The Declaration of Dependence - WordPress.com€¦ · The Declaration of Dependence Sausville 1...

The Declaration of Dependence

Ethan J. Sausville

Gileskirk American Culture 2003 Dr. George Grant

29 April, 2010

The Declaration of Dependence Sausville 1

Table of Contents THESIS: The Declaration of Independence was not a pagan document. Instead it was an entirely Christian document, declaring its dependence on God and His law, just as much as its independence of the king of England and his law. This can be clearly seen when the document itself, the authors, and the nation surrounding the document are examined in some depth. I. The God of the Bible was and is the God of the Declaration of Independence.

A. The Declaration of Independence stands for everything that the men of the American War for Independence fought for.

B. The Declaration of Independence was a Christian document. II. The very wording of the Declaration of Independence requires a Christian Worldview.

A. Many of the ideas of the Declaration are inherently Christian ideas. B. The largest section of the Declaration specifically cites 27 violations of the rights of the

colonists. None of these accusations would be valid without the Christian Worldview C. One of the major Christian ideas seen in the Declaration is the idea of a Just War, which

is a totally Christian idea, even non-Christians admit this. III. Not only was the wording of the Declaration Christian, but the source of the Declaration was

Christian as well. A. Thomas Jefferson was the man who wrote the majority of the Declaration. Though he

was obviously not a Christian, he thoroughly understood Christianity. B. Though Jefferson did write the Declaration, the ideas in it were not his own. Those ideas

came from three undoubtedly Christian books written long before the Declaration. IV. Even if the Declaration was a Pagan document, why would a Christian nation accept it?

A. From its very earliest beginnings Christianity was at the heart of America. B. Without this Christian drive American may very well never have been discovered, for it

was because of his Christian beliefs that Columbus ‘sailed the ocean blue’. C. Even as when America seemed farthest from Christ, the Great Awakening occurred and

inflamed Americans once more. D. Of all the men who signed the Declaration almost of all of them were well educated

Christian men who would not have accepted a Pagan document. E. The never would have accepted the Declaration unless it reflected a Christian Worldview

V. No solid argument can be made that the Declaration was not a Christian document because it was absolutely a Christian document. A. The argument that since Jefferson was not a Christian, the Declaration was not a

Christian quickly falls apart. VI. The Declaration of Independence was really a Declaration of Dependence on God and His

law A. In the war for Independence men fought and died for their God given rights of “Life,

Liberty, and the Pursuit of Happiness.” The Declaration epitomized this what these men died for.

B. The Declaration was most certainly a Christian document. C. The reason that it is important to remember that the Declaration really was a Christian

document is because if it was not then the very cornerstone of America, Christ, begins to crumble.


Ethan J. Sausville 4/30/2010

Final Draft The Declaration of Dependence

The Declaration of Independence

The British and the American Colonists stood opposite each other with muskets loaded. No

one moved or fired, everything was as still as could be, but the Americans were holding their

ground. Suddenly out of nowhere the sound of a musket shot rang in the silence. A few seconds

later the noise of gunfire was deafening, when it ended eight Americans were dead, ten were

wounded, and one British soldier was slightly wounded. In less than five minutes the battle of

Lexington was over, and yet one of the most epic and most important portions of American

history had begun in those five minutes. The War for American Independence had begun, but

independence had yet to be declared, and as of yet they were only fighting for their liberties.

Few of the Americans would have imagined that they would declare themselves a separate nation

a year later.

No matter how surprising it may have been to these men, they would a little more than a year

later declare their independence of Great Britain. They signed the “Unanimous Declaration of

the United States of America” with the same convictions that they had literally stood and died for

on that mid April day on Lexington Green, and many more would die standing for these ideas.

They fought not only for “life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness,” but for honor, home,

family, and their faith. In essence they fought for what they believed was right. However, most

Americans today forget about their Christian heritage, and don’t know that the War for American

Independence was wholly backed by Christian thinking. This thinking can be most clearly seen

in the Declaration of Independence, and yet even that document has come to be known as pagan.

The Declaration of Dependence

When, in the course of human events, it becomes necessary for one people to

dissolve the political bonds which have connected them with another, and to

assume among the powers of the earth, the separate and equal station to which

the laws of nature and of nature's God entitle them, a decent respect to the

opinions of mankind requires that they should declare the causes which impel


them to the separation. (To read the whole Document, see Appendix A:

Documents and Speeches, The Declaration of Independence)

With these words our founding fathers “established what they themselves called a Covenant

Lawsuit, against their covenant brethren in Great Britain. . . . This lawsuit George Mason . . .

attested was modeled on the Old Testament prophets like: Nahum, Obadiah, and Micah”

(Gileskirk, Covenant Lawsuit). Today, a few oppose the “fact” that the Declaration of

Independence was a Christian document. Many books have been written that try and prove that

the Declaration was not a Christian document, and that it did not reflect a Christian worldview.

The Declaration of Independence was not a pagan document. Instead it was an entirely Christian

document, declaring its dependence on God and His law, just as much as its independence of the

king of England and his law. This can be clearly seen when the document itself, the authors, and

the nation surrounding the document are examined in some depth.

The Christian Declaration

To claim that the Declaration is Christian, the document must be examined quite thoroughly.

When, we do so we will easily see that the Declaration of Independence was Christian in both its

language and thought. Even when the Declaration of Independence list the wrongs of the king of

England it is utilizing the Christian worldview. Also, within the Declaration are all the necessary

points of the Christian idea of a Just war. It is from all of this that we can begin to reach the

conclusion that the Declaration of Independence really was a Christian document.

Christian Assertions

When the Declaration of American Independence is examined five distinct Christian

assertions can be seen very clearly. Some of these assertions are more obvious than others, but

in the end it should be fairly obvious that they are Christian assertions.

The first Christian assertion shows up very early in the very first sentence of the Declaration:

“. . . and to assume among the powers of the earth, the separate and equal station to which the

laws of nature and of nature's God entitle them. . .” The authors of the Declaration believed that

it was the “laws of nature and of nature’s God” that entitled “to assume among the powers of

the earth, the separate and equal station” of an independent nation. What they’re saying is that

it is God and his law that allows them to secede. Thus, in the very first sentence of the


Declaration they are declaring that they hold God and his law as the standard by which they live

and act. When put this way it seems obvious that there is at least one Christian assertion in the

Declaration, yet many say that nature’s God does not refer to the God of the Bible. Instead it

refers to a ‘watchmaker God of Deism’ (qtd. in Dershowitz, 15). The problem with this

statement is that a watchmaker god does nothing, all he did was create the world and now he is

sitting back watching it unfold. This in turn means that god cannot or will not do anything, he

cannot direct events, he cannot work in the hearts of men, and he cannot create laws. If nature’s

God refers to a watchmaker god than there can be no laws of nature. Thus, nature’s God must

logically refer to at least a God who is active in the lives of men, and who has the sovereign

power to create absolute laws.

The next major Christian assertion can be seen in the very next sentence: “We hold these

truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal…” The very thought that all men are

created equal is a Christian idea, though admittedly many pagans at least say that they hold to

this idea, but in doing so they are borrowing from the Christian worldview. According to the

scriptures all men are made in the image of God (Genesis 1:26-27, Genesis 9:6, 1 Corinthians

11:7b), thus no man is above another, whether rich or poor, subjects or rulers, or black or white

(Proverbs 22:2, Job 31:15, Malachi 2:10). In a pagan world it cannot rightly be said that all men

are created equal, in fact the near opposite is often true. This is true because, all pagan

worldviews are in the end survival of the fittest (an idea Darwin was by no means the first to

invent, he only named it). In Deism and Atheism this can be seen most clearly where survival is

the chief end of man. In this world there is either total tyranny or total anarchy, if not it is simply

because they are borrowing just enough from the Christian worldview to keep civilization

civilized. In this dog eat dog world there is no equality, everything is based upon strength, or

intellect. With this worldview someone will always be considered lower than others, whether

they are Black, Jewish, or the Elderly and disabled (as we see today). To say that all men are

created equal requires a Christian worldview.

If we finish the very sentence that we began above we will again see another Christian idea:

“We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by

their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty, and the pursuit

of Happiness.” The very idea that men are “endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable

Rights” is a very Christian idea. First of all because it admits that we were created by a single


Creator. Admittedly this can be said in a deistic world (we will ignore every worldview for now

except deism and atheism simply because none of the men involved in the creation of the

document are accused of being anything else), but most certainly not in an atheistic worldview.

However, not only has this Creator created man, but according to the Declaration he has created

him with ‘certain inalienable rights.’ In order for these men to have rights at all, let alone

unchangeable rights, God must be active in this world. The reason this is true is because to say

that a right is inalienable and unchangeable requires there to be an absolute standard. That

absolute standard can only come from an active and all sovereign God. Active, because a god

who created the world then left it alone as the deist believes could do nothing to stop the

alienation of these rights. All sovereign, because if God were not all sovereign than He would

not have the power to stop the alienation of these rights. Thus, the statement cannot be deistic

(nor any other non-Christian worldview) because God is neither active nor all sovereign, nor can

it be any other pagan worldview because their god(s) is/are not all sovereign. In a non-Christian

world there are no absolutes, moral or otherwise (Bahnsen, chap. 9). Therefore, the rights of

‘Life, Liberty, and the pursuit of Happiness’ are not inalienable in a non-Christian world. In

truth, almost the exact opposite is true in a pagan world. Anyone and everyone can do anything

that they please no matter how it affects the ‘rights’ of others.

This, on the other hand, is not the case with the Christian worldview, and it is not even, as we

are beginning to see, the case with the Declaration of Independence. As of yet we have only

looked at three of the five major Christian ideas that exist in the Declaration. The next idea is

that governments are instituted to protect the rights of the people. We read: “We hold these

truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator

with certain inalienable Rights that among these are Life, Liberty, and the pursuit of Happiness.

That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men.” Thus, according to the

Declaration, the purpose of the government is to protect the inalienable rights discussed a

moment ago. It has already been seen that there is no absolute standard which means that there

is also no absolute standard of right and wrong. Thus, there is no reason for government because

the purpose of government is to enforce the law and protect the inalienable and God given rights

of man. In a Christian world the purpose of the government is to protect the people by

preserving justice and defending their rights as a people. Not only is that the stance of the

Christian worldview, but that is the stance of the Declaration.


The final Christian statement is probably the most obvious and important statement in the

whole document. In conclusion the Declaration says:

We, therefore, the Representatives of the United States of America, in General

Congress, Assembled, appealing to the Supreme Judge of the world for the

rectitude of our intentions. . . . 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.

The purport of this statement is that the authors and signers of the declaration are “appealing to

the Supreme Judge of the world,” and placing their “reliance on the Protection of Divine

Providence.” In other words they are saying that God is their authority and their strength. This

statement simply cannot be made by a consistent Deist or an Atheist. Even most, if not all,

Deists or Atheists today would not say this. To say this admits both that God exists and that he

is active. Some may argue that the “Supreme Judge” and “Divine Providence” refer to some

force other than the God of the Bible. This thought, however, quickly collapses when examined.

First of all as we have already seen the Declaration demands an absolute standard, yet were does

this absolute standard come from, but from God. And how can an absolute standard exist

without an all sovereign God as described in the Bible? It can’t. To make something absolute,

absolute power is needed, and who has absolute power but the God of the Bible? No one. Thus

we can see that, a single and all sovereign God is at the center of the Declaration of American

Independence, and that the men who drafted the Declaration had Christian ideals.

Christian Accusations

In the last section, if you are familiar with the Declaration, you will know that we skipped a

very large section of the document. The central and largest portion of the Declaration is filled

with accusation after accusation against the king of England. As we shall see the very premise of

these accusations is Christian. (For those readers who wish to read the actual document see

appendix B, the actual wording of the document will only be cited briefly.)

Of the 27 accusations made by our founding fathers, not one can be supported by anything

but a Christian worldview. How can this be true? Once again we return to the fact that an

absolute standard cannot exist in a non-Christian world. Instead of God’s standard the opinions

of man are instituted, and the opinions of man are relative to each man. Thus, there is no


standard by which the king of England can be held in a non-Christian world, for there is no right

and there is no wrong, but that which each individual decides upon. Most Deists and Atheists

today define right as either that which invokes social approval or personal approval, and wrong

as that which does not. To say that what is right is what invokes personal approval, in the end is

saying the same thing: good is different for each individual. This means that right and wrong are

different for different people. Nothing is either right or wrong, in this world, everything is

relative to each individual. On the other hand, the idea that approval of society that defines good

also collapses under the weight of its own absurdity, and once again it turns out to be just moral

relativity. To say this means that anything that any society ever did as a whole was good and

acceptable. Thus we cannot condemn anything from genocide to community suicide, to

pederasty to terrorism (Bahnsen, 172). Yet most would condemn Hitler for his mass murder of

the Jews, and almost every American condemns Iraqi terrorism. However, if they believe that

good is defined by the society then there is nothing wrong with what Hitler did and the Iraqi

nation is doing. Thus, neither definition of good can be upheld by a non-Christian worldview.

In a Christian world both Hitler and the Iraqi’s are wrong, because there is a King of kings and a

Lord of lords, and he has set forth an absolute standard in His Word.

Just War

Immediately following the fall of Rome, St, Augustine, the greatest theologian of his day,

wrote ‘The City of God.’ In this book he proposed seven points of Christian warfare, what we

now know of as the just war theory. Since he proposed these ideas it has been shown time and

time again that the doctrines are wholly Biblical. The Declaration of Independence states many

of these ideas. The only ideas that are not seen in the document are those that cannot apply to a

document (i.e. not killing civilians). The seven points are: First, it must be a last resort, all other

options must be thoroughly exhausted. Second, the war must be lead by a legitimate authority.

Third, it must redress past wrongs. Fourth, its goal must be to establish peace. Fifth, there must

be a reasonable chance of success. Sixth, it must discriminate between civilians and combatants,

and only harm the latter. Finally, it must use equivalent force (Wikipedia). Obviously the last

three points will not be seen in a document, but the other four can be seen very plainly.

Throughout the Declaration we find the authors saying in one form or another that they have

exhausted every other means before taking the step or war and independence, they were, as Dr.


Grant says, ‘reluctant revolutionaries’ (Gileskirk, Reluctant Revolutionaries). For example we

see such wording as: “In every stage of these Oppressions: We have Petitioned for Redress in the

most humble terms: Our repeated Petitions have been answered only by repeated injury.” The

Declaration thus states that the people of America have exhausted everything and nothing has

worked, the king of England would not heed their petitions. These words are not merely idle

words said to make the American war seem more just. Instead, the Americans had done as they

say, they did petition the king of England time and time again, but, as they stated, to no avail.

The second point in the just war theory is that a legitimate authority must lead the war. Once

again we see proof of this in and out of the Declaration. They assert what authority that they

have by saying: “We, therefore, the Representatives of the United States of America, in General

Congress…” The men who wrote this document were not only men getting together and

throwing a few words together that declared them to have separated from England. No, they

were some of the greatest leaders in America at the time. Compare that to the thinking of the

French Revolution. Not only were most of the leaders of the French Revolution just a normal

citizen whom other citizens wanted to be lead by, but when a leader was a legitimate authority

they immediately took from him any sign of that legitimacy. This is part of the reason why,

during the French Revolution nearly everyone was identified as citizen.

It is so glaringly obvious that the third point of a just war hardly needs to be covered. This

point states that it must redress the wrongs of the past, over half of the paper focus’ on the

wrongs committed in the past by the king of England. It is for these wrongs that the War for

American Independence was being fought.

The Christian Origins

Now that we have clearly seen that the Declaration of Independence is full of Christian

language and thought, it is high time that we look at the lives of the men who wrote, influenced,

and signed the Declaration. As most know Thomas Jefferson was the major author of the

Declaration of Independence. In Thomas Jefferson we see a man full of moral and theological

contradictions, but though he tried to make believe that he was a Christian, he really was not.

This, contrary to what one may think, does not make the Declaration a non-Christian document.

First, because although Jefferson was not a Christian he thought in Christian terms. Second,

because his ideas were not his, but were drawn from Christian books.


Thomas Jefferson

Thomas Jefferson was, as many know, the major author of the Declaration of Independence,

thus it is important that we study his worldview. Of his worldview there are many different

beliefs. Some say that he was a Christian, while others say that he was a terrible pagan. Others

still, say that yes he was pagan, but even so he was not completely opposed to Christianity. This

view seems to be the most accurate. Jefferson most certainly was a pagan, this is clear when you

look at his life, words, and deeds, and yet Jefferson’s life was visibly influenced by Christianity.

Thomas Jefferson was definitely not a Christian. On the contrary, he was a very astute

pagan. His life is filled with terrible things that he did and for which he felt no remorse. Yet that

is not the major reason that we know that he is not a Christian, we know mainly from his letters

and books. In a letter to his seventeen year old nephew Peter Carr, Jefferson wrote this:

. . . . Fix reason firmly in her seat, and call to her tribunal every fact, every

question. Question with boldness even the existence of God; because, if there be

one, he must more approve of the homage of reason, than that of blindfolded fear.

. . . Read the Bible as, then, as you would read Livy or Tacitus. The facts which

are within the ordinary course of nature, you will believe on the authority of the

writer, as you do those of the same kind in Livy and Tacitus. . . . For example, in

the book of Joshua, we are told, the sun stood still several hours. Were we to

read that fact in Livy or Tacitus, we should class it with the showers of blood . . . .

Your own reason is the only oracle given you by Heaven, and you are answerable,

not for the rightness, but the uprightness of the decision. (To read this letter see

Appendix A: Documents and Speeches, Jefferson’s Letter on Religion).

Basically, what Jefferson is saying here is that reason is the means by which we discover

truth and that a person should never reach the conclusion that God exists apart from reason. A

person cannot take God’s word as infallible. This is obviously not a Christian way of thinking.

The Christian believes that the Bible is wholly infallible, and takes the Bible as a whole not in

little bite size chunks as Jefferson did. Jefferson believed that so long as a person reaches their

conclusion by reason then no just god could condemn them for getting the wrong answer. He

thought that no man will go to hell for not believing Euclid’s Geometry, thus no man will go to

hell for not believing Christianity (Dershowitz, 21).


Thomas Jefferson’s reactions to Christianity are fairly numerous, yet throughout his life one

theme is pretty clear: he believed that Christianity was a farce, but that it had a positive effect on

the society (Dershowitz, 39). This type of thinking was not at all new to his time. Paul Johnson

says that, “even the doubting and the unenthusiastic were quite clear that religion was needed in

society, especially in a vast rapidly growing, and boisterous country like America” (qtd. 208).

Ben Franklin, for instance, also believed that Christianity was necessary to America. In fact, one

of the only deistic leaders of the time that you can find that did not believe in this way is Thomas

Paine. He was heavily criticized by Jefferson and Franklin, the two leading deists of the day, and

two men who where almost identical in there beliefs. Franklin wrote this to Paine: “He who

spits in the wind spits in his own face . . . If men are wicked with religion, what would they be

without it” (qtd. Johnson, 208). Both Jefferson and Franklin agreed that religion (which at the

time referred specifically to Christianity) was an absolute necessity of a functioning culture.

Although, Jefferson was certainly not a Christian, he seems to have wanted the people to

think of him as one, or at the very least as a man friendly to Christianity. The reason is simple, at

the time the nation was full of Christians, and in order to hold any political office Jefferson had

to secure their votes. He was what we would call a pragmatist. One thing that shows this clearly

is the fact that when he was no longer in politics he completely renounced all Christianity.

Jefferson most certainly believed in a god, and even a god that had some involvement in the

world, but his god was nothing like the God of the Bible. His god did not punish eternally,

though his god did set a moral standard (exactly what that moral standard was Jefferson never

quite decided, it seems that it applied to others and not to himself). He believed that Jesus was a

real man and that much of what He said was applicable to the day. However, he didn’t believe

that Jesus’ rose from the dead or that he died for our sins, though he did believe that Jesus was

crucified. In his ‘revised’ version Gospels, “The Life and Morals of Jesus of Nazareth,”

Jefferson deletes large sections from the Bible. Specifically, he deletes nearly every reference to

the supernatural.

Consequently, it is quite clear that Jefferson couldn’t have been a Christian. How then could

he have authored the Declaration of American Independence in a Christian manner? He

understood Christian thought very well. “He was a deist,” Paul Johnson says, “possibly even a

skeptic; yet he was also a ‘closet theologian,’ who read daily from a multilingual edition of the

New Testament” (144). Thus, he understood the Bible far better than many Christians do today,


and was fully equipped to write a document full of Christian language. Jefferson openly

borrowed from the Christian worldview, as well as from his friend and mentor Richard Henry

Lee who was a very Christian man.

Silent Authors

Originally Richard Henry Lee was going to be the main man in drafting the Declaration of

Independence. A brilliant lawyer, a political leader, and the man who actually proposed the

Declaration, his list of qualifications for writing the Declaration were numerous. He was the

man for the job, but in the midst of this his wife and children became deathly ill, and he had to

return home. Thus, Lee was placed in predicament. He had to decide who to hand off the task

of writing the majority of the declaration to. He decided to hand the duty to his young pupil and

colleague Thomas Jefferson, but before doing so he gave Jefferson a solid idea of what needed to

be written in the Declaration. Consequently, Jefferson was not the man who invented the ideas

seen in the declaration. Richard Henry Lee was.

Lee, however, gave Jefferson much more than just advice, he gave him books. One was the

book ‘Lex Rex’ by Samuel Rutherford, a puritan from the years before Cromwell. Essentially

the book stated that the law should be the king, not the other way around. By law, Rutherford

meant the law of God established in the Bible. This book was extremely influential in the days

of Oliver Cromwell and the English Civil War, in the creation of the Solemn League and

Covenant, and in the minds of many of the great men of America at that time. Another volume

that Lee gave Jefferson was ‘A Commentary on Judges’ (the book of the Bible) by Thomas

Hooker. Thomas Hooker was an early American puritan leader, and one of the men who helped

to form early America. He was a very Christian man. The point of the Commentary was that

there is a theological justification of rebellion and war, but only after every other recourse has

been thoroughly exhausted, and when rebellion comes it must take a specific form. We talked

earlier about the Just War theory, Jefferson did not get these ideas from St. Augustine, but from

Thomas Hooker in this book. Finally there was the ‘Second Treatise of Government’ by John

Locke. Locke was an English legal theorist who had originated the notion that certain

inalienable rights were given to everyone by God. These rights according to Locke were to be

the basis for every ‘covenantal plea.’ Rebellion could only take place, he argued, if these

inalienable rights were being taken from the people (Gileskirk, Covenant Lawsuit).


Richard Henry Lee handed these books to Jefferson and told him to draw ideas from them to

compose the Declaration of Independence, and Jefferson did. The ideas in these books can be

very clearly seen throughout the Declaration, and as we have already seen these ideas are not

only pushed forward by Christian men, but by Christian principles.

These books were most certainly fundamental in the creation of the Declaration, but there

was something very fundamental in the creation of these books. Long before the Declaration,

way back in the 16th century, a great revival occurred known to us today as the Reformation. In

this reformation thousands of men banded together for the cause of Christ and the Gospel. Chief

among these men was a man by the name of John Calvin. John Calvin restated and spread such

ideas as the right to rebel in certain cases, that law was king not the other way around, that man

has certain inalienable rights, etc. It was upon the foundation laid by John Calvin that

Rutherford, Hooker, and Locke built the theses of these books upon. Without Calvin and his

work for Christ the Declaration would have been totally different, for these books could not have

been written. Thus, not only is the Christian religion central to the Declaration, but the

Reformation and what it did for the Gospel is as well.

Christian Beginnings

Thus far we have examined the actual document seeking to discover if it was a Christian

document or not, and we have seen quite clearly that, yes it is a Christian document. Now we

will shift gears and ask the question: why would any intelligent Christian culture accept a pagan

document? But before we do that we must understand that it was a Christian nation.

From the Earliest

To do this we must travel back in time, and examine the history of America from the very

beginning. What we shall see is that from its absolute earliest days America was ruled by

Christian thinking. In fact, the very reason that America was discovered and explored was

Christianity, and even before Columbus, America was shaped by Christian thought.

Long before Columbus ‘discovered’ America it was already discovered. Several from the

Old World of Christendom had visited, and even lived and died in America. There are two

major stories of Christians coming to the New World. Only a little is known about the voyages


of St. Brendan and Madoc Gwynedd. This we do know, that around the middle of the sixth

century St. Brendan and several men set out on a great voyage. Somehow this voyage made it

across the Atlantic, where vast lands were discovered. After spending a short period of

exploration and evangelization St. Brendan returned to his native land of Ireland were he spent

the rest of his days. But, before he left behind him on this vast land several missionaries who we

presume spent the rest of their days preaching and teaching to the natives. Thus, America

received its first known contact with Christian culture.

Almost exactly six hundred years later Madoc Gwynedd shows up on the scene. He sailed

and discovered the New World, apparently landing around Mobile Bay. Unlike St. Brendan,

Gwynedd did not leave, he stayed. He and those with him moved inland and finally settled

around present day central Tennessee, where they intermarried with the Indians, and shared the

Gospel. Thus, once again Christianity was evident in early American History. (Gileskirk, Early

Contact)

It was not until 1492 that Christopher Columbus ‘sailed the ocean blue,’ almost 350 years

after Madoc Gwynedd’s journey. We all know the story of Columbus’ journeys back and forth

from the New World to the Old. What few of us do know is Columbus did this with a Christian

worldview. When Columbus landed in the New World, he thought that he was landing

somewhere off the coast of Asia. In fact, this was the assumption of his entire voyage, and is

part of the reason that he attempted the voyage. The three major reasons that Columbus sailed

the ocean blue, were first the Gospel, second Islam, and third gold. All three of these ideas are

tied up in the growth of the Gospel of Jesus Christ. The goal of his great voyage was to bring as

many pagans as they would meet into the Christian Kingdom, to defeat Islam once and for all,

and to finance that effort by the discovery of Gold. His was thinking of the possibility of a

flanking attack on Islam, but he never counted on America, and it was not until late in his fourth

trip to the New World that he realized that he had discovered two whole new continents.

(Gileskirk, Columbus)

Beyond Columbus

After Columbus, Christianity continued to influence America, though only minimally. This

doesn’t mean that America didn’t have Christian beginnings. On the contrary, it was because of

the decline of Christian Spain that England was able to gain a foothold in America and firmly


establish Christianity as the foundation of America forever. Admittedly, England was not

Christian in its method of exploration of America at first, but no permanent colony was

established until Christian ideas were used at Jamestown. In listing the reasons why the Roanoke

colony (this colony was planted before Jamestown, but it just disappeared off the face of the

earth, hence it became know as the lost colony) failed, Paul Johnson says that a large part of why

it failed was because, “it was an entirely secular effort” (19).

When Jamestown was established in 1607, those who established it did not forget about

Christianity’s place in colonization. They had learned from Roanoke what happens without

Christianity, but at first they only thought of it in terms of evangelization (23). That changed a

short while later. During ‘the starving time’ it became absolutely necessary for them to live by

Christian rules, if they hadn’t they wouldn’t have survived. It was only because John Smith

instituted the Biblical idea, that if you don’t work you don’t eat, that anyone survived (Gileskirk,

Lecture 8). Thus, the very first permanent settlement in America only survived because of

Christian discipline.

After Jamestown came the Puritans from England. The lives of these people was so

distinctly Christian that most recognize them as Christian, even after much historical revision.

They came fleeing the persecution of England and a steady flood of them continued until just

prior to the turn of the 17th century. Their goal in coming to America was to establish a Christian

nation, built upon the principles of the Bible. John Winthrop, one of the great preachers of the

day, told those on the voyage across the Atlantic: that America was set as a city on a hill. They

were a light to the world, a beacon on a hill. The rest of the world he said would be watching

them to see if they could create the Godly nation they intended (To read this sermon see

Appendix A: Documents and Speeches, John Winthrop’s Sermon on Christian Charity). In the

years following this speech they did an incredible job of becoming a ‘City on a Hill.’ For nearly

100 years Christianity flourished in Plymouth colony. Then something happened. The people

began to turn away from God, and they forgot all that he had done for their fathers. However,

God had a plan.

The Great Awakening

The Great Awakening was just that, a great awakening. It was a time when the people of

America once again became the people of God. It was a time when people turned to God in


greater numbers than most anywhere else in history. It was a time when some of the greatest

theologians and evangelists in American history arose. Men like Jonathan Edwards, the man

who preached one of the best known sermons of all time: ‘Sinners in the Hands of an Angry

God,’ or George Whitefield the man central to the Great Awakening. George Whitefield was an

especially amazing man. Without his efforts the Great Awakening never would have happened.

The Great Awakening once again turned Americans to God for guidance. The effect of the

Great Awakening was so great that before the signing of the Declaration of Independence,

almost every American was Christian, and every American had heard and been affected by the

preaching of George Whitefield. In fact, according to Archie P. Jones over two thirds of all

Americans at this time were not only Christian, but Calvinistic (25).

Without the Great Awakening America would have floundered in its formative years, and

without the Great Awakening the American War for Independence probably wouldn’t have

happened. It was the Great Awakening that once again pulled America back to the Word of

God. The Great Awakening did this so well that when war did erupt, king of England called it

not the Revolutionary War, nor the War for Independence; instead, he called it the Presbyterian

Parsons Rebellion. He called it this, because of the enormous influence of the Presbyterianism

on the war.

Signature Christians

Of those who signed the Declaration of Independence a large majority was Christian. In fact,

the only confirmed non-Christians who signed the document were Charles Carroll (a Catholic),

Robert T. Paine, Thomas Jefferson, and Benjamin Franklin. Of the 52 other signers few would

debate that they were Christian men, with the possible exception of John Adams whose faith like

that of Washington is misunderstood by many today. Several of these men were pastors, others

were elders or vestrymen, and many more were sons of pastors. Samuel Adams for instance was

a Presbyterian elder.

Even those who were not Christians understood the importance of Christianity in America.

They understood that historically America was a Christian nation, and they understood that

without Christ, America wouldn’t survive. Years after signing of the Declaration of

Independence, during the Constitution Conventions, Benjamin Franklin said this:


I've 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 Men. And if 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 except

the Lord build the House they labor in vain who build it. I firmly believe this, —

and I also believe that without his concurring Aid, we shall succeed in this

political Building no better than 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 Bye word down to future Ages.

From this we can see that even Benjamin Franklin, a man who was in all likelihood a Deist,

understood that God was in control of all things, and that if America did not turn to Him than it

should fall as Babel had (if only our leaders understood this today!).

Why Not the Declaration?

Thus, it can be very clearly seen that America was and had been a Christian nation from its

very earliest days, and that all the men signing the Declaration understood and applied this truth.

Why then did this nation and these men accept the Declaration of Independence if it was not a

Christian document as many argue that it was not? There is no valid reason why this nation and

these men would have accepted this document unless it was a Christian document. These men

were some of the most intelligent men in American history, so it can’t be said that Jefferson

deceived all 55 of these men that it was a Christian document even though it was not. Also, the

thoughts in the Declaration were not new to Jefferson, they were a summation of what the people

were thinking at the time. Thus, we can clearly see that the Declaration if it had been a pagan

document wouldn’t have been accepted by the people or signed by the leaders.

On the Contrary!

What then? We have seen that document was full of Christian ideas, it came from Christian

sources, and it was accepted by intelligent Christian men. How is it that anyone could believe

that the Declaration of Independence was not a Christian document?

Alan Dershowitz is one of the major authors who say that the Declaration of Independence

was not a Christian document. His argument is basically this: Jefferson was not a Christian,


Jefferson could not write a Christian document, and therefore the Declaration of Independence

was not a Christian document. We do not need to address why he believes that Jefferson was not

a Christian because as we have already seen Jefferson was not a Christian, he was a Deist. Thus,

Dershowitz’ argument falls apart because he fails to examine the document, or the influences on

the document. Jefferson was a Deist, but he did write a Christian document. Jefferson knew that

Christianity was necessary to the survival of the Nation, thus he wrote a Christian document.

Though, it was admittedly a little weak in its use of Christian thinking and terms, Christianity’s

influence can be very clearly seen throughout.

And Last

Early on we heard the story of Lexington and Concord, of how those men stood in that day

and died, and how it started the war. What was it that those men were fighting for on that day?

Those men fought for their families, their homes, their faith, and their liberty. It was for these

same things that men fought, risked their lives, and died for throughout the rest of the war.

When they drove the British out of Boston this was what they were fighting for. When they

suffered through Valley Forge this was what they were fighting for. When they won the battle of

Saratoga this was what they were fighting for. When they won the battle of Kings Mountain this

is what they were fighting for, and when they won the Siege of Yorktown this was what they

were fighting for. The men who fought and died on the battlefields of America risked

everything. The Declaration of Independence epitomizes what those men fought for. They

fought for “Life, Liberty, and the pursuit of Happiness,” and they pledged their lives, their

fortunes, and their sacred honor. They did this not flippantly, but as an appeal “to the Supreme

Judge of the world for the rectitude of [their] intentions.”

Putting it All Together

As we have seen the Declaration of Independence was undoubtedly a Christian document, it

is packed full of Christian thought. Ideas such as an absolute standard, equality of men, or the

Just War theory, resonate throughout the Declaration of Independence. It can, however, be seen

that it was written by a Deist, due to the fact that it is not very strong in its statement of these

Christian ideas, but instead only timidly states them. The fact of the matter is that Thomas

Jefferson was a Deist, but that he a man who was heavily influenced and understood the


importance of Christianity. Not only that, but he read from several Christian authors to draw

ideas from for the creation of the document. Much of the thinking in the declaration was drawn

from three very Christian books: ‘Lex Rex’ by Samuel Rutherford, ‘A Commentary on Judges’

by Thomas Hooker, and ‘Second Treatise on Government’ by John Locke.

Even if we forget all of that for a moment we can see that the document must have been

Christian in order to meet the Christian acceptance from the signers and the Nation. America

was at this time a very Christian nation as it always has been, and most all of the great leaders of

the day were very Christian men. In fact, of those who signed the Declaration, only four of them

were not Christians. These men were not unintelligent men. On the contrary they were some of

the brightest men that America had ever produced. Thus, they were most certainly not deceived

into signing something that they didn’t believe in. It is for these reasons that the Declaration of

Independence was not a pagan document as some assert. Instead, it was wholly Christian, in

thought, word, and history.

Does it Matter?

What difference does it make whether the Declaration of Independence was Christian or not.

Does it matter? Absolutely! It is an extremely important issue because many are trying to turn

America into something it is not! To do this they must first subvert the truth about the

foundation of America. Consequently, it is the Declaration of Independence, and the

Constitution that receive the heaviest fire, from those who wish to change history. The reason

for this is because these two documents are absolutely foundational to America. Indeed, the

Declaration has been called the birth certificate of America, and if that is so then the Constitution

was the diploma, the signal to the world that America was a Nation. When The Declaration is

put into question, then there arises the question of whether or not America was a Christian nation

at all, and if it is forgotten that America is a Christian nation then the right of the people will

fade. The very rights named in the Declaration of ‘life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness’ are

lost in a world of tyranny and chaos, and this is the reason it is so important that the Declaration

of Independence was a Christian document. We need to remember that this, because when we

do it changes us. It changes the way that we think about American history. It changes the way

we look at American Government. And it changes the very way we look at America as a whole,


because from the very beginning, even before the Declaration of Independence, America was a

Christian nation.


Appendix A: Documents and Speeches

This is where you will find documents and speeches reference and quoted from in the paper in full length, please note that all improper spelling, punctuation, or grammar is original to the document or speech.

The Declaration of Independence IN CONGRESS, July 4, 1776 The unanimous Declaration of the thirteen united States of America When in the Course of human events, it becomes necessary for one people to dissolve the political bands which

have connected them with another, and to assume, among the Powers of the earth, the separate and equal station to which the Laws of Nature and of Nature's God entitle them, a decent respect to the opinions of mankind requires that they should declare the causes which impel them to the separation.

We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty, and the pursuit of Happiness. That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed, That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness. Prudence, indeed, will dictate that Governments long established should not be changed for light and transient causes; and accordingly all experience hath shown, that mankind are more disposed to suffer, while evils are sufferable, than to right themselves by abolishing the forms to which they are accustomed. But when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same Object evinces a design to reduce them under absolute Despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such Government, and to provide new Guards for their future security. --Such has been the patient sufferance of these Colonies; and such is now the necessity which constrains them to alter their former Systems of Government. The history of the present King of Great Britain is a history of repeated injuries and usurpations, all having in direct object the establishment of an absolute Tyranny over these States. To prove this, let Facts be submitted to a candid world.

He has refused his Assent to Laws, the most wholesome and necessary for the public good. He has forbidden his Governors to pass Laws of immediate and pressing importance, unless suspended in their

operation till his Assent should be obtained; and when so suspended, he has utterly neglected to attend to them. He has refused to pass other Laws for the accommodation of large districts of people, unless those people would

relinquish the right of Representation in the Legislature, a right inestimable to them and formidable to tyrants only. He has called together legislative bodies at places unusual, uncomfortable, and distant from the depository of

their Public Records, for the sole purpose of fatiguing them into compliance with his measures. He has dissolved Representative Houses repeatedly, for opposing with manly firmness his invasions on the

rights of the people. He has refused for a long time, after such dissolutions, to cause others to be elected; whereby the Legislative

Powers, incapable of Annihilation, have returned to the People at large for their exercise; the State remaining in the mean time exposed to all the dangers of invasion from without, and convulsions within.

He has endeavoured to prevent the population of these States; for that purpose obstructing the Laws of Naturalization of Foreigners; refusing to pass others to encourage their migration hither, and raising the conditions of new Appropriations of Lands.

He has obstructed the Administration of Justice, by refusing his Assent to Laws for establishing Judiciary Powers.

He has made judges dependent on his Will alone, for the tenure of their offices, and the amount and payment of their salaries.

He has erected a multitude of New Offices, and sent hither swarms of Officers to harass our People, and eat out their substance.

He has kept among us, in times of peace, Standing Armies without the Consent of our legislatures. He has affected to render the Military independent of and superior to the Civil Power. He has combined with others to subject us to a jurisdiction foreign to our constitution, and unacknowledged by

our laws; giving his Assent to their Acts of pretended legislation:


For quartering large bodies of armed troops among us: For protecting them, by a mock Trial, from Punishment for any Murders which they should commit on the

Inhabitants of these States: For cutting off our Trade with all parts of the world: For imposing taxes on us without our Consent: For depriving us, in many cases, of the benefits of Trial by Jury: For transporting us beyond Seas to be tried for pretended offences: For abolishing the free System of English Laws in a neighbouring Province, establishing therein an Arbitrary

government, and enlarging its Boundaries so as to render it at once an example and fit instrument for introducing the same absolute rule into these Colonies:

For taking away our Charters, abolishing our most valuable Laws, and altering fundamentally the Forms of our Governments:

For suspending our own Legislatures, and declaring themselves invested with Power to legislate for us in all cases whatsoever.

He has abdicated Government here, by declaring us out of his Protection and waging War against us. He has plundered our seas, ravaged our Coasts, burnt our towns, and destroyed the lives of our people. He is at this time transporting large armies of foreign mercenaries to compleat the works of death, desolation

and tyranny, already begun with circumstances of Cruelty & perfidy scarcely paralleled in the most barbarous ages, and totally unworthy of the Head of a civilized nation.

He has constrained our fellow Citizens taken Captive on the high Seas to bear Arms against their Country, to become the executioners of their friends and Brethren, or to fall themselves by their Hands.

He has excited domestic insurrections amongst us, and has endeavoured to bring on the inhabitants of our frontiers, the merciless Indian Savages, whose known rule of warfare, is an undistinguished destruction of all ages, sexes and conditions.

In every stage of these Oppressions We have Petitioned for Redress in the most humble terms: Our repeated Petitions have been answered only by repeated injury. A Prince, whose character is thus marked by every act which may define a Tyrant, is unfit to be the ruler of a free People.

Nor have We been wanting in attention to our Brittish brethren. We have warned them from time to time of attempts by their legislature to extend an unwarrantable jurisdiction over us. We have reminded them of the circumstances of our emigration and settlement here. We have appealed to their native justice and magnanimity, and we have conjured them by the ties of our common kindred to disavow these usurpations, which would inevitably interrupt our connections and correspondence. They too have been deaf to the voice of justice and of consanguinity. We must, therefore, acquiesce in the necessity, which denounces our Separation, and hold them, as we hold the rest of mankind, Enemies in War, in Peace Friends.

We, therefore, the Representatives of the United States of America, in General Congress, Assembled, appealing to the Supreme Judge of the world for the rectitude of our intentions, do, in the Name, and by the Authority of the good People of these Colonies, solemnly publish and declare, That these United Colonies are, and of Right ought to be Free and Independent States; that they are Absolved from all Allegiance to the British Crown, and that all political connection between them and the State of Great Britain, is and ought to be totally dissolved; and that as Free and Independent States, they have full Power to levy War, conclude Peace, contract Alliances, establish Commerce, and to do all other Acts and Things which Independent States may of right do. 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.

Jefferson’s letter on Religion Your reason is now mature enough to examine this object. In the first place, divest yourself of all bias in favor

of novelty & singularity of opinion. Indulge them in any other subject rather than that of religion. It is too important, and the consequences of error may be too serious. On the other hand, shake off all the fears & servile prejudices, under which weak minds are servilely crouched. Fix reason firmly in her seat, and call to her tribunal every fact, every opinion. Question with boldness even the existence of a God; because, if there be one, he must more approve of the homage of reason, than that of blindfolded fear. You will naturally examine first, the religion of your own country. Read the Bible, then as you would read Livy or Tacitus. The facts which are within the ordinary course of nature, you will believe on the authority of the writer, as you do those of the same kind in Livy & Tacitus. The testimony of the writer weighs in their favor, in one scale, and their not being against the laws of nature, does not weigh against them. But those facts in the Bible which contradict the laws of nature, must be examined with more


care, and under a variety of faces. Here you must recur to the pretensions of the writer to inspiration from God. Examine upon what evidence his pretensions are founded, and whether that evidence is so strong, as that its falsehood would be more improbable than a change in the laws of nature, in the case he relates. For example, in the book of Joshua, we are told, the sun stood still several hours. Were we to read that fact in Livy or Tacitus, we should class it with their showers of blood, speaking of statues, beasts, &c. But it is said, that the writer of that book was inspired. Examine, therefore, candidly, what evidence there is of his having been inspired. The pretension is entitled to your inquiry, because millions believe it. On the other hand, you are astronomer enough to know how contrary it is to the law of nature that a body revolving on its axis, as the earth does, should have stopped, should not, by that sudden stoppage, have prostrated animals, trees, buildings, and should after a certain time gave resumed its revolution, & that without a second general prostration. Is this arrest of the earth's motion, or the evidence which affirms it, most within the law of probabilities? You will next read the New Testament. It is the history of a personage called Jesus. Keep in your eye the opposite pretensions: 1, of those who say he was begotten by God, born of a virgin, suspended & reversed the laws of nature at will, & ascended bodily into heaven; and 2, of those who say he was a man of illegitimate birth, of a benevolent heart, enthusiastic mind, who set out without pretensions to divinity, ended in believing them, and was punished capitally for sedition, by being gibbeted, according to the Roman law, which punished the first commission of that offence by whipping, & the second by exile, or death in fureâ. See this law in the Digest Lib. 48. tit. 19. §. 28. 3. & Lipsius Lib 2. de cruce. cap. 2. These questions are examined in the books I have mentioned under the head of religion, & several others. They will assist you in your inquiries, but keep your reason firmly on the watch in reading them all.

Do not be frightened from this inquiry by any fear of its consequences. If it ends in a belief that there is no

God, you will find incitements to virtue in the comfort and pleasantness you feel in its exercise, and the love of others which it will procure you. If you find reason to believe there is a God, a consciousness that you are acting under his eye, & that he approves you, will be a vast additional incitement; if that there be a future state, the hope of a happy existence in that increases the appetite to deserve it; if that Jesus was also a God, you will be comforted by a belief of his aid and love. In fine, I repeat, you must lay aside all prejudice on both sides, and neither believe nor reject anything, because any other persons, or description of persons, have rejected or believed it. Your own reason is the only oracle given you by heaven, and you are answerable, not for the rightness, but uprightness of the decision. I forgot to observe, when speaking of the New Testament, that you should read all the histories of Christ, as well of those whom a council of ecclesiastics have decided for us, to be Pseudo-evangelists, as those they named Evangelists. Because these Pseudo-evangelists pretended to inspiration, as much as the others, and you are to judge their pretensions by your own reason, and not by the reason of those ecclesiastics. Most of these are lost. There are some, however, still extant, collected by Fabricius, which I will endeavor to get & send you.

John Winthrop’ Sermon on Christian Charity “God Almighty, in his most holy and wise providence, hath so disposed of the condition of mankind, as in all

times some must be rich, some poor, some high and eminent in power and dignity, others mean and in subjection. “First, to hold conformity with the rest of his works. Being delighted to show forth the glory of his wisdom in

the variety and difference of the creatures; and the glory of his power, in ordering all these differences for the preservation and good of the whole; and the glory of his greatness, that as it is the glory of princes to have many officers, so this great king will have many stewards, counting himself more honored in dispensing his gifts to man by man, than if he did it by his own immediate hands.

“Secondly, that he might have the more occasion to manifest the work of his Spirit. First, upon the wicked, in moderating and restraining them: so that the rich and mighty should not eat up the poor, nor the poor and despised rise up against their superiors and shake off their yoke. Secondly, in the regenerate, in exercising his graces in them: as in the great ones, their love, mercy, gentleness, temperance etc.; in the poor and inferior sort, their faith, patience, obedience etc.

“Thirdly, that every man might have need of other, and from hence they might be all knit more nearly together in the bond of brotherly affection. From hence it appears plainly that no man is made more honorable than another, or more wealthy etc., out of any particular and singular respect to himself, but for the glory of his creator and the common good of the creature, man. Therefore God still reserves the property of these gifts to himself, as Ezekiel, 16.17: he there calls wealth his gold and his silver; Proverbs, 3.9: he claims their service as his due: honor the Lord with thy riches etc. All men being thus (by divine providence) ranked into two sorts, rich and poor, under the first are comprehended all such as are able to live comfortably by their own means duly improved; and all others are poor, according to the former distribution….


“This law of the Gospel propounds likewise a difference of seasons and occasions. There is a time when a Christian must sell all and give to the poor, as they did in the apostles’ times. There is a time also when a Christian (though they give not all yet) must give beyond their ability, as they of Macedonia, II Corinthians, 8.8. Likewise community of perils calls for extraordinary liberality, and so doth community in some special service for the church. Lastly, when there is no other means whereby our Christian brother may be relieved in his distress, we must help him beyond our ability, rather than tempt God in putting him upon help by miraculous or extraordinary means….

“The definition which the scripture gives us of lave is this: ‘Love is the bond of perfection.’ First, it is a bond, or ligament Secondly, it makes the work perfect There is nobody but consists of parts, and that which knits these parts together, gives the body its perfection, is love….

“From hence we may frame these conclusions. First, all true Christians are of one body in Christ, I Corinthians, 12.12.27: “Ye are the body of Christ and members of its parts”

“Secondly, the ligaments of this body which knit together are love. Thirdly, no body can be perfect which wants it proper ligament. Fourthly, all the parts of this body, being thus united, are made so contiguous in a special relation as they must needs partake of each other’s strength and infirmity, joy and sorrow, weal and woe, I Corinthians, 12.26: “If one member suffers, all suffer with it, if one be in honor, all rejoice with it.” Fifthly, this sensibleness and sympathy of each other’s conditions will necessarily infuse into each part a native desire and endeavor to strengthen, defend, preserve and comfort the other…

“It rests now to make some application of this discourse by the present design, which gave the occasion of writing of it. Herein are four things to be propounded: first, the persons; secondly, the work; thirdly, the end; fourthly, the means.

“First, for the persons. We are a company professing ourselves fellow members of Christ, in which respect only though were absent from each other many miles, and had our employments as far distant, yet we ought to account ourselves knit together by this bond of love, and live in the exercise of it, if we would have comfort of our being in Christ. This was notorious in the practice of the Christians in former times; as is testified of the Waldenses, from the mouth of one of the adversaries Aeneas Sylvius “mutuo ament pene antequam norunt”-they used to love any of their own religion even before they were acquainted with them.

“Secondly, for the work we have in hand. It is by a mutual consent through a special overvaluing providence and a more than an ordinary approbation of the churches of Christ, to seek out a place of cohabitation and consortship under a due form of government both civil and ecclesiastical. In such cases as this, the care of the public must oversay all private respects, by which not only conscience, but mere civil policy, cloth bind us. For it is a true rule that particular estates cannot subsist in the ruin of the public.

“Thirdly, the end is to improve our lives to do more service to the Lord; the comfort and increase of the body of Christ whereof we are members, that ourselves and posterity may be the better preserved from the common corruptions of this evil world, to serve the Lord and work out our salvation under the power and purity of his holy ordinances.

“Fourthly, for the means whereby this must be effected. They are twofold, a conformity with the work and end we aim at. These we see are extraordinary, therefore we must not content ourselves with usual ordinary means: whatsoever we did, or ought to have done, when we lived in England, the same must we do, and more also, where we go. That which the most in their churches maintain as a truth in profession only, we must bring into familiar and constant practice, as in this duty of love. We must love brotherly without dissimulation, we must love one another with a pure heart fervently, we must bear one another’s burdens, we must not look only on our own things, but also on the things of our brethren. Neither must we think that the Lord will bear with such failings at our hands as he cloth from those among whom we have lived, and that for three reasons.

“First, in regard of the more near bond of marriage between him and us, wherein he hath taken us to be his after a most strict and peculiar manner, which will make him the more jealous of our love and obedience. So he tells the people of Israel, you only have I known of all the families of the earth, therefore will I punish you for your transgressions. Secondly, because the Lord will be sanctioned in them that come near him. We know that there were many that corrupted the service of the Lord, some setting up altars before his own, others offering both strange fire and strange sacrifices also; yet there came no fire from heaven or other sudden judgment upon them, as did upon Nadab and Abihu, who yet we may think did not sin presumptuously. Thirdly, when God gives a special commission he looks to have it strictly observed in every article. When he gave Saul a commission to destroy Amalek, he indented with him upon certain articles, and because he failed in one of the least, and that upon a fair pretense, it lost him the kingdom which should have been his reward if he had observed his commission.

“Thus stands the cause between God and us. We are entered into covenant with him for this work, we have taken out a commission, the Lord hath given us leave to draw our own articles, we have professed to enterprise these actions, upon these and those ends, we have hereupon besought him of favor and blessing. Now if the Lord shall


please to hear us, and bring us in peace to the place we desire, then hath he ratified this covenant and sealed our commission, [and] will expect a strict performance of the articles contained in it. But if we shall neglect the observation of these articles, which re the ends we have propounded, and, dissembling with our God, shall fall to embrace this present world and prosecute our carnal intentions, seeking great things for ourselves and our posterity, the Lord will surely break out in wrath against us, be revenged of such a perjured people and make us know the price of the breach of such a covenant.

“Now the only way to avoid this shipwreck, and to provide for our posterity, is to follow the counsel of Micah: to do justly, to love mercy, to walk humbly with our God. For this end, we must be knit together in this work as one man, we must entertain each other in brotherly affection, we must be willing to abridge ourselves of our superfluities, for the supply of others’ necessities, we must uphold a familiar commerce together in all meekness, gentleness, patience and liberality; we must delight in each other, make others’ conditions our own, rejoice together, mourn together, labor and suffer together, always having before our eyes our commission and community in the work, our community as members of the same body. So shall we keep the unity of the spirit in the bond of peace. The Lord will be our God, and delight to dwell among us as his own people, and will command a blessing upon us in all our ways, so that we shall see much more of his wisdom, power, goodness and truth, than formerly we have been acquainted with. We shall find that the God of Israel is among us, when ten of us shall be able to resist a thousand of our enemies: when he shall make us a praise and glory that men shall say of succeeding plantations: “the Lord make it like that of New England.” For we must consider that we shall be as a city upon a hill: The eyes of all people are upon us, so that if we shall deal falsely with our God in this work we have undertaken, and so cause him to withdraw his present help from us, we shall be made a story and a by-word through the world: we shall open the mouths of enemies to speak evil of the ways of God and all professors for God’s sake. We shall shame the faces of many of God’s worthy servants, and cause their prayers to be turned into curses upon us, till we be consumed out of the good land whither we are going.

“And to shut up this discourse with that exhortation of Moses, that faithfull servant of the Lord, in his last farewell to Israel, Deuteronomy, 30: beloved, there is now set before us life and good, death and evil, in that we are commanded this day to love the Lord our God, and to love one another, to walk in his ways and to keep his commandments and his ordinance and his laws, and the articles of our covenant with him, that we may live and be multiplied, and that the Lord our God may bless us in the land whither we go to possess it. But if our hearts shall turn away, so that we will not obey, but shall be seduced, and worship other God-our pleasures and profits-and serve them , it is propounded unto us this day, we shall surely perish out of the good land whither we pass over this vast sea to possess it: Therefore let us choose life, that we and our seed may live by obeying His voice and cleaving to Him, for He is our life, and our prosperity.”

Appendix B: For Further Reading

~The Holy Spirit. The Bible (NKJV) ~Bahnsen, Greg L. Pushing the Antithesis ~Becker, Carl. The Declaration of Independence: A Study in the History of Political ideas ~Dershowitz, Alan M. America declares independence ~Grant, George. Last crusader the untold story of Christopher Columbus ~Grant, George. Patriot's handbook ~Johnson, Paul. A History of the American People ~Jones, Archie P. The influence of historic Christianity on early America

The Declaration of Dependence Sausville

25

~Lillback, Peter. George Washington’s Sacred Fire ~Locke, John. Two Treatises of Government ~Lossing, Benson J. Lives of the Signers of the Declaration of Independence ~Woods, Dennis. Discipling the Nations: The Government upon His Shoulders ~Dr. Vollmer, Philip / Dr. Good, J.I. / and Dr. Morecraft III, Joseph C. John Calvin: Man of the Millennium.

Appendix C: Works Cited

~The Holy Spirit. The Bible (NKJV). Nashville, TN. Nelson Bibles ~Bahnsen, Greg L. Pushing the Antithesis. New York, NY. Google books 2007 URL: http://books.google.com/books?id=O1gPpUMzcEQC&printsec=frontcover&dq=inauthor:%22Greg+L.+Bahnsen%22&ei=02WFS4D6K4HglQTut73ZBA&cd=1#v=onepage&q=&f=true ~Dershowitz, Alan M. America declares independence. Hoboken, NJ. John Wiley & Sons, 2003 (Note: This book basically asserts the antithesis of what my paper, saying that the Declaration is entirely atheistic) ~Gileskirk American Culture Lectures, Lecture 4, Early Contact ~Gileskirk American Culture Lectures, Lecture 6, Christopher Columbus ~Gileskirk American Culture Lectures, Lecture 8, Scramble for Colonies ~Gileskirk American Culture Lectures, Lecture 20, Reluctant Revolutionaries ~Gileskirk American Culture Lectures, Lecture 21, Covenant Lawsuit (NOTE: I failed to find the publication information of these lectures) ~Johnson, Paul. A History of the American People. New York, NY. HarperCollins, 1998 ~Jones, Archie P. The influence of historic Christianity on early America (Chalcedon contemporary issues). New York, NY. Chalcedon Foundation, 1998 ~Wikipedia http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Just_War

http://books.google.com/books?id=O1gPpUMzcEQC&printsec=frontcover&dq=inauthor:%22Greg+L.+Bahnsen%22&ei=02WFS4D6K4HglQTut73ZBA&cd=1#v=onepage&q=&f=true

http://books.google.com/books?id=O1gPpUMzcEQC&printsec=frontcover&dq=inauthor:%22Greg+L.+Bahnsen%22&ei=02WFS4D6K4HglQTut73ZBA&cd=1#v=onepage&q=&f=true

The Declaration of Dependence - WordPress.com€¦ · The Declaration of Dependence Sausville 1...

Documents

Transcript of The Declaration of Dependence - WordPress.com€¦ · The Declaration of Dependence Sausville 1...