John Quincy Adams Speech is Used to Justify Christianity in Government



Quite often we see some Christian declaring he/she has finally found proof the founding fathers intended the faith called Christianity was to be the national religion in the U.S. Now a speech delivered by President John Quincy Adams is being pushed down the runway. 

The speech is 65 pages long and must have taken a long time to write--and was long to listen to. It was delivered in the 1840's when Adams was 71 years old. Speeches and letters by politicians may have their own self-interest in mind. While in office, it might be getting reelected. After office, it might be justifying whatever they did. In any event, from the parts I read of Quincy Adams, it was the same old song and dance.

The same old is not that we "know" there is a God and Jesus. It's that we should all agree on something so we can move forward. When we are all going in different directions things don't get done. What's handy to reach for is religion. Let's all grab onto that and we'll live happily ever after. 

Of course, then as now many did not buy this notion. Roger Williams, who established Rhode Island had a very different take on the faith. He was a firm believer in separation of church and state. He treated the native people as equals. Traditional Christians thought he was terrible. Then there was Thoms Paine, Thomas Jefferson and Benjamin Franklin who, while not using the term atheist, were far removed at various times in their lives from Christian orthodoxy.

We're going to see lots of this "Christian nation" garbage" as a part of 250 years. None of it proves it's true. 

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Ancient God, Bel (Baal), the Main Character in an Ancient Play

Image
In a British museum is a preserved stone tablet from Babylon. It dates to about 2,000 BCE. Someone labored patiently to inscribe an entire passion play featuring the god Bel. I reiterate this is a stone tablet, not a recopied papyrus. The play begins with the god Bel arrested by soldiers and taken off the stage. He reappears at a trial in the Hall of Judgement. Bel is innocent but is sentenced to death. In the next scene Bel is accosted by a mob. He is despised and rejected. The actor playing Bel is then taken by guard to a hilltop in a sacred grove. Two criminals are taken with him. One of these is released. The the audience then leaves the theater and follows the actor Bel and his guards to the top of a hill where the death scene is enacted by hanging from a tree. The audience returns to the theater for the dramatic final scenes. The dead Bel is stripped and prepared for burial. On a theatrical hill to the side of the stage is a tomb where the body is placed. A stone is rolle...
Read more

Will We Ever Know How Accurate Current Bibles Are

Image
When I discuss the many times the Bible was copied and recopied by scribes over a couple of thousand years, the reply is often, "I have a book by this (or that) expert who says the Bible is 99% accurate to its original writers." The 99% claim appears in various places defending the Bible. There is one thing we know absolutely: There is no surviving original copy of the Bible. Even the oldest surviving material is a generation or two after the time some of the Bible was written. This means no one can claim he has, or ever will, compare the current Bible to the original Bible and find the two are 99% the same. We cannot claim either that it is not 99% accurate. For the sake of discussion, however, assume the current Bible is 99% accurate. That would mean the one word out of every 100 was inaccurate. It could still mean an important misreading of the original text. An example is the passage referring to punishment for a man who kills a fetus. In the oldest know materia...
Read more

What Was the "Argument" in the Election

Image
I hate to add my blog to the piles of blogs and pundits analyzing and pondering the meaning of the just passed election. But that's what I feel like doing today. I've always like Senator Ted Cruz's summary of politics. He once said, "First, win the argument. Then, win the election." I think there is a way of applying that to anti abortion Catholics and Protestants. The link talks of Catholics who now feel they have no political home because Republicans let them down with Trump but they remain against abortion rights. Taking Cruz's win-the-argument thesis, I'd call the past election about an argument between two groups. One group's argument was, "Trump's a jerk." The other's argument was, "Abortion is wrong." The group, "Trump's a jerk," won the argument and then the election.  While one can argue the election, or any election, it about more complex issues, I believe in the end elections hinge on very simple ar...
Read more