Was the United States founded on Judeo-Christian principles?

AlwaysRight.org ^ | October 17, 2003

[rightcoast]

Was the United States founded on Judeo-Christian principles?

Is the issue really about what religion our founding fathers practiced? With laws prohibiting many, if not all of the Ten Commandments, I wonder how there can be much doubt where these laws originated. However, I understand that many people believe that these are "universal" ideals, somehow ingrained in man from his conception.

In response to the belief that we are somehow born knowing right from wrong, I ask a simple question. Do you have to teach children to fight over toys, or to share them? I have two children of my own, and I assure you...sharing does not come naturally.

Regardless of whether you subscribe to the Judeo-Christian belief that man was created in the image of God, then man sinned, so now man has fallen and is inherently bent on evil until the return of the Messiah, it is inarguable that we are born with natural tendencies toward conflict and selfishness. These are the exact tendencies our laws were put in place to protect others from.

Michael Savage, in his book The Savage Nation: Saving America from the Liberal Assault on Our Borders, Language and Culture poses an interesting question. Many people, usually those on the side of this argument believing that this country was NOT founded on Christian principles, would take religion completely out of society. They see religion as a destructive force, a source of great conflict, and something to be avoided in any enlightened society at all costs.

In many ways, their beliefs are justified, if even accurate. Many wars are fought over religious beliefs. Many conflicts begin over religion. So in that respect, I tend to agree. Religion does breed conflict. However, what would you replace it with?

The natural response is science. I actually subscribed to this belief at one point in my life...prior to becoming a Christian. It seems that the more and more society and science progress, the more we can explain through science. Religion can appear as simply something that weak-minded people use to explain things for which there is currently no explanation. So, again, the natural tendency is to believe that science will eventually replace society's need for religion.

There is one huge problem with this, and this is the crux of my argument. Science does not, and can not, define a moral code for a society. The example that Michael Savage uses is Nazi Germany. Look at the experiments that the scientists performed once they were relieved of the "restraints" of morality. They conducted innumerable atrocities on human beings in the name of science. I assure that similar things will happen in any society that removes the morality that is the fiber of it's laws.

So back to the basic question posed: Is the United States founded on Christian principles? I believe that the morality that we all ascribe to, whether Christian or not, stems from the Bible. There is a great deal of evidence of this throughout history, regardless of the specific religious preferences of our forefathers.

The real question, though, is would we have morals without religion? I think that, given the above example, the answer is no. Look at the morality of the Native Americans compared to the morality of European Christians. Look at the morality of a buddhist compared to the Native American. They are vastly different, given different moral and religious influences. Left to our devices, we will seek out religion to bring some form of order to our societies. Native Americans practiced some pretty atrocious and heinous things, but they still had a religion that defined what is and what is not acceptable.

In the end, I think the question that Christianity has influenced many of our laws has to go unquestioned. It is evident by simply picking up a Bible, and then comparing it to our laws. They are (or were) identical in many places. Given all of the evidence presented above, do you really believe that we would have these morals were it not for the effect Christianity has had on society?

[wardaddy]

I'm pretty hard right and I haven't heard any reject Judeo-Christian language.

[rmlew]

People will fight over anything. Often "Religious wars" are fought for multiple reasons, religion being one of many.

America is one of the most religious countries in the world. What relgious war have we fought?

[rmlew]

Just for the fun of it, let me give a collection of quotes by Washington:
"Religion and morality are the essential pillars of civil society."
"Let it simply be asked where is the security for prosperity, for reputation, for life, if the sense of religious obligation desert the oaths, which are the instruments of investigation in the Courts of Justice."
"Let me conjure you in the name of our common country, as you value your sacred honor, as you respect the rights of humanity, and as you regard the military and national character of America, to express your utmost horror and detestation of the man who wishes, under any specious pretenses, to overturn the liberties of our country."
"Of all the dispositions and habits, which lead to political prosperity, Religion, and Morality are indispensable supports. -- In vain would that man claim the tribute of Patriotism, who should labor to subvert these great pillars of human happiness, these firmest props of the duties of Men and Citizens. -- The mere Politician, equally with the pious man, ought to respect and to cherish them. -- A volume could not trace all their connections with private and public felicity. -- Let it simply be asked where is the security for property, for reputation, for life, if the sense of religious obligation desert the oaths, which are the instruments of investigation in Courts of Justice? And let us with caution indulge the supposition, that morality can be maintained without religion. -- Whatever may be conceded to the influence of refined education on minds of peculiar structure -- reason and experience both forbid us to expect, that national morality can prevail in exclusion of religious principle." --George Washington, from his Farewell Address

"No people can be bound to acknowledge and adore the invisible hand which conducts the invisible affairs of men more than the people of the United States. Every step by which they have advanced to the character of an independent nation seems to have been distinguished by some token of providential agency.... We ought to be no less persuaded that the propitious smiles of heaven cannot be expected on a nation that disregards the eternal rules of order and right, which heaven itself has ordained." --George Washington

"It is rightly impossible to govern the world without God and the Bible." --George Washington
It is the duty of all nations to acknowledge the providence of Almighty God, to obey His will, to be grateful for His benefits, and humbly to implore His protection and favors." Thanksgiving Proclamation, October 3, 1789

"Statesmen, my dear Sir, may plan and speculate for Liberty, but it is Religion and Morality alone, which can establish the Principles upon which Freedom can securely stand." John Adams, Letter to Zabdiel Adams, June 21, 1776

"We have no government armed with power capable of contending with human passions unbridled by morality and religion...Our Constitution was made only for a moral and religious people. It is wholly inadequate to the government of any other." -John Adams {John Adams, The Works of John Adams, Second President of the United States, Charles Francis Adams, ed. (Boston: Little, Brown, 1854), Vol. IX, p. 401, June 21, 1776.}

"Suppose a nation in some distant region should take the Bible for their only law book, and every member should regulate his conduct by the precepts there contained! Every member would be obliged in conscience to temperance, frugality and industry; to justice, kindness and charity towards his fellow men; and to piety, love and reverence toward Almighty God." --John Adams

"The sacred rights of mankind are not to be rummaged for, among, old parchments, or musty records. They are written, as with a sun beam in the whole volume of human nature, by the hand of the divinity itself; and can never be erased or obscured by mortal power." Alexander Hamilton 1775

Benjamin Rush: "Without the restraints of religion and social worship, men become savages."

I could go on, but you should get the point by now.
America was founded as a non-sectarian Christian country.

[Looking for Diogenes]

America was founded as a non-sectarian Christian country.

I have no doubt that most, if not all, of the Founders were Christians. I also have no doubt that they did not found a Christian nation. There is no single quotation which you have provided, by Washington, Adams, Hamilton or Rush, which states otherwise.

This one comes close:
"It is rightly impossible to govern the world without God and the Bible." --George Washington

However there is no record that Washington ever said it. It's a pity that you have to resort to misquoting Washington to try to make your point.

Unconfirmed Quotations

[rmlew]

I have no doubt that most, if not all, of the Founders were Christians. I also have no doubt that they did not found a Christian nation. There is no single quotation which you have provided, by Washington, Adams, Hamilton or Rush, which states otherwise.
All of the above made it clear that America was to be a religious nation. All were Christians. What religion do you think they were talking about? Hale Bop...?

However there is no record that Washington ever said it. It's a pity that you have to resort to misquoting Washington to try to make your point.
At worst it is an unConfirmed quote, in line with Washington's general beliefs.
I did not originate the quote. I got it from the bi-weekly publication, The Federalist.

[Looking for Diogenes]

All of the above made it clear that America was to be a religious nation. All were Christians. What religion do you think they were talking about? Hale Bop...?

If they all thought that the U.S. should be a Christian nation why didn't any of them say so or include something in the Constitution about it?

At worst it is an unconfirmed quote, in line with Washington's general beliefs. I did not originate the quote. I got it from the bi-weekly publication, The Federalist.

It is an uncomfirmed quote, which is the same as saying that despite research there is no evidence he ever said it. Now if you can find an actual, verifiable quotation from Washington that "The U.S.A is founded on Judeo-Christian principles," then please leave your made-up quotes out of this.

[evad]

What relgious war have we fought?

Looks like we might be fighting one right now although we call it the "war on terror".

[jwalsh07]

In other words, you don't know.

NO, in other words it was time to watch the Yankees beat the fish. But it would be fruitless in any case. You're an ideologue and unconvincable. That doesn't concern me becasue it has no effect on my life.

What can have an effect on my life are those who endorse judges who continue to build a bogus Wall of Separation. So, if you think the mention of God in a voluntary pledge, or voluntary prayer in public school or before football games can be banned by judges then we have big problems.

Otherwise you can go to your grave convinced that Judeo/Chriistian principles played no part in this nations founding and I could care less.

[KC Burke]

I think your reference to the Novak book, On Two Wings is right on target for a place to start the study of this question. When it first came out I had some threads directing people to this fine work.

Its subtitle, "Humble Faith and Common Sense at the American Founding", explains the point of the book. Truely it was two wings. Plain and humble faith, not a specific denomination or litergy was one wing. Common Sense was the other. That Common Sense was a true knowledge of history and what they were attempting. They looked to Cicero's Rome as much as to the bible in devising a system. What hasn't been mentioned upon this thread is what the vast majority of the colonists thought of their own political caste. The answer was that by-and-large, they thought of themselves as Whigs. Sure their were a few Tories, but Old Whiggish principles were the expectations that they had of how government should be founded.

Look no further than the colors of the Continental Army. Why was Washington's army clad in the Blue and the Buff? Those were the colors of the Whig Party. This was so commonly understood in that day that it was rarely remarked upon and hence largely forgotten.

While Blackstone may have been foremost in their mind in devising government, the Bible lay quietly in the background of all that undertook the task as their cultural foundation.

Some good reading on what was actually written into the various colonies' documents contemporareously with our founding (and therefore a good citation of local opinion) see Neither King nor Prelate and its appendixes, by Edwin Gaustad.

But, largely I would answer the question of the thread by saying that though completely a Christian culture at the founding and with constant reliance upon those precepts, the founding rested upon Whiggish Principles for its structure and history for its guide. Montesquieu, Blacstone, Cicero, the Glorius Revolution and all of history were the guides for structure and form, much more so than the Gospel. Those gides were the Common Sense cited by Novak.

[rmlew]

Looks like we might be fighting one right now although we call it the "war on terror".

We are not fighting Islam, but Islamism.
Moreover, the US is not fighting on the side of Christendom, but promoting universal democracy.

[evad]

We are not fighting Islam, but Islamism.

Whew!! Das too deep for me dude. If it works for you...fine and dandy.

To me, a radical element of a religious cult has declared war on us and regardless of what we want to call it, they definitely believe that they are at war with us.

[f.Christian]

promoting universal democracy

Majority rule of itself is a very bad thing ... mobacracy !

[Held_to_Ransom]

One very enlightening process about this is to read the various state constitutions from that era. Many of them still exist, though with a great deal of fiddling with the essentials over the generations.

Here are some clips from MA.

We, therefore, the people of Massachusetts, acknowledging, with grateful hearts, the goodness of the great Legislator of the universe, in affording us, in the course of His providence, an opportunity, deliberately and peaceably, without fraud, violence or surprise, of entering into an original, explicit, and solemn compact with each other; and of forming a new constitution of civil government, for ourselves and posterity; and devoutly imploring His direction in so interesting a design, do agree upon, ordain and establish the following Declaration of Rights, and Frame of Government, as the Constitution of the Commonwealth of Massachusetts.

PART THE FIRST

A Declaration of the Rights of the Inhabitants of the Commonwealth of Massachusetts.

Article I. All men are born free and equal, and have certain natural, essential, and unalienable rights; among which may be reckoned the right of enjoying and defending their lives and liberties; that of acquiring, possessing, and protecting property; in fine, that of seeking and obtaining their safety and happiness. [Annulled by Amendments, Art. CVI.]

Article II. It is the right as well as the duty of all men in society, publicly, and at stated seasons to worship the Supreme Being, the great Creator and Preserver of the universe. And no subject shall be hurt, molested, or restrained, in his person, liberty, or estate, for worshipping God in the manner and season most agreeable to the dictates of his own conscience; or for his religious profession or sentiments; provided he doth not disturb the public peace, or obstruct others in their religious worship

[f.Christian]

It is Calvinism, Hamilton argued, that "more than any other Protestant theology, brings together the seeming paradox that man's will is corrupt by nature but also capable of doing good." In other words, Calvinism holds that "we can hope for the best but expect the worst from each other and from the social institutions humans devise."

"Neither Calvin nor the framers stop at distrust, however," Hamilton said. "They also embrace an extraordinary theology of hope. The framers, like Calvin, were reformers."

This is interesting (( Judeo part of Judeo - Christianity )) ...

exactly if you read the writings of David Horowitz ---

why he became a conservative !

The real America was scuttled by liberals ...

They are floating this disney world cruise loop of horrors !

[norton]

"Is the issue really about what religion our founding fathers practiced? With laws prohibiting many, if not all of the Ten Commandments, I wonder how there can be much doubt where these laws originated. However, I understand that many people believe that these are "universal" ideals, somehow ingrained in man from his conception.
In response to the belief that we are somehow born knowing right from wrong, I ask a simple question. Do you have to teach children to fight over toys, or to share them? I have two children of my own, and I assure you...sharing does not come naturally."

Is about as clumsy as a professional writer can get - but the point is there anyway. (And, it does not matter if it is Christian, Jewish, or Vulcan.)

The ten commandments are a generally shared set of principles laid down to suggest, in the strongest language then used, that stealing, raping, and ignoring orders were not healthy passtimes.

I'd guess the author also wanted to show that there was some reasonability to both the pro and the anti commandments side of debate: something like 50/50 in his words.

I've always believed that some religion was a good thing, that all religions tought values that would hold us a bit above the wildlife we try to keep at bay; then came 9/11. So, yes, I guess they are not universal after all and I'll have to take sides with the Judeo-Christian bits of religion I have been party to. Warts and all.