The Religious Beliefs of America’s Founders
- ethananthonywood
- Jun 20, 2023
- 4 min read
In The Religious Beliefs of America’s Founders, Dr. Gregg L. Frazer from the Master’s University wrestles against popular opinion and argues that the founders of America were neither deists, as many liberals claim, nor genuine Christians, as “Christian America” tries to claim. Instead, he argues, they believe in “theistic rationalism,” which claims to believe in both reason and God but provides the option to rely on human reasoning when God may be inconvenient or beyond understanding. It seems that Frazer may be trying to create a “new term” to describe what others have simply called “Christian deism,” but his statements' accuracy is on point.
Theistic rationalism has at least two fundamental problems. First, it destroys the truth. If a man decides what is reasonable, then each man can create his reality. Whether or not the Founding Fathers realized it, they were inadvertently advertising soft postmodernism. Secondly, it places man over God. As the book's last line says, theistic rationalism creates idols or “created gods in their image.” So it is clear that theistic rationalism is often a heretical form of Christianity.
Why was theistic rationalism such a heavy belief among our nation's founders? Our nation’s founders founded it out of rebellion, which is almost incompatible with the Christian worldview. So, to ease their seared consciences, the revolutionaries adopted an almost-Christian worldview because it allowed them to appeal to all Christians (who didn’t consider their true beliefs thoroughly) and maintain their political views. They were rational deists practicing Christianity for political advantage.
Anyone who thinks about the Founder’s religion realizes it accomplishes much politically. However, it is also fake Christianity. That is why there was (and still often is) a gap between politicians' religion and the masses' faith.
We studied two primary examples of Christian rationalism; the first was John Adams Sr., and the second was George Washington. While this may stun some, the truth is that John Adams was an apostate Christian and George Washington wasn’t a Christian at all! In this next section of the paper, we will examine some of the evidence presented for this assumption, using, as Frazer did, the founder’s words.
Out of all of the Founders, John Adams was as close to Orthodox Christianity as any. He “reserved a place for traditional worship….did believe in miracles, Providence, and to a certain extent the Bible as revelation.” However, he admitted that he believed solely because these beliefs were rational. Furthermore, Adams denied all five tenets of Calvinism, and more shockingly, he denied the deity of Jesus and the Atonement. Essentially, he rejected the gospel. He believed “Jesus was an exemplary man who left an example to follow and who deserved to be imitated, but He was not God and did not pay the price for men’s sins.”
Although he didn’t care much for the “Christ of Christianity,” he believed that “Christianity—as he understood it—was the best of many options.” To summarize, Adams was a typical universalist, believing in temporary judgment but that, ultimately, everyone will make it to heaven. This is a classic heresy, and although he called himself a “Christian,” his rejection of the gospel made it clear he wasn’t one. Nevertheless, he believed that Christianity usually kept a civilization wholesome and thus should be followed.
That leads us to the second (and last) person we will analyze; George Washington. He firmly believed in “Providence,” as he “believed in an active, intervening God who was interested in and who impacted human affairs.” However, he was uncommitted to the Bible, which he “did not deem important enough to use on a regular basis or as authoritative support for his beliefs or arguments.” How can a Christian go their entire life without referencing the Bible, the written Word of God? That would be a sign to show a “lukewarm” Christian (Revelation 3) if I’ve ever seen one. Finally, he was uncommitted to his church, going about once a month (in private life). As Frazer stated, “His attendance record seems to indicate a sense of public duty more than heartfelt piety, which is just what one would expect of a theistic rationalist.”
To summarize, “Washington had a faith that was essentially of the mind, not of the heart.” It allowed him to sympathize with the American Indian “Great Spirit” and, more importantly, explained why he never proclaimed himself a Christian and refused communion! Washington provided clear evidence (through his intentional apathy of Christianity) that he was not an Orthodox Christian.
To conclude the book, Frazer emphasized that the American Revolution was not based on Scripture. Instead, the leaders twisted it to support their means. Additionally, he noted that the founding documents were written in a non-Christian way. For example, the Declaration of Independence and the Constitution were “neither Christian nor biblical.” It identified with the God of the deists, or “the god of nature rather than the God of Christian scriptural revelation.” These documents were intentionally written to please “both...rationalists and to the more conventionally religious.” While this type of writing may be beneficial for statesmen, it clearly shows the error of the claim that “Christian America…was based on biblical principles and was meant to establish a Christian nation.”
Finally, he asks whether the theistic rationalists tried to “establish” their religion. And Frazer’s answer to that? Yes…somewhat. The founder’s religion, or worship, was more of a lack of worship of God and, instead, the worship of personal reason than any particular set of beliefs.
To conclude, I believe that Frazer was right on target. While the nation's state today is not what the Founders envisioned, with the wall of separation between church and state, the typical attitude of churches and many governmental officials lines up precisely with the Founding Fathers. Clearly, they were not Christians and may have unknowingly begun liberalizing “Christianity.” Thus, I found Frazer’s work insightful, intelligent, and well-contended.
コメント