Tutorial:
explaining Founding Fathers quotes that seem to show they weren't Christian

Part 1 : There's more than 250 of them!
I have spoken to numerous people on the issue of the faith of our founders and am often asked to comment on a quote by a founder that seems to "point blank" show that he wasn't a Christian. I have thoroughly searched out many of these quotes and would like to present to you the following: when determining whether or not our founders were IN GENERAL Christians, we must understand this: It is generally accepted that over 250 men were instrumental in the foundation of our country, thus qualifying for the designation of "founding father" consider the following list:

56 Signers of the Declaration of Independence
14 Presidents from 1774 to 1789 [President of the United States in Continental Congress]
First 4-6 Presidents of the United States beginning with George Washington
36+ prominent military leaders of the Revolutionary War
55 Men in the Constitutional Convention
38 Signers of the Constitution
13 State Governors responsible for leading the ratification of the Constitution
90 Members of the First Congress—creators of the Bill of Rights

Plus:
Earliest members of the Supreme Court
Others like Patrick Henry, Thomas Paine, and Noah Webster who called for the Constitutional Convention

When a particular founder is quoted and appears to NOT be a Christian, always remember that there are these 250 + men. Most of them are NEVER questioned nowadays in regards to their faith. A few like John Adams, Thomas Jefferson, Thomas Paine, and Benjamin Franklin, and James Madison have been isolated with quotes to try to show they were not Christians. We never hear Charles Carroll, Alexander Hamilton, Elias Budinout, John Quincy Adams, Patrick Henry, or many others questioned in regards to faith, with any serious allegations.
__________________________________________________________________________

Part 2 : Beware of the ...
I often use ... in the middle of a quote, since there may be long, unrelated parts in the middle of the quote and I am trying to conserve space. But there are rules one should abide by when using ...

1) Removing what was originally in the "..." should not change the meaning of the quote
2) What was originally in the "..." should not be material that you would be embarrassed to have published
3) The "..." should ONLY be used to conserve space. When possible, it is best to include the entire section of the quote and then bold or italicize the parts you want to emphasize
4) Beware of what may have come before, or just after the quote, even the quote with no "..."!!!!!! Many people copy a quote, and just start and end the copy to include the parts they like. In other words: "..." is used in the middle of a quote, but effectively a "..." is really at the beginning and end of almost every quote you read, we just don't include it. Most quotes you read come from very large speeches, of which it is not practical to quote the whole speech. [By the way: on my website www.eadshome.com I have a few places where you can download an entire speech--this allows the reader to see the full context]
5) Beware of the LACK of "..."'s in a quote, also. Sometimes a founder is quoted with a "..." in it. Then another person copies that quote and simply leaves out the "..."
Here is an example:
Patrick Henry's famous "give me liberty or give me death" speech contains the following section: "...Is life so dear, or peace so sweet, as to be purchased at the price of chains and slavery! Forbit it, Almighty God! I know not what course others may take; but as for me, give me liberty or give me death!..." Notice the 2 "..." 's found in that quote. But most writers place a third "..." by removing the phrase, "Forbid it, Almighty God!", next you find writers omitting the "..." and still leaving out the phrase which refers to Almighty God.

In summary, you must beware of a quote that you read. Beware of the context the quote was removed from, the presence or absence of "..." and spend time looking up the full text and speech for yourself to get a good view of what was said.
________________________________________________________________________

Part 3 : Life seasons
I may quote George Washington as saying, "It is impossible to rightly govern the world without God and Bible." and you may be confused since you learned that our founders didn't want religion as a part of government. Then you may find a quote by another founder which seems to contradict what George Washington just said. What do you do? What do you believe? Well, we are slowly covering this topic in part 3 of our series on how to explain seemingly contradictory quotes. Today let's briefly discuss life seasons.

A life season refers to a time in our lives where actions, beliefs, words, and motives may differ from other times in our lives.
For instance, a teenager may believe that he will never die, at least not soon, and has little to no concern for safety. His actions are affected and he drives like a maniac everywhere he goes and talks about doing daring things and brags when he does them.
Often a life season is a temporary phenomenon. Another life season we may encounter is the time in our lives when we have young children. Suddenly we are concerned about safety, wholesomeness in our actions and words, and we may become embarrassed about our former wild days [or just laugh at them!]. Other life seasons occur when a relative dies, a financial reversal happens, or some other major event. During those times, we may say or do things that do not characterize our true, and dearly held beliefs, but we say them out of anxiety, frustration, or other emotions.

Until then let me tell you a story: on april 18, 1775 John Adams and John Hancock were at the home of Rev. Jonas Clarke, a Lexington Pastor and militia leader. That same night Paul Revere arrived to warn them of the approaching Redcoats. The next morning British Major Pitcairn shouted to an assembled regiment of minutement. "Disperse ye villians, lay down your arms in the name of George the Sovereign King of England. The immediate response of John Adams and John Hancock was "WE RECOGNIZE NO SOVEREIGN BUT GOD AND NO KING BUT JESUS!"
_________________________________________________________________________

Part 4 : Historical revisionism
Historical Revisionism: 1) The changing or re-writing of history done to accomplish a social agenda and to agree with current beliefs 2) Lies

It is a known fact that history is often revised to suit the needs of the speaker. Hitler revised history to fit his desires and beliefs. Revised history can appear so true that it is often believed without a question. This is exactly what happend during WWII. We could give many contemporary examples of historical revisionism. Many times the revision is not done knowingly, but un-knowingly...but it is revision nonetheless.

In our current discussion, we must regard the possibility that history could be revised in regards to the faith of our founders and their intent for our country from a religious standpoint. When examining a quote, please consider the possibility that the quote is a product of historical revisionism [including any quote I give you!!!].

Begin your studies by reading all the inaugural addresses of our presidents. These documents have been meticulously protected and are widely available. Read the Northwest Ordinance. Read George Washington's farewell address. After reading these documents, formulate a tentative position on the faith and intent of our founders. Do this apart from any of your previously held beliefs. Then look up the religious affliliations of our presidents. Are any of them Jewish, Muslim, or atheistic? How many attended church? Then look at our currency, "In God we trust"...is this a deistic belief? Do you know what Deism is? Study deistic beliefs and compare them to what you see on our coins. Investigate Supreme court rulings from the first 100 years of our nation. Was Christianity and religion alientated from public life? What did the US Supreme Court say? These cases and the written opinions have also been wonderfully preserved. After this initial study, you will be ready to tackle larger issues and able to study letters, public speeches, etc.

Never forget that historical revisionism must be dealt with in any serious study of history, including the founding of our own country.
____________________________________________________________________________
Part 5: "Out of Step"
"Out of step" It is impossible to have a very large group of people agree on every single matter. Sometimes, even in central matters, there will be a few who do not agree with the rest. These people would be out of step with the group. A person may be permanently out of step, or just temporarily so.
We should not condemn the whole group should we find that one or a few in the group are temporarily [or even permanently!] out of step with the rest of the group, even if it involves a central matter. In an early lesson on this series, we showed that over 250 people were considered "Founding Fathers". So should we find a few that even disagreed with this large crowd on central matters, it should not shake our resolve to comment on the beliefs and intent of the whole.

Thomas Paine at one brief time in his life wrote letters that seemed to deny some of the basic tenets of the Christian faith. Whether or not he persisted in these beliefs, I do not know. But he was vehemently rebuked in public letters by his contemporaries for these beliefs, and this was done as a friend. Were we to read one of Mr. Paine's letters from this time, we might conclude that he certainly was not a Christian and then perhaps make a larger conclusion of the whole group of our Founders.

So remember: When we examine a letter or quote from a Founder, we should analyze it for its context, reading the whole document if possible. Decide if the person was experiencing a life season, and then see if he was "out of step" with the rest of the group on this matter. This will keep us from making generalizations from a small sample.
__________________________________________________________________________

Part 6 : Taken out of context
Please go to FoundersQuotesoutofContext.htm for this lesson
________________________________________________________________________

Part 7: "This doesn't match!"...what's the real reason behind this debate?
Have you ever read a quote from a founder that seemed to clearly back up the position that he wasn't a Christian and wanted religion out of government? Before you jump to conclusions, please read our last 6 parts in this series. Now what if you read a very reputable source which quoted the same person as saying, "It is impossible to rightly govern the world without God and Bible." [that person is George Washington], or any such similar quote. What would you conclude? You might say, "This doesn't match!!!"

Forgetting our past 6 lessons, and how we should analyze a quote, let's just pretend that we have two side-by-side quotes from very reputable sources that say opposite things in regard to faith and government. Let me ask you this:
1) Do you believe that there is evil in this world?
2) Do you believe that there is perhaps a spiritual dimension that from time to time affects our world?
3) If there was an evil spiritual dimension that was interested in affecting the outcome of our world, would this evil seek to add Christianity to our country, or to remove it?
4) If this evil desired to remove Christianity from our country, then how would it go about doing so?
5) If you believe that God exists, would we be better off as a country without God, or with Him?
6) How would evil seek to remove the knowledge and awareness of God from our country's memory?

© 2005 EadsHome Ministries
All materials produced by EadsHome Ministries are free for your use as long as a profit is not made.
Materials copyrighted to others are specifically noted and linked.