Were Most Of America's Founding Fathers - Christians

[DriftingSand]

"Believers in the Father, Son, and Holy Ghost, or, as they would be known today, “an extremist Fundementalist hate group.”

Fundamentalists are a small portion of Christianity and do not define it generally.

Agreed. The Bible and the tenets of the New Testament define the Gospel and Christ's intent for His followers.

 

[Hollie]

I didn't hear anyone in the videos teach that the public schools are teaching that any founders were atheists (though I might have missed it). I'll watch them again.

I think that the main point is the fact that our Christian roots are either ignored and not taught at all or the fact is under-emphasized. I would have to see a modern text book on American history to see what is being taught today. I graduated from public school in 1975 but I can say that I never once heard my history teachers emphasize America's Christian roots.

In the first video, around 8:32 sec, the guests claims that now the public schools teach that all the founding fathers are atheists and agnostics...

Start around 8:00 and let it play.


There are some other claims that I find a bit curious. For instance, he shows us a document that has written on it "The year of our Lord Christ" and pushes the claim that Jefferson is a Christian because he signed this document. However, Jefferson signs the document, How do we know if it was Jefferson that drafted the document? Wouldn't this piece of evidence indicate that the drafter was christian? I don't think this document can be used to indicate the signatures faith without establishing a connection between the signatures and the draft type.

I just find that curious--did not catch it the first time I watch it.

The document, by itself, is a piece of evidence but not proof. I would also include the fact that Jefferson started a church right in the halls of Congress and also send missionaries to evangelize the Indians. If he wasn't a Christian he certainly seemed to act like one.

Jefferson also owned slaves and wrote his own bible.

 

[DriftingSand]

“[The textbook] by Barton displays a clear devotional tone and contains a number of religious truth-claims that cross the line into promotion of a particular religion. Beyond this, the curriculum presents a problematic historical account of the founding period that falls well outside mainstream scholarly understanding, providing inaccurate, incomplete and biased profiles of various leading figures from that era.” Exposing David Barton?s Bad History | TFN Insider

Barton is an amateur historian, interesting but very flawed on the founding of America and the role of Christianity.

For an "amateur" he certainly knows a WHOLE lot more than the University-trained "experts." But we all know the types of folks that Universities produce these days (in most cases). Do you happen to know how many actual, pre-1900 documents Barton/Wallbuilders have? Likely one of the largest (if not THE largest) collections in America. More than you and me combined.

 

[JakeStarkey]

As a school board president for two school systeme, one public and one private, the members of the board and I always reviewed the text books.

The history books taught the English reformation, the Puritans and Pilgrims, the Catholics, the Quakers, etc, in the founding of the colonies.

They taught that the Constitution is a secular document with strong religious input.

They taught the 1st and 2nd Great Awakenings.

And so forth.

They do not teach fundamentalist modern day politicial principles.

 

[DriftingSand]

In the first video, around 8:32 sec, the guests claims that now the public schools teach that all the founding fathers are atheists and agnostics...

Start around 8:00 and let it play.


There are some other claims that I find a bit curious. For instance, he shows us a document that has written on it "The year of our Lord Christ" and pushes the claim that Jefferson is a Christian because he signed this document. However, Jefferson signs the document, How do we know if it was Jefferson that drafted the document? Wouldn't this piece of evidence indicate that the drafter was christian? I don't think this document can be used to indicate the signatures faith without establishing a connection between the signatures and the draft type.

I just find that curious--did not catch it the first time I watch it.

The document, by itself, is a piece of evidence but not proof. I would also include the fact that Jefferson started a church right in the halls of Congress and also send missionaries to evangelize the Indians. If he wasn't a Christian he certainly seemed to act like one.

Jefferson also owned slaves and wrote his own bible.

Doesn't change the fact that most of our founders were Christians and incorporated several of the tenets of Christianity into the founding documents.

 

[JakeStarkey]

“[The textbook] by Barton displays a clear devotional tone and contains a number of religious truth-claims that cross the line into promotion of a particular religion. Beyond this, the curriculum presents a problematic historical account of the founding period that falls well outside mainstream scholarly understanding, providing inaccurate, incomplete and biased profiles of various leading figures from that era.” Exposing David Barton?s Bad History | TFN Insider

Barton is an amateur historian, interesting but very flawed on the founding of America and the role of Christianity.

Most is backed up by documents and personal letters found in the National Archives.

Selectively picking and choosing and ignoring documents.

That is propaganda, not history.

 

[DriftingSand]

As a school board president for two school systeme, one public and one private, the members of the board and I always reviewed the text books.

The history books taught the English reformation, the Puritans and Pilgrims, the Catholics, the Quakers, etc, in the founding of the colonies.

They taught that the Constitution is a secular document with strong religious input.

They taught the 1st and 2nd Great Awakenings.

And so forth.

They do not teach fundamentalist modern day politicial principles.

Thank you. That's what I'm talkin' about! Strong Christian influence.

 

[JakeStarkey]

Doesn't change the fact that most of our founders were Christians and incorporated several of the tenets of Christianity into the founding documents.

Far right social conservative political propaganda.

 

[thebrucebeat]

“[The textbook] by Barton displays a clear devotional tone and contains a number of religious truth-claims that cross the line into promotion of a particular religion. Beyond this, the curriculum presents a problematic historical account of the founding period that falls well outside mainstream scholarly understanding, providing inaccurate, incomplete and biased profiles of various leading figures from that era.” Exposing David Barton?s Bad History | TFN Insider

Barton is an amateur historian, interesting but very flawed on the founding of America and the role of Christianity.

Most is backed up by documents and personal letters found in the National Archives.

He cherry picks his documentation to support a position. He doesn't do thorough research to uncover whatever is there.
In the Treaty of Tripoli we have an official state document that specifically declares "Since the United States is in no way founded on the Christian faith...". Some of the Founders are in Congress and are signatories to this document.
Why is this not part of Barton's " research".
He is an agenda driven proselytizer.
Surely you can do better than him.

 

[MHunterB]

For anyone who denies that the USA's Constitution and intent of the founders is NOT influenced by Christianity then you need to read this essay: Christianity and the American Constitution

There's a HUGE difference between the FF having been 'influenced' by Christianity - and their having intended to promote Christianity over other faith traditions in the US.

What the FF *did* promote was individual conscience wherever it was possible to do so without destroying the social fabric. The phrase 'all men are created equal' is one way in English to indicate 'all human beings' - as opposed to 'male White Christians', which is the interpretation some have put on that phrase.

As for 'Supreme Being' - that is 'doctrine -neutral' and covers all monotheism, as well as possibly extending to henotheism as well...... Certainly our FF were aware of some of the other religious traditions followed outside of their own society.

Of course! I agree with everything you've said, Marge. Except for the last two sentences.

As the founding fathers were believers in G-d, they meant G-d of the Bible not any other god. As you point out they had no intention of forcing others to become christians or have a legal system INFLUENCED by Christianity. It is all men created EQUAL. Which is why we are not executing homosexuals in this country. This was the wisdom of our founding fathers. All men created equal means all men not just men who are Christians. It is a compliment to Christianity that our founding fathers made clear they were not imposing their will on others. Thanks for reading. - Jeri

Jeri, I agree and I disagree : )) Mostly, I agree.....

I don't have any argument with the idea that our Constitution and the FF's intent were devoid of any religious influence whatsoever of Christianity (by anyone's definition - as we see here Christians disagreeing....). I think that idea is a 'strawman'.

As to whether the FF were intending to limit the meaning of 'Supreme Being' to ONLY the 'BibleGOD' they understood - I really do NOT think so. Because they didn't say 'GOD of the Bible' or anything like that. Now we might want to consult other, specifically Christian religious, writings of the time to see if the phrase 'Supreme Being' was commonly being used to indicate 'BibleGOD': I admit I haven't read that body of literature.

What we DO know about that phrase, 'Supreme Being', is that it's very similar to the title 'Supreme Architect' which is accorded to GOD by Freemasonry. We know that the FM started as a Christian fraternity - BUT we also know that Jews and other monotheists were not excluded from the not-specifically-Christian Masonic degrees (which is most of 'em). And we also know that a free Black man, one Prince Hall, also received a Charter from the Grand Lodge of England, to establish a lodge in America. And we know that many of the were indeed members of Masonic lodges....

Of course as a woman I've got little direct experience - but there are any number of Past Masters among family and friends for me to consult, including a couple of District Deputies and a couple of Knights as well.

I know that back around 1980, the Southern Baptist Convention announced its members could no longer participate in Freemasonry exactly because the SBC considered it improper for its members to enter into any 'fellowship' with "nonbelievers" of any sort. It is that element of denominational supremacism which is the opposite of the Friends' (Quakers) tradition of 'seeking that of GOD within every person'.

I believe that it is a compliment to the FF's understanding of Christian faith - as opposed to that expressed by the SBC - that the FF didn't seek to set up any religious preference or primacy of Christianity over other faiths in our nation.

And I thank the GOD of my understanding frequently for such vision as theirs!

 

[DriftingSand]

“[The textbook] by Barton displays a clear devotional tone and contains a number of religious truth-claims that cross the line into promotion of a particular religion. Beyond this, the curriculum presents a problematic historical account of the founding period that falls well outside mainstream scholarly understanding, providing inaccurate, incomplete and biased profiles of various leading figures from that era.” Exposing David Barton?s Bad History | TFN Insider

Barton is an amateur historian, interesting but very flawed on the founding of America and the role of Christianity.

Most is backed up by documents and personal letters found in the National Archives.

Selectively picking and choosing and ignoring documents.

That is propaganda, not history.

Isn't that what secularists do when they ignore the documents indicating a Christian influence? It's okay for you guys but not okay for Barton? Any logical explanation?

 

[JakeStarkey]

As a school board president for two school systeme, one public and one private, the members of the board and I always reviewed the text books.

The history books taught the English reformation, the Puritans and Pilgrims, the Catholics, the Quakers, etc, in the founding of the colonies.

They taught that the Constitution is a secular document with strong religious input.

They taught the 1st and 2nd Great Awakenings.

And so forth.

They do not teach fundamentalist modern day politicial principles.

Thank you. That's what I'm talkin' about! Strong Christian influence.

But not fundamentalist propaganda of today.

The documents clearly teach that the Founders were afraid of organized religion being a part of government.

That's why the Constitution is secular.

That's why the states got rid of established churches.

That's why modern Christians are not going to let fundamentlist dogma into our history books.

 

[JakeStarkey]

Isn't that what secularists do when they ignore the documents indicating a Christian influence? It's okay for you guys but not okay for Barton? Any logical explanation?

It's not OK for anyone, DS, who loves our kids. Not Coutler, Barton, or "secularists", whatever that means.

 

[MHunterB]

"Doesn't change the fact that most of our founders were Christians and incorporated several of the tenets of Christianity into the founding documents"

Please identify those tenets for us - and demonstrate that none of them appears among the tenets of any other faith tradition, that they are uniquely and particularly 'Christian'.

Christianity is a pretty large tent - so you're also going to have to explain where you are drawing the edges of that tent......

 

[MHunterB]

"Secular" does not mean "atheist".

 

[DriftingSand]

Doesn't change the fact that most of our founders were Christians and incorporated several of the tenets of Christianity into the founding documents.

Far right social conservative political propaganda.

Most of which is true but certainly much better than leftist, secular, socialist propaganda -- comrade.

 

[DriftingSand]

“[The textbook] by Barton displays a clear devotional tone and contains a number of religious truth-claims that cross the line into promotion of a particular religion. Beyond this, the curriculum presents a problematic historical account of the founding period that falls well outside mainstream scholarly understanding, providing inaccurate, incomplete and biased profiles of various leading figures from that era.” Exposing David Barton?s Bad History | TFN Insider

Barton is an amateur historian, interesting but very flawed on the founding of America and the role of Christianity.

Most is backed up by documents and personal letters found in the National Archives.

He cherry picks his documentation to support a position. He doesn't do thorough research to uncover whatever is there.
In the Treaty of Tripoli we have an official state document that specifically declares "Since the United States is in no way founded on the Christian faith...". Some of the Founders are in Congress and are signatories to this document.
Why is this not part of Barton's " research".
He is an agenda driven proselytizer.
Surely you can do better than him.

LOL. You pull out a treaty and that's "thorough research?" One document compared to hundreds or thousands? The treaty doesn't mean that our founding documents aren't strongly influenced by the Christian faith.

You are not "agenda driven" bruce? Why won't you acknowledge that the vast majority of America's founders were Christians, theologians, ministers, or, at least, Bible believers?

 

[Chuckt]

Doesn't change the fact that most of our founders were Christians and incorporated several of the tenets of Christianity into the founding documents.

Far right social conservative political propaganda.

Most of which is true but certainly much better than leftist, secular, socialist propaganda -- comrade.

The American Revolution involved Churches:

Yuku slide show - folder: White Creek Fort

I hope you can view this slide show.

 

[DriftingSand]

Far right social conservative political propaganda.

Most of which is true but certainly much better than leftist, secular, socialist propaganda -- comrade.

The American Revolution involved Churches:

Yuku slide show - folder: White Creek Fort

I hope you can view this slide show.

Wow. That's a great find. I'll watch the whole thing when I get home. I wonder how many secular/humanists fought for America's freedom. I haven't been able to find any documentation giving credit to the institution of Humanism for shedding any blood. They certainly enjoy the freedoms purchased by Christians though (but don't seem too grateful).

 

[PoliticalChic]

"Doesn't change the fact that most of our founders were Christians and incorporated several of the tenets of Christianity into the founding documents"

Please identify those tenets for us - and demonstrate that none of them appears among the tenets of any other faith tradition, that they are uniquely and particularly 'Christian'.

Christianity is a pretty large tent - so you're also going to have to explain where you are drawing the edges of that tent......

1. The most quoted source was the Bible. Established in the original writings of our Founding Fathers we find that they discovered in Isaiah 33:22 the three branches of government: Isaiah 33:22 “For the LORD is our judge, the LORD is our lawgiver, the LORD is our king; he will save us.” Here we see the judicial, the legislative and the executive branches.

2. In Ezra 7:24 we see where they established the tax exempt status of the church: Ezra 7:24 “Also we certify you, that touching any of the priests and Levites, singers, porters, Nethinims, or ministers of this house of God, it shall not be lawful to impose toll, tribute, or custom, upon them.”


3. When we look at our Constitution we see in Article 4 Section 4 that we are guaranteed a Republican form of government, that was found in Exodus 18 “Moreover thou shalt provide out of all the people able men, such as fear God, men of truth, hating covetousness; and place such over them, to be rulers of thousands, and rulers of hundreds, rulers of fifties, and rulers of tens:” This indicates that we are to choose, or elect God fearing men and women.


4. Looking at Article 3 Section 3 we see almost word for word Deuteronomy 17:6: ‘No person shall be convicted of Treason unless on the testimony of two Witnesses. . .’ Deuteronomy 17:6 “At the mouth of two witnesses, or three witnesses. . .”. The next paragraph in Article 3 Section 3 refers to who should pay the price for treason. In England, they could punish the sons for the trespasses of the father, if the father died.
Roger Anghis -- Bring America Back To Her Religious Roots, Part 7



5. In a study that appeared in the American Political Science Review in 1984, two political science professors, Dr. Donald Lutz and Dr. Charles Heineman researched 15,000 writings, letters, diaries, sermons and other works that were written by various leading Americans from 1760-1805. Their purpose was to identify quotations to find out who the founding fathers were quoting' where they got their ideas, what authorities they were most impressed with.

They found that by far the most widely quoted source in the founding fathers' writings was the Bible. Thirty-four percent of all quotations came out of the Bible. And the book of the Bible they quoted most often was the book of Deuteronomy. Now most of us don't go around quoting Deuteronomy a great deal today, but Deuteronomy is the book of the law. And they were writing about law and government.
Citizens for a Fashionable Republic |