Interesting scriptural allusions in Franklins quote. He references Acts 17:27 (Geneva translation it would seem) - which is interesting as that would support his contention that the ancient Greeks were fumbling for political truth as much as spiritual truth - and not a fool proof guide for the new constitution. And of course also a clear allusion James 1:17 - which also contains the admonition for those who lack wisdom to ask the Lord. Clearly Franklin knew scripture and employed it in his rhetoric. But also clear that at the public level, scripture and prayer were not significant influences on the forming of the constitution. And in fact seem to have been avoided/rejected by the delegate as sources of appeal in their deliberations.
I also am always puzzled by the CN contention that the constitution is uniquely biblically inspired or Christian because that can only then feed an apology for slavery, since this also was enshrined in the constitution. It’s difficult to argue BOTH that the Constitution is divinely inspired AND that slavery is Americas original sin. So whenever that contradiction becomes clear, it’s the second contention that usually is abandoned or downplayed.
although not specifically related to this post, but related to christian nationalism, i am curious as to your thoughts about the following statement(s).
I might do a post on this. I have been pretty busy with another project but I will say for now that he gets some things right and some things wrong. It is what he gets wrong that makes his main premise wrong. Some states did have establishments but that didn't make the nation Christian. Kirk dramatically overstates the situation and exaggerates the history.
Your shiny new toy—a radical new discovery seized on by progressive Christians—is what real evangelicals who follow the narrow way of holiness have always known: we have never been a Christian nation. No, there is not a “white Christian nationalist” hiding behind every bush destroying two million dollars in property and associated with multiple deaths in 2020 BLM riots. No, young African American males are not targeted by “white Christian nationalist” police at a rate inconsistent with their participation in violent crime. No, “white Christian nationalists” were not responsible for last year’s 106 percent increase in Wash. DC’s violent carjackings, no, “white Christian nationalists” were not responsible for years of chaos at the southern border and cruel, cruel inflation against the working class when they buy groceries or pay rent. But maybe the Democrats fear them so much that Democrats are frantically trying (temporarily?) to clean up their problems in time for the general election.
Well, it isn't new, Christian nationalism has been around since near the founding. There have always been Christians who want the government to privilege Christianity. While I don't know in each case what is behind the things you bring up, there was white Christian nationalism behind Charlottesville, and the church shooting in South Carolina, the Buffalo massacre, and some of the rioters on Jan 6 did so in Jesus' name. Ignoring white Christian nationalism because there are other problems in society is another of the problems with white Christian nationalism. The Republicans in Congress avoided acting on the bipartisan border deal because Donald Trump told them to kill it. There are other problems in the US and we should deal with them, but, imo, WCN is a problem for the American system and it is a threat to Christianity as well.
I'm beginning to think that particular history myth will never die. I wish I could say I was disappointed that Carson repeated it, but I doubt he has any particular prejudice against Republican mendacity.
Interesting scriptural allusions in Franklins quote. He references Acts 17:27 (Geneva translation it would seem) - which is interesting as that would support his contention that the ancient Greeks were fumbling for political truth as much as spiritual truth - and not a fool proof guide for the new constitution. And of course also a clear allusion James 1:17 - which also contains the admonition for those who lack wisdom to ask the Lord. Clearly Franklin knew scripture and employed it in his rhetoric. But also clear that at the public level, scripture and prayer were not significant influences on the forming of the constitution. And in fact seem to have been avoided/rejected by the delegate as sources of appeal in their deliberations.
I also am always puzzled by the CN contention that the constitution is uniquely biblically inspired or Christian because that can only then feed an apology for slavery, since this also was enshrined in the constitution. It’s difficult to argue BOTH that the Constitution is divinely inspired AND that slavery is Americas original sin. So whenever that contradiction becomes clear, it’s the second contention that usually is abandoned or downplayed.
although not specifically related to this post, but related to christian nationalism, i am curious as to your thoughts about the following statement(s).
https://x.com/charliekirk11/status/1824451990577172811?s=46
I might do a post on this. I have been pretty busy with another project but I will say for now that he gets some things right and some things wrong. It is what he gets wrong that makes his main premise wrong. Some states did have establishments but that didn't make the nation Christian. Kirk dramatically overstates the situation and exaggerates the history.
Your shiny new toy—a radical new discovery seized on by progressive Christians—is what real evangelicals who follow the narrow way of holiness have always known: we have never been a Christian nation. No, there is not a “white Christian nationalist” hiding behind every bush destroying two million dollars in property and associated with multiple deaths in 2020 BLM riots. No, young African American males are not targeted by “white Christian nationalist” police at a rate inconsistent with their participation in violent crime. No, “white Christian nationalists” were not responsible for last year’s 106 percent increase in Wash. DC’s violent carjackings, no, “white Christian nationalists” were not responsible for years of chaos at the southern border and cruel, cruel inflation against the working class when they buy groceries or pay rent. But maybe the Democrats fear them so much that Democrats are frantically trying (temporarily?) to clean up their problems in time for the general election.
Well, it isn't new, Christian nationalism has been around since near the founding. There have always been Christians who want the government to privilege Christianity. While I don't know in each case what is behind the things you bring up, there was white Christian nationalism behind Charlottesville, and the church shooting in South Carolina, the Buffalo massacre, and some of the rioters on Jan 6 did so in Jesus' name. Ignoring white Christian nationalism because there are other problems in society is another of the problems with white Christian nationalism. The Republicans in Congress avoided acting on the bipartisan border deal because Donald Trump told them to kill it. There are other problems in the US and we should deal with them, but, imo, WCN is a problem for the American system and it is a threat to Christianity as well.
PS, Carjackings in DC are down 48% this year. https://mpdc.dc.gov/node/212492
I'm beginning to think that particular history myth will never die. I wish I could say I was disappointed that Carson repeated it, but I doubt he has any particular prejudice against Republican mendacity.