Tag: declaration of independence

David Barton Says Founders Took Bill of Rights from Genesis. What If They Did?

Bill_of_Rights_Pg1of1_AC
The Bill of Rights from Archives.gov Charters of Freedom collection

David Barton has lately started sounding like the Institute on the Constitution. Michael Peroutka tells people that the American view is based on the Declaration of Independence and proves that

“The American View” of government is that there is a God, the God of the Bible, our rights come from Him, and the purpose of civil government is to secure our rights.

Barton promoted those points on Glenn Beck’s show recently and added that the Bill of Rights came from Genesis 1-8. Watch (from Right Wing Watch):
[youtube]https://youtu.be/g8Z8sWQM3ig[/youtube]
At 1:42 into the clip above, Barton said:

And they held that all those came out of Genesis one through eight and that’s what they looked to, Genesis one through eight. They went through and said here’s the rights we see and that’s why governments exist.

I can’t remember ever hearing Barton cite the part of the Declaration in bold letters below:

That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed,

Where do the powers come from? The consent of the governed. If the governed want something other than what Barton thinks the Bible teaches, then would Barton say the Declaration is wrong?
As usual Barton isn’t specific about which founders said what. I have pointed out several times on this blog that Thomas Jefferson, the author of the Declaration, did not point to the Bible as a source for the document.  Below is a segment from a previous post which cites Jefferson’s description of the influences on him as he wrote the Declaration:

When Jefferson wrote about the Declaration, he did not credit the Bible or Christianity.

First, to Henry Lee on May 8, 1825, Jefferson wrote:

But with respect to our rights, and the acts of the British government contravening those rights, there was but one opinion on this side of the water. All American whigs thought alike on these subjects. When forced, therefore, to resort to arms for redress an appeal to the tribunal of the world was deemed proper for our justification. This was the object of the Declaration of Independence. Not to find out new principles or new arguments never before thought of, not merely to say things which had never been said before: but to place before mankind the common sense of the subject, in terms so plain and firm as to command their assent, and to justify ourselves in the independent stand we are compelled to take. Neither aiming at originality of principle or sentiment, nor yet copied from any particular and previous writing, it was intended to be an expression of the American mind, and to give to that expression the proper tone and spirit called for by the occasion. All its authority rests then on the harmonizing sentiments of the day, whether expressed in conversation, in letters, printed essays, or in the elementary books of public right as Aristotle, Cicero, Locke, Sidney, &c. The historical documents which you mention as in your possession ought all to be found, and I am persuaded you will find to be corroborative of the facts and principles advanced in that Declaration.

Who wrote the “elementary books of public right?” Moses? The Apostle Paul? No, Aristotle, Cicero, Locke, Sidney contributed to the “harmonizing sentiments of the day.” A case could be made that some of that harmonizing sentiment derived from religious sources with religious references, but Jefferson did not mention them or appeal to them as primary influences.

In 1823, Jefferson told James Madison (referring to Lee’s theories about the source of the Declaration):

Richard Henry Lee charged it as copied from Locke’s treatise on government. Otis’s pamphlet I never saw, and whether I had gathered my ideas from reading or reflection, I do not know. I know only that I turned to neither book nor pamphlet while writing it. I did not consider it as any part of my charge to invent new ideas altogether, and to offer no sentiment which had ever been expressed before.

According to Jefferson (and in contrast to what the authors of the Founders’ Bible want you to believe), he did not turn to the Bible when writing the Declaration of Independence. Christian historians Mark Noll, Nathan Hatch, and George Marsden got it right when they wrote in 1989:

Here then is the “historical error”: It is historically inaccurate and anachronistic to confuse, and virtually to equate, the thinking of the Declaration of Independence with a biblical world view, or with Reformation thinking, or with the idea of a Christian nation. (p. 130).

I will add that I can’t see how the Bill of Rights can be found in Genesis 1-8.
What If Genesis 1-8 Was the Source of Our Rights?
It did get me wondering what the Bill of Rights would look like if the founders had used Genesis 1-8.
The first amendment probably would not be the same since everybody would have to observe the Sabbath on the same day. Women would be ruled by men (well, that isn’t so far off from the founding era). Burnt offerings would be a right. Murder would not be a capital offense. As with Cain, a murderer would have the right to be banished with protection from retaliation and the ability to marry. Polygamy would be a right. Nephilim-human marriages would be protected.
I just don’t see anything about quartering soldiers, search and seizures, juries, or trials, etc.
During this clip, Beck asked Barton to bring in the Bible and point out where these things are found. I think that is a super idea that will probably never happen.

Daily Jefferson: On June 28, 1776 a Draft of the Declaration of Independence was Given to Congress

The Declaration of Independence was one of the three accomplishments Thomas Jefferson wanted written on his tombstone. His tombstone reads:

HERE WAS BURIED
THOMAS JEFFERSON
AUTHOR OF THE 
DECLARATION OF
AMERICAN INDEPENDENCE
OF THE STATUTE OF VIRGINIA 
FOR RELIGIOUS FREEDOM
AND FATHER OF THE 
UNIVERSITY OF VIRGINIA

Today in 1776, the draft of the Declaration of Independence written by Jefferson and edited by the remaining committee members (Benjamin Franklin, John Adams, Roger Sherman, and Robert Livingston) was given to the delegates assembled from the colonies to discuss.
From the Library of Congress website:

Thomas Jefferson drafted the Declaration of Independence in Philadelphia behind a veil of Congressionally imposed secrecy in June 1776 for a country wracked by military and political uncertainties. In anticipation of a vote for independence, the Continental Congress on June 11 appointed Thomas Jefferson, John Adams, Benjamin Franklin, Roger Sherman, and Robert R. Livingston as a committee to draft a declaration of independence. The committee then delegated Thomas Jefferson to undertake the task. Jefferson worked diligently in private for days to compose a document. Proof of the arduous nature of the work can be seen in the fragment of the first known composition draft of the declaration, which is on public display here for the first time.
Jefferson then made a clean or “fair” copy of the composition declaration, which became the foundation of the document, labeled by Jefferson as the “original Rough draught.” Revised first by Adams, then by Franklin, and then by the full committee, a total of forty-seven alterations including the insertion of three complete paragraphs was made on the text before it was presented to Congress on June 28. After voting for independence on July 2, the Congress then continued to refine the document, making thirty-nine additional revisions to the committee draft before its final adoption on the morning of July 4. The “original Rough draught” embodies the multiplicity of corrections, additions and deletions that were made at each step. Although most of the alterations are in Jefferson’s handwriting (Jefferson later indicated the changes he believed to have been made by Adams and Franklin), quite naturally he opposed many of the changes made to his document.

Daily Jefferson: June 24, 1826 Letter Declining Invitation to Celebrate 50th Year of Independence in Washington

In late June of 1826, Thomas Jefferson was in decline. He knew he was ill but continued to carry on correspondence until he died on July 4, 1826.
Jefferson had been invited to attend a 50 year celebration in Washington DC by Roger Weightman and, despite his ill health, declined the invitation with a remarkable letter about the rights of mankind.

Monticello June 24. 26
Respected Sir
The kind invitation I receive from you on the part of the citizens of the city of Washington, to be present with them at their celebration of the 50th. anniversary of American independance; as one of the surviving signers of an instrument pregnant with our own, and the fate of the world, is most flattering to myself, and heightened by the honorable accompaniment proposed for the comfort of such a journey. it adds sensibly to the sufferings of sickness, to be deprived by it of a personal participation in the rejoicings of that day. but acquiescence is a duty, under circumstances not placed among those we are permitted to controul. I should, indeed, with peculiar delight, have met and exchanged there congratulations personally with the small band, the remnant of that host of worthies, who joined with us on that day, in the bold and doubtful election we were to make for our country, between submission or the sword; and to have enjoyed with them the consolatory fact, that our fellow citizens, after half a century of experience and prosperity, continue to approve the choice we made. may it be to the world, what I believe it will be, (to some parts sooner, to others later, but finally to all,) the Signal of arousing men to burst the chains, under which monkish ignorance and superstition had persuaded them to bind themselves, and to assume the blessings & security of self-government. that form which we have substituted, restores the free right to the unbounded exercise of reason and freedom of opinion. all eyes are opened, or opening, to the rights of man. the general spread of the light of science has already laid open to every view. the palpable truth, that the mass of mankind has not been born with saddles on their backs, nor a favored few booted and spurred, ready to ride them legitimately, by the grace of god. these are grounds of hope for others. for ourselves, let the annual return of this day forever refresh our recollections of these rights, and an undiminished devotion to them.
I will ask permission here to express the pleasure with which I should have met my ancient neighbors of the City of Washington and of it’s vicinities, with whom I passed so many years of a pleasing social intercourse; an intercourse which so much relieved the anxieties of the public cares, and left impressions so deeply engraved in my affections, as never to be forgotten. with my regret that ill health forbids me the gratification of an acceptance, be pleased to receive for yourself, and those for whom you write, the assurance of my highest respect and friendly attachments.
Th. Jefferson

Jefferson hoped that the American action would stimulate enlightenment around the world. It is disturbing that his eloquence was not equaled by his action of removing saddles from the backs of his slaves. Even at his death, Jefferson did not free all of his slaves. Those saddles remained.
In the letter to Weightman, Jefferson did not locate the origin of his grand ideas. To Henry Lee, just over a year prior to his letter to Weightman (May 8, 1825), Jefferson provided similar thoughts about the Declaration of Independence and gave insight into the source of his beliefs as expressed in the Declaration of Independence:

[W]ith respect to our rights, and the acts of the British government contravening those rights, there was but one opinion on this side of the water. All American whigs thought alike on these subjects.

When forced, therefore, to resort to arms for redress, an appeal to the tribunal of the world was deemed proper for our justification. This was the object of the Declaration of Independence. Not to find out new principles, or new arguments, never before thought of, not merely to say things which had never been said before; but to place before mankind the common sense of the subject, in terms so plain and firm as to command their assent, and to justify ourselves in the independent stand we are compelled to take. Neither aiming at originality of principle or sentiment, nor yet copied from any particular and previous writing, it was intended to be an expression of the American mind, and to give to that expression the proper tone and spirit called for by the occasion.

All its authority rests then on the harmonizing sentiments of the day, whether expressed in conversation, in letters, printed essays, or in the elementary books of public right, as Aristotle, Cicero, Locke, Sidney, &c. …

David Barton preaches that the Declaration of Independence was “nothing more than” a collection of sermons preached before 1763. Watch:

[vimeo]https://vimeo.com/31136085[/vimeo]

The man who is most responsible for the Declaration of Independence referred to older authorities than American preachers. Inasmuch as the preachers expressed the same ideas as the conversations, essays, and correspondence among supporters of independence, they no doubt added to the “harmonizing sentiments of the day.” However, Barton’s claim about the Declaration of Independence is contradicted by the author.

Happy Independence Day – 2011

Over at Crosswalk, I posted the full text of the Declaration of Independence. Yesterday, my rising 5th grader and I read and discussed it, and I asked him if he had read it before in school. He said — to my and the school’s shame — he didn’t remember ever reading it before.
David Barton says that the schools today teach that the American Revolution was only about “taxation without representation.” I don’t know if that is true, but he says that the Declaration was about much more than that, citing religious freedom, judicial activism and slavery as principle reasons.

An obvious example of the secularization of history occurs each year around the Fourth of July. Americans are taught that “taxation without representation” was the reason America separated from Great Britain; yet “taxation without representation” was only reason number seventeen out of the twenty-seven reasons given in the Declaration of Independence – it was not even in the top half, yet it’s all that most ever hear. Never mentioned today are the numerous grievances condemning judicial activism – or those addressing moral or religious or other issues.

Barton says that Samuel Adams and Charles Carroll got involved in the revolution to seek religious freedom and that the

…desire to end slavery in America was a significant motivation not only for Franklin and Rush but also for a number of others; but the end of slavery in America could be achieved only if they separated from Great Britain – which they were willing to do (and six of the thirteen colonies began abolishing slavery following the separation).

I have no doubt that some signers of the Declaration opposed slavery but I think it would not be accurate to say that ending the practice was a motivation for all of them. Great Britain outlawed the practice before we did and we fought a horrible war to decide the issue.
Barton recently told Focus on the Family that

As a matter of fact, of the 56 individuals who signed the Declaration of Independence, 27 had seminary degrees. That’s not bad for a bunch of atheists to have seminary degrees. (Laughter) That’s fairly impressive. I mean, that’s like saying the U.S. Congress today is made up of half pastors.

If you count Harvard, Yale and the College of William and Mary, you might get close to those numbers but it is misleading to say that these were seminaries in the theological sense. These schools were founded to help seek religious aims, in addition to providing a well rounded education. By the 1700s, these schools were liberal arts institutions and those who attended were not of necessity studying to be pastors. Only one signer — John Witherspoon — held that vocation. Calling the degrees “seminary degrees” is surely misleading since the first theological seminary in the United States was not formed until 1808 at Andover, MA.
And so, it seems good, to offset neglect from some and zeal from others, to read the Declaration, especially today. Here again is the link at Crosswalk, and then to the government source as well.