Chuck Baldwin

Food For Thought

More About: Religion: Believers

The Birth Of Christ And The Birth Of America Are Linked

The Birth Of Christ And The Birth Of America Are Linked by Chuck Baldwin As we approach the celebration of Christ's birth, I am reminded of the words of John Quincy Adams. On July 4, 1837, he spoke these words: "Why is it that, next to the birthday of the Savior of the world, your most joyous and most venerated festival returns on this day? . Is it not that, in the chain of human events, the birthday of the nation is indissolubly linked with the birthday of the Savior? That it forms a leading event in the progress of the Gospel dispensation? Is it not that the Declaration of Independence first organized the social compact on the foundation of the Redeemer's mission upon earth. That it laid the cornerstone of human government upon the first precepts of Christianity, and gave to the world the first irrevocable pledge of the fulfillment of the prophecies announced directly from Heaven at the birth of the Savior and predicted by the greatest of the Hebrew prophets six hundred years before?" Adams was exactly right: America's birth is directly linked to the birth of our Savior. In fact, the United States of America is the only nation established by Christian people, founded upon Biblical principles, and dedicated to the purpose of religious liberty. This truth is easily observed within America's earliest history. To continue reading Chuck's editorial, click here:  

5 Comments in Response to

Comment by Ed Price
Entered on:

When the founding fathers of the United States talked about religious freedom, they weren't considering the pagan religions such as Islam (Muhammadanism), Buddhism, Hinduism, Shintoism, etc.. Even Judaism was barely on their minds.

What they were mostly considering as religion for the purposes of religious freedom were the various forms of Protestantism, plus, to some degree, Roman Catholicism.

From "Established in 1816, American Bible Society history follows closely and even intersects the history of our nation. In fact, ABS’ early leadership reads like a Who’s Who of patriots. Our first president was Elias Boudinot, former president of the Continental Congress. John Jay, John Quincy Adams, DeWitt Clinton and James Fennimore Cooper also played significant roles, as did Rutherford B. Hayes, Benjamin Harrison and Francis Scott Key. Since those early days, American Bible Society has worked closely with organizations to reach people in the United States and around the world who might otherwise not have access to a Bible."

Exhaustive research will show that possibly thousands of immigrants to America in the early to mid 1800s, received Bibles, free, from the American Bible Society. So you see, it is kind of the other way around. The deterioration of our nation goes hand in hand with the nations decline and fall from its earliest understanding of the meaning of religious freedom.

Comment by David Jackson
Entered on:

      At this late date, you'd think that we'd be spared the mindless ramblings of such manipulative mental meanderings. Is there no growth?

      In what universe did the "United States of America" spring forth from the mysticism and hubris of Christianity? The earliest of "invaders" were a gang of mental midgets and social misfits, who ended up robbing graves and committing acts of cannibalism - amongst other human violations of decency and the simplest of humanity's social protocols. As to the more evolved founding fathers, those who invoked religion only did so because they needed a social consensus and it already existed (to some extent). The major players were, as we use to say, "C&Es" - "most normally true believers on Christmas and Easter. If one bothers to check the record, one might find that there were very few "true" Christians amingst the founders. Even if all of them had been devout clergy, what does that have to do with the vile pretensions of modernity? The C&Es are still smarmy social engineers, many of whom make themselves wealthy by claiming to talk to God and know how everyone else should live:  They are some of the lowest forms on earth!

     Religious liberty has NOTHING to do with religion. Freedom is freedom!

     As for observing America's earliest history, I'd rather not be reminded that some of my relatives were zenophobic, arrogant mental midgets. As best I can tell, the many belief systems of the real Americans (native) were as developed and any of the self-serving crap spewed by Euro-centric zealots and weak-willed bigots.

     If this is "food for thought", we are all in the throes of starvation!

Comment by Ed Price
Entered on:

Oh, this is so good!

Dennis Treybil reminds us that the Magna Carta was for the king: '"Us and our heirs" refers to the King and his descendants.  All rights guaranteed in the Magna Carta accrue only to royalty.  No reader should see this in any wise as benefitting any common person in any way.'

Now here's the good part. Lets compare the above to the Preamble of the United States Constitution. The Preamble reads thus: "We the People of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defence,[note 1] promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America."

Notice the "We the People of the United States" line. Who are these people? They aren't the common people. They are the people of the newly formed United States (Government). The only way that you as a commoner can take part in anything in the Constitution, is to become part of the United States Government.

Now to the beneficial part for the commoner. You become part of the United States Government temporarily, when you get into the court system through a trial or something similar. Then, as part of the Government, you have the authority to make the Government stick to its Constitutional rules by using the Constitution.

This works with State Governments as well. But if you are not an elected or appointed Government official or worker, you probably don't have any standing or authority in Government.

Learn you law. Or find someone who knows the law to stand with you and whisper it into your ear.

Comment by Dennis Treybil
Entered on:

 Is it a "crazy superstition" or a "hallucination" to show concern for others?

The ancient teachings of "Do unto others as you would have them do unto you" is a reflection of a law of the jungle:  Reciprocity is generally friendly.

And the great commandment "Love thy neighbor as thyself" rhymes in meaning with that.

I get Karma-ic connotations from those teachings.

Baldwin cites the Mayflower Compact in his article to show how he reads JQ Adams' speech.  In that compact, they speak of  passing laws "as shall be thought most convenient for the General good of the Colony".   This is in stark contrast with the Magna Carta.  I counted over 40 references to "heirs".  "Us and our heirs" refers to the King and his descendants.  All rights guaranteed in the Magna Carta accrue only to royalty.  No reader should see this in any wise as benefitting any common person in any way.

That the royalty continued to be concerned only for itself is reflected in the Declaration of Independence where it says,

He (King George III) has refused his Assent to Laws, the most wholesome and necessary for the public good.

Parties to the Mayflower Compact were concerned for themselves and each other.  To that end, they sought to promote the general welfare, later declared in the Constitution.

If this line in the DoI is any indication, King George III actively opposed such legislation.  No wonder George Washington declared, "The time for Kings is past."

I agree that the brutish marshall instruments of the state should be directed in according with the Constitution itself, plus legislation and treaties duly passed in pursuance of the Constitution - not by the tenets of any religous text.

But if "government of the people, for the people, and by the people" exists at all, individuals have to autonomously direct their actions on SOMETHING.  The teachings used by many to autonomously direct their actions are tenets of various religious texts.

Even Euclid and Rheimann had to start somewhere.  They chose axioms that could not be proven, but without which conversation on the topic of their disparate geometries was not possible.  Their geometries are different.  Does that make geometry a hallucination or a superstition?  Their axioms are different.  Are those axioms then hallucinations or superstitions?

DC Treybil


Comment by G Cone
Entered on:

People's crazy hallucinations and superstitions have no place in government. 

Join us on our Social Networks:


Share this page with your friends on your favorite social network: