Separation of Church and State?

The founding fathers' views on religion and government

After the recent flap over the 9th circuit court's pledge decision (ruling the added phrase 'under God,' inserted into the pledge in 1954, to be unconstitutional), I've received a lot of requests for the thoughts of the Founding fathers on the issue of Separation of Church and State. At issue is the belief of many mainstream Christians that separation is a later construct of the courts, and never intended by the founders. Another prominent argument is that the founders only opposed the establishment of one Christian sect over another, and not Christianity as a whole. Yet another popular belief is that the first amendment only applies to laws restricting religion, and that the majority should be able to do as they wish, using references to the 'Creator' in documents as a tacit endorsement of Christianity. I believe all of these arguments to be incorrect, and who better to argue the issue than the principal author of the constitution, founders themselves?

Quotes are arranged in a question/answer format, to highlight common arguments.

Argument one: The phrase 'separation of Church and state' is of recent origin, and the concept was not known or promulgated by the founders.

False. The Founders were well aware of the threats posed by religion/state entanglement; it's what gave the world Kings with "divine right."

The exact phrase was first used in Thomas Jefferson's Letter to the Danbury Baptists, explaining the decision to seperate state and religion:

"Believing with you that religion is a matter which lies solely between man and his God, that he owes account to none other for is faith or his worship, that the legislative powers of government reach actions only, and not opinions, I contemplate with sovereign reverence that act of the whole American people which declared that their legislature should "make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof," thus building a wall of separation between Church and State. Adhering to this expression of the supreme will of the nation in behalf of the rights of conscience, I shall see with sincere satisfaction the progress of those sentiments which tend to restore to man all his natural rights, convinced he has no natural right in opposition to his social duties."

James Madison, principal author of the constitution:

"The civil Government, though bereft of everything like an associated hierarchy, possesses the requisite stability, and performs its functions with complete success, whilst the number, the industry, and the morality of the priesthood, and the devotion of the people, have been manifestly increased by the total separation of the church from the State." (1819).

Argument two: But the founders meant only that no sect of Christianity was to be elevated above another, but still meant our government to be Christian...

"Congress should not establish a religion and enforce the legal observation of it by law, nor compel men to worship God in any manner contrary to their conscience, or that one sect might obtain a pre-eminence, or two combined together, and establish a religion to which they would compel others to conform" (Madison, Annals of Congress, 1789).

"Who does not see that the same authority which can establish Christianity, in exclusion of all other Religions, may establish with the same ease any particular sect of Christians, in exclusion of all other Sects? that the same authority which can force a citizen to contribute three pence only of his property for the support of any one establishment, may force him to conform to any other establishment in all cases whatsoever?" (Madison, Memorial and Remonstrance)

"Because we hold it for a fundamental and undeniable truth, "that religion or the duty which we owe to our Creator and the manner of discharging it, can be directed only by reason and conviction, not by force or violence." The Religion then of every man must be left to the conviction and conscience of every man; and it is the right of every man to exercise it as these may dictate. " (ibid)

"How a regulation so unjust in itself, so foreign to the authority of Congress, and so hurtful to the sale of public land, and smelling so strongly of an antiquated bigotry, could have received the countenance of a committee is truly a matter of astonishment ." (Madison, 1785, letter to James Monroe, on a failed attempt by congress to set aside public funds to support churches)

Argument three: But one of the first acts of Congress was to appoint a Christian chaplain!

This they did do, years before the ratification of the bill of rights. Madison's objection:

"The establishment of the chaplainship to Congs is a palpable violation of equal rights, as well as of Constitutional principles: The tenets of the chaplains elected [by the majority shut the door of worship agst the members whose creeds & consciences forbid a participation in that of the majority. To say nothing of other sects, this is the case with that of Roman Catholics & Quakers who have always had members in one or both of the Legislative branches. Could a Catholic clergyman ever hope to be appointed a Chaplain! To say that his religious principles are obnoxious or that his sect is small, is to lift the evil at once and exhibit in its naked deformity the doctrine that religious truth is to be tested by numbers or that the major sects have a tight to govern the minor. " (Memorial and Remonstrance)

"If Religion consist in voluntary acts of individuals, singly, or voluntarily associated, and it be proper that public functionaries, as well as their Constituents shd discharge their religious duties, let them like their Constituents, do so at their own expense." (Madison, detached memoranda, 1820)

"That religion, or the duty we owe to our Creator, and the manner of discharging it, can be directed only by reason and conviction, not by force or violence; and therefore all men are equally entitled to the free exercise of religion, according to the dictates of conscience." (Patrick Henry)

"I am persuaded, you will permit me to observe that the path of true piety is so plain as to require but little political direction. To this consideration we ought to ascribe the absence of any regulation, respecting religion, from the Magna-Charta [Constitution] of our country" (George Washington, 1789).

"In the course of the opposition to the bill in the House of Delegates, which was warm & strenuous from some of the minority, an experiment was made on the reverence entertained for the name & sanctity of the Saviour, by proposing to insert the words "Jesus Christ" after the words "our lord" in the preamble, the object of which would have been, to imply a restriction of the liberty defined in the Bill, to those professing his religion only. The amendment was discussed, and rejected by a vote of agst." (James Madison, Memorial and Remonstrance)

"Whilst we assert for ourselves a freedom to embrace, to profess and observe the Religion which we believe to be of divine origin, we cannot deny equal freedom to those whose minds have not yet yielded to the evidence which has convinced us. If this freedom be abused, it is an offense against God, not against man: To God, therefore, not to man, must an account of it be rendered." (ibid)

"The appropriation of funds of the United States for the use and support of religious societies, [is] contrary to the article of the Constitution which declares that 'Congress shall make no law respecting a religious establishment'" (James Madison, Veto, 1811)

"It is now no more that toleration is spoken of as if it was by the indulgence of one class of the people that another enjoyed the exercise of their inherent natural rights. For happily the Government of the United States, which gives to bigotry no sanction, to persecution no assistance, requires only that those who live under its protection should demean themselves as good citizens in giving it, on all occasions, their effectual support." (George Washington, letter to the Touro Synagogue 1790. )

"We should begin by setting conscience free. When all men of all religions ... shall enjoy equal liberty, property, and an equal chance for honors and power ... we may expect that improvements will be made in the human character and the state of society." (John Adams)

"The United States of America have exhibited, perhaps, the first example of governments erected on the simple principles of nature; and if men are now sufficiently enlightened to disabuse themselves of artifice, imposture, hypocrisy, and superstition, they will consider this event as an era in their history. Although the detail of the formation of the American governments is at present little known or regarded either in Europe or in America, it may hereafter become an object of curiosity. It will never be pretended that any persons employed in that service had interviews with the gods, or were in any degree under the influence of Heaven, more than those at work upon ships or houses, or laboring in merchandise or agriculture; it will forever be acknowledged that these governments were contrived merely by the use of reason and the senses...." (John Adams, 1787)

"...Thirteen governments [of the original states] thus founded on the natural authority of the people alone, without a pretense of miracle or mystery, and which are destined to spread over the northern part of that whole quarter of the globe, are a great point gained in favor of the rights of mankind." (ibid)

Further quotes:

"As to religion, I hold it to be the indispensable duty of government to protect all conscientious protesters thereof, and I know of no other business government has to do therewith." (Thomas Paine, the Rights of Man)

"All national institutions of churches, whether Jewish, Christian or Turkish [Muslim], appear to me no other than human inventions, set up to terrify and enslave mankind, and monopolize power and profit. I do not mean by this declaration to condemn those who believe otherwise; they have the same right to their belief as I have to mine. But it is necessary to the happiness of man that he be mentally faithful to himself. Infidelity does not consist in believing, or in disbelieving; it consists in professing to believe what he does not believe. It is impossible to calculate the moral mischief, if I may so express it, that mental lying has produced in society. When a man has so far corrupted and prostituted the chastity of his mind as to subscribe his professional belief to things he does not believe, he has prepared himself for the commission of every other crime. He takes up the profession of a priest for the sake of gain, and in order to qualify himself for that trade he begins with a perjury. Can we conceive anything more destructive to morality than this?" (Thomas Paine, The Age of Reason)

 US presidents:

"Let it be henceforth proclaimed to the world that man's conscience was created free; that he is no longer accountable to his fellow man for his religious opinions, being responsible therefore only to his God." (John Tyler)

"I am tolerant of all creeds. Yet if any sect suffered itself to be used for political objects I would meet it by political opposition. In my view church and state should be separate, not only in form, but fact. Religion and politics should not be mingled." (Millard Fillmore)

"When the Know-Nothings get control, it will read: "All men are created equal except negroes, foreigners and Catholics." When it comes to this I should prefer immigrating to some country where they make no pretense of loving liberty--to Russia, for instance, where despotism can be taken pure, and without the base alloy of hypocrisy." (Abraham Lincoln)

"Encourage free schools, and resolve that not one dollar of money shall be appropriated to the support of any sectarian school. Resolve that neither the state nor nation, or both combined, shall support institutions of learning other than those sufficient to afford every child growing up in the land the opportunity of a good common school education, unmixed with sectarian, pagan, or atheistically tenets. Leave the matter of religion to the family altar, the church, and the private schools, supported entirely by private contributions. Keep the church and state forever separated." (Ulysses S. Grant)

"We all agree that neither the Government nor political parties ought to interfere with religious sects. It is equally true that religious sects ought not to interfere with the Government or with political parties. We believe that the cause of good government and the cause of religion suffer by all such interference." (Rutherford B. Hayes)

"The divorce between Church and State ought to be absolute. It ought to be so absolute that no Church property anywhere, in any state or in the nation, should be exempt from equal taxation; for if you exempt the property of any church organization, to that extent you impose a tax upon the whole community." (James A. Garfield)

"Because we are unqualifiedly and without reservation against any system of denominational schools, maintained by the adherents of any creed with the help of state aid, therefore, we as strenuously insist that the public schools shall be free from sectarian influences, and, above all, free from any attitude of hostility to the adherents of any particular creed." (Theodore Roosevelt)

"In the experiences of a year of the Presidency, there has come to me no other such unwelcome impression as the manifest religious intolerance which exists among many of our citizens. I hold it to be a menace to the very liberties we boast and cherish." (Warren G. Harding)

"The fundamental precept of liberty is toleration. We cannot permit any inquisition either from within or from without the law or apply any religious test to the holding of office. The mind of America must be forever free." (Calvin Coolidge.)

"I come of Quaker stock. My ancestors were persecuted for their beliefs. Here they sought and found religious freedom. By blood and conviction I stand for religious tolerance both in act and in spirit." (Herbert C. Hoover)

"The lessons of religious toleration--a toleration which recognizes complete liberty of human thought, liberty of conscience--is one which, by precept and example, must be inculcated in the hearts and minds of all Americans if the institutions of our democracy are to be maintained and perpetuated. We must recognize the fundamental rights of man. There can be no true national life in our democracy unless we give unqualified recognition to freedom of religious worship and freedom of education." (Franklin D. Roosevelt)

"Religious and racial persecution is moronic at all times, perhaps the most idiotic of human stupidities." (Harry S. Truman)

"I believe in an America where the separation of Church and State is absolute--where no Catholic prelate would tell the President (should he be a Catholic) how to act, and no Protestant minister would tell his parishioners for whom to vote--where no church or church school is granted any public funds or political preference--and where no man is denied public office merely because his religion differs from the President who might appoint him or the people who might elect him." (John F. Kennedy)

 Another trend I find disturbing is the use of questionable quotes to support positions that are antithetical to the beliefs of the founders. The following collection are quotes commonly used to support anti-separation arguments, none of which can be verified as genuine. Some are outright fabrications.

Unconfirmed quotes:

"It cannot be emphasized too strongly or too often that this great nation was founded, not by religionists, but by Christians; not on religions, but on the gospel of Jesus Christ." attributed to Patrick Henry

"It is impossible to rightly govern the world without God and the Bible." attributed to George Washington

"Whosoever shall introduce into the public affairs the principles of primitive Christianity will change the face of the world." attributed to Benjamin Franklin

"The principles of all genuine liberty, and of wise laws and administrations are to be drawn from the Bible and sustained by its authority. The man therefore who weakens or destroys the divine authority of that book may be assessory [sic] to all the public disorders which society is doomed to suffer." attributed to Noah Webster

"There are two powers only which are sufficient to control men, and secure the rights of individuals and a peaceable administration; these are the combined force of religion and law, and the force or fear of the bayonet." attributed to Noah Webster

"The only assurance of our nation's safety is to lay our foundation in morality and religion." attributed to Abraham Lincoln

"The philosophy of the school room in one generation will be the philosophy of government in the next." attributed to Abraham Lincoln

"I have always said and always will say that the studious perusal of the Sacred Volume will make us better citizens. " attributed to Thomas Jefferson

False:

"We have staked the whole future of American civilization, nor upon the power of government, far from it. We have staked the future of all of our political institutions upon the capacity of each and all of us to govern ourselves ... according to the Ten Commandments of God."

attributed to James Madison

"Our laws and our institutions must necessarily be based upon and embody the teachings of the redeemer of mankind. It is impossible that it should be otherwise. In this sense and to this extend, our civilizations and our institutions are emphatically Christian." attributed to the The Supreme Court in the Holy Trinity case

"Before any man can be considered as a member of Civil Society, he must be considered as a subject of the Governor of the Universe...Religion... [is] the basis and foundation of government." Misquote of James Madison

"The highest glory of the American Revolution is this; it connected in one indissoluble bond the principles of civil government with the principles of Christianity. " attributed to John Quincy Adams

 Books covering church/state separation issues.

1. Why the Religious Right Is Wrong

An overview of church/state separation issues, and the war of the religious right on the first amendment.

 2. The Godless Constitution: The Case Against Religious Correctness

The Godless Constitution: The Case Against Religious Correctness-A well written argument for continued separation of church and state.

 

3. The Myth of Christian America

Another book exploring the Separation issue and the arguments of the religious right.

 4. Between Church and State

Written by a Clergyman, this book focuses on issues of public education in a multicultural society, and seeks compromise.

 http://altreligion.about.com/od/deism/tp/separation.htm

Read More

Deism and Christianity by Bill McCracken

I thought it would be interesting to consider what Deism shares with the Christian religion. This topic could be a bit tricky because Deists have no set of codified beliefs. We consider ourselves to be free-thinkers, so we don’t tell each other what to believe. But, in a nutshell, Deists believe in God as revealed in nature, and then use reason to determine for ourselves our other personal beliefs and practices. This makes me reluctant to speak for all Deists everywhere, so I’ll just share the similarities that I know of.    In the first place, modern Deism grew out of Christianity. The earliest Deists, at least in America, were members of churches, usually Anglican. They believed in God. They appreciated and tried to follow Jesus’ teachings, especially the Golden Rule and the importance of loving God and others (something I still hold to). But they also realized that the Church held to many beliefs which just didn’t seem to line up with progressive human understanding. For instance, they questioned the doctrine of the Virgin Birth because everyone knows it takes a male and a female to produce a child. They didn't believe that God impregnates people. They questioned the Christian doctrine that everyone is born evil (Original Sin). They also rejected the doctrine of Substitutionary Atonement, the notion that Jesus had to die in order for God to forgive our sins. So while the Deists affirmed the reality of the Creator and the core teachings of Jesus Christ, they dared to question whether or not Church doctrines or biblical doctrines really line up with reality, with how we know the world really works. But they still affirmed, along with Christians, that God is real and that Jesus taught us how to live good lives.  Another strong tie that Deism has with what Jesus taught is a reverence for nature. Many, if not most, of Jesus’ parables concerned nature – plants, seeds, tree, water, fire, farming, the sun, the wind. He was quite the “country boy” and used stories about nature to illustrate what human relationships to God and to each other should look like. Like Jesus, Deists looked around them at nature and found, not only evidence for God, but spiritual lessons that can teach us how to love, appreciate, and care for one another.  Many Deists consider Jesus to be a great teacher, perhaps an extremely enlightened person who had keen insight into how to relate to God as a Father and to humanity as brothers and sisters. Deists also strongly believe in Jesus’ social gospel of helping others. And many Deists, though not all, believe in some sort of afterlife, another subject that Christianity focuses on.  If Christianity consisted only of the central teachings of Jesus concerning loving God and others, many Deists might consider themselves to be Christians. But Christianity has added many, many other doctrines to its religion over the years that go far beyond what Jesus taught, and Deists find many of these added doctrines to often be irrational, superstitious, and sometimes harmful. Because of all the “extra baggage” that Christianity currently has, most Deists would probably not choose to self-identify as Christians.

As I mentioned in Part 1, Deism in America began in the Church, within Christianity. But it also had a bit of a “love/hate” relationship with Christianity that has not quite abated. Deists affirmed, along with Christians, that God is our Creator and that the creation is good and shows God’s handiwork. And it also often affirmed the central teachings of Jesus about loving God, loving others, and making our world a better place. But it didn’t agree with the Church that all knowledge was confined to the Bible. It didn’t agree with the Church that we had nothing left to learn about ourselves or our universe other than what the Church or the Bible says. Deists embraced the “new knowledge” of the Enlightenment, advances gained in the fields of science, medicine, astronomy, sociology, and even psychology. Deists strongly felt that God was the source of all truth and that God has continued to lead us into truths that people in the Bible days just weren’t privy to. Can you imagine trying to explain to a Roman soldier or a Jewish peasant how an inoculation shot works? Deists embraced these advances in the sciences and in the arts, even in theology (how we think about God), and felt that humanity needed to grow up and out of some of the superstitions of the past.    The Church, to a large degree, was extremely slow in accepting any new knowledge. It felt that everything God wanted us to know was either found in the Bible (for Protestants) or found in the Vatican (for Catholics) or found in the Church Fathers (for Eastern Orthodox). Granted, the Church has made some strides over the last few decades, but let’s be honest, it only recently allowed for inter-racial marriages and it still is opposed to gays “because the Bible says so.” Deists don’t feel that all knowledge is confined to the Bible or the Church. They feel that God teaches us through everything in life and that we should never stop growing. Our beliefs, think most Deists, should come from what we think, given the information and wisdom available to us now, not just residual knowledge held onto simply because people 2000 years ago believed they knew all truth.  So this is where the relationship between Deism and Christianity can sometimes be strained. Deism accepts and incorporates new knowledge wherever it finds it, using reasoning as a measuring stick to judge truth. Christianity looks primarily to the past for what it believes is truth, to the way people thought and believed from 2000 to 4000 years ago. If you were sick, would you want to go to a doctor that only had the medical training from the first century? Or would you want a doctor with the latest in medical training? Similarly, if you want to understand God, would you consider only what people 2000 years ago had to say? Or would you want to consider other sources? Granted, some things from the past, many things in fact, are worth holding onto. But not if it no longer makes sense (like keeping women out of church pulpits) or if it is superstition (like believing God impregnates people) or if it is harmful, as many of the supposed commands of God in the Bible are.  Nevertheless, Deism usually does not wish to be “anti-Christian”. Christianity is a good religion, as far as it goes. But not everything in Christianity is good. And Deism wants to be known more for what it is for than what it is against.

Read More

What Is A Christian Deist?

 

A deist is a person who believes that God designed and created the world and governs it through natural laws that are inherent in everything. These natural laws can be discovered through observation, experience, and reasoning.

Deism is a religion based primarily on nature and reasoning, in contrast to other religions that are based on alleged "revelations" that come through some "supernatural" means. Deists believe that human beings have "free will" and have responsibility for choosing how they live in relation to natural laws that govern the world.

It is sometimes said that deists believe that God created the world, set it in operation, and then took no further interest in it. But this idea comes from a misunderstanding of an old analogy that compared God to a "watchmaker" and the world to a "watch." This old analogy was only intended to say that from the complex and purposeful "design" of a watch, it is logical to infer the existence of an intentional "designer" or watchmaker. Likewise, from the "designs" that are seen in our world and in ourselves, deists infer the existence of an intentional "Designer" or creator called "God."

Christian Deists believe that God does take an ongoing interest in the world and humanity but God does not control the world or humanity. Human beings are "free agents in a free world." A "free agent" is someone who has authority and ability to choose his/her actions and who may make mistakes. A "free world" is one which ordinarily operates as it is designed to operate but failures and accidents may occur.

Christian deism is opposed to the doctrine of predestination in which everything that happens is thought to be "the will of God." John Calvin was a proponent of the theory of predestination in which God allegedly determines everything that happens, whether good or bad. For example, this theory is heard when a person is killed in an automobile accident and someone says, "God must have a purpose in this." Christian Deists reject this kind of belief.

Christian Deists believe that it is never "God's will" for anything "bad" to happen. Anything that is destructive to human life is "bad." These bad things may be caused by accident or by human action. For example, an illness may be caused by an accidental infection or may be caused by a person choosing to smoke cigarettes. God does not make a person sick or well. Our health is partly within our own control and sometimes beyond our control. God gives our bodies and minds certain natural powers to heal many illnesses but God does not directly intervene to heal by some "supernatural" action.

If God directly intervened in human events, we would no longer be "free agents in a free world." We would be like puppets controlled by God. Such control by God would cost us the very thing that makes us individual human beings -- our freedom to think and act for ourselves.

God can indirectly intervene in the world through human beings. For example, God can heal through the efforts of physicians and nurses. God can care for the poor through charitable persons and through programs designed by compassionate leaders and legislators. According to Jesus, our mission is to create the "kingdom of God on earth." God can work through each of us if we will follow God's law of love for each other. We are God's representatives on earth if we do God's will. Each of us can contribute in some way toward the development of the Kingdom of God on earth.

Christian Deists believe that Jesus was a deist. Jesus taught that there are two basic laws of God governing humankind. The first law is that life comes from God and we are to use it as God intends, as illustrated in Jesus' parable of the talents (money). The second law is that God intends for human beings to live by love for each other, as illustrated in Jesus' parable of the good Samaritan. (Note: The parable of the talents is explained in the essay "How Can You Love God? The parable of the good Samaritan is explained in the essay "Love Your Neighbor.")

Jesus summarized these two basic "commandments" (or laws) of God as "love for God and love for neighbor." These two commandments were known to Jesus from the Hebrew scriptures but Jesus expanded the definition of "neighbor" to include everyone. "Love for God" means having appreciation for God as the creator of the world and the source of human life. "Love for neighbor" means having appreciation for the value of every human life. In his "parable of the sower," Jesus taught that the "word of God," or God's commandment to love our "neighbor" is known naturally because it is sown "in the heart" of everyone. Christian Deists believe that we show our love for God by loving our "neighbor" as we love our own life (Matthew 22:37-40).

Even the apostle Paul, who was a Jew, recognized that God's laws are known naturally by everyone. Paul wrote, "When Gentiles (non-Jews) who do not have the (Mosaic) law do by nature what the law requires, they are a law to themselves, even though they do not have the (Mosaic) law. They show that what the law requires is written on their hearts" (Romans 2:14-15).

In his teachings, Jesus used examples from the natural world and from human nature to explain basic truths about life. In his parables, Jesus spoke of mustard seeds, wheat, weeds, fishing nets, pearls, vineyards, fig trees, salt, candle light and sheep to illustrate his points. Jesus also used illustrations from human nature to teach basic concepts such as repentance, forgiveness, justice, and love.

Jesus believed that it is God's will for people to love (appreciate) God and to love (appreciate) each other. God should be loved (appreciated) as creator of the the world and as the source of human life. We should show our love (appreciation) for each other because happiness comes to us as we live in harmony, or unity, with each other. Christian deism is based on appreciation for all creation and on appreciation for every human life.

Christian Deists do not worship Jesus as God and do not believe in the theory of atonement that claims that Jesus had to die as a sacrifice to pay the "death penalty" for humankind and save them from the "wrath" of God. Christian Deists do not view God as a whimsical tyrant who sends plagues and pestilence to punish people on earth and who plans to torture people in "hell" in the future. Christian Deists reject these superstitious ideas as products of human hatred and a failure to recognize God's natural laws of love for others.

Christian Deists consider themselves to be disciples (students) of Jesus because Jesus taught the natural laws of God. But Christian Deists recognize that Jesus was only human. Jesus had to struggle with his own times of disappointment, sorrow, anger, prejudice, impatience, and despair, just as other human beings struggle with these experiences. Jesus never claimed to be perfect but he was committed to following God's natural laws of love.

Jesus called for people to follow God's laws (commandments) so the "kingdom of God" could come "on earth as it is in heaven." As Jesus preached the "gospel" (good news) that the "kingdom of God is at hand," the Romans viewed Jesus as a Jewish revolutionary seeking to liberate the Jews from Roman rule. Jesus refused to stop preaching his "gospel" even though he knew that he was risking crucifixion, the usual Roman penalty for revolutionaries. Jesus called for his followers to take this same risk, "If a man would come after me, let him deny himself and take up his cross and follow me. For whoever would save his life will lose it, and whoever loses his life for my sake and the gospel's will save it" (Mark 8:34-35).

After his crucifixion, Jesus' cross became a symbol of commitment to establishing the "kingdom of God" (obedience of God's laws) on earth. Christian Deists are committed to following God's natural laws, as summarized in the two "commandments" to love God and love our neighbor.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Read More

Andrew Dean Wrote Thomas Paine a Letter and His Response Is Perfect

This Letter Offers a Rare Glimpse Into the Brilliant Mind of One of the Founding Founders of Deism

Respected Friend,

I received your friendly letter, for which I am obliged to you. It is three weeks ago to day (Sunday, Aug. 15,) that I was struck with a fit of an apoplexy, that deprived me of all sense and motion. I had neither pulse nor breathing, and the people about me supposed me dead. I had felt exceedingly well that day, and had just taken a slice of bread and butter for supper, and was going to bed. The fit took me on the stairs, as suddenly as if I had been shot through the head; and I got so very much hurt by the fall, that I have not been able to get in and out of bed since that day, otherwise than being lifted out in a blanket, by two persons; yet all this while my mental faculties have remained as perfect as I ever enjoyed them. I consider the scene I have passed through as an experiment on dying, and I find that death has no terrors for me. As to the people called Christians, they have no evidence that their religion is true. There is no more proof that the Bible is the word of God, than that the Koran of Mahomet is the word of God. It is education makes all the difference. Man, before he begins to think for himself, is as much the child of habit in Creeds as he is in ploughing and sowing. Yet creeds, like opinions, prove nothing.

Where is the evidence that the person called Jesus Christ is the begotten Son of God? The case admits not of evidence either to our senses or our mental faculties: neither has God given to man any talent by which such a thing is comprehensible. It cannot therefore be an object for faith to act upon, for faith is nothing more than an assent the mind gives to something it sees cause to believe is fact. But priests, preachers, and fanatics, put imagination in the place of faith, and it is the nature of the imagination to believe without evidence.

If Joseph the carpenter dreamed, (as the book of Matthew (i) says he did,) that his betrothed wife, Mary, was with child by the Holy Ghost, and that an angel told him so, I am not obliged to put faith in his dreams; nor do I put any, for I put no faith in my own dreams, and I should be weak and foolish indeed to put faith in the dreams of others.

The Christian religion is derogatory to the Creator in all its articles. It puts the Creator in an inferior point of view, and places the Christian Devil above him. It is he, according to the absurd story in Genesis, that outwits the Creator in the garden of Eden, and steals from him his favorite creature, Man, and at last obliges him to beget a son, and put that son to death, to get Man back again; and this the priests of the Christian religion call redemption.

Christian authors exclaim against the practice of offering up human sacrifices, which, they say, is done in some countries; and those authors make those exclamations without ever reflecting that their own doctrine of salvation is founded on a Human Sacrifice. They are saved, they say, by the blood of Christ. The Christian religion begins with a dream and ends with a murder.
As I am now well enough to sit up some hours in the day, though not well enough to get up without help, I employ myself as I have always done, in endeavoring to bring man to the right use of the reason that God has given him, and to direct his mind immediately to his Creator, and not to fanciful secondary beings called mediators, as if God was superannuated or ferocious.

As to the book called the Bible, it is blasphemy to call it the word of God. It is a book of lies and contradictions, and a history of bad times and bad men. There are but a few good characters in the whole book. The fable of Christ and his twelve apostles, which is a parody on the Sun and the twelve signs of the Zodiac, copied from the ancient religions of the Eastern world, is the least hurtful part. Every thing told of Christ has reference to the Sun. His reported resurrection is at sunrise, and that on the first day of the week; that is, on the day anciently dedicated to the Sun, and from thence called Sunday -- in Latin 'Dies Solis,' the day of the Sun; as the next day, Monday, is Moon-day. But there is no room in a letter to explain these things.

While man keeps to the belief of one God, his reason unites with his creed. He is not shocked with contradictions and horrid stories. His bible is the heavens and the earth. He beholds his Creator in all his works, and everything he beholds inspires him with reverence and gratitude. From the goodness of God to all, he learns his duty to his fellow-man, and stands self-reproved when he transgresses it. Such a man is no persecutor.

But when he multiplies his creed with imaginary things, of which he can have neither evidence nor conception, such as the tale of the garden of Eden, the Talking Serpent, the Fall of Man, the Dreams of Joseph the Carpenter, the pretended Resurrection and Ascension, of which there is even no historical relation, -- for no historian of those times mentions such a thing, -- he gets into the pathless region of confusion, and turns either fanatic or hypocrite. He forces his mind, and pretends to believe what he does not believe. This is in general the case with the Methodists. Their religion is all creed and no morals.

I have now, my friend, given you a 'fac simile' of my mind on the subject of religion and creeds, and my wish is, that you make this letter as publicly known as you find opportunities of doing.

Yours, in friendship,

Thomas Paine

Read More

Deism's Relationship with Christianity

I thought it would be interesting to consider what Deism shares with the Christian religion. This topic could be a bit tricky because Deists have no set of codified beliefs. We consider ourselves to be free-thinkers, so we don’t tell each other what to believe. But, in a nutshell, Deists believe in God as revealed in nature, and then use reason to determine for ourselves our other personal beliefs and practices. This makes me reluctant to speak for all Deists everywhere, so I’ll just share the similarities that I know of.

 In the first place, modern Deism grew out of Christianity. The earliest Deists, at least in America, were members of churches, usually Anglican. They believed in God. They appreciated and tried to follow Jesus’ teachings, especially the Golden Rule and the importance of loving God and others (something I still hold to). But they also realized that the Church held to many beliefs which just didn’t seem to line up with progressive human understanding. For instance, they questioned the doctrine of the Virgin Birth because everyone knows it takes a male and a female to produce a child. They didn't believe that God impregnates people. They questioned the Christian doctrine that everyone is born evil (Original Sin). They also rejected the doctrine of Substitutionary Atonement, the notion that Jesus had to die in order for God to forgive our sins. So while the Deists affirmed the reality of the Creator and the core teachings of Jesus Christ, they dared to question whether or not Church doctrines or biblical doctrines really line up with reality, with how we know the world really works. But they still affirmed, along with Christians, that God is real and that Jesus taught us how to live good lives.

 Another strong tie that Deism has with what Jesus taught is a reverence for nature. Many, if not most, of Jesus’ parables concerned nature – plants, seeds, tree, water, fire, farming, the sun, the wind. He was quite the “country boy” and used stories about nature to illustrate what human relationships to God and to each other should look like. Like Jesus, Deists looked around them at nature and found, not only evidence for God, but spiritual lessons that can teach us how to love, appreciate, and care for one another.

 Many Deists consider Jesus to be a great teacher, perhaps an extremely enlightened person who had keen insight into how to relate to God as a Father and to humanity as brothers and sisters. Deists also strongly believe in Jesus’ social gospel of helping others. And many Deists, though not all, believe in some sort of afterlife, another subject that Christianity focuses on.

 If Christianity consisted only of the central teachings of Jesus concerning loving God and others, many Deists might consider themselves to be Christians. But Christianity has added many, many other doctrines to its religion over the years that go far beyond what Jesus taught, and Deists find many of these added doctrines to often be irrational, superstitious, and sometimes harmful. Because of all the “extra baggage” that Christianity currently has, most Deists would probably not choose to self-identify as Christians.

 As I mentioned in Part 1, Deism in America began in the Church, within Christianity. But it also had a bit of a “love/hate” relationship with Christianity that has not quite abated. Deists affirmed, along with Christians, that God is our Creator and that the creation is good and shows God’s handiwork. And it also often affirmed the central teachings of Jesus about loving God, loving others, and making our world a better place. But it didn’t agree with the Church that all knowledge was confined to the Bible. It didn’t agree with the Church that we had nothing left to learn about ourselves or our universe other than what the Church or the Bible says. Deists embraced the “new knowledge” of the Enlightenment, advances gained in the fields of science, medicine, astronomy, sociology, and even psychology. Deists strongly felt that God was the source of all truth and that God has continued to lead us into truths that people in the Bible days just weren’t privy to. Can you imagine trying to explain to a Roman soldier or a Jewish peasant how an inoculation shot works? Deists embraced these advances in the sciences and in the arts, even in theology (how we think about God), and felt that humanity needed to grow up and out of some of the superstitions of the past.

The Church, to a large degree, was extremely slow in accepting any new knowledge. It felt that everything God wanted us to know was either found in the Bible (for Protestants) or found in the Vatican (for Catholics) or found in the Church Fathers (for Eastern Orthodox). Granted, the Church has made some strides over the last few decades, but let’s be honest, it only recently allowed for inter-racial marriages and it still is opposed to gays “because the Bible says so.” Deists don’t feel that all knowledge is confined to the Bible or the Church. They feel that God teaches us through everything in life and that we should never stop growing. Our beliefs, think most Deists, should come from what we think, given the information and wisdom available to us now, not just residual knowledge held onto simply because people 2000 years ago believed they knew all truth.

So this is where the relationship between Deism and Christianity can sometimes be strained. Deism accepts and incorporates new knowledge wherever it finds it, using reasoning as a measuring stick to judge truth. Christianity looks primarily to the past for what it believes is truth, to the way people thought and believed from 2000 to 4000 years ago. If you were sick, would you want to go to a doctor that only had the medical training from the first century? Or would you want a doctor with the latest in medical training? Similarly, if you want to understand God, would you consider only what people 2000 years ago had to say? Or would you want to consider other sources? Granted, some things from the past, many things in fact, are worth holding onto. But not if it no longer makes sense (like keeping women out of church pulpits) or if it is superstition (like believing God impregnates people) or if it is harmful, as many of the supposed commands of God in the Bible are.

Nevertheless, Deism usually does not wish to be “anti-Christian”. Christianity is a good religion, as far as it goes. But not everything in Christianity is good. And Deism wants to be known more for what it is for than what it is against.

By Bill McCracken 

Read More