--The Magical Myth of America's Supposed Religious Founding

Many Americans sincerely (but ignorantly and routinely) insist that the United States of America was founded on the principle of “One Nation Under God.”

It is a point of view that has been faithfully repeated--in all its historical inaccuracy--by some participants on this "Recovery from Mormonism" bulletin board.

For example, one RfM poster claimed:

“You can believe in whatever you want but this country was founded on a belief in God”

(“beaglie,” post entitled, “Neither have I called you a fool,” on "Recovery from Mormonism" bulletin board, 1 February 2003)


Likewise, another RfMer observed:

“Regardless of your belief in God, it is important to note that the Founders of this great nation clearly recognized and acknowledged a ‘Supreme Creator’ whoever or whatever that force might be defined as”

(“utem,” post entitled, “steve benson,” on "Recovery from Mormonism" bulletin board, 1 February 2003)


Still another similarly-minded contributor argued:

“[No one] should be offended” [at invocations of God by the President of the United States because] [t]his nation was established on a belief in God.”

This individual asserted that:

“Our national anthem refers to God. Our Pledge of Allegiance refers to God. Our Declaration of Independence refers to God. Our money has the phrase, ‘In God We Trust’ on it. The Constitution prohibits the promotion of a specific religious denomination by the government, but not a belief in God, which is held by people of numerous faiths.”

To suggest otherwise, the poster claimed, is “extremist and un-American.”

(“rising sun,” post entitled, “This nation was established on a belief in God, Steve should not be offended,” on "Recovery from Mormonism" bulletin board, 1 February 2003)


Following suit, another RfM poster (thought by many to have been a “troll”), emphatically declared:

“History makes it completely clear (ridiculously so) that God was at the heart of everything the Founding Fathers did. A simple cursory reading of the 'Declaration,' the 'Articles of Confederation' and the 'Constitution,' along with all of the related secondary texts (particularly the 'Federalist Papers') is in order.

"All of the above are quite clear in both their acknowledgment of and allowance for deity (God) as the sole source of all power/authority--legal and otherwise. There was never any intention to remove God from government--quite the contrary, every attempt possible was made to include God in government. Again, this is not conjecture--this is historical fact of the highest order.

"It is written in black and white in all of our governing instruments and finds its ultimate source in documents like the "Magna Charta' and the 'Bible.'

”Only a total fool would/could argue otherwise--or . . . a virulent atheist with an agenda”

(“tiger style,” post entitled, “Entirely immaterial,” on "Recovery from Mormonism" bulletin board, 4 February 2003)
_____


The above opinions, while no doubt genuinely offered, are historically--and constitutionally--untenable.

--The Founders’ Deliberate “de-Goding” of the Constitution

The notion of “God” was purposely written out of the U.S. Constitution by the Founding Fathers, an act that did not go unnoticed by offended clerics of the day.

The First Presbytery of the Eastward, for instance, wrote to complain to George Washington about the lack of acknowledgement of God and Christianity in the fledgling Constitution:

“We should not have been alone in rejoicing to have seen some explicit acknowledgement of the only true god, and Jesus Christ, whom he hath sent, inserted somewhere in the Magna Charta of our country” (quoted in Franklin Steiner, “The Religious Beliefs of Our Presidents: From Washington to F.D.R.” [Amherst, New York: Prometheus Books, 1995], p. 37)

In October 1831, the Reverend Bird Wilson, an Episcopal minister in Albany, New York, delivered a sermon explaining that the lack of God in the U.S. Constitution was deliberately planned:

“When the [Revolutionary] war was over and the victory over our enemies won, and the blessings and happiness of liberty and peace were secured, the Constitution was framed and God was neglected. He [God] was not merely forgotten. He was absolutely voted out of the Constitution. The proceedings, as published by Thompson, the secretary, and the history of the day, show that the question was gravely debated whether God should be in the Constitution or not, and after a solemn debate he was deliberately voted out of it . . . There is not only in the theory of our government no recognition of God's laws and sovereignty, but its practical operation, its administration, has been conformable to its theory”

(quoted in John E. Remsberg, “Six Historic Americans” [New York: The Truth Seekers Company, 1906], pp. 120-21).


--“The Year of Our Lord”

Despite the Founders’ decision to write God out of the Constitution, some defenders of “the one nation under God’ theory of American history--like ExMormon poster “utem”--insist that Diety, in fact, remains in the document The proof, they say, is found in the following passage from Article 7:

"Done in convention by the unanimous consent of the states present the seventeenth day of September in the year of our Lord one thousand seven hundred and eighty seven and of the independence of the United States of America the twelfth."

One RfM poster has argued:

“[A]ll signers of the document [the Constitution] signed directly below this statement, referring to the year of ‘our’ Lord, 1777. If these Founders were avid atheists, surely such a reference would not have been made.”

(“utem,” post entitled, “The Founders vs. Steve Benson,” "Recovery from Mormonism" bulletin board, 2 February 2003).


The claim is not made that the Founders were “avid atheists.” But a traditional calendar reference to God does not constitute much of anything, certainly not any kind of legal acknowledgment to a divine superpower.

As Ed Buckner, Ph.D., notes in his article, “It’s a Free Country, Not a Christian Nation”:

“What about the ‘Year of our Lord’ dating? Ask those who insist that our government is Christian if they worship the Germanic god Tiu or Norse gods Woden and Thor or the Roman gods Janus or Mars. If they say no, suggest that they stop referring to Tuesday (Tiu's Day), Wednesday (Woden's Day), Thursday (Thor's Day), January (named after Janus), and March (after Mars). Conventional forms of dating have nothing to do with religious commitment or belief, and everything formal in 1787 was dated in the ‘Year of our Lord.’ The absence of religious reference in the body of the document is far more significant.”
_____


--The United States of America Is Not a Christian Nation

To understand why God didn’t survive the constitutional cut, the following “question-and-answer” is provided from the Freedom From Religion Foundation (FFRF) publication entitled, “Is America a Christian Nation?” (non-*tract no. 6, FFRF, Inc., PO Box 750, Madison WI 53701):

*Question: “Is America a Christian nation?”

*Answer: “The U.S. Constitution is a secular document. It begins, ‘We the people,’ and contains no mention of ‘God’ or ‘Christianity.’ Its only reference to religion was exclusionary, such as ‘no religious test shall ever be required as a qualification to any office or public trust’ (Article 6), and ‘Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof’ (First Amendment). The presidential oath of office, the only oath detailed in the Constitution does not contain the phrase ‘so help me God’ or any requirement to swear on a Bible (Article 2, Section 1). If we are a Christian nation, why doesn’t our Constitution say so?

“In 1797 America made a treaty with Tripoli, declaring that ‘the government of the United States is not, in any sense, founded on the Christian religion.’ This reassurance to Islam was written under Washington’s presidency, and approved by the Senate under John Adams.”


*Question: “What about the Declaration of Independence?”

*Answer: “We are not governed by the Declaration. Its purpose was to ‘dissolve the political bands,’ not to set up a religious nation. Its authority was based on the idea that ‘governments are instituted among men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed,’ which is contrary to the Biblical concept of rule by divine authority. It deals with laws, taxation, representation, war, immigration, and so on, never discussing religion at all.

“The references to ‘Nature’s God,’ ‘Creator,’ and ‘Divine Providence’ in the Declaration do not endorse Christianity. Thomas Jefferson, its author was a Deist, opposed to orthodox Christianity and the supernatural.”


*Question: “What about the Pilgrims and Puritans?”

*Answer: “The first colony of English-speaking Europeans was Jamestown, settled in 1609 for trade, not religious freedom. Fewer than half of the 102 Mayflower passengers in 1620 were ‘Pilgrims’ seeking religious freedom. The secular United States of America was formed more than a century and a half later. If tradition requires us to return to the views of a few early settlers, why not adopt the polytheistic and natural beliefs of the Native Americans, the true founders of the continent at least 12,000 years earlier?

“Most of the religious colonial governments excluded and persecuted those of the ‘wrong’ faith. The framers of our Constitution in 1787 wanted no part of religious intolerance and bloodshed, wisely establishing the first government in history to separate church and state.


*Question: “Do the words ‘separation of church and state’ appear in the Constitution?”

*Answer: “The phrase ‘a wall of separation between church and state,’ was coined by President Thomas Jefferson in a carefully crafted letter to the Danbury Baptists in 1802, when they had asked him to explain the First Amendment. The Supreme Court, and lower courts, have used Jefferson’s phrase repeatedly in majory decisions upholding neutrality in matters of religion. The exact words ‘separation of church and state’ do not appear in the Constitution; neither do ‘separation of powers,’ ‘interstate commerce,’ ‘right to privacy,’ and other phrases describing well-established constitutional principles.


*Question: “What does ‘separation of church and state’ mean?

*Answer: “Thomas Jefferson, explaining the phrase to the Danbury Baptists, said ‘the legitimate powers of government reach actions only, and not opinions.’ Personal religious views are just that: personal. Our government has no right to promulgate religion or to interfere with private beliefs.

“The Supreme Court has forged a three-part ‘Lemon test’ (Lemon v. Kurtzman, 1971) to determine if a law is permissible under the First Amendment religion clauses. (1) A law must have a secular purpose. (2) It maust have a primary effect which neither advances not inhibits religion. (3) It must avoid excessive entanglement of church and state. The separation of church and state is a wonderful American principle supported not only by minorities, such as Jews, Moslems, and unbelievers, but applauded by most Protestant churchs that recognize that it has allowed religion to flourish in this nation. It keeps the majority from pressuring the minority.”


*Question: “What about majority rule?”

*Answer: “America is one nation under a Constitution. Although the Constitution sets up a representative democracy, it specifically was amended with the Bill of Rights in 1791 to uphold individual and minority rights. On constitutional matters we do n ot have majority rule. When the majority in certain localities voted to segregate Blacks, this was declared illegal. The majority has not right to tyrannize the minority on matters such as race, gender, or religion.

“Not only is it unAmerican for the government to promote religion, it is rude. Whenever a public official uses the office to advance religion, someone is offended. The wisest policy is one of neutrality.”


*Question: “Isn’t removing religion from public places hostile to religion?”

*Answer: “No one is deprived of worship in America. Tax-exempt churches and temples abound. The state has no say about private religious beliefs and practices, unless they endanger health or life. Our government represents all of the people, supported by dollars from a plurality of religious and non-religious taxpayers.

“Some countries, such as the [former] U.S.S.R., expressed hostility to religion. Others, such as Iran (‘one nation under God’), have welded church and state. America wisely has taken the middle course—neither for nor against religion. Neutrality offends no one, and protects everyone.”


*Question: “The First Amendment deals with ‘Congress.’ Can’t states make their own religious policies?”

*Answer: “Under the ‘due process’ clause of the 14th Amendment 9ratified in 1868), the entire Bill of Rights applies to the states. No governor, mayor, sheriff, public school employee, or other public official may violate the human rights embodied in the Constitution. The government at all levels must respect the separation of church and state. Most state constitutions, in fact, contain language that is even stricter than the First Amendment, prohibiting the state from ssetting up a ministry, using tax dollars to promote religion, or interfering with freedom of conscience.”


*Question: “What about ‘One nation under God’ and ‘In God We Trust?”

*Answer: “The words ‘under God’, did not appear in the Pledge of Allegiance until 1954, when Congress, under McCarthyism, inserted them. Likewise, ‘In God We Trust’ was absent from paper currency before 1956. It appeared on some coins earlier, as did other sundry phrases, such as ‘Mind Your Business.’ The original U.S. motto, chosen by John Adams, Benjamin Franklin, and Thomas Jefferson is ‘E Pluribus Unun (‘Of Many, one’), celebrating plurality, not theocracy.”


*Question: “Isn’t American law based on the Ten Commandments?”

*Answer: “Not at all! The first four Commandments are religious edicts having nothing to do with law or ethical behavior. Only three (homicide, theft, and perjury) are relevant to American law, and have existed in cultures long before Moses. If Americans honored the commandment against ‘coveting,’ free enterprise would collapse! The Supreme Court has ruled that posting the Ten Commandments in public schools is unconstitutional.

“Our secular laws, based on the human principle of ‘justice for all,’ provide protection against crimes, and our civil government enforces them through a secular criminal justsic system.”


*Question: “Why be concerned about the separation of church and state?”

*Answer: “Ignoring history, law, and fairness, many fanatics are working vigorously to turn America into a Christian nation. Fundamentalist Protestants and right-wing Catholics would impose their narrow morality on the rest of us, resisting women’s rights, freedom for religious minorities and unbelievers, gay and lesbian rights, and civil rights for all. History shows us that only harm comes uniting church and state.”

******


--Falsification of American History by Christian Fundamentalists

The historical fact that the United States has never been a Christian nation has not prevented keepers of the Biblical flame from seeking to remake American history in their own image.

Bemoaning the outlandish rewriting of America’s founding by Christian apologists, Farrell Till, editor of “The Skeptical Review,” notes:

“Fundamentalist Christians are currently working overtime to convince the American public that the Founding Fathers intended to establish this country on ‘Biblical principles,’ but history simply does not support their view. The men . . . who were instrumental in the founding of our nation were in no sense Bible-believing Christians”

(Farrell Till, “Christian Nation Myth,” 1999, published by “Internet Infidels”)


On the false notion of America supposedly being a “Christian nation,” the late Madalyn Murray O’Hair observed:

“. . . I am stunned by just how successfully the Christian advocates have rewritten our nation’s history . . .

“The myth of a Christian nation has brought to us in our times a [Christian] church which feels that it owns the country . . . The churches now, indeed, overtly and covertly, receive more money per year from the taxpayers than does the military”

(Madalyn Murray O’Hair, “Our Constitution: The Way It Was,” American Atheist Press, Inc., Austin, Texas, p. 70)
_____


--The Founding Fathers: Nearly All ”Infidels”

For the purposes of historical accuracy, it is important to review the actual statements by key Founding Fathers regarding their personal views on Deity, on the relationship between Church and State, on the sect of Christianity in particular and on the subject of religion in general.

Among the Founders were Deists, Unitarians, Materialists, Rationalists and Agnostics.

Certainly it can be said that many of them were unorthodox in their religious beliefs. Some held views that were doubtful or ambiguous. Some detested organized religion. Some hated Christianity.

Although many of them were Deists, they represented the Infidels of their era. As historian Franklin Steiner notes, “Deists . . . were considered to be as much ‘Infidels’ in [colonial days] as an Athiest is now”

(Steiner, "The Religious Beliefs of Our Presidents: From Washington to F.D.R," p. 99)


Episcopalian Reverend Wilson of Albany, New York, confirmed the religious infidelity of not only the Constitution’s authors, but of the first six presidents of the United States:

“The Founders of our nation were nearly all Infidels, and that of the presidents who had thus far been elected [Washington, Adams, Jefferson, Madison, Monroe, Adams and Jackson] not a one had professed a belief in Christianity” . . .   Among all our presidents from Washington downward, not one was a professor was a professor of religion, at least not of more than Unitarianism."

(first sentence quoted in Remsberg, "Six Historic Americans," p. 120; second sentence quoted in Paul F. Boller, "George Washington & Religion" [Dallas Southern Methodist University Press, 1963], pp. 14-15).


Certainly none of the first six presidents were Christians in the traditional sense of the word.

As noted by "The Encyclopedia Britannica":

“One of the embarrassing problems for the nineteenth-century champions of the Christian faith was the fact that not one of the first six presidents of the United States was a Christian. They were Deists"

("The Encycopedia Britannica," 1968 edition, vol. 2, p. 420).


The term “Deism” is defined by Till as follows:

“Deism was a philosophical belief that was widely accepted by the colonial intelligentsia at the time of the American Revolution. Its major tenets included belief in human reason as a reliable means of solving social and political problems and belief in a Supreme Deity who created the Universe to operate solely by natural laws. The Supreme God of the Deists removed Himself entirely from the Universe after creating it. They believed that He assumed no control over it, exerted no influence on natural phenomena, and gave no supernatural revelation to man. A necessary consequence of these beliefs was a rejection of many doctrines central to the Christian religion. Deists did not believe in the virgin birth, divinity, or resurrection of Jesus, the efficacy of prayer, the miracles of the Bible, or even the divine inspiration of the Bible”

(Till, “Christian Nation Myth")
_____



Conclusion: Pulling the Founding Fathers Off Their Mythical Knees

The broad record shows that notion that the American Founders purportedly established the United States of America and its Constitution on a foundation of Christianity and/or the typical religious believer sloganeering of "In God We Trust" is, plain and simple, an historiocal bust.

In short, the Founders were not a divinely-raised up God Squad--despite what dunk-'em-for-the-dead Mormons insist.



Edited 15 time(s). Last edit at 07/04/2011 08:27PM by steve benson.

spend the time necessary to read through these. You do wonderful research, but I just don't have the time!

Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 07/04/2011 07:02PM by steve benson.

the first time through. It certainly would have been a pile of crap the second time through... and the third......

Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 07/04/2011 07:09PM by steve benson.

I need to construct a clay model of a fish so I can demonstrate how a fish breathes. Are you game?

I could use a good 60 wooden lure bodies for a craft project.

Happy days are here again!

Edited 3 time(s). Last edit at 07/04/2011 07:19PM by steve benson.

pretty badly. Hence, the need to create a clay model.

What is that saying: Both relatives and fish stink after three days.

Happy carving! Do you have a lathe available? Just kidding!

Dinner time!

Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 07/04/2011 10:53PM by steve benson.

THe unfortunate part is, facts do not matter to people who insist they are right.

Good post and very informative. I might have to save this for the next time I feel like debating someone about this particular subject.

HERE AT rfm....WHERE WAS YA THEN HUH??? :)
isnt the Ten Commandments posted somewhere ...like at the Supreme court building? checking!

and there seems to be some controversy about the Ten Commandments at the Supreme Court building...... there are some tablets shown in the sculptures around the building..... some say "moses" like tablets(moses is also depicted here).... that some say represent the Ten Commandments....some say the Bill of Rights.... and that the last five of the commandments are the only ones actually shown....which could be considered secular...... no killing and the like.... what say yee SB??

http://www.snopes.com/politics/religion/capital.asp



Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 07/04/2011 07:55PM by steve benson.

controversy!..... i dont want the intrusions of the religious right at all..... it just seems a little in-congruent to have the USSC tell every one else that no ten commandments are allowed on their buildings ...and yet have something that could appear to be the same thing on their building!
Just sayin

If I am not mistaking as well Thomas Jefferson the writer of the Declaration of Independence wasn't christian at all. He was a deist believing there a supreme creator who created this world then left

Surprise, surprise, I actually LOVED this post! May I quote parts of it, if I give you credit? Or should I just plagiarize snopes?

The Founding Fathers were MASONS. There's a painting, in Philadelphia, I think, of George Washington wearing his little green apron. And the Bible used at Washington's Inauguration was the Masonic one at his lodge.

~VOW

Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 07/04/2011 08:26PM by steve benson.

There's another painting called the Apotheosis of Washington where Washington becomes a god. I guess. It looks that way.

Theists are the majority in the US. The majority pretty much rules.

the nerve of those people trying to keep the Majority rules out of there.... i mean MAJORITY RULES right?? aint this a democracy??? oh wait...we are a Republic.... where the rights of all must be considered.... or else we may still have segregation and other crap!! or would you like that???

Thanks Steve.

I wonder how many LDS are familiar with this one:

http://www.senate.gov/reference/resources/pdf/hconres331.pdf

House Concurrent Resolution 331
October 1988

"To acknowledge the contribution of the Iroquois confederacy of nations to the development of the United States Constitution"

"Whereas the original framers of the Constitution, including, most notably, George Washington and Benjamin Franklin, are known to have greatly admired the concepts of the Six Nations of the Iroquois Confederacy"

Those idle, lazy, dark and loathsome, fallen and wicked, non-Christain pagan Lamanites influenced the constitution.

I’ve been watching a Knowledge Network series called ‘The History of Scotland’. The network describes the series as follows:

“This compelling 10-part series begins with the first stirrings of [Scottish] identity around 2,000 years ago, as the tribes banded together to confront the legions of the Roman Empire. It tells of battles and allegiances, political intrigue and religious conflict, and reveals the fascinating struggles, power brokers, incidents and characters across the years.”

http://www.knowledge.ca/program/a-history-of-scotland

One episode covers the history of slavery in Scotland, concurrent history in North America, and goes on to discuss the beginnings of the American War of Independence. The narrator reads the final line from the American Declaration of Independence:

“And for the support of this Declaration, with a firm reliance on the protection of divine Providence, we mutually pledge to each other our Lives, our Fortunes and our sacred Honor.”

http://www.archives.gov/exhibits/charters/declaration_transcript.html

I assume that the mention of divine Providence is ‘proof’ enough to those who believe, or want to believe, that the U.S. Founding Fathers were ‘men of God’. That phrase could also lend credence (in their minds) to the idea that the nation was founded on Christian principles.

Use of the word ‘divine’ does not exclusively refer to the Christian god, but to many Christians it seems to.

I think it’s a matter of perception, again, in that the preconceptions that you bring to your reading of it can affect your understanding of the document and the intent of its authors.

I think the interpretation that many people have with regard to the religious aspect is something they truly believe. I don’t see it as ‘lying’. I don’t see the point, anyway, of lying about established fact that easily disproves one’s inaccurate assertions. I see insistence on a certain view even if incorrect as more a lack of knowledge or skewed perception (including 'blind spots').

I found the following excerpts from Steve’s OP especially interesting, informative and thought-provoking, some of which I did not know before:

(Direct quotes are from Steve's reference: Freedom From Religion Foundation (FFRF) publication entitled, “Is America a Christian Nation?” (non-*tract no. 6, FFRF, Inc., PO Box 750, Madison WI 53701):

“The references to ‘Nature’s God,’ ‘Creator,’ and ‘Divine Providence’ in the Declaration do not endorse Christianity. Thomas Jefferson, its author was a Deist, opposed to orthodox Christianity and the supernatural.”

“If tradition requires us to return to the views of a few early settlers, why not adopt the polytheistic and natural beliefs of the Native Americans, the true founders of the continent at least 12,000 years earlier?”

“The wisest policy is one of neutrality.”

“Neutrality offends no one, and protects everyone.”

“The original U.S. motto, chosen by John Adams, Benjamin Franklin, and Thomas Jefferson is ‘E Pluribus Unun (‘Of Many, one’), celebrating plurality, not theocracy.”

The last one I did not know - interesting!

It’s too bad everyone can’t agree on what is fact and then take their own symbolism from it. For instance, ‘of many, one’ could be secular or religious, depending on one’s point of view. I’m fond of the ‘each to his/her own’ approach. Maybe that comes from living in a multicultural society here in Canada. I like to know facts and then I am comfortable accepting or adapting, whatever works for me, but keeping it real at a basic level.

I never learned a Christianity that seeks to embroil itself in the workings of society and especially not in politics. Rather, in the groups I have associated with it’s been emphasized that we are ‘in the world but not of the world’. This works well with my concept of what being Christian means. It’s not that we don’t engage (exception: JWs) but that we don’t expect society at large to embrace our beliefs and goals. You can’t have a multicultural society, as is the case here in Canada, or a melting pot even, as in the USA, and expect every person to reject their own traditions and uphold Christianity. Even with my limited knowledge of US history I am positive that was never the intent of the nation’s founders. Rather, one of the founding principles in the USA, the way I learned it, was freedom of religion. That includes freedom to be other than Christian, even atheist. That just stands to reason. Maybe it’s my JW background (with their strong belief in keeping oneself separate from the world) but I have never expected that the whole of society would be Christian. Quite the opposite, in fact. I can be Christian in any group and/or any segment of society. That doesn't mean that everyone else has to subscribe to the same beliefs. Hence the importance of looking for common ground with others in so many pursuits. We won't all agree on everything, especially in regard to religious beliefs, but we can still find a way to work together on common goals.

Also, I am 100% on the side that calls for total separation of church and state. I think that is the way to be ‘neutral’ (an ideal I wholeheartedly endorse) and just. If the two merged, which church would gain favour and who would decide that? Surely that is a road down which not many of us would want to go. Imagine if any one of the Mormon (so-called) prophets were calling the shots not just for their own people but for all Americans! What about if a non-Christian religious group became the majority and thereby had the power to make law? How much in favour of a linked church and state would people then be? We see examples of religious law being paramount in other countries and not too many of us yearn for such a scenario in North America. (I hope!)

A belated happy July 4 to our American friends. Sorry I'm late on it. It took me a while to read through this post of Steve's as well as several other related posts. {{jk}} :)