Wednesday, July 06, 2011

Countering a Christian Nation Talking Point at WorldNetDaily:

For those who aren't friends with me on Facebook, I've been doing a lot of intellectual stuff over there that I don't link to on my blogs (perhaps I should more).

Here is an article from one Tom Flannery on history. In it he writes:

For the past half century, there has been a concerted effort to de-emphasize our founders, the (biblical) principles upon which they established this nation and America's Christian heritage – for the express purpose of robbing us of that heritage.

I replied:

There is way too much Christian Nation revisionist nonsense coming from the other side. Great Britain arguably was more of a Christian state than America was. And the invocations of God in the DOI were not meant to distinguish America as any kind of biblical government from Great Britain's. Rather it was done arguably out of necessity. When you violate the positive law as revolutions by their nature do, you better make sure you square your arguments with God. Great Britain did the same, but they had Romans 13 and the Bible on their side. America had to turn to theistic naturalism.

I realize my assertion, like his, is debatable; so debate all you want. But, I wrote what I did because I noticed an all too common error from Christian Nationalists on the Declaration of Independence -- that its religious talk was somehow meant to distinguish American government as a "godly" or biblical government from Great Britain's or the rest of the world's. This is false. If one wants to mention the Declaration to distinguish America's birth certificate from modern positivism or secularism, fine. As I intimated in my comment, all then governments, or at least all then Western governments had some sort of explicit religious connection, indeed just about all of the others were more sectarian, more orthodox and more biblical than America's.

Great Britain had its political-theological arguments for demanding loyalty that were FAR more "biblical" and proof texting oriented. (Romans 13 and all that.) America could not make a successful argument that could rally the masses without likewise matching Great Britain's God talk. But do keep in mind, this was not a matter of America turning to "God" against Great Britain's or the other nations of the world's man made positivism. Rather it was God talk matching God talk. And theirs was more traditional, more orthodox Christian. America's was more naturalistic.

No comments: