I'm a firm believer that the USA is founded on a Godly herritage. That being said...

I had a hard time in my History classes when I was force fed the concept that the framers and founding fathers of our country and government were "diests". When looking at the personal history of these men, Ben Franklin and Thomas Jefferson were the most "questionable" in their faith. The rest were former clergymen, congregationalists, and very devout believers in the "Almighty God whose Providence is our source of Divine Protection."

Ben Franklin, who I mention as being questionable, was quoted as saying the following, during a heated and bitter deadlock issue on representation (The New York Delegation had angrilly left the Convention, as were some other delegates):

"In the begining of the contest with Britain, when we were sensible of danger, we had daily prayers in this room for Divine protection. Our prayers, Sir, were heard, and they were graciously answered. All of us who were engaged in the struggle must have observed frequent instances of a superintending Providence in our favor ... And have we now forgotten this powerful Friend? Or do we imagine we no longer need His assistance?
I have lived, Sir, a long time, and the longer I live, the more convincing proofs I see of this truth: "that God governs in the affairs of man." And a sparrow cannot fall to the ground without His notice, is it probable that an empire can rise without His aid?
We have been assured, Sir, in the Sacred Writings that excerpt the Lord build the house, they labor in vain that build it I firmly believe this. I also believe that, without His concurring aid, we shall succeed in this political building no better then the builders of Babel; we shall be divided by our little, partial local interests; our projects will be confounded; and we ourselves shall become a reproach and a byword down to future ages. And what is worse, mankind may hereafter, from this unfortunate instance, despair of establishing government by human wisdom and leave it to chance, war, or conquest.
I therefore beg leave to move that, henceforth, prayers imploring the assistance of Heaven and its blessing on our deliberation be held in this assembly every morning before we proceed to business."

I will agree, The Constitution and Bill of Rights were not perfect. There was a lot of petty squabbling in the Convention on the "Rights of Property" and the "Rights of the State". And states like Gerogia and South Carolina were adamant in those rights which you highlightes above. It took a bloody Civil war and an Equal Rights Movement to correct those mistakes. (And that is what they were, mistakes) But it was all to keep these independant states in one Federal Government. (I'm not saying it was right, because it was definately wrong, as God's word, which Franklin so heroicly charged, should never be compromised.)

If you like, I have some great books which speak about this subject, if you are interested in a little light reading. They helped me sort this through in my head, as I was converted from an athiest to a Christian 8 years ago.

*steps off soap box*

Hello, Jeremy. Thanks for commenting; I was beginning to think no one would touch it. I am a Christian, as well. I grew up with the same history as you and I do know that many of the contributors to the writing of the Constitution were Christians-great men of faith. I think the vocabulary lends itself to a decidedly obvious knowledge of Biblical language.

I have been teaching (and learning right along with them) Ancient Greece and Roman history to my three (of four) oldest daughters. It occured to me one day, while diagramming the governing structures, that ours is very similar.

While I think that the Founders definitely believed in the God of the Bible (the One, True and Living God), I do not think they wished to declare this nation a "Christian" nation. I am thinking they desired more that people truly be able to worship as their conscience dictates. This having fueled by escaping the dictatorial Church of England.

So, when I hear people claim that we need things like prayer in school, postings of the Ten Commandments, and such, it makes me realize how little they know about this nation, how little they understand the varying subcultures that exsist outside of their own tiny town, and they have wrapped God up in a nice package (complete with complimentary coordinating ribbon).

I think moving to Utah has been the best thing in helping me to understand the reasoning behind the state making no recognition of a particular church or faith. I assume (after reading your very thorough and well-organized site-kudos there) that you may understand a bit about that living in AZ as AZ, UT, and ID contain the highest populous of LDS. What other states make allowance for an off-campus hour long study of one's faith? And why?

Anyway, thanks again! Please come back frequently- I welcome your thoughts, positions, jokes, donations, left-over Italian food, etc. :)

It is my understanding that yes, we did look back at the Greek form of government, a democratic (people rule) republic (the people elect representatives to govern them according to the law) and also the Roman government, which also was a republic for awhile, when beginning our new country.

I don't think that the founding fathers intended to make this a "Christian nation", they wanted a nation of liberty and justice for all. That being said, I do think that many of them were devout believers and that certainly influenced their thoughts and ideas. But again, this country was founded as a place where all (albeit all probably meant white land owning men at that time) could live freely. They were so concerned about protecting freedom and about limiting government that the first constitution of the US, the Articles of Confederation, didn't work too well. It didn't give Congress very much power, and there was no president except the president of Congress and he couldn't do much either. Thomas Jefferson actually did include a section in the origonal Declaration of Independence in which he described slavery as a "cruel war against human nature." But Georgia and South Carolina would not sign the Declaration if it contained the anti-slavery section. Must go now, more thoughts later!

The opening proposition to me seems to beg an answer, for so many reading here may have an opinion as I do. I believe it was the intent of the founding fathers as more a matter of expected result rather than "on what" they based our constitution. If I am to set up a business or interest group or sports team or terrorist group for that matter, I have a myriad of methods to model from. History is a good source of my choosing. What worked and why and how can I make it better I may ask myself. So what really matters in my eyes is the intent of result, not the method of execution. I also believe that they may not have intended a "Christian" nation per se. However niether did they conceive anything other than that. Rather it may have been their world view or paradigm of a society that was worth having. Better than what they came from. I suggest that they might allow "tolerance". Not in the modern sense of moral relativism. I think that their paradigm was one of acceptance of other forms of the same faith. When you think of societies of the time that were not european or "Christian", what was there to offer other than raw materials needed for a more modern nation? So did they see the need to create a "christian" nation-no. But they may not have conceived an anything goes secular one either. We have become what was not intended for sure. Would public displays of faith have worked then? Yes and no, just like today. Do I want prayer in schools or government supported programs of faith? No. I must remember that we live in a fallen world and the government doesn't do many things very well. The one thing the government still does well is make MARINES. Semper Fidelis.

Hmm, good thougts me friends (R & K)....

I agree with your opposition to Prayer in School. However, I still believe there are a lot of biblical principles applied to both the Constitution and our frame of Government. (Sure the Greeks and Romans had simmilar styles) But even our Balance of Powers comes straight from Isaiah 33:22:
"The Lord is our King, the Lord is our Lawgiver, the Lord is our Judge"
There was the inspiration of our model of Executive, Legistlative, and Judicial branches.

But was this designed to be a "Christian Nation", I don't believe it was. I do believe that God wanted to use this nation as a way to reach the masses. The freedom of Religion we enjoy is a perfect vehicle for that. I don't neccesarily believe in a Seperation of Church and State. Yes the State cannot tell the Church what to do, but I do not believe it prevents the Chruch advising the state. (I quote the mighty mighty Thomas Jefferson there.) The Church is a source of Truth, why should our Government be withdrawn from it?

But in terms of heritage, I look more towards the powerful Providential events which took place to bring this great country to fruition, and I look to that as the heritage. What we enjoy today, is deeply rooted in events like Plymoth Rock, The Great Awakening, and a Revolutionary War fueled by the pulpet, via the likes the men like Mulenberg. The mechanism may be derived from various sources (the most of which was quoted from John Locke, and not that Voltaire guy) but the Biblical priniciples are there. (Minus the whole slavery and lack of equal rights - but hey, none of us are perfect!) And its through those principles that even non-Christians enjoy the rights of this great land.

I guess that is a rather wholistic perspective, perhaps I'm wrong, but it sounds good to me.

Thanks for the compliment, by the way!

Anyone watch Colonial House? ;)

Love this thought provoking thread!

Yes, Pam, this is such an interesting thread. I don't watch Colonial House, but I am sure that if I had cable or DirectTV I would be watching it (we aren't television boycotter's, btw, just too cheap to pay for it).

Interesting points, Jeremy and fabulous verse. I am to ponder some more on your thoughts.

Oh, and you're welcome on the compliments :)

I would have to agree with Jeremy and add my assertion that this nation was in fact founded on Judeo-Christian tradition.

As for slavery, the Bible has absolutely no strictures on the taking and holding of slaves, and makes no moral pronouncements except those in Leviticus 25:39-54, Deut. 23:15 and Deut. 24:7. Taken in context with the words of the Apostle Paul in Ephesians 6:5-9 the Bible paint a very different picture of slavery in it's biblical context. In fact, Israel's punishment for the immoral taking of slaves is given to us in Jeremiah 34:8-22.

Needless to say it was a very different institution than the one practiced by Europeans.

That having been said, our Christian forefathers were decidedly un-Christian in their treatment of slaves. This has since been rectified.

But I digress. Your assertion, "I see that we were a nation established as a Democratic Republic and we came to be influenced by Judeo-Christian ethics and values..." has it exactly backward. Parethetically, it would be the absolute truth when applied to Britain, where the Roman Republic was imposed before Christianity was introduced. America was, in the beginning, colonized primarily by Puritans and Quakers who suffered discrimination and persecution under the Anglican Church of England. As such, the culture was dominantly Christian in nature and practice. In fact, Jews were concerned that the overt nature of Christianity in America would lead to their eventual persecution. Their fears were allayed when George Washington wrote to the Touro Synagogue of Newport, Rhode Island.

It was exactly those Christian values of tolerance that permitted Christians of different denominations and Jews to live harmoniously together to bring this nation into being. In fact, Jesus sets the tone for this tolerance in Mark 4:26-29. He makes it clear that all we need do is plant the seed, set the example and God will do the rest.

In terms of faith in the public arena, I believe that currently we have it all wrong. Let's review the First Amendment again:

"Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances."

Note the emphasis. The Constitution is very clear. The intent of the Constitution was to limit the powers of the Federal government. There's no provision at all to prevent a state from establishing itself as a "Christian" state. In fact, a very clear picture of this separation between Federal and State authority becomes clearer when you review this proposed legislation. It was opposed by James Madison not on the false "separation" argument we see today, but on the very simple grounds that all citizens of a free Christian nation cannot be compelled to support a faith that they may not agree with. His arguments are extremely compelling.

In any case, there's just too much evidence to the contrary to make the assertion that this nation was not founded on Judeo-Christian principles.

Robert- thanks for coming by and commenting.

Your comments are well-organized and very thought provoking. I am especially moved to rethink my position by your example of Great Britain being first a Republic and then moving into a nation influenced by Christianity. Likewise, your comment that "all citizens of a free Christian nation cannot be compelled to support a faith they may not agree with" has lodged in my brain, too. What about prayer in a classroom setting being led by a teacher? I am curious as to your thoughts on that specifically, as well. I think I am going to have to print out all the comments and read through them.

I checked out your site-I love the power point quotes and enjoyed digging through your archives. Please come again anytime.

To chime in with Robert, I wrote a simmilar article on Misinformation on the Seperation of Church and State.

One of the clinchers of this argument of a Biblical Heritage for me, is seeing who serves whom?

Unless I'm mistaken, the United States Declaration of Independence and the Constitution were the first to put Man before The State.

Until then, Man was to serve the State, as the State was the authority and Man was just an element of it. (Likewise, the Church, and the Family were also elements of the State)

The Bible teaches us differently. God is Soverign, God uses Man to do his work, and the State, the Family and the Church are external reflections of Man. So no longer does Man server the State, but the State serves Mankind. This was the revolutionary part of the Constitution. The State came second, not first. Our founders recognized that and made sure to put those mechanisms in place.

They did a pretty good job. It took 200 years for us to distort it to where we find ourselves today. Usually these kinds of things go "off-the-wire" in a couple of generations.

For years I thought I was some kind of heathen for thinking that prayer in schools wasn't a good idea. You know me Rae, I have opinions, but I never have a good way to make my point. Not like you do anyway.

I believe God is a gentleman. He doesn't want to make us love him. That's why he created us the way we are. As Christians it's our job to show people the love of Christ, not to dictate it. I haven't heard anyone being changed by having Christian prayer in schools. I have heard that people were changed by the way a Christian teacher or student showed his love.

By the way, I checked out a book called A Nation of Gods: A History of the Mormon Church. It's very enlightening. I learned that the great, great, great granddaughter of Brigham Young asked to be "released" from the LDS church because of the many indiscrepancies that she found. Interesting???
Amy