THE Founding Fathers Thread of All Founding Fathers Threads

[Gary K]

Here is the insight of one of the best political minds ever to exist on the influence of Christianity early in the history of the US.

In the United States the influence of religion is not confined to the manners, but it extends to the intelligence of the people. Amongst the Anglo-Americans, there are some who profess the doctrines of Christianity from a sincere belief in them, and others who do the same because they are afraid to be suspected of unbelief. Christianity, therefore, reigns without any obstacle, by universal consent; the consequence is, as I have before observed, that every principle of the moral world is fixed and determinate, although the political world is abandoned to the debates and the experiments of men. Thus the human mind is never left to wander across a boundless field; and, whatever may be its pretensions, it is checked from time to time by barriers which it cannot surmount. Before it can perpetrate innovation, certain primal and immutable principles are laid down, and the boldest conceptions of human device are subjected to certain forms which retard and stop their completion.

The imagination of the Americans, even in its greatest flights, is circumspect and undecided; its impulses are checked, and its works unfinished. These habits of restraint recur in political society, and are singularly favorable both to the tranquillity of the people and to the durability of the institutions it has established. Nature and circumstances concurred to make the inhabitants of the United States bold men, as is sufficiently attested by the enterprising spirit with which they seek for fortune. If the mind of the Americans were free from all trammels, they would very shortly become the most daring innovators and the most implacable disputants in the world. But the revolutionists of America are obliged to profess an ostensible respect for Christian morality and equity, which does not easily permit them to violate the laws that oppose their designs; nor would they find it easy to surmount the scruples of their partisans, even if they were able to get over their own. Hitherto no one in the United States has dared to advance the maxim, that everything is permissible with a view to the interests of society; an impious adage which seems to have been invented in an age of freedom to shelter all the tyrants of future ages. Thus whilst the law permits the Americans to do what they please, religion prevents them from conceiving, and forbids them to commit, what is rash or unjust.

Religion in America takes no direct part in the government of society, but it must nevertheless be regarded as the foremost of the political institutions of that country; for if it does not impart a taste for freedom, it facilitates the use of free institutions. Indeed, it is in this same point of view that the inhabitants of the United States themselves look upon religious belief. I do not know whether all the Americans have a sincere faith in their religion, for who can search the human heart? but I am certain that they hold it to be indispensable to the maintenance of republican institutions. This opinion is not peculiar to a class of citizens or to a party, but it belongs to the whole nation, and to every rank of society.

In the United States, if a political character attacks a sect, this may not prevent even the partisans of that very sect from supporting him; but if he attacks all the sects together, everyone abandons him, and he remains alone.

So, was the US founded on Christian principles and Christian ideas? Absolutely according to Alexis de Tocqueville. He came to this conclusion after spending 2 years traveling around the US both geographically and politically. He mingled with the people on a regular basis and spent many an evening in the local taverns to eat and listen to the ongoing political discussions for there it was the custom of the people to gather around and discuss the current political events of the time. He was also give access to many of the historical records at most levels of government from townships, to counties, to states. I do not know if he was offered access to federal levels, but that is not too important for at the time the vast majority of political power was held at the township and county levels.

The quote comes from Vol 1 of Democracy in America.

 

[McCoy]

So, the fact, as you agreed to, that a state controlled church is headed by a political entity rather than Christ, is to you meaningless. To be a Christian means, by definition, to be a follower of Christ. In a church controlled by a state those adherents to that church would then be followers of a state, not of Christ. All of this put together means you're willing to toss out the very definition of Christianity itself in favor of a man-made definition that denies the very meaning, the very essence of, Christianity.

I get it. You're a socialist troll. I've been watching to see you develop your position and you've developed it well enough to eliminate Christ as the head of the church and still call that entity "Christian".

Um. No. Just, no.

Sorry, I’m having trouble understanding your disconnect here. I think perhaps your missing the point I’m trying to make with our wingnut, ACW.

You and I appear to be in complete agreement that FOR TRUE CHRISTIANS, the idea of a Christian State or a Christian Nation is absurd and antithetical to the teachings of Christ. Agree.

I’m simply saying, that for those like ACW who like to toss around the silly term “Christian Nation”, there is an objective definition for it in the English language. That definition has existed for quite some time, and is in practice with many nations around the globe. The fact that such a political concept is, in my estimation, a very bad and unchristian idea, is obvious and beside the point. What Barton and people like ACW have done is create their own alternative, self-styled definition of “Christian nation”, one that is devoid of any historical or objective context whatsoever.

 

[Gary K]

Um. No. Just, no.

Sorry, I’m having trouble understanding your disconnect here. I think perhaps your missing the point I’m trying to make with our wingnut, ACW.

You and I appear to be in complete agreement that FOR TRUE CHRISTIANS, the idea of a Christian State or a Christian Nation is absurd and antithetical to the teachings of Christ. Agree.

I’m simply saying, that for those like ACW who like to toss around the silly term “Christian Nation”, there is an objective definition for it in the English language. That definition has existed for quite some time, and is in practice with many nations around the globe. The fact that such a political concept is, in my estimation, a very bad and unchristian idea, is obvious and beside the point. What Barton and people like ACW have done is create their own alternative, self-styled definition of “Christian nation”, one that is devoid of any historical or objective context whatsoever.

OK. I understand you now. Sorry about the misunderstanding.

Where you lost me was your insistence on a dictionary definition that defies the very essence of Christianity. It's that definition that acw clings to and makes the very basis of his ideology.

 

[Gary K]

I thought I would post the two paragraphs which follow the passage from de Tocqueville in volume 1 of Democracy in America. They really help define what he said in the previous paragraphs but that post was already so long I cut it short.

The Americans combine the notions of Christianity and of liberty so intimately in their minds, that it is impossible to make them conceive the one without the other; and with them this conviction does not spring from that barren traditionary faith which seems to vegetate in the soul rather than to live.

I have known of societies formed by the Americans to send out ministers of the Gospel into the new Western States to found schools and churches there, lest religion should be suffered to die away in those remote settlements, and the rising States be less fitted to enjoy free institutions than the people from which they emanated. I met with wealthy New Englanders who abandoned the country in which they were born in order to lay the foundations of Christianity and of freedom on the banks of the Missouri, or in the prairies of Illinois. Thus religious zeal is perpetually stimulated in the United States by the duties of patriotism. These men do not act from an exclusive consideration of the promises of a future life; eternity is only one motive of their devotion to the cause; and if you converse with these missionaries of Christian civilization, you will be surprised to find how much value they set upon the goods of this world, and that you meet with a politician where you expected to find a priest. They will tell you that "all the American republics are collectively involved with each other; if the republics of the West were to fall into anarchy, or to be mastered by a despot, the republican institutions which now flourish upon the shores of the Atlantic Ocean would be in great peril. It is, therefore, our interest that the new States should be religious, in order to maintain our liberties."

What de Tocqueville describes here is just the opposite of what we have in this country now. And what he describes is the very essence of what John Adams said about our Constitution.

Our Constitution was designed only for a moral and religious people. It is wholly inadequate for the government of any other.”

That tells us exactly how the founding fathers saw their own culture.

 

[Gary K]

That you seem to think this over-arching Enlightenment idea was popularized solely by Whitefield in early American culture, is even more amazing to me. That you seem to lack any historical framework around which to interpret Jefferson's words (and by extension, Franklin's addendum), is also amazing-- but I can't say all that surprising.

I look at the fruits of events or eras to see if they were good or evil.. What was the product of the Age of Reason in France? The French Revolution that completely rejected God, Christianity, and made man's reasoning powers their god. The founding fathers completely rejected that outcome and followed revelation rather than reason for God was central to the American revolution. If they had accepted the fruits of the age of reason this nation would have made the same egregious errors France did for you cannot separate thoughts, beliefs and actions. The former two shapes the latter.

I don't think Whitefield pushed enlightenment in any way, shape or form. He advocated for, very impressively, the revealed will of God. He used scripture and followed it closely. What Whitefield preached was the gospel revealed in both the Old and New Testaments. He rejected reason as his god.

 

[aCultureWarrior]

Originally posted by aCultureWarrior View Post
Since you appear to be using David Barton as a tool to discredit the Founding Father's intention of making the United States a Christian nation, let's continue on with my questions (which thus far have gone unanswered by you)

"Why would a secular nation do this?

You're aware that there are objective definitions for terms like "Christian State"/"Christian Nation", aren't you?

Before I address that subject, I guess I should ask a more specific question:

"Why would a nation whose founders were supposedly very strict about the separation of Church and State do things like have their government endorse the printing of The Holy Bible, have their President sign a government document that ends with "In the Year of our Lord Christ"; have church services in one of the most famous federal government buildings in WA DC, the US Capitol building?

Of course when Thomas Jefferson wrote his famous letter that is taken out of total context by secular humanists/God-less L/libertarians (which by the way is not a US government document and holds no legality in American law), to the Danbury Baptist Church, he wasn't talking about the separation of church and state (something that was in Communist Soviet Union's constitution) but that the federal government of the new United States would not endorse a specific Christian denomination and make it a "State Church.
https://wallbuilders.com/letters-dan...mas-jefferson/

Since I have already presented that objective definition to you-- from a dictionary no less-- and you have rejected it claiming something to the effect this actual definition "wasn't what you meant", then perhaps (just out of curiosity) you can tell me exactly--
1) what your subjective/personalized definition of "Christian Nation" IS and
2) how your definition comports with historical facts and stated goals of historical figures.

Important stuff, rent boy.

Supreme Court Justice David Brewer already explained what a Christian nation is in the post that I wrote earlier. If you have issues with what Supreme Court Justice David Brewer said, let's discuss that.
As far as the term "Christian State" goes: I don't believe that I've ever heard the United States referred to as a "Christian State", although it did fit closely to what the definition is (no State Church though).
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Christian_state

I must say that the paste eating rent boy is thoroughly enjoying watching the secular humanist/L/libertarians squirrrrrrm with all of the evidence that David Barton and Wallbuilders has supplied (and there's tons more where those came from) showing that the founders of this nation didn't intend Christianity to be separated from government, but instead intended it to be a huge part of American government and culture.

Also helpful would be how you define the word "Christian"-- because, as I have previously pointed out to you-- there is plenty of evidence that one of Barton's favorite primary Founders, gave every indication of rejecting most of the main tenets of orthodox Christianity.

Barton has pointed out that there are 250 Founding Fathers, and he makes a point to talk about those that aren't well known (you know, the Christian pastors, Elders and founders and managers of Bible societies).
Are you referring to the Founder that wrote two bibles and signed a US government document ending with "In the Year of our Lord Christ" as well as invited the US Marine Corp band to play for church services in the US Capitol building during some of the 70 years that church services were held there?

Regarding my interpretation of Christianity: Love God (and His institutions) with all of your heart, soul and mind and love your neighbor as yourself. Pretty simple stuff for those of us that are followers of Christ.
Unfortunately in this day and age others have hijacked the word and are pretending to be Christian. Heck, can you believe that L/libertarians are calling themselves Christian? Even sodomites have their own bible and call it the "Queen James Bible".

BTW, have we discussed how the Founding Fathers felt about "that infamous crime against nature"?

 

[ok doser]

... Why would a nation whose founders were supposedly very strict about the separation of Church and State do things like have their government endorse the printing of The Holy Bible ....

"endorse" it through lip service

unless you can show that they diverted federal funds to support its printing and distribution, or that they mandated its use through legislature?

Acw hastily moves the target:

... the founders of this nation ... intended (Christianity) to be a huge part of American government and culture.

culture, yes

government?

nope

sorry

embarrassed at having his lack of knowledge of American history so thoroughly exposed, Acw minces his way back onto comfortable ground:

Even sodomites have their own bible and call it the "Queen James Bible".

BTW, have we discussed how the Founding Fathers felt about "that infamous crime against nature"?

 

[aCultureWarrior]

Spiritual Heritage and Government Monuments

QUESTION: Spiritual Heritage – Government Monuments, Buildings, and Landmarks

ANSWER:

Some of the most important monuments, buildings, and landmarks in Washington, D.C., include religious words, symbols, and imagery. In the United States Capitol the declaration “In God We Trust” is prominently displayed in both the United States House and Senate Chambers.​

Around the top of the walls in the House Chamber appear images of 23 great lawgivers from across the centuries, but Moses (the lawgiver, who– according to the Bible – originally received the law of God,) is the only lawgiver honored with a full face view, looking down on the proceedings of the House.​

Religious artwork is found throughout the United States Capitol, including in the Rotunda where the prayer service of Christopher Columbus, the Baptism of Pocahontas, and the prayer and Bible study of the Pilgrims are all prominently displayed; in the Cox Corridor of the Capitol where the words “America! God shed His grace on thee” are inscribed; at the east Senate entrance with the words “Annuit Coeptis” – Latin for “God has favored our undertakings”; and in numerous other locations.​

Images of the Ten Commandments are found in many federal buildings across Washington, D. C., including in bronze in the floor of the National Archives; in a bronze statue of Moses in the Main Reading Room of the Library of Congress; in numerous locations at the U. S. Supreme Court, including in the frieze above the Justices, the oak door at the rear of the Chamber, the gable apex, and in dozens of locations on the bronze latticework surrounding the Supreme Court Bar seating.​

Spiritual Heritage – The Washington Monument, Jefferson Memorial, and Lincoln Memorial

In the Washington Monument not only are numerous Bible verses and religious acknowledgements carved on memorial blocks in the walls, including the phrases: “Holiness to the Lord” (Exodus 28:26, 30:30, Isaiah 23:18, Zechariah 14:20), “Search the Scriptures” (John 5:39), “The memory of the just is blessed” (Proverbs 10:7), “May Heaven to this Union continue its beneficence,” and “In God We Trust”, but the Latin inscription Laus Deo – “Praise be to God” – is engraved on the monument’s capstone.​

Of the five areas inside the Jefferson Memorial into which Jefferson’s words have been carved, four are God-centered, including Jefferson’s declaration that “God who gave us life gave us liberty. Can the liberties of a nation be secure when we have removed a conviction that these liberties are the gift of God? Indeed I tremble for my country when I reflect that God is just, that His justice cannot sleep forever.”​

The Lincoln Memorial contains numerous acknowledgments of God and citations of Bible verses, including the declarations that “we here highly resolve that . . . this nation under God . . . shall not perish from the earth”; “The Almighty has His own purposes. ‘Woe unto the world because of offenses; for it must needs be that offenses come, but woe to that man by whom the offense cometh’ (Matthew 18:7)”; “as was said three thousand years ago, so still it must be said ‘the judgments of the Lord are true and righteous altogether’ (Psalms 19:9)”; “one day every valley shall be exalted and every hill and mountain shall be made low, the rough places will be made plain, and the crooked places will be made straight and the glory of the Lord shall be revealed and all flesh see it together” (Dr. Martin Luther King’s speech, based on Isaiah 40:4-5).​

In the Library of Congress, The Giant Bible of Mainz and The Gutenberg Bible are on prominent permanent display and etched on the walls are Bible verses, including “The light shineth in darkness, and the darkness comprehendeth it not” (John 1:5); “Wisdom is the principal thing; therefore, get wisdom and with all thy getting, get understanding” (Proverbs 4:7); “What doth the Lord require of thee, but to do justly, and to love mercy, and to walk humbly with thy God” (Micah 6:8); and “The heavens declare the Glory of God, and the firmament showeth His handiwork” (Psalm 19:1).​

¹

The spiritual heritage of the United States of America is obvious. Numerous other of the most important American government leaders, institutions, monuments, buildings, and landmarks both openly acknowledge and incorporate religious words, symbols, and imagery into official venues. Such acknowledgments are even more frequent at the state and local level than at the Federal level, where thousands of such acknowledgments exist.​

https://www.allabouthistory.org/spir...uments-faq.htm

So much for separation of Church and State.

 

[ok doser]

Spiritual Heritage and Government Monuments

...

So much for separation of Church and State.

and you think these constitute an establishment of religion?


silly boy :chuckle:

 

[aCultureWarrior]

and you think these constitute an establishment of religion?


silly boy :chuckle:

More evidence of America being a Christian nation.

Your library historians, Warren, Chris, Mikey and the communist founded ACLU don't like that.
https://theologyonline.com/forum/pol...05#post2731505

BTW, have we discussed how the Founding Fathers felt about "that infamous crime against nature"?

https://fromthetrenchesworldreport.com/what-the-founding-fathers-believed-about-homosexuality/95738

Oh my....​

 

[ok doser]

More evidence of America being a Christian nation.

The only person that seems confused about that is you

Yes, America is a nation comprised mainly of people who identify as Christian

 

[aCultureWarrior]

Instead of going to Barton for your ideas why don't you go to the founders themselves?

Why on earth would I not use an invaluable source that has over 100,000 original documents on the colonial period predating 1812? Why would I not use the extensive knowledge of David Barton who gives over 400 lectures a year on the Founding Fathers?
Have I mentioned that the sodomites HATE David Barton with a passion? Pastor Scott Lively explains it well when talking about LGBT activist Warren Throckmorton's attack on David Barton in Lively's two articles titled:

In Defense of David Barton (part 1 and part 2).
https://www.scottlively.net/2012/08/12/in-defense-of-david-barton/
https://www.scottlively.net/2012/08...ton-part-2-fact-checking-warren-throckmorton/

 

[aCultureWarrior]

The only person that seems confused about that is you

Yes, America is a nation comprised mainly of people who identify as Christian

Was Supreme Court Justice David Brewer confused when he stated the following in the Supreme Court Case Church of the Holy Trinity vs the United States:

"Brewer added that a legislature representing a religious people would certainly not take action against religion. He provided an overview of references to God in official documents from U.S. history, beginning with the commission to Christopher Columbus and continuing through colonial charters, state constitutions, and oaths of office.

Turning to the Constitution, he offered the First Amendment and the “Sundays excepted” provision in Article 1 as evidence of the importance of religion in the United States. He also found throughout American life — from its laws to its businesses, customs, and multitudes of churches, charitable organizations, and missionary associations — further evidence that “this is a Christian nation.”​

https://theologyonline.com/forum/pol...24#post2731524

Sundays Excepted: Originalism, the Blue Laws, and the Christian Nation​

https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=949842

Fact check that on NPR and get back to me.

"endorse" it [The Aitken Bible] through lip service​

unless you can show that they diverted federal funds to support its printing and distribution, or that they mandated its use through legislature?​

BTW, you know all of those statues and paintings promoting the Christian religion in government buildings, who do you think paid for those?

 

[McCoy]

Before I address that subject, I guess I should ask a more specific question:

"Why would a nation whose founders were supposedly very strict about the separation of Church and State do things like have their government endorse the printing of The Holy Bible... "

You reach a lot of invalid conclusions because your premises are often completely invalid.

What do I mean exactly? Well, right here: The fact is, the Founders WEREN'T strict about the separation of Church and State. I never said they were. And I'm not sure who you've heard make that specific claim. The concept was progressive and challenging in the 18th century... and still is in the 21st century. Those Founders who were more free-thinking, progressive and Enlightenment-minded seemed to have less trouble, than others who were more traditionalist. John Jay tried to ban all Catholics from holding public office. Founders of all persuasions owned other human beings as property. And women were actively denied the right to vote and to enjoy the same opportunities as men.

The practical adherence to many Constitutional ideas and rights, was spotty at best. Which is one reason why citing any early American practice as prime evidence for Constitutional precedent or intent, will lead you to some very, very bad and unconstitutional conclusions.

"In the Year of our Lord Christ"

The language of all Western societies in the 17th and 18th centuries was decidedly religious-- even among irreligious people. It was largely cultural. Remember, the Bible was the most prevalent published book and was central to all classical studies.

The bible-believing evangelists of the late 18th century and early 19th century, had a very different view of American culture's "Christianity", than either you or your rent boy Barton do. Unlike you, I've actually studied the early American revivalists and the 1st and 2nd Great Awakenings pretty extensively. To them, America was largely a festering cesspool of counterfeit Christianity, drum-beating waywardness and phony piety. It's estimated by the way, that Church attendance around the time of the Revolutionary War, was only somewhere between 10-15% of the population.

Of course when Thomas Jefferson wrote his famous letter that is taken out of total context by secular humanists/God-less L/libertarians...

Do you even know what the Danbury Baptists wanted help with? Do you reckon Jefferson was a Christian like you? On what substantive historical evidence do you base this? The evidence points to Jefferson being a free-thinking Unitarian. If you think Unitarians and naturalists are Christians too, then you're a lot more Liberal than you pretend.

Supreme Court Justice David Brewer already explained what a Christian nation is in the post that I wrote earlier.

Justice Brewer never made clear what he meant by use of the term, in Church of the Holy Trinity v. United States, 143 U.S.457 (1892). He did not make clear whether by “Christian nation” he meant “government” or State in a legal sense, or whether he was simply observing the undisputed fact that most Americans claimed to be Christians and that Christianity was up to that point, the most prevalent organized religion. He would later elaborate in a series of published lectures ("The United States: A Christian Nation") that the United States wasn't a Christian nation “in the sense that Christianity is the established religion or that the people are in any manner compelled to support it” (Brewer 1905:12).

Regarding my interpretation of Christianity: Love God (and His institutions) with all of your heart, soul and mind and love your neighbor as yourself. Pretty simple stuff for those of us that are followers of Christ.

That's probably the most innocuous and liberal definition of Christianity that Ive head in a while. Good for you!

 

[aCultureWarrior]

You reach a lot of invalid conclusions because your premises are often completely invalid.

What do I mean exactly? Well, right here: The fact is, the Founders WEREN'T strict about the separation of Church and State.

Because there was no "separation" aside from creating a State Church, therefore the entire modern day argument that prayer in public schools, Christian monuments on government property, etc. etc. etc. is invalid.

BTW, I'm going to share what books were read in public schools during the colonial period. One would think that if the Bible and Bible related materials were embraced back then, why is it illegal to use those materials in our current public school systems?

Justice Brewer never made clear what he meant by use of the term, in Church of the Holy Trinity v. United States, 143 U.S.457 (1892). He did not make clear whether by “Christian nation” he meant “government” or State in a legal sense, or whether he was simply observing the undisputed fact that most Americans claimed to be Christians and that Christianity was up to that point, the most prevalent organized religion. He would later elaborate in a series of published lectures ("The United States: A Christian Nation") that the United States wasn't a Christian nation “in the sense that Christianity is the established religion or that the people are in any manner compelled to support it” (Brewer 1905:12).

Brewer defined what a Christian nation is in my above quote to my bestest friend in the whoooole wide world, ok doser.
Plus you're confusing a theocracy with a Christian nation. Many Islam countries are Muslim theocracies. If you knew anything about Christianity, you'd know that while Jesus wants His Word promoted throughout the globe, He doesn't want to try and force people to have a relationship with Him.


Quote: Originally posted by aCultureWarrior "In the Year of our Lord Christ"

The language of all Western societies in the 17th and 18th centuries was decidedly religious-- even among irreligious people. It was largely cultural. Remember, the Bible was the most prevalent published book and was central to all classical studies

The word "religion" covers numerous beliefs: Buddhism, Islam, Hinduism, etc. Yet the President of the United States signed a document that said "In the Year of our Lord Christ".

Could you imagine the uproar that your ACLU'ers would have if a President signed an official US government document with those words on it today?​

Quote: Originally posted by aCultureWarrior


Regarding my interpretation of Christianity: Love God (and His institutions) with all of your heart, soul and mind and love your neighbor as yourself. Pretty simple stuff for those of us that are followers of Christ.

That's probably the most innocuous and liberal definition of Christianity that Ive head in a while. Good for you!​

You'd be surprised how many phony followers of Christ that definition weeds out. <wink>​

 

[McCoy]

PS) Incidentally, Barton loves to point out the religious symbolism in State architecture and art, but conveniently ignores an equal number of templar crosses, freemasonry symbols, pentagrams, Egyptian architecture and gods and goddesses on some of the same buildings. Do the presence of these pagan artifacts somehow declare that the U.S. is a masonic or neo-pagan occultic society? This argument is absurd.

 

[McCoy]

Because there was no "separation" aside from creating a State Church, therefore the entire modern day argument that prayer in public schools, Christian monuments on government property, etc. etc. etc. is invalid.

The Constitution omits all mention of God and Christ. The State cannot promote religious opinions or have stake in sectarian religious debates. There is likewise NO religious requirement for any elected public office.

Politicians can freely practice any religion of their choosing, and so can all citizens.

 

[McCoy]

Brewer defined what a Christian nation is in my above quote ...

In Brewer's decision Church of the Holy Trinity v. the United States, he simply states how Christianity was important to American life and central to its initial formation, a fact that is not really debated by anyone who knows history. The Constitution however, carefully omits all mention of Christianity and/or the New Testament.

 

[ok doser]

... my bestest friend in the whoooole wide world, ok doser ....

quit flirting with me nancy

 

[aCultureWarrior]

PS) Incidentally, Barton loves to point out the religious symbolism in State architecture and art, but conveniently ignores an equal number of templar crosses, freemasonry symbols, pentagrams, Egyptian architecture and gods and goddesses on some of the same buildings.

Equal? 'Besides Moses being the central figure in the Sculpture atop the front of the Supreme Court building, he

appears eight times in carvings that ring the Supreme Court Great Hall ceiling. Tablets representing the Ten Commandments can be found carved in the oak courtroom doors, on the support frame of the courtroom's bronze gates and in the library woodwork. The words "Jesus Christ" appears upside-down on an open Bible in a painting in the Capitol Rotunda. Judeo Christian symbols appear so often that it takes Christian Heritage Tours three days to show visitors all the biblical references on buildings ranging from the Library of Congress to the Capitol itself.' Etc.etc. etc.​

Do the presence of these pagan artifacts somehow declare that the U.S. is a masonic or neo-pagan occultic society? This argument is absurd.

A very small presence of historical figures and architecture that relate to non Judeo-Christian culture most definitely doesn't indicate that America was founded as a secular/pagan nation. Anyone that would suggest such is absurd.