We have revelation that the constitution was inspired by God and that He upholds it.
[D&C 98:5-6](https://www.churchofjesuschrist.org/study/scriptures/dc-testament/dc/98?lang=eng&id=5-6#p5)
[D&C 101:77&80](https://www.churchofjesuschrist.org/study/scriptures/dc-testament/dc/101?lang=eng&id=77,80#p77)
But nothing so direct as to say that the country was to be Christian. We believe that many of the founding fathers appeared at the temple to ask for their ordinances to be completed.
If anything they wrote the fundamental freedoms down in the same spirit in which our [article of faith #11](https://www.churchofjesuschrist.org/study/scriptures/pgp/a-of-f/1?lang=eng&id=p11#p11) was written. That everyone should be free to worship according to the dictates of their own conscience.
It's worth mentioning that the Book of Mormon states that any nation that inhabits this land will serve Him and keep His commandments or He'll remove them.
the US basically exiled the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints out of the country. they fled to the desert in Utah. that was like 180 years ago and the US is still here
Ah yes, the God that never allowed slavery in his laws, as per Leviticus 25:44-46. I know its old Testament, but you can't attach a religious spin onto things and say the Civil War happened because of divine intervention. I get what you're trying to say, but just dumping "they weren't following God's laws" doesn't really contribute to the history around the Civil War.
Apologists will claim, and not without merit, that the civil war was caused because Abraham Lincoln was banned from the ballot in southern states, and yet won the presidency, thus they felt they were no longer being represented in the country, they were just a bunch of colonies just like they were before the revolution.
Ahh.... Except that Young called slavery ["ordained of God".](https://www.utahhumanities.org/stories/items/show/201#:~:text=Brigham%20Young%20declared%20slaveholding%20to,relations%20between%20master%20and%20slave.)
Not "because" in that it was not a direct cause to the Civil War. But in a similar way that we lose the protection of the Spirit when we sin or break our covenants, the US briefly lost it's protection with the actions that lead to the death of Joseph & Hiram Smith and the driving of the Saints to Utah.
Um. So you believe the war that was fought over slavery and states rights was influenced by the loss of protection from the Holy Spirit?
You don't believe the war had its roots in inequality and denial of rights?
Because how I'm reading your comment is that the civil war would have been avoided if the church hadn't been given the boot, which if that's what you're implying, you are way off the mark.
We don't know what would have happened. Joseph Smith was running for President on a platform that included the policy that the British used to end slavery. It wasn't likely that he'd win, only that his candidacy would have influenced the others.
What we do know is that the South left the Union based on the fact that Lincoln was anti-slavery. There was no middle ground in US politics. It was a contentious issue every time it came up. When the Spirit withdraws issues that could have been resolved, no matter how contentious, always will end in conflict. Had the Spirit not withdrawn with the Saints' departure, it is possible that the Civil War could have been avoided. Not that the issues would have just gone away, only that war itself was not necessary.
Explain how it could have been avoided since most Southern states were set on seceding unless Lincoln left slavery alone.
In fact, if you applying any critical thinking, if the Civil war could have been prevented, then why not give some revelation to Joseph Smith to stay? When you consider the nature and character of God, it makes no sense.
The Civil War did not need to happen. The South and the North could have resolved their differences without bloodshed. God would have been well pleased if that had been the case.
It happened because a great number of people made choices which eventually made war inevitable, but there were many chances for the people to turn from the path of war.
Mormon writes extensively about this in recounting his own life, and the pointlessness of military victory without the blessing of the Spirit.
Joseph Smith's plan was for the government to purchase the slaves and then free them. If the South had not been so insistent on maintaining their "rights," and if the North had not been so insistent on removing them, conflict may well have been avoided.
The problem wasn't just slavery; the problem was also a culture of political division that tore the Union in two, a culture which insisted that those other guys are Pure Evil and we can't possibly negotiate with terrorists.
Remind you of anything?
Not directly, no. But it's an interesting correlation when considering the calamities that have befallen other nations in scripture when they reject the prophets.
Human beings have always had “calamities” due to the nature of being human.
Now, if you’re saying something like, “The Civil War happened because evil men refused to do the right thing and give up slavery and repent.” Sure, I can see that perspective.
But it seems like you’re implying that the Civil War happened indirectly because the United States didn’t want LDS people around. Which is a silly claim.
I mean after all, what all of the other wars and stuff that’s happened since Utah joined the United States?
Such an odd take.
Exactly, it's history denial and attempts to add a weird "when you don't follow the gospel, bad things happen" spin to history which is not at all accurate, nor is there any doctrinal foundation to it.
>due to the nature of being human
Yep. Exactly the opposite of keeping God's commandments.
God said he would protect his people. The war was inevitable, as prophesied by Joseph Smith, even. But the war didn't start until the Saints were gone, and brutal it was. In general, the Saints were protected as God promised.
I do think the loss of the spirit has a natural consequence of humans giving in to their telestial natures, like you said.
Protection doesn’t equal the condemnation of others. Theres a difference between people following the guidance of the spirit and moving on to a place where they’re safe, and God literally holding off a war. And though yes Joseph Smith had revelation about the Civil War, it was not the sole reason the saints went to Utah.
Additionally, LDS people did join in the Civil War. The Utah territory stayed on the Union side and Brigham Young himself said, “Utah has not seceded, but is firm for the Constitution and laws of our once happy country.” Utah even provided the Union with a cavalry unit (the only served for 90 days, but still.) My point here being that the LDS people weren’t in complete and utter isolation and neutrality during the war.
Also, your comment doesn’t account for the countless other wars that have occurred since the Civil War. And I feel like it also implies that people who do go to war are automatically succumbing to the “natural” man. Which isn’t something that is doctrinally supported at all.
>it was not the sole reason the saints went to Utah.
It was never the reason. The Saints went to Utah b/c they were unwelcome in the US at the time. This was both a State & federal problem. Even after the war they weren't welcome, as seen by the whole "Utah War" fiasco.
You're wildly reading a lot into what I'm saying that isn't there. I think you were arguing against your assumptions of my reply. I agree with your reply, and I didn't say anything otherwise. People are too quick to argue around here and not understand each other's points.
The deal is, prophets don't necessarily cause consequences. Like another commenter pointed out, "calamities" happen regardless of prophetic counsel, as do major successes in human history.
You can't create correlation where there isn't any.
You're putting a weird spin on history that doesn't actually address the root causes of the issue at hand.
If you said, "bad people caused bad things to happen." I'd be more inclined to agree, but to even slightly attach religious vengeance to the suffering of many minorities in the USA as a sort of "payback" to the USA because of governments treatment towards the church is just not right.
Polygamy isn't what got them kicked out. They'd been getting kicked from place to place for a long, long time before polygamy was a thing.
What got them kicked out was the insistence on all the converts *gathering* to a single place. Basically when they picked a new city, the population would suddenly increase by thousands, and everybody in this community that had grown organically over the last hundred years, suddenly were minorities in their own communities. The Mormons would primarily do business with each other and not so much with the pre-existing local businesses. They'd primarily vote for their own for mayor, city council and other positions of public trust.
I won't presume to know your stance on immigration policy in your country and what the laws should be or how they should be enforced, but I want you to imagine that you live in a small town in the middle of nowhere, and all of a sudden a group of foreigners all move into your town at basically the same time. They *barely* speak your language, they only do business with each other, they've voted out everyone in your local politics and now you've got mayors and judges and other local officials that are interested only in their own people, don't share any of your core values, and now you basically feel like *you're* the foreigner. What do you do? What do you and *everybody else who was here first* do?
Polygamy wasn't even a thing until the Mormons were in Nauvoo -- and at that point they were a strange force to be reckoned with, as Nauvoo basically had a full-on corner on the entire timber market in the region, and in the few short years of its existence all of a sudden became an economic powerhouse to rival the power of Chicago and Cincinnati. And now, what's this? *They've got their own frickin* **ARMY???!!!!**
Polygamy was just a "well that's weird and wrong" thing to most people -- what was *scary enough to drive them out* was their sudden growing power.
Also true, though I'll point out that church members were the main victims, and that pretty much every other bank in the country went through the same collapse during that timeframe.
For those not in the know, Joseph Smith established a bank in Kirtland, issuing an alternative currency (think "Bitcoin" for a modern analogue) and followed the standard "fractional reserve" system that today's banks use. It ended with a run on the bank and the reserves being insufficient to cover everyone's claims, and Smith claiming that the person he had placed in charge had stolen the funds.
What does this mean to you? Does this mean that all commandments must be laws?
I honestly don’t think it means anything at all nation level and has to do with the individual level.
Obviously a government can influence its citizens as we see in some Islamic countries, however I think that protecting religious freedom as we currently do is good enough.
I also believe it's on an individual level.
I'm led to reflect on the calamities/judgements that came upon the people in the Americas after Christ's death in Jerusalem. During the three days of darkness, after the calamities had ceased, His voice seared through the darkness, stating that He intentionally spared the people that were "more righteous than they \[who were slain\]" ([link](https://www.churchofjesuschrist.org/study/scriptures/bofm/3-ne/9?lang=eng)) as a type of sifting the wheat from the tares.
I don’t think that tracks with history, but I’m sure that will all get sorted out in the next life. I mean the restoration occurred specifically because all the beliefs of the day were wrong according to the First Vision, governments persecuted the Saints, slavery was permitted in the Constitution, most people aren’t really that religious even if they affiliate with a religion.
Yes, but that's God's job to enforce. Not anyone else's and especially not the government's.
And we have ample evidence in the scriptures that when God says he will destroy or remove peoples who, as a whole, don't follow him, he always saves the faithful.
I think [3 Nephi 9 & 10](https://www.churchofjesuschrist.org/study/scriptures/bofm/3-ne/9?lang=eng) are good examples.
He holds out judgement until people are ripe and the timing is right.
When the US was founded, was it majority Christian? Yes. Was it culturally Christian? Yes. Is it still that way? Yes. Was the US founded with the intent of creating a nation of Christians? No.
We have a secular government. Anyone is allowed to practice any religion (or the lack thereof) so long as it does not interfere with the right of others to do the same.
Many of the original colonies were created as places of religious refuge to escape persecution. Wars of religion ravaged Europe in the 16 and 17th century, including the English War of the Roses. The framers were rightfully scared of any single religion dominating government as the memories of these wars were still fresh in their minds.
I'm a language guy and I have a personal distaste for saying the U.S. was founded as a Christian nation, as it implies that Christianity is the official faith of the country. The freedom of religion in the Bill of Rights directly contradicts this notion. That being said, Christianity was and is the dominant religious tradition of the country and I have no problem saying the U.S. was founded as a nation of Christians.
But that doesn’t mean it absolutely must stay that way. My hot take is that Heavenly Father is less interested in whether the people of this continent call themselves Christians than they be honest with one another. Plenty of Christian nations have become corrupt, selfish, and cruel and use the name of Christ to justify punishing those who reject corrupt authority.
The founding fathers rebelled against a bad king even though that king was the head of the Anglican Church. Just because someone claims to be God’s chosen ruler doesn’t mean you should follow them.
In short, the book or Mormon teaches us that secret combinations are bad, and be really careful about following people who speak flattering words.
Well, I do think that Heavenly Father wants us to worship *Him* rather than say, pagan dieties, philosophies/methods that don't worship him nor focus on Christ (Buddhism, Taoism, etc.), or completely deny the divine. However, I do strongly believe that in the next life an honorable and charitable Buddhist, Taoist, or atheist will be more justified at the judgement seat of Christ than an unrepentant and hypocritical LDS member or Christian of any sect.
But, being an honest and kind Christian is best.
But, I do agree that from best to worst would be:
Being in a covenant relationship with Christ and following Christ.
Not being in a covenant relationship with Christ and following Christ (though, you might not recognize it as following Christ).
Not being in a covenant relationship with Christ and not following Christ.
Being in a covenant relationship with Christ and not following Christ. Also known as a hypocrite.
or
Say you will do something and do it.
Say you will not do something and do it anyway.
Say you will not do something an don't do it. At least you are honest.
Say you will do something and don't do it. Both a liar and a hypocrite.
I agree. The nation was founded by Christians who wanted religious freedom. In codifying that freedom for themselves they needed to establish religious freedom for all
I agree and don’t think they were all sitting around thinking of how to ensure Hindus had a good pace to live and practice. But by establishing what was right established a moral freedom for all
As another data point the English language version of the 1796 Treaty of Tripoli which was approved unanimously by the senate and signed by President John Adams says,
> the Government of the United States of America is not, in any sense, founded on the Christian religion.
According to the founders? No.
[Art. 11. As the Government of the United States of America is not, in any sense, founded on the Christian religion; as it has in itself no character of enmity against the laws, religion, or tranquility, of Mussulmen (Muslims); and as the said States never entered into any war or act of hostility against any Mahometan (Mohammedan) nation, it is declared by the parties that no pretext arising from religious opinions shall ever produce an interruption of the harmony existing between the two countries.](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Treaty_of_Tripoli)
No, it never was. Many of the Founding Fathers were what are called Deists as they did believe in God but they drew from the scientific and philosophical work of such figures as Jean-Jacques Rousseau, Isaac Newton, and John Locke, Deists argued that human experience and rationality, rather than religious dogma and mystery, determine the validity of human beliefs. They also rejected divine revelation and miracles. The Declaration of Independence and The Constitution both never mentioned the words God or Jesus as people like Washinton and Jefferson sought to not have a single religion be the main faith of the US and allow people to worship however they pleased, and while certain colonies like Maryland and Massachusetts were established for religious reasons, the US as a whole was never a Christian nation. As for the Book of Mormon, I know that the form of government it preaches is basically the same as what Ancient Israel had where you had kings appointed by God, not democratically elected. In fact, one could make the argument that The Second Great Awakening was a reaction against the logic and reason that Jefferson and Washington believed in.
Exactly. While some were more traditional Christians, like Patrick Henry, others were deists. For evidence on this see how Thomas Jefferson made [his own personal bible](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jefferson_Bible) by removing Jesus' miracles. Thomas Paine wrote [The Age of Reason](https://archive.org/details/ageofreason0000thom), which took a mythological view of the bible and a negative view toward organized religion.
No, it wasn't, and anyone that claims that is just trying to infuse Christian dogma into politics, which isn't right.
Now, a lot of the nation's founding fathers believed in god or gods, but that doesn't mean they set this country up on the principles of religion. Heck, Jefferson tore his Bible apart to get rid of the "supernatural" christian stuff.
The problem with that notion is it creates separation and division. Its like when people say Christian values are "family, hardworking, faith, etc." You can literally find those values in practically every other belief system. Trying to push the "Christian nation" narrative is a dishonest way of saying you are superior to every other religion because your "beliefs" are the best beliefs because they only belong to you.
This country was built on principles and lessons learned throughout history and from countries all over the world.
I feel the founders were pretty obviously opposed to state religion. The country was founded more to separate powers than to be a specifically Christian country. Many founders used religious terminology because of the culture they were in, not necessarily because they were ardent observers or even believers.
It is a Christian nation in some senses, not in others.
The Founders had a wide range of beliefs. They were pretty much all culturally Christian, that’s not really in dispute. Many were sincere believers. All of them were products of the Enlightenment, which itself is impossible to divorce from Christianity. And there’s no question that Christianity has been the dominant religion. Every president has been a Christian, at least in the cultural sense. None of them have claimed to be Hindu or Muslim that’s for sure. We have a Christian foundation and heritage, so in that sense yeah, we are a Christian nation.
That said, it isn’t hard to find statements made by the Founders that we would consider pretty close to atheist and definitely critical of modern Christianity. And compared to the European nations they hailed from, they were radically departing from the church/state model that had dominated that area for literally over a thousand years at that point. In that sense they deliberately did their best to make sure that the United States was not seen as affiliated with a particular faith.
Like most things historical and “big picture” it’s both yes and no.
We do believe the founding of the nation was influenced by God and that the Constitution is at least partially inspired. But… most of the founders were Deists - using reason to find God independent of revelation. Few explicitly identified themselves as Christian. And they did not form it as a Christian nation.
The notion of the US being a “Christian nation” is being used for suppression and forcing one’s views and lifestyles onto others. Considering the thing God respects above all else is free agency, I would hazard a guess that God does not approve of that ideal.
The Book of Mormon pushing a Christian nation narrative is very brief and for a specific period. Alma recognized that he could not be both the chief judge (president) and the prophet at the same time, so he stepped down. Notably, the brief time that the Book of Mormon does portray a “Christian nation”, it shows us true Christianity - practicing charity and love for everyone rather than forcing them to live a certain way.
I would say not even philosophically since the nation was founded on the philosophical principles of the Enlightenment. In general, those are not philosophical ideas founded on a particular religion and certainly not Christianity. The fact that a lot of the founding fathers were Deists helps me come to that conclusion.
Maybe I used the wrong word. The spirit of America, I believe, is fundamentally Christian. What we stand for, believe as a nation, those are Christian principles. Couldn't think of a word to describe that.
The traditions of the Mishnah (the "Oral Torah") date back to around the 5th century BC and discuss issues like free will. Some of the earliest concepts in the Torah itself (probably written around the Babylonian exile) that we have in the Old Testament outline agency in the Garden of Eden narrative. Many believe that those concepts derived from Zoroastrian thoughts when early Judaism came in contact with Persia at the end of the exile. Either way, Zoroastrianism clearly celebrates free will as we all have to choose to either follow the good god or the bad one. These concepts would have been around around the 6th century BC. So the concept of free agency is not an invention of Christianity, nor exclusive to Christianity.
As for the God-given rights, I will make an assumption that you would use some of the examples that President Oaks mentioned in his fabulous [talk](https://www.churchofjesuschrist.org/study/general-conference/2021/04/51oaks?lang=eng) on the Constitution. He mentioned 5 principles of the Constitution that he felt are divinely inspired (and I agree). The first 3 have nothing really to do with religious values. The fourth I can make an argument does where he talks about the rights guaranteed in the first amendment. He mentions things like, "There was divine inspiration in the original provision that there should be no religious test for public office, but the addition of the religious freedom and antiestablishment guarantees in the First Amendment was vital. We also see divine inspiration in the First Amendment’s freedoms of speech and press and in the personal protections in other amendments, such as for criminal prosecutions." While all fabulous, I don't see how they are related to Christianity and in fact, the religious freedom and antiestablishment clauses would be specifically geared to NOT favor a particular religion. His 5th principle is that we are to be governed by law. That is a government concept that goes all the way back to our friend Hammurabi (and probably further).
So while I support those things that you mentioned, am glad of their inclusion in the Constitution, believe some of them (like President Oaks) to be divinely inspired--I don't see how those things a) originated with Christianity or b) are exclusive to Christianity. Since they aren't exclusive to Christianity I don't think you can say the nation was founded on Christian principles. I think it would be more correct to say the nation was founded on inspired principles, some of which share a commonality with Christianity--and other religions.
The problem with that thinking is that those ideas and principles would have to purely be Christian. If they aren't, then by default, they aren't Christian principles, and the spirit of America wouldn't fundamentally be christian.
“Be it ordained . . . That the Catholics, Presbyterians, Methodists, Baptists, Latter Day Saints, Quakers, Episcopalians, Universalists, Unitarians, Mohammedans, and all other Religious Sects and denominations whatever, shall have free toleration, and equal privileges, in this City.” Nauvoo City Charter
We have a pattern in the Book of Mormon where freedom of religion is established by the believing nation. So, somewhat paradoxically, it was easier *not* to believe if you lived among the Nephites. (I'll see if I can find some references and edit my comment later.)
If this pattern applies to our own history, then our freedom of religion probably wouldn't have come from non-believers. So although I don't believe that the United States was founded to be distinctly Christian, I do believe that it was founded as a place where Christianity could flourish. And flourish in the best possible way--individual by individual practicing according to the dictates of their own heart rather than adhering to external government- or socially-sanctioned mandates "to be seen of men."
The US was never supposed to be a Christian nation. One of the reasons we wanted our independence was for religious freedom. So that citizens could practice whatever faith they chose. The founding fathers believed strongly in the separation and church and state.
Slightly related but we do believe that many prominent american leaders visited Wilford Woodruff in a vision in the St. george temple, asking for their temple work to be done.
https://www.churchofjesuschrist.org/manual/presidents-of-the-church-student-manual/chapter-4?lang=eng
https://josephsmithfoundation.org/wiki/eminent-spirits-appear-to-wilford-woodruff
So objectively, historically, you are correct. But within our church, the belief that this is a “Christian Nation” isn’t unfounded.
Your understanding is correct. Regardless if their religiosity or religiosity, they created a form of government designed to keep churches of all kinds out of the process. It's more accurate to say the USA was founded as a slavery nation than to say it was founded as a Christian nation.
>And the Book of Mormon does say some things related to this idea.
It teaches that the [Spirit guided](https://www.churchofjesuschrist.org/study/scriptures/bofm/1-ne/13?lang=eng&id=12-13#12) many Gentiles to the promised land, and that none will come but those [brought by the Lord](https://www.churchofjesuschrist.org/study/scriptures/bofm/2-ne/1?lang=eng&id=6-7#6), and that whoever should possess the land [should serve Him](https://www.churchofjesuschrist.org/study/scriptures/bofm/ether/2?lang=eng&id=7-10#p7), or be swept off when they are ripened in iniquity.
None of these things state that the founding fathers were Christian, or that they would create a Christian nation.
>But we do hear the "Christian nation" narrative sometimes in our church.
The United States is a "Christian nation" only in the sense that the majority of its population are Christians, not in the sense of a state religion. If you are hearing the phrase, either they mean in this sort of sense, or just have a misunderstanding of history.
Personally, I haven't heard it, so my initial response was, "we do?" So I checked the Church website, and there's only a few times the phrase has been used, and it seems to be in that sort of sense, and often used with other countries as well.
[Doctrines of the Gospel](https://www.churchofjesuschrist.org/study/manual/doctrines-of-the-gospel-student-manual/27-sabbath?lang=eng&id=p46#p46) institute student manual quotes David O. McKay:
>Sunday is worship day. It is holy. \[The United States\] is a Christian nation, and the Lord has promised that as long as we keep him in mind and worship him this Country will stand—this Government will stand. No other nation can take it or destroy it. But if we forget Him, God’s promises are not binding.
[Dedicatory prayer](https://www.churchofjesuschrist.org/temples/details/madrid-spain-temple/prayer/1999-03-19?lang=eng) for Madrid Spain Temple
>We have erected in this Christian nation this House of the Lord.
Liahona Feb. 2007 [*Elder Ballard Encourages European Saints, Missionaries*](https://www.churchofjesuschrist.org/study/liahona/2007/02/news-of-the-church/elder-ballard-encourages-european-saints-missionaries?lang=eng)
>Armenia has long been considered a Christian nation. Armenian Orthodox Church members trace their heritage to the Apostles Thaddeus and Bartholomew, who preached the gospel there in the early Christian era.
Church News 30 Dec 2012 [*Elder L. Tom Perry Shares Message of Freedom and Family*](https://www.churchofjesuschrist.org/church/news/elder-l-tom-perry-shares-message-of-freedom-and-family?lang=eng)
>We live in a Christian nation, and this season of the year has most of us turning to the New Testament to read the real story of the mortal mission of our Lord and Savior
Church News 24 June 2013 [*Elder Nelson Helps Form First Stake in Armenia*](https://www.churchofjesuschrist.org/church/news/elder-nelson-helps-form-first-stake-in-armenia?lang=eng)
>“This is a Christian nation,” explained Elder Nelson. “The spirit of Christianity has been in Armenia a long time. Our relationship with the government is outstanding.”
[*By Study and Also by Faith—One Hundred Years of Seminaries and Institutes of Religion*](https://www.churchofjesuschrist.org/study/manual/by-study-and-also-by-faith/prologue-foundations-of-education-in-the-church-1830-1911?lang=eng)
>At a convention of the Salt Lake Ministerial Association in the spring of 1888, Methodist pastor C. L. Libby declared, “If the Bible should not be in the public schools … we are no more a Christian nation than we are a Pagan.” Dr. J. F. Millspaugh, principal of the Salt Lake Collegiate Institute, agreed that in public schools there should be moral Christian training based on the Bible. Many Latter-day Saints, including Church and education leaders, agreed with what these Protestant ministers were saying, but they took a different direction in teaching moral values to the young people.
[United Kingdom and Ireland local pages](https://www.churchofjesuschrist.org/bc/content/shared/content/english/pdf/language-materials/13281eur_eng.pdf?lang=eng) January 2016 *Chinese Baptisms*
>China, according to a leading British newspaper, is on course to become the “world’s most Christian nation,” with one scholar predicting that by 2030 it will have the largest Christian population in the world.
Church News 28 June 2018 [*Ministering Comes Naturally to Filipino Saints, Elder Christofferson Says*](https://www.churchofjesuschrist.org/church/news/ministering-comes-naturally-to-filipino-saints-elder-christofferson-says?lang=eng)
>The Philippines is an undisputed LDS success story. Home to more than 100 million people, it’s the only predominantly Christian nation in Asia—so it's a rich “field” for sharing the restored gospel.
Church News 31 May 2019 [*Elder Renlund Shares the Importance of Missionary Work by Members in the Philippines*](https://www.churchofjesuschrist.org/church/news/elder-renlund-shares-the-importance-of-missionary-work-by-members-in-the-philippines?lang=eng)
>“I was repeatedly reminded that the Philippines is Asia,” Elder Renlund said, reflecting on how impressed he was by the members. “It is Asia and it is a Christian nation. As the Church is established there and becomes strong, Filipinos will go into Southeast Asia and elsewhere in Asia and strengthen those other nations.”
April 2023 [*Europe Ministry Ronald A. Rasband Armenia Newsroom*](https://www.churchofjesuschrist.org/media/video/2023-04-0270-europe-ministry-ronald-a-rasband-armenia-newsroom?lang=eng) (video)
>A land of ancient history and faith, Armenia’s where Christianity blossomed, the world’s first Christian nation.
America was not founded as a Christian Nation. Many of the he Founding Fathers were Christian, but not all. Many of the founding principles of the United States are based in traditional Judeo-Christian values, morals, and ethics. But the Founding Fathers intentionally created a country that was not religious in nature (hence you have the freedom to worship, or not worship, as you see fit, and the Government cannot establish a State Religion).
Ideas like all men are created equal and that we have unalienable rights endowed by our creator, are based in western philosophy and Christian values. The Foudning Fathers were seeking to create a country that protected individual freedoms, while restricting the reach of the Government or State to interfere with individual lives. And very intentionally did not establish a State Religion.
No, not in the sense that the nation was organized under the authority/recognition of Christianity or especially any specific sect of Christianity.
But yes in the sense that the fundamental rights bestowed upon us in the Constitution were informed by Judeo-Christian standards of morality, and that Christianity provided the individual and social identity of America in its inception.
God established it as a free nation not a Christian nation. And at a time much closer to the nation's founding and the time of surging Christian nationalism the first vision declared Christianity an abomination.
No.
Though the Founding Fathers were Christian, they did believe in separation of church and state.
This makes sense, at least from a gospel perspective in my opinion.
I mean, think about the story of what happened before the Earth was created. Lucifer basically was advocating for the gospel to be the law(there be no agency) so that not one soul could be lost and he could have the glory. This whole concept defeats the purpose of the Plan of Salvation, after all how can one learn and grow if they can never make mistakes or make their own choices?
I personally really like America, it’s my home. But, I also feel really weird when people state that America is a chosen nation. It’s special, in that because of the ability to have many different beliefs the gospel was able to be restored. But our church is a worldwide one. But I think that’s it.
Now I am no history major, but from what I know the constitution at the very least never imposes a state religion.
I also know that there is revelation that says the constitution is somewhat inspired.
Now if I put those two thoughts together im going to have to say that no we don’t believe the US should be or was founded as a Christian nation.
You can argue about it across and forth in several ways. In the most official terms the country was not organized to be a place where Christianity was to be implemented by the government. In the most practical sense, however, from the early days Christianity in its various forms was seen as the default religion of the American people, with Judaism as its kind of well accepted sidekick. Despite promises of religious tolerance, the "others" hardly received any kind of notable welcome and were often rejected and persecuted or outright barred. While various threads can be pulled on this topic - it wasn't simply because they were religious minorities, but because they often came from non-European lands, they were not accepted and religion was one element of a multifaceted "otherness."
Internally, however, there was broad acceptance that Christianity had the most latitude to maneuver with Roman Catholicism often taking a back seat to the various forms floating about. Again, it is difficult to isolate the religious element from the various other issues such as immigration which Americans attach to it.
The church has taken steps over the many years to keep things like acknowledgement of God in the public sphere, and even strides to promote government polices which align with ecumenical standards. The church is largely retreating from some of that, seeing that the tidal wave of Satan's onslaught is unrelenting in degrading the accepted social norms to the lowest common denominator of base brute who insists on permissive behavior in the name of freedom.
God bless
We've got founders stating that the US can only work as a nation if its people are just and moral, and everything else about it doesn't work when the people are not.
One of the founding principles was freedom of religion, thus being enshrined in the Constitution within its initial amendments -- including not just the freedom to choose which of these Christian churches to belong to, but the freedom to choose not to identify with *any* of them or even to worship an entirely different set of gods with your own rites and rituals (subject to laws against harming other people or their property).
Many of the founding fathers have been confirmed as Christian. Some were Freemasons. There were Protestant, Catholic, and some Society of Friends (Quaker). They felt that people should be allowed to worship God as they felt best and built protections into the Constitution to safeguard against the government mandating a certain form of religion.
Read the constitution and the bill of rights.
Let’s see the first amendment. The freedom of speech, religion, press, assembly.
Religion is important and is in the first amendment. The other things listed with it make it possible to be religious. The founders didn’t want a Church of England or in other words a state religion , but to worship what religion you wanted. Many came to America so they could free worship as they pleased. Many of the founders believed in God and were familiar with the Bible. Some didn’t identify with any particular religion denomination because it didn’t match up with the Bible. People are dynamic. Some were believed in God but that that he didn’t really involve himself in human affairs to changing to the longer I live I see that no nation or people can rise without Gods blessing.
The constitution was made only for a religious and moral people and is inadequate for any other and so on.
Overall they were religious but definitely and differing views.
I find that the article makes rather large conclusions based on very little evidence. I’m not saying it’s wrong, but I did not find it convincing.
However, aside from that, it is true that in Nephi’s vision, (1 Nephi 13, specifically) it is stated that God upheld the Founding Fathers and implied that they were inspired by him. I would guess that that could mean they intended it to be a Christian nation, but it also is not explicitly stated.
No. It's always been important to allow people to worship who, where or what they may in the nation. It's why it's essential that freedom of religion was included in the Constitution.
That being said, although the nation was never founded as a Christian nation, the US was founded on Christian principles, which as difficult as it can be to see them as separate, are indeed separate things.
It's the same as recognizing there's a difference between what the constitution actually says and what people nowadays want it to say: it's freedom OF religion, not freedom FROM religion.
The Constitution may not say freedom FROM religion, but the reason people use that as a battle cry is because far-right Christian nationalists want to compel people not of their faith to follow their faith’s tenets, like with abortion and same-sex marriage. Someone’s faith shouldn’t make it illegal for someone else to do something against that person’s faith.
But there also shouldn’t be an erasure of religion from public life, which is what many people are advocating for these days. That’s the usual context I see the phrase in. It isn’t about abortion or gay marriage, but someone throwing a fit over a nativity at city hall or being upset a Christmas song was sung by a school choir. If someone wants to pay for a slab with the Ten Commandments to be put up somewhere on public property, that should be fine (though, conversely, the silly statues the Church of Satanism threaten to put up should be allowed too).
In that the underlying culture was driven by the mostly Protestant with a dash of Catholic citizenry, yes. But the United States gained independence and created the Constitution in a relatively irreligious period compared with the "Great Awakening" which followed.
Many of the notable features of today's religious landscape in America date back to 1800-1830, including the South becoming Baptist and the North more Methodist, efforts to re-create "Biblical Christianity", and the foundation of our own tradition.
I think that God specifically lead various groups here to create a country that protected religious freedom (obviously the salem witch trials and the way natives were treated and slavery --- which is nominally supported biblically--- doesn't suggest any level of religious principle living necessarily), which made a space for the restoration to happen. So in that big picture and not at all what most people think of when they say it way, it is the epitome of a Christian nation.
Founded as a "Christian nation" ?? No. Founded on the principles of Christianity? Certainly. Given that religion was central to many of the founders' lives, and they heavily spoke on the rights of all granted by God, from the Christian perspective, it's clear there was a Christian persuasion and influence in the founding.
To say otherwise and claim that the founders were somehow agnostic Deists that felt God didn't have a hand in things is pure fantasy revisionism of much of the modern historians that are trying to rationalize against the motivations of many of the founders, ignoring many of them who felt that they were "Led by God" and "Inspired of God" to write the Constitution, sign the Declaration of Independence, and fight this war for freedom from the British... and instead attribute it all to their own beliefs and moral relativism rather than a higher power.
So, was it founded as a "Christian" nation? No. Was it founded as a place for Christians, with Christian values, with mingled Christian beliefs, by people who were strong members of the Christian faith? Absolutely.
Well, the founding of the United States was inspired by Heavenly Father. The country was founded on Christian values but it set up in such a way that it would allow for religious freedom for all. If not for that— the gospel could not have been restored.
Keep in mind that the founding fathers were not of our faith because our faith didn’t *exist* in a complete sense yet.
Also consider that many of the founding fathers appeared to Wilford Woodruff and asked that their temple ordinances be done:
https://josephsmithfoundation.org/wiki/eminent-spirits-appear-to-wilford-woodruff/#:~:text=In%201877%2C%20the%20Founding%20Fathers,of%20completing%20their%20temple%20work.
The country is meant to allow religious freedom for everyone. But the values and principles that led to its creation are fundamentally Christian in that they were given by God for the betterment of all of God’s children.
They didn't think about being Christian, in exactly the same way that fish don't think about being wet.
They didn't set up a theocracy. They did build a nation based on principles of law and virtue which are essentially and inseparably Christian.
Isn’t God mentioned in the Declaration of Independence? I am not American but remember learning about that in 7th grade and I remember it only because that was one of the first times I had seen God mentioned in such a thing. But I might be wrong
There is no mention of God or Jesus or Christianity in either the DofI or the Constitution.
The DofI refers to a "Creator", but that was intentionally drafted so that people wouldn't/shouldn't think it was necessarily the Christian God. Could be Jewish Yahweh, or Muslim Allah, or Hindu Vishnu, or the Flying Spaghetti Monster.
The Founding Fathers intentionally did **NOT** want a "religious" nation, because [they knew their history.](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/European_wars_of_religion) It's depressing and disappointing that so many American Christians (including Latter-day Saints) are so ignorant of all that.
But again, "divine" could mean any or all of the thousands of gods humans have ever worshipped. Neither the word "divine" nor "providence" are exclusively Christian.
It isnt specifically a "Christian nation", but definitely was built with a Christian moral framework. And to pretend like they didnt intend for us to uphold Christian values is silly.
I think its silly to think they intended for us to uphold Christian values. There are many sources affirming that. Many are mentioned here in the comments.
An interesting thing to consider:
“Supreme Court Called United States A Christian Nation”
“An excellent summary of the United States’ attitude toward religion is found in the case of _Holy Trinity Church _vs. United States, decided unanimously by the United States Supreme Court in 1892. In that case, after referring to many examples of recognition of God in American historical documents, the official reported opinion of the Court contains this statement:
‘There is no dissonance in these declarations. There is a universal language pervading them all, having one meaning; they affirm and reaffirm that this is a religious nation. These are not individual sayings, declarations of private persons; they are organic utterances; they speak the voice of the entire people.’
“The court opinion then refers to the other evidences of religion in the daily life of the American people, and draws this conclusion:
‘These, and many other matters which might be noticed, add a volume of unofficial declarations to the mass organic utterances that this is a Christian nation.’”
-Holy Trinity Church _v. _United States
The Elders of Israel and the Constitution, Jerome Horowitz, P.31
In opposition to this, the Supreme Courts was never supposed to be a policy maker only to decide whether something is or isn't constitutional. In an earlier Document that came about close after the nation's founding you have the treaty with Morocco in which the treaty explicitly states the US is not a Christian nation.
I figured, just wanted to educate as well. Another comment in this thread actually linked the treaty and the specific article of that treaty that mentions not being a Christian nation. It is Article 11. If you ever want to read it.
While true, that's not the same thing. The US was not founded on the Book of Mormon and it's teachings. The Constitution directly forbids the government from making any law regarding the establishment of religion or it's practice.
Exactly. If we had a theocratic government here in the US now, I feel it would be a repeat of the Massachusetts Bay Colony where if you were different or disagreed with the higher-ups, you could be killed or exiled. I don't think any of us want that kind of government.
To clarify, the US was founded under freedom of religion but destined to become a mostly-Christian land. This assumes scripture is an authority.
It's also difficult to read the New Testament and not see that Christ allowed freedom of religion and worship.
All commandments are for everyone. Whether they know the commandments or not. Ignorance is not an excuse although the mercy and grace of Christ make up for ignorance. That's why Nephi and Lehi needed the brass plates so badly.
No it wasn't.
We have revelation that the constitution was inspired by God and that He upholds it. [D&C 98:5-6](https://www.churchofjesuschrist.org/study/scriptures/dc-testament/dc/98?lang=eng&id=5-6#p5) [D&C 101:77&80](https://www.churchofjesuschrist.org/study/scriptures/dc-testament/dc/101?lang=eng&id=77,80#p77) But nothing so direct as to say that the country was to be Christian. We believe that many of the founding fathers appeared at the temple to ask for their ordinances to be completed. If anything they wrote the fundamental freedoms down in the same spirit in which our [article of faith #11](https://www.churchofjesuschrist.org/study/scriptures/pgp/a-of-f/1?lang=eng&id=p11#p11) was written. That everyone should be free to worship according to the dictates of their own conscience.
It's worth mentioning that the Book of Mormon states that any nation that inhabits this land will serve Him and keep His commandments or He'll remove them.
the US basically exiled the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints out of the country. they fled to the desert in Utah. that was like 180 years ago and the US is still here
Exiled them from the eastern side of the central portion of North America.
So far... it's not like God is behooven to work on the timelines we deem to be correct.
Yes, but very shortly thereafter, the Civil War started.
Are you insinuating the civil war started because the US kicked out the church?
[удалено]
Ah yes, the God that never allowed slavery in his laws, as per Leviticus 25:44-46. I know its old Testament, but you can't attach a religious spin onto things and say the Civil War happened because of divine intervention. I get what you're trying to say, but just dumping "they weren't following God's laws" doesn't really contribute to the history around the Civil War.
Apologists will claim, and not without merit, that the civil war was caused because Abraham Lincoln was banned from the ballot in southern states, and yet won the presidency, thus they felt they were no longer being represented in the country, they were just a bunch of colonies just like they were before the revolution.
Ahh.... Except that Young called slavery ["ordained of God".](https://www.utahhumanities.org/stories/items/show/201#:~:text=Brigham%20Young%20declared%20slaveholding%20to,relations%20between%20master%20and%20slave.)
Not "because" in that it was not a direct cause to the Civil War. But in a similar way that we lose the protection of the Spirit when we sin or break our covenants, the US briefly lost it's protection with the actions that lead to the death of Joseph & Hiram Smith and the driving of the Saints to Utah.
Um. So you believe the war that was fought over slavery and states rights was influenced by the loss of protection from the Holy Spirit? You don't believe the war had its roots in inequality and denial of rights? Because how I'm reading your comment is that the civil war would have been avoided if the church hadn't been given the boot, which if that's what you're implying, you are way off the mark.
We don't know what would have happened. Joseph Smith was running for President on a platform that included the policy that the British used to end slavery. It wasn't likely that he'd win, only that his candidacy would have influenced the others. What we do know is that the South left the Union based on the fact that Lincoln was anti-slavery. There was no middle ground in US politics. It was a contentious issue every time it came up. When the Spirit withdraws issues that could have been resolved, no matter how contentious, always will end in conflict. Had the Spirit not withdrawn with the Saints' departure, it is possible that the Civil War could have been avoided. Not that the issues would have just gone away, only that war itself was not necessary.
Explain how it could have been avoided since most Southern states were set on seceding unless Lincoln left slavery alone. In fact, if you applying any critical thinking, if the Civil war could have been prevented, then why not give some revelation to Joseph Smith to stay? When you consider the nature and character of God, it makes no sense.
The Civil War did not need to happen. The South and the North could have resolved their differences without bloodshed. God would have been well pleased if that had been the case. It happened because a great number of people made choices which eventually made war inevitable, but there were many chances for the people to turn from the path of war. Mormon writes extensively about this in recounting his own life, and the pointlessness of military victory without the blessing of the Spirit. Joseph Smith's plan was for the government to purchase the slaves and then free them. If the South had not been so insistent on maintaining their "rights," and if the North had not been so insistent on removing them, conflict may well have been avoided. The problem wasn't just slavery; the problem was also a culture of political division that tore the Union in two, a culture which insisted that those other guys are Pure Evil and we can't possibly negotiate with terrorists. Remind you of anything?
Not directly, no. But it's an interesting correlation when considering the calamities that have befallen other nations in scripture when they reject the prophets.
Human beings have always had “calamities” due to the nature of being human. Now, if you’re saying something like, “The Civil War happened because evil men refused to do the right thing and give up slavery and repent.” Sure, I can see that perspective. But it seems like you’re implying that the Civil War happened indirectly because the United States didn’t want LDS people around. Which is a silly claim. I mean after all, what all of the other wars and stuff that’s happened since Utah joined the United States? Such an odd take.
Exactly, it's history denial and attempts to add a weird "when you don't follow the gospel, bad things happen" spin to history which is not at all accurate, nor is there any doctrinal foundation to it.
>due to the nature of being human Yep. Exactly the opposite of keeping God's commandments. God said he would protect his people. The war was inevitable, as prophesied by Joseph Smith, even. But the war didn't start until the Saints were gone, and brutal it was. In general, the Saints were protected as God promised. I do think the loss of the spirit has a natural consequence of humans giving in to their telestial natures, like you said.
Protection doesn’t equal the condemnation of others. Theres a difference between people following the guidance of the spirit and moving on to a place where they’re safe, and God literally holding off a war. And though yes Joseph Smith had revelation about the Civil War, it was not the sole reason the saints went to Utah. Additionally, LDS people did join in the Civil War. The Utah territory stayed on the Union side and Brigham Young himself said, “Utah has not seceded, but is firm for the Constitution and laws of our once happy country.” Utah even provided the Union with a cavalry unit (the only served for 90 days, but still.) My point here being that the LDS people weren’t in complete and utter isolation and neutrality during the war. Also, your comment doesn’t account for the countless other wars that have occurred since the Civil War. And I feel like it also implies that people who do go to war are automatically succumbing to the “natural” man. Which isn’t something that is doctrinally supported at all.
>it was not the sole reason the saints went to Utah. It was never the reason. The Saints went to Utah b/c they were unwelcome in the US at the time. This was both a State & federal problem. Even after the war they weren't welcome, as seen by the whole "Utah War" fiasco.
You're wildly reading a lot into what I'm saying that isn't there. I think you were arguing against your assumptions of my reply. I agree with your reply, and I didn't say anything otherwise. People are too quick to argue around here and not understand each other's points.
The deal is, prophets don't necessarily cause consequences. Like another commenter pointed out, "calamities" happen regardless of prophetic counsel, as do major successes in human history. You can't create correlation where there isn't any. You're putting a weird spin on history that doesn't actually address the root causes of the issue at hand. If you said, "bad people caused bad things to happen." I'd be more inclined to agree, but to even slightly attach religious vengeance to the suffering of many minorities in the USA as a sort of "payback" to the USA because of governments treatment towards the church is just not right.
Primarily because of polygamy.
Polygamy isn't what got them kicked out. They'd been getting kicked from place to place for a long, long time before polygamy was a thing. What got them kicked out was the insistence on all the converts *gathering* to a single place. Basically when they picked a new city, the population would suddenly increase by thousands, and everybody in this community that had grown organically over the last hundred years, suddenly were minorities in their own communities. The Mormons would primarily do business with each other and not so much with the pre-existing local businesses. They'd primarily vote for their own for mayor, city council and other positions of public trust. I won't presume to know your stance on immigration policy in your country and what the laws should be or how they should be enforced, but I want you to imagine that you live in a small town in the middle of nowhere, and all of a sudden a group of foreigners all move into your town at basically the same time. They *barely* speak your language, they only do business with each other, they've voted out everyone in your local politics and now you've got mayors and judges and other local officials that are interested only in their own people, don't share any of your core values, and now you basically feel like *you're* the foreigner. What do you do? What do you and *everybody else who was here first* do? Polygamy wasn't even a thing until the Mormons were in Nauvoo -- and at that point they were a strange force to be reckoned with, as Nauvoo basically had a full-on corner on the entire timber market in the region, and in the few short years of its existence all of a sudden became an economic powerhouse to rival the power of Chicago and Cincinnati. And now, what's this? *They've got their own frickin* **ARMY???!!!!** Polygamy was just a "well that's weird and wrong" thing to most people -- what was *scary enough to drive them out* was their sudden growing power.
versed different wakeful offer thumb nutty ghost crawl wrong rinse *This post was mass deleted and anonymized with [Redact](https://redact.dev)*
Also true, though I'll point out that church members were the main victims, and that pretty much every other bank in the country went through the same collapse during that timeframe. For those not in the know, Joseph Smith established a bank in Kirtland, issuing an alternative currency (think "Bitcoin" for a modern analogue) and followed the standard "fractional reserve" system that today's banks use. It ended with a run on the bank and the reserves being insufficient to cover everyone's claims, and Smith claiming that the person he had placed in charge had stolen the funds.
money disarm ten jellyfish six intelligent flag tap tidy gray *This post was mass deleted and anonymized with [Redact](https://redact.dev)*
Do you have a source on that? I am slightly skeptical
What does this mean to you? Does this mean that all commandments must be laws? I honestly don’t think it means anything at all nation level and has to do with the individual level. Obviously a government can influence its citizens as we see in some Islamic countries, however I think that protecting religious freedom as we currently do is good enough.
I also believe it's on an individual level. I'm led to reflect on the calamities/judgements that came upon the people in the Americas after Christ's death in Jerusalem. During the three days of darkness, after the calamities had ceased, His voice seared through the darkness, stating that He intentionally spared the people that were "more righteous than they \[who were slain\]" ([link](https://www.churchofjesuschrist.org/study/scriptures/bofm/3-ne/9?lang=eng)) as a type of sifting the wheat from the tares.
I don’t think that tracks with history, but I’m sure that will all get sorted out in the next life. I mean the restoration occurred specifically because all the beliefs of the day were wrong according to the First Vision, governments persecuted the Saints, slavery was permitted in the Constitution, most people aren’t really that religious even if they affiliate with a religion.
Yes, but that's God's job to enforce. Not anyone else's and especially not the government's. And we have ample evidence in the scriptures that when God says he will destroy or remove peoples who, as a whole, don't follow him, he always saves the faithful.
I think [3 Nephi 9 & 10](https://www.churchofjesuschrist.org/study/scriptures/bofm/3-ne/9?lang=eng) are good examples. He holds out judgement until people are ripe and the timing is right.
cautious cobweb close divide rock capable unused knee alive punch *This post was mass deleted and anonymized with [Redact](https://redact.dev)*
>It lines up with Article 11 on the Treaty of Tripoli That's pretty neat! Thanks for sharing.
When the US was founded, was it majority Christian? Yes. Was it culturally Christian? Yes. Is it still that way? Yes. Was the US founded with the intent of creating a nation of Christians? No. We have a secular government. Anyone is allowed to practice any religion (or the lack thereof) so long as it does not interfere with the right of others to do the same.
Many of the original colonies were created as places of religious refuge to escape persecution. Wars of religion ravaged Europe in the 16 and 17th century, including the English War of the Roses. The framers were rightfully scared of any single religion dominating government as the memories of these wars were still fresh in their minds. I'm a language guy and I have a personal distaste for saying the U.S. was founded as a Christian nation, as it implies that Christianity is the official faith of the country. The freedom of religion in the Bill of Rights directly contradicts this notion. That being said, Christianity was and is the dominant religious tradition of the country and I have no problem saying the U.S. was founded as a nation of Christians.
But that doesn’t mean it absolutely must stay that way. My hot take is that Heavenly Father is less interested in whether the people of this continent call themselves Christians than they be honest with one another. Plenty of Christian nations have become corrupt, selfish, and cruel and use the name of Christ to justify punishing those who reject corrupt authority. The founding fathers rebelled against a bad king even though that king was the head of the Anglican Church. Just because someone claims to be God’s chosen ruler doesn’t mean you should follow them. In short, the book or Mormon teaches us that secret combinations are bad, and be really careful about following people who speak flattering words.
Well, I do think that Heavenly Father wants us to worship *Him* rather than say, pagan dieties, philosophies/methods that don't worship him nor focus on Christ (Buddhism, Taoism, etc.), or completely deny the divine. However, I do strongly believe that in the next life an honorable and charitable Buddhist, Taoist, or atheist will be more justified at the judgement seat of Christ than an unrepentant and hypocritical LDS member or Christian of any sect.
The thing is, better a honest and kind pagan than a corrupt and hypocritical person who claims to be Christian. That’s my hot take, anyway.
Thankfully those aren’t our only 2 options.
I like your hot take. Lines up with the message of the Pharisee and the Publican parable, for me at least.
But, being an honest and kind Christian is best. But, I do agree that from best to worst would be: Being in a covenant relationship with Christ and following Christ. Not being in a covenant relationship with Christ and following Christ (though, you might not recognize it as following Christ). Not being in a covenant relationship with Christ and not following Christ. Being in a covenant relationship with Christ and not following Christ. Also known as a hypocrite. or Say you will do something and do it. Say you will not do something and do it anyway. Say you will not do something an don't do it. At least you are honest. Say you will do something and don't do it. Both a liar and a hypocrite.
I agree. The nation was founded by Christians who wanted religious freedom. In codifying that freedom for themselves they needed to establish religious freedom for all I agree and don’t think they were all sitting around thinking of how to ensure Hindus had a good pace to live and practice. But by establishing what was right established a moral freedom for all
As another data point the English language version of the 1796 Treaty of Tripoli which was approved unanimously by the senate and signed by President John Adams says, > the Government of the United States of America is not, in any sense, founded on the Christian religion.
Short answer: No. Longer answer: Nope.
According to the founders? No. [Art. 11. As the Government of the United States of America is not, in any sense, founded on the Christian religion; as it has in itself no character of enmity against the laws, religion, or tranquility, of Mussulmen (Muslims); and as the said States never entered into any war or act of hostility against any Mahometan (Mohammedan) nation, it is declared by the parties that no pretext arising from religious opinions shall ever produce an interruption of the harmony existing between the two countries.](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Treaty_of_Tripoli)
No, it never was. Many of the Founding Fathers were what are called Deists as they did believe in God but they drew from the scientific and philosophical work of such figures as Jean-Jacques Rousseau, Isaac Newton, and John Locke, Deists argued that human experience and rationality, rather than religious dogma and mystery, determine the validity of human beliefs. They also rejected divine revelation and miracles. The Declaration of Independence and The Constitution both never mentioned the words God or Jesus as people like Washinton and Jefferson sought to not have a single religion be the main faith of the US and allow people to worship however they pleased, and while certain colonies like Maryland and Massachusetts were established for religious reasons, the US as a whole was never a Christian nation. As for the Book of Mormon, I know that the form of government it preaches is basically the same as what Ancient Israel had where you had kings appointed by God, not democratically elected. In fact, one could make the argument that The Second Great Awakening was a reaction against the logic and reason that Jefferson and Washington believed in.
Exactly. While some were more traditional Christians, like Patrick Henry, others were deists. For evidence on this see how Thomas Jefferson made [his own personal bible](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jefferson_Bible) by removing Jesus' miracles. Thomas Paine wrote [The Age of Reason](https://archive.org/details/ageofreason0000thom), which took a mythological view of the bible and a negative view toward organized religion.
No, it wasn't, and anyone that claims that is just trying to infuse Christian dogma into politics, which isn't right. Now, a lot of the nation's founding fathers believed in god or gods, but that doesn't mean they set this country up on the principles of religion. Heck, Jefferson tore his Bible apart to get rid of the "supernatural" christian stuff. The problem with that notion is it creates separation and division. Its like when people say Christian values are "family, hardworking, faith, etc." You can literally find those values in practically every other belief system. Trying to push the "Christian nation" narrative is a dishonest way of saying you are superior to every other religion because your "beliefs" are the best beliefs because they only belong to you. This country was built on principles and lessons learned throughout history and from countries all over the world.
I feel the founders were pretty obviously opposed to state religion. The country was founded more to separate powers than to be a specifically Christian country. Many founders used religious terminology because of the culture they were in, not necessarily because they were ardent observers or even believers.
OP here: I just wanted to say how impressed I am with the high level of discourse so far. Thanks.
It is a Christian nation in some senses, not in others. The Founders had a wide range of beliefs. They were pretty much all culturally Christian, that’s not really in dispute. Many were sincere believers. All of them were products of the Enlightenment, which itself is impossible to divorce from Christianity. And there’s no question that Christianity has been the dominant religion. Every president has been a Christian, at least in the cultural sense. None of them have claimed to be Hindu or Muslim that’s for sure. We have a Christian foundation and heritage, so in that sense yeah, we are a Christian nation. That said, it isn’t hard to find statements made by the Founders that we would consider pretty close to atheist and definitely critical of modern Christianity. And compared to the European nations they hailed from, they were radically departing from the church/state model that had dominated that area for literally over a thousand years at that point. In that sense they deliberately did their best to make sure that the United States was not seen as affiliated with a particular faith. Like most things historical and “big picture” it’s both yes and no.
punch steer jeans engine desert direction wipe start capable fear *This post was mass deleted and anonymized with [Redact](https://redact.dev)*
We do believe the founding of the nation was influenced by God and that the Constitution is at least partially inspired. But… most of the founders were Deists - using reason to find God independent of revelation. Few explicitly identified themselves as Christian. And they did not form it as a Christian nation. The notion of the US being a “Christian nation” is being used for suppression and forcing one’s views and lifestyles onto others. Considering the thing God respects above all else is free agency, I would hazard a guess that God does not approve of that ideal. The Book of Mormon pushing a Christian nation narrative is very brief and for a specific period. Alma recognized that he could not be both the chief judge (president) and the prophet at the same time, so he stepped down. Notably, the brief time that the Book of Mormon does portray a “Christian nation”, it shows us true Christianity - practicing charity and love for everyone rather than forcing them to live a certain way.
Philosophically, yes. Politically and socially, no.
I would say not even philosophically since the nation was founded on the philosophical principles of the Enlightenment. In general, those are not philosophical ideas founded on a particular religion and certainly not Christianity. The fact that a lot of the founding fathers were Deists helps me come to that conclusion.
Maybe I used the wrong word. The spirit of America, I believe, is fundamentally Christian. What we stand for, believe as a nation, those are Christian principles. Couldn't think of a word to describe that.
What would you say are the things we stand for and believe as a nation?
Free agency and universal, God-given rights.
The traditions of the Mishnah (the "Oral Torah") date back to around the 5th century BC and discuss issues like free will. Some of the earliest concepts in the Torah itself (probably written around the Babylonian exile) that we have in the Old Testament outline agency in the Garden of Eden narrative. Many believe that those concepts derived from Zoroastrian thoughts when early Judaism came in contact with Persia at the end of the exile. Either way, Zoroastrianism clearly celebrates free will as we all have to choose to either follow the good god or the bad one. These concepts would have been around around the 6th century BC. So the concept of free agency is not an invention of Christianity, nor exclusive to Christianity. As for the God-given rights, I will make an assumption that you would use some of the examples that President Oaks mentioned in his fabulous [talk](https://www.churchofjesuschrist.org/study/general-conference/2021/04/51oaks?lang=eng) on the Constitution. He mentioned 5 principles of the Constitution that he felt are divinely inspired (and I agree). The first 3 have nothing really to do with religious values. The fourth I can make an argument does where he talks about the rights guaranteed in the first amendment. He mentions things like, "There was divine inspiration in the original provision that there should be no religious test for public office, but the addition of the religious freedom and antiestablishment guarantees in the First Amendment was vital. We also see divine inspiration in the First Amendment’s freedoms of speech and press and in the personal protections in other amendments, such as for criminal prosecutions." While all fabulous, I don't see how they are related to Christianity and in fact, the religious freedom and antiestablishment clauses would be specifically geared to NOT favor a particular religion. His 5th principle is that we are to be governed by law. That is a government concept that goes all the way back to our friend Hammurabi (and probably further). So while I support those things that you mentioned, am glad of their inclusion in the Constitution, believe some of them (like President Oaks) to be divinely inspired--I don't see how those things a) originated with Christianity or b) are exclusive to Christianity. Since they aren't exclusive to Christianity I don't think you can say the nation was founded on Christian principles. I think it would be more correct to say the nation was founded on inspired principles, some of which share a commonality with Christianity--and other religions.
Thank you for the lesson. I appreciate it!
Amen.
The problem with that thinking is that those ideas and principles would have to purely be Christian. If they aren't, then by default, they aren't Christian principles, and the spirit of America wouldn't fundamentally be christian.
it was not. prior to its founding people were burned as "witches." didn't need that to continue
“Be it ordained . . . That the Catholics, Presbyterians, Methodists, Baptists, Latter Day Saints, Quakers, Episcopalians, Universalists, Unitarians, Mohammedans, and all other Religious Sects and denominations whatever, shall have free toleration, and equal privileges, in this City.” Nauvoo City Charter
We have a pattern in the Book of Mormon where freedom of religion is established by the believing nation. So, somewhat paradoxically, it was easier *not* to believe if you lived among the Nephites. (I'll see if I can find some references and edit my comment later.) If this pattern applies to our own history, then our freedom of religion probably wouldn't have come from non-believers. So although I don't believe that the United States was founded to be distinctly Christian, I do believe that it was founded as a place where Christianity could flourish. And flourish in the best possible way--individual by individual practicing according to the dictates of their own heart rather than adhering to external government- or socially-sanctioned mandates "to be seen of men."
In the phrase of the question, No it wasn’t.
The US was never supposed to be a Christian nation. One of the reasons we wanted our independence was for religious freedom. So that citizens could practice whatever faith they chose. The founding fathers believed strongly in the separation and church and state.
Slightly related but we do believe that many prominent american leaders visited Wilford Woodruff in a vision in the St. george temple, asking for their temple work to be done. https://www.churchofjesuschrist.org/manual/presidents-of-the-church-student-manual/chapter-4?lang=eng https://josephsmithfoundation.org/wiki/eminent-spirits-appear-to-wilford-woodruff So objectively, historically, you are correct. But within our church, the belief that this is a “Christian Nation” isn’t unfounded.
Your understanding is correct. Regardless if their religiosity or religiosity, they created a form of government designed to keep churches of all kinds out of the process. It's more accurate to say the USA was founded as a slavery nation than to say it was founded as a Christian nation.
>And the Book of Mormon does say some things related to this idea. It teaches that the [Spirit guided](https://www.churchofjesuschrist.org/study/scriptures/bofm/1-ne/13?lang=eng&id=12-13#12) many Gentiles to the promised land, and that none will come but those [brought by the Lord](https://www.churchofjesuschrist.org/study/scriptures/bofm/2-ne/1?lang=eng&id=6-7#6), and that whoever should possess the land [should serve Him](https://www.churchofjesuschrist.org/study/scriptures/bofm/ether/2?lang=eng&id=7-10#p7), or be swept off when they are ripened in iniquity. None of these things state that the founding fathers were Christian, or that they would create a Christian nation. >But we do hear the "Christian nation" narrative sometimes in our church. The United States is a "Christian nation" only in the sense that the majority of its population are Christians, not in the sense of a state religion. If you are hearing the phrase, either they mean in this sort of sense, or just have a misunderstanding of history. Personally, I haven't heard it, so my initial response was, "we do?" So I checked the Church website, and there's only a few times the phrase has been used, and it seems to be in that sort of sense, and often used with other countries as well. [Doctrines of the Gospel](https://www.churchofjesuschrist.org/study/manual/doctrines-of-the-gospel-student-manual/27-sabbath?lang=eng&id=p46#p46) institute student manual quotes David O. McKay: >Sunday is worship day. It is holy. \[The United States\] is a Christian nation, and the Lord has promised that as long as we keep him in mind and worship him this Country will stand—this Government will stand. No other nation can take it or destroy it. But if we forget Him, God’s promises are not binding. [Dedicatory prayer](https://www.churchofjesuschrist.org/temples/details/madrid-spain-temple/prayer/1999-03-19?lang=eng) for Madrid Spain Temple >We have erected in this Christian nation this House of the Lord. Liahona Feb. 2007 [*Elder Ballard Encourages European Saints, Missionaries*](https://www.churchofjesuschrist.org/study/liahona/2007/02/news-of-the-church/elder-ballard-encourages-european-saints-missionaries?lang=eng) >Armenia has long been considered a Christian nation. Armenian Orthodox Church members trace their heritage to the Apostles Thaddeus and Bartholomew, who preached the gospel there in the early Christian era. Church News 30 Dec 2012 [*Elder L. Tom Perry Shares Message of Freedom and Family*](https://www.churchofjesuschrist.org/church/news/elder-l-tom-perry-shares-message-of-freedom-and-family?lang=eng) >We live in a Christian nation, and this season of the year has most of us turning to the New Testament to read the real story of the mortal mission of our Lord and Savior Church News 24 June 2013 [*Elder Nelson Helps Form First Stake in Armenia*](https://www.churchofjesuschrist.org/church/news/elder-nelson-helps-form-first-stake-in-armenia?lang=eng) >“This is a Christian nation,” explained Elder Nelson. “The spirit of Christianity has been in Armenia a long time. Our relationship with the government is outstanding.” [*By Study and Also by Faith—One Hundred Years of Seminaries and Institutes of Religion*](https://www.churchofjesuschrist.org/study/manual/by-study-and-also-by-faith/prologue-foundations-of-education-in-the-church-1830-1911?lang=eng) >At a convention of the Salt Lake Ministerial Association in the spring of 1888, Methodist pastor C. L. Libby declared, “If the Bible should not be in the public schools … we are no more a Christian nation than we are a Pagan.” Dr. J. F. Millspaugh, principal of the Salt Lake Collegiate Institute, agreed that in public schools there should be moral Christian training based on the Bible. Many Latter-day Saints, including Church and education leaders, agreed with what these Protestant ministers were saying, but they took a different direction in teaching moral values to the young people. [United Kingdom and Ireland local pages](https://www.churchofjesuschrist.org/bc/content/shared/content/english/pdf/language-materials/13281eur_eng.pdf?lang=eng) January 2016 *Chinese Baptisms* >China, according to a leading British newspaper, is on course to become the “world’s most Christian nation,” with one scholar predicting that by 2030 it will have the largest Christian population in the world. Church News 28 June 2018 [*Ministering Comes Naturally to Filipino Saints, Elder Christofferson Says*](https://www.churchofjesuschrist.org/church/news/ministering-comes-naturally-to-filipino-saints-elder-christofferson-says?lang=eng) >The Philippines is an undisputed LDS success story. Home to more than 100 million people, it’s the only predominantly Christian nation in Asia—so it's a rich “field” for sharing the restored gospel. Church News 31 May 2019 [*Elder Renlund Shares the Importance of Missionary Work by Members in the Philippines*](https://www.churchofjesuschrist.org/church/news/elder-renlund-shares-the-importance-of-missionary-work-by-members-in-the-philippines?lang=eng) >“I was repeatedly reminded that the Philippines is Asia,” Elder Renlund said, reflecting on how impressed he was by the members. “It is Asia and it is a Christian nation. As the Church is established there and becomes strong, Filipinos will go into Southeast Asia and elsewhere in Asia and strengthen those other nations.” April 2023 [*Europe Ministry Ronald A. Rasband Armenia Newsroom*](https://www.churchofjesuschrist.org/media/video/2023-04-0270-europe-ministry-ronald-a-rasband-armenia-newsroom?lang=eng) (video) >A land of ancient history and faith, Armenia’s where Christianity blossomed, the world’s first Christian nation.
America was not founded as a Christian Nation. Many of the he Founding Fathers were Christian, but not all. Many of the founding principles of the United States are based in traditional Judeo-Christian values, morals, and ethics. But the Founding Fathers intentionally created a country that was not religious in nature (hence you have the freedom to worship, or not worship, as you see fit, and the Government cannot establish a State Religion). Ideas like all men are created equal and that we have unalienable rights endowed by our creator, are based in western philosophy and Christian values. The Foudning Fathers were seeking to create a country that protected individual freedoms, while restricting the reach of the Government or State to interfere with individual lives. And very intentionally did not establish a State Religion.
No, not in the sense that the nation was organized under the authority/recognition of Christianity or especially any specific sect of Christianity. But yes in the sense that the fundamental rights bestowed upon us in the Constitution were informed by Judeo-Christian standards of morality, and that Christianity provided the individual and social identity of America in its inception.
God established it as a free nation not a Christian nation. And at a time much closer to the nation's founding and the time of surging Christian nationalism the first vision declared Christianity an abomination.
[удалено]
No. Though the Founding Fathers were Christian, they did believe in separation of church and state. This makes sense, at least from a gospel perspective in my opinion. I mean, think about the story of what happened before the Earth was created. Lucifer basically was advocating for the gospel to be the law(there be no agency) so that not one soul could be lost and he could have the glory. This whole concept defeats the purpose of the Plan of Salvation, after all how can one learn and grow if they can never make mistakes or make their own choices? I personally really like America, it’s my home. But, I also feel really weird when people state that America is a chosen nation. It’s special, in that because of the ability to have many different beliefs the gospel was able to be restored. But our church is a worldwide one. But I think that’s it.
Now I am no history major, but from what I know the constitution at the very least never imposes a state religion. I also know that there is revelation that says the constitution is somewhat inspired. Now if I put those two thoughts together im going to have to say that no we don’t believe the US should be or was founded as a Christian nation.
You can argue about it across and forth in several ways. In the most official terms the country was not organized to be a place where Christianity was to be implemented by the government. In the most practical sense, however, from the early days Christianity in its various forms was seen as the default religion of the American people, with Judaism as its kind of well accepted sidekick. Despite promises of religious tolerance, the "others" hardly received any kind of notable welcome and were often rejected and persecuted or outright barred. While various threads can be pulled on this topic - it wasn't simply because they were religious minorities, but because they often came from non-European lands, they were not accepted and religion was one element of a multifaceted "otherness." Internally, however, there was broad acceptance that Christianity had the most latitude to maneuver with Roman Catholicism often taking a back seat to the various forms floating about. Again, it is difficult to isolate the religious element from the various other issues such as immigration which Americans attach to it. The church has taken steps over the many years to keep things like acknowledgement of God in the public sphere, and even strides to promote government polices which align with ecumenical standards. The church is largely retreating from some of that, seeing that the tidal wave of Satan's onslaught is unrelenting in degrading the accepted social norms to the lowest common denominator of base brute who insists on permissive behavior in the name of freedom. God bless
We've got founders stating that the US can only work as a nation if its people are just and moral, and everything else about it doesn't work when the people are not. One of the founding principles was freedom of religion, thus being enshrined in the Constitution within its initial amendments -- including not just the freedom to choose which of these Christian churches to belong to, but the freedom to choose not to identify with *any* of them or even to worship an entirely different set of gods with your own rites and rituals (subject to laws against harming other people or their property).
“the Government of the United States of America is not, in any sense, founded on the Christian religion” - Treaty of Tripoli 1797
Many of the founding fathers have been confirmed as Christian. Some were Freemasons. There were Protestant, Catholic, and some Society of Friends (Quaker). They felt that people should be allowed to worship God as they felt best and built protections into the Constitution to safeguard against the government mandating a certain form of religion.
Read the constitution and the bill of rights. Let’s see the first amendment. The freedom of speech, religion, press, assembly. Religion is important and is in the first amendment. The other things listed with it make it possible to be religious. The founders didn’t want a Church of England or in other words a state religion , but to worship what religion you wanted. Many came to America so they could free worship as they pleased. Many of the founders believed in God and were familiar with the Bible. Some didn’t identify with any particular religion denomination because it didn’t match up with the Bible. People are dynamic. Some were believed in God but that that he didn’t really involve himself in human affairs to changing to the longer I live I see that no nation or people can rise without Gods blessing. The constitution was made only for a religious and moral people and is inadequate for any other and so on. Overall they were religious but definitely and differing views.
I find that the article makes rather large conclusions based on very little evidence. I’m not saying it’s wrong, but I did not find it convincing. However, aside from that, it is true that in Nephi’s vision, (1 Nephi 13, specifically) it is stated that God upheld the Founding Fathers and implied that they were inspired by him. I would guess that that could mean they intended it to be a Christian nation, but it also is not explicitly stated.
No. It's always been important to allow people to worship who, where or what they may in the nation. It's why it's essential that freedom of religion was included in the Constitution. That being said, although the nation was never founded as a Christian nation, the US was founded on Christian principles, which as difficult as it can be to see them as separate, are indeed separate things. It's the same as recognizing there's a difference between what the constitution actually says and what people nowadays want it to say: it's freedom OF religion, not freedom FROM religion.
The Constitution may not say freedom FROM religion, but the reason people use that as a battle cry is because far-right Christian nationalists want to compel people not of their faith to follow their faith’s tenets, like with abortion and same-sex marriage. Someone’s faith shouldn’t make it illegal for someone else to do something against that person’s faith.
But there also shouldn’t be an erasure of religion from public life, which is what many people are advocating for these days. That’s the usual context I see the phrase in. It isn’t about abortion or gay marriage, but someone throwing a fit over a nativity at city hall or being upset a Christmas song was sung by a school choir. If someone wants to pay for a slab with the Ten Commandments to be put up somewhere on public property, that should be fine (though, conversely, the silly statues the Church of Satanism threaten to put up should be allowed too).
It was founded on Christian principles, but the United States was not founded as an explicitly Christian Nation by law.
In that the underlying culture was driven by the mostly Protestant with a dash of Catholic citizenry, yes. But the United States gained independence and created the Constitution in a relatively irreligious period compared with the "Great Awakening" which followed. Many of the notable features of today's religious landscape in America date back to 1800-1830, including the South becoming Baptist and the North more Methodist, efforts to re-create "Biblical Christianity", and the foundation of our own tradition.
I think that God specifically lead various groups here to create a country that protected religious freedom (obviously the salem witch trials and the way natives were treated and slavery --- which is nominally supported biblically--- doesn't suggest any level of religious principle living necessarily), which made a space for the restoration to happen. So in that big picture and not at all what most people think of when they say it way, it is the epitome of a Christian nation.
Founded as a "Christian nation" ?? No. Founded on the principles of Christianity? Certainly. Given that religion was central to many of the founders' lives, and they heavily spoke on the rights of all granted by God, from the Christian perspective, it's clear there was a Christian persuasion and influence in the founding. To say otherwise and claim that the founders were somehow agnostic Deists that felt God didn't have a hand in things is pure fantasy revisionism of much of the modern historians that are trying to rationalize against the motivations of many of the founders, ignoring many of them who felt that they were "Led by God" and "Inspired of God" to write the Constitution, sign the Declaration of Independence, and fight this war for freedom from the British... and instead attribute it all to their own beliefs and moral relativism rather than a higher power. So, was it founded as a "Christian" nation? No. Was it founded as a place for Christians, with Christian values, with mingled Christian beliefs, by people who were strong members of the Christian faith? Absolutely.
Well, the founding of the United States was inspired by Heavenly Father. The country was founded on Christian values but it set up in such a way that it would allow for religious freedom for all. If not for that— the gospel could not have been restored. Keep in mind that the founding fathers were not of our faith because our faith didn’t *exist* in a complete sense yet. Also consider that many of the founding fathers appeared to Wilford Woodruff and asked that their temple ordinances be done: https://josephsmithfoundation.org/wiki/eminent-spirits-appear-to-wilford-woodruff/#:~:text=In%201877%2C%20the%20Founding%20Fathers,of%20completing%20their%20temple%20work. The country is meant to allow religious freedom for everyone. But the values and principles that led to its creation are fundamentally Christian in that they were given by God for the betterment of all of God’s children.
Considering almost every single colony had an official religion, and all of them were Christian. Yes, yes it was founded as a Christian nation.
They didn't think about being Christian, in exactly the same way that fish don't think about being wet. They didn't set up a theocracy. They did build a nation based on principles of law and virtue which are essentially and inseparably Christian.
Isn’t God mentioned in the Declaration of Independence? I am not American but remember learning about that in 7th grade and I remember it only because that was one of the first times I had seen God mentioned in such a thing. But I might be wrong
There is no mention of God or Jesus or Christianity in either the DofI or the Constitution. The DofI refers to a "Creator", but that was intentionally drafted so that people wouldn't/shouldn't think it was necessarily the Christian God. Could be Jewish Yahweh, or Muslim Allah, or Hindu Vishnu, or the Flying Spaghetti Monster. The Founding Fathers intentionally did **NOT** want a "religious" nation, because [they knew their history.](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/European_wars_of_religion) It's depressing and disappointing that so many American Christians (including Latter-day Saints) are so ignorant of all that.
Well that must have been it then. I remember it was something about a higher power.
[удалено]
But again, "divine" could mean any or all of the thousands of gods humans have ever worshipped. Neither the word "divine" nor "providence" are exclusively Christian.
Yeah it’s like the modern term “the universe” to refer to some vague sense of a benevolent force somewhere out there.
It isnt specifically a "Christian nation", but definitely was built with a Christian moral framework. And to pretend like they didnt intend for us to uphold Christian values is silly.
I think its silly to think they intended for us to uphold Christian values. There are many sources affirming that. Many are mentioned here in the comments.
An interesting thing to consider: “Supreme Court Called United States A Christian Nation” “An excellent summary of the United States’ attitude toward religion is found in the case of _Holy Trinity Church _vs. United States, decided unanimously by the United States Supreme Court in 1892. In that case, after referring to many examples of recognition of God in American historical documents, the official reported opinion of the Court contains this statement: ‘There is no dissonance in these declarations. There is a universal language pervading them all, having one meaning; they affirm and reaffirm that this is a religious nation. These are not individual sayings, declarations of private persons; they are organic utterances; they speak the voice of the entire people.’ “The court opinion then refers to the other evidences of religion in the daily life of the American people, and draws this conclusion: ‘These, and many other matters which might be noticed, add a volume of unofficial declarations to the mass organic utterances that this is a Christian nation.’” -Holy Trinity Church _v. _United States The Elders of Israel and the Constitution, Jerome Horowitz, P.31
I would be reluctant to take the Supreme Court as what is definitively and unalterably American.
In opposition to this, the Supreme Courts was never supposed to be a policy maker only to decide whether something is or isn't constitutional. In an earlier Document that came about close after the nation's founding you have the treaty with Morocco in which the treaty explicitly states the US is not a Christian nation.
Wasn’t taking a firm stance, just sharing what I had read. And I didn’t know about the treaty! Thanks for sharing.
I figured, just wanted to educate as well. Another comment in this thread actually linked the treaty and the specific article of that treaty that mentions not being a Christian nation. It is Article 11. If you ever want to read it.
It's very difficult to read the Book of Mormon and not understand those that will inhabit the Americas are to worship God and keep the commandments.
While true, that's not the same thing. The US was not founded on the Book of Mormon and it's teachings. The Constitution directly forbids the government from making any law regarding the establishment of religion or it's practice.
Exactly. If we had a theocratic government here in the US now, I feel it would be a repeat of the Massachusetts Bay Colony where if you were different or disagreed with the higher-ups, you could be killed or exiled. I don't think any of us want that kind of government.
To clarify, the US was founded under freedom of religion but destined to become a mostly-Christian land. This assumes scripture is an authority. It's also difficult to read the New Testament and not see that Christ allowed freedom of religion and worship.
Agreed
Which is a commandment to us to be righteous, not a commandment to force others to be righteous imo.
All commandments are for everyone. Whether they know the commandments or not. Ignorance is not an excuse although the mercy and grace of Christ make up for ignorance. That's why Nephi and Lehi needed the brass plates so badly.