are brought up to prove the U.S. is a Christian nation are factually inaccurate. You didn't address a single argument in any post, so I responded directly to your own claims, and showed that there was no godly inspiration, no religious inspiration, as told by the men who should know best: the very people who founded the country.
I think quotes are important, but there are many quotes by the founders put out there that are not accurate, or are taking them out of context. One such person I know who peddles quotes like these are the historical revisionist David Barton. Perhaps you've heard of him?
You write, ”This being said....even though we don't agree on this subject. I am very impressed with the amount of time and effort you have put into your website. It is just a shame that your agenda tends to take the drivers seat. I can tell you are very smart, articulate and driven. I wish you were on the right side! Hehe”
Believe you me, I am on the right side. :- ) And thanks for the compliments. Like I said at the outset of my reply here, facts are facts and that's all I'm doing is providing facts for you that show that what you believe about the founding of the country being based on religion is not accurate. I'm simply following the evidence where it leads. That is all. There is no agenda in that.
Cont.
You write, ”1)The constitution says " the year of our Lord"”
ReplyDeleteSo? How is this supposed to demonstrate that this is a Christian nation? This was the standard way of stating the date during this time. Does the Constitution say anything about deriving any Constitutional principle from Christianity or any other religion? No, which is the entire point of the discussion.
You write, ”You write, “2) I think I disagree with your interpretation of the quote from John Adams. When interpreting a quote sometime you have to look at other quotes the same person made....other wise known as taking out of context. Our second president also said." It is the will of heaven that the two countries should be sundered forever; It may be the will of heaven that America shall suffer calamities still more wasting and distresses yet more dreadful" so.....Is John Adams confused? probably not.”
This is a quote taken from a letter from John Adams to Abigail Adams, dated July 3. 1776. What is Adams saying here? Let's take him in context, because this quote mentions nothing about any religious principles that the country might have been founded upon. Adams, like all the founders were religious, so they often used religious phrases and wording in their writings. This is one example. What Adams was talking about what America's split with Britain and that he believed it was god's plan. Again, this isn't saying that the country was founded upon religion, he's simply saying (because he is religious after all) that he believes god allowed this to take place. Just as a believer today might say that it was god's will that he'd get a big bonus because of all the hard work he's put in. So, no, Adams wasn't confused. He was simply religious, like most during that time and today.
You write, ” You left out the part where he says " anymore than those at work upon ships and houses" In this quote what he is saying is that, The founding fathers and the founding documents did not have any special revelation from God more than the ordinary person. It is written on common sence because it is for all men, great or small.”?
I'm sorry but you're misreading Adams. He said, “It will never be pretended that any persons employed in that service had any interviews with the gods, or were in any degree under the inspiration of heaven, any more than those at work upon ships or houses, or labouring in merchandize or agriculture.”
What is he saying here? He's saying that just as those who build things, like ships or houses, the founders also did not need to resort to any religious influence when building the country. The words “any more” mean, “just as” in this context. So, I could rephrase Adams by writing, “It will never be pretended that any persons employed in that service had any interviews with the gods, or were in any degree under the inspiration of heaven, just as those at work upon ships or houses, or labouring in merchandize or agriculture.”
I could just as easily say, “I don't need donuts any more than that guy!” What do I mean here? Do I mean that I don't need as many donuts as the other guy? No. I'm saying (just like Adams) that just as the other guy doesn't need any donuts at all, neither do I. Make sense?
Thanks and take care.