• Starting today August 7th, 2024, in order to post in the Married Couples, Courting Couples, or Singles forums, you will not be allowed to post if you have your Marital status designated as private. Announcements will be made in the respective forums as well but please note that if yours is currently listed as Private, you will need to submit a ticket in the Support Area to have yours changed.

Calvinism and the American Revolution

Cajun Huguenot

Cajun's for Christ
Aug 18, 2004
3,055
293
65
Cajun Country
Visit site
✟4,779.00
Faith
Protestant
Marital Status
Married
The great 19th century Baptist preacher Charles H. Spurgeon once said “That God predestines, and yet that man is responsible, are two facts that few can see clearly. They are believed to be inconsistent and contradictory; but they are not. The fault is in our weak judgment. Two truths cannot be contradictory to each other.”

I believe that one of the more important reasons why some folks deny this point is they have an unbiblical view of man, his nature and his relationship to God. It is natural that we chafe at the idea that man is not autonomous (literally means self-law) in his relationship to God. No created thing is autonomous. Only the Creator is and can be autonomous. All other beings are completely dependent on God for their continued existence.

I believe that the denial of God’s sovereignty (in the Calvinistic understanding of the word) is nothing less than an invasion of humanism into Christian thought. The rise of semi-pelagianism (non-Augustinianism) in the medieval Church and the rise of Arminianism (non-Calvinism) in post-Reformation Protestant Churches have lead to the decline of Christian culture and Christian influence in our society.

The Augustinian/Calvinistic understanding of God’s sovereignty was central to the Reformation and the cultures that sprang from the Reformation. Calvinism (actually the broader aspects of it known as Covenant theology) was a primary, and vital ingredient in the American Revolution. Non-Calvinistic Christian thought would have never rebelled against the British Crown.

George Bancroft (America’s most important 19th century historian) said this about Calvinism’s influence in the Revolution: "The Revolution of 1776, so far as it was affected by religion, was a Presbyterian measure. It was the natural outgrowth of the principles which the Presbyterianism of the Old World planted in her sons, the English Puritans, the Scotch Covenanters, the French Huguenots, the Dutch Calvinists, and the Presbyterians of Ulster."

The conservative American Roman Catholic scholar Russell Kirk said this “In colonial America, everyone with the rudiments of schooling knew one book thoroughly: The Bible. And the Old Testament mattered as much as the New, for the American colonies were founded in a time of renewed Hebrew scholarship, and the Calvinistic character of Christian faith in early America emphasized the legacy of Israel....” he also wrote “John Calvin's Hebrew scholarship, and his expounding of the doctrine of sin and human depravity, impressed the Old Testament aspect of Christianity more strongly upon America than upon European states or other lands where Christians were in the majority.”

The Roman Catholic Austrian scholar Erik von Kuehnelt-Leddihn said this "If we call the American statesmen of the late eighteenth century the Founding Fathers of the United States, then the Pilgrims and Puritans were the grandfathers and Calvin the great-grandfather. In saying this, one need not exclude the Virginians because Anglicanism has essentially Calvinistic foundations still recognizable in the Thirty-nine Articles, and the Pilgrim Fathers, like the Puritans generally, represented a kind of re-reformed Anglicanism. Though the fashionable eighteenth century Deism may have pervaded some intellectual circles, the prevailing spirit of Americans before and after the War of Independence was essentially Calvinistic . . .”

The greatest German historian of the 19th century Leopold von Ranke said, “John Calvin was the virtual founder of America

University of Chicago historian Carl Bridenbaugh said, “It is indeed high time we repossess the important historical truth that religion was a fundamental cause of the American Revolution." That religion was Calvinistic and was found mostly among the Presbyterians, Congregationalists, Baptist and even the Anglicans.

Ideas have consequences. American Evangelical Christians first abandoned their Calvinistic roots then they adopted a pessimistic eschatology (dispensational premillennialism). When these two things had happened the theological roots for American Christian culture was destroyed. America has lost her Christian theological foundations because American Christians first abandoned the theological foundations of America. That theological foundation is known as Covenant theology.

Coram Deo,
Kenith
 

frumanchu

God's justice does not demand second chances
Site Supporter
Apr 5, 2003
6,719
469
48
Ohio
✟85,280.00
Faith
Calvinist
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Libertarian
The 55 Constitutional Framers (from North to South):

John Langdon, Congregationalist (Calvinist)
Nicholas Gilman, Congregationalist (Calvinist)
Elbridge Gerry, Episcoplian (Calvinist)
Rufus King, Episcopalian (Calvinist)
Caleb Strong, Congregationalist (Calvinist)
Nathaniel Gorham, Congregationalist (Calvinist)
Roger Sherman, Congregationalist (Calvinist)
William Samuel Johnson, Episcopalian (Calvinist)
Oliver Ellsworth, Congregationalist (Calvinist)
Alexander Hamilton, Episcopalian (Calvinist)
John Lansing, Dutch Reformed (Calvinist)
Robert Yates, Dutch Reformed (Calvinist)
William Patterson, Presbyterian (Calvinist)
William Livingston, Presbyterian (Calvinist)
Jonathan Dayton, Episcopalian (Calvinist)
David Brearly, Episcopalian (Calvinist)
William Churchill Houston, Presbyterian (Calvinist)
Benjamin Franklin, Christian in his youth, Deist in later years, then back
to his Puritan background in his old age (his June 28, 1787 prayer at the
Constitutional Convention was from no "Deist")
Robert Morris, Episcopalian, (Calvinist)
James Wilson, probably a Deist
Gouverneur Morris, Episcopalian (Calvinist)
Thomas Mifflin, Lutheran (Calvinist-lite)
George Clymer, Quaker turned Episcopalian (Calvinist)
Thomas FitzSimmons, Roman Catholic
Jared Ingersoll, Presbyterian (Calvinist)
John Dickinson, Quaker turned Episcopalian (Calvinist)
George Read, Episcopalian, (Calvinist)
Richard Bassett, Methodist
Gunning Bedford, Presbyterian (Calvinist)
Jacob Broom, Lutheran
Luther Martin, Episcopalian, (Calvinist)
Daniel Carroll, Roman Catholic
John Francis Mercer, Episcopalian (Calvinist)
James McHenry, Presbyterian (Calvinist)
Daniel of St Thomas Jennifer, Episcopalian (Calvinist)
George Washington, Episcopalian (Calvinist; no, he was not a deist)
James Madison, Episcopalian (Calvinist)
George Mason, Episcopalian (Calvinist)
Edmund Jennings Randolph, Episcopalian (Calvinist)
James Blair, Jr., Episcopalian (Calvinist)
James McClung, ?
George Wythe, Episcopalian (Calvinist)
William Richardson Davie, Presbyterian (Calvinist)
Hugh Williamson, Presbyterian, possibly later became a Deist
William Blount, Presbyterian (Calvinist)
Alexander Martin, Presbyterian/Episcopalian (Calvinist)
Richard Dobbs Spaight, Jr., Episcopalian (Calvinist)
John Rutledge, Episcopalian (Calvinist)
Charles Cotesworth Pinckney, III, Episcopalian (Calvinist)
Abraham Baldwin, Congregationalist (Calvinist)
William Leigh Pierce, Episcopalian (Calvinist)
William Houstoun, Episcopalian (Calvinist)
William Few, Methodist


Even some "four score"-odd years later, the supposedly "non-christian"
Abraham Lincoln offered the positively Biblical and very Reformed
covenantal view of the Sovereign of the Nations and Ruler of history:


"It is the duty of nations, as well as of men, to own their dependence upon
the overruling power of God, to confess their sins and transgressions in
humble sorrow, yet with assured hope that genuine repentance will lead to
mercy and pardon. And to recognize the sublime truth announced in the Holy
Scriptures and proven by all history, that those nations are blessed whose
God is the Lord." (Abraham Lincoln, Lincoln's Thanksgiving Proclamation,
October 3, 1863.
 
Upvote 0

AndOne

Deliver me oh Lord, from evil men
Apr 20, 2002
7,477
462
Florida
✟28,628.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Calvinist
Marital Status
Married
I'm a "southern calvinist" and I love President Lincoln. Let it be known - I would have fought for the north during the civil war too! One's geography should never override doing the right thing - such as working to eradicate the evils of slavery!

Great thread here, btw! I was surprised that no one mentioned Johnathan Edwards - one of the greatest Calvinist preachers in our history whose writings and sermons had much influence just prior to the revolution.
 
Upvote 0

frumanchu

God's justice does not demand second chances
Site Supporter
Apr 5, 2003
6,719
469
48
Ohio
✟85,280.00
Faith
Calvinist
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Libertarian
Behe's Boy said:
I'm a "southern calvinist" and I love President Lincoln. Let it be known - I would have fought for the north during the civil war too! One's geography should never override doing the right thing - such as working to eradicate the evils of slavery!

Unfortunately, slavery was only the flashpoint issue of the war. The larger point of the war had to do with state authority vs federal authority.

The wrong side won.

Great thread here, btw! I was surprised that no one mentioned Johnathan Edwards - one of the greatest Calvinist preachers in our history whose writings and sermons had much influence just prior to the revolution.

Well, Edwards wasn't really a politician. Nor was Whitefield, Spurgeon, etc. But all were Calvinists.
 
Upvote 0

Cajun Huguenot

Cajun's for Christ
Aug 18, 2004
3,055
293
65
Cajun Country
Visit site
✟4,779.00
Faith
Protestant
Marital Status
Married
Behe's Boy said:
I'm a "southern calvinist" and I love President Lincoln. Let it be known - I would have fought for the north during the civil war too! One's geography should never override doing the right thing - such as working to eradicate the evils of slavery!

Great thread here, btw! I was surprised that no one mentioned Johnathan Edwards - one of the greatest Calvinist preachers in our history whose writings and sermons had much influence just prior to the revolution.

Greetings Behe's Boy,

I found you post interesting. I believe your thinking reflects that of most Americans today, including most Southerners.

Here is a link that I posted on Southern secession sometime back. YOu mah (or may not) find it interesting.
The Constitution and Secession

Coram Deo,
Kenith
 
Upvote 0

AndOne

Deliver me oh Lord, from evil men
Apr 20, 2002
7,477
462
Florida
✟28,628.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Calvinist
Marital Status
Married
Thanks Cajun -

Just as with modern "hot" issues - I will always pick the side that represents Biblical values best. Though I disagree with many of the modern day Republican fiscal policies - I generally vote pro-republican since they tend to support pro-Christian values such as being pro-life, anti gay marriage, etc. In other words I don't let my pocket book or my loyalty to my community (or the South) over-ride an issue that is so clearly black and white (wrong or right).

Slavery may have only been a flashpoint issue of the Civil war - but for me - a Christian - it would have been THE ISSUE. I will read the link Cajun posted and comment on it later.

God Bless
 
Upvote 0

Cajun Huguenot

Cajun's for Christ
Aug 18, 2004
3,055
293
65
Cajun Country
Visit site
✟4,779.00
Faith
Protestant
Marital Status
Married
Behe's Boy said:
Thanks Cajun -

Slavery may have only been a flashpoint issue of the Civil war - but for me - a Christian - it would have been THE ISSUE. I will read the link Cajun posted and comment on it later.

God Bless

Behe's Boy,

You are very welcome. You may want to read this article as well: Christianity, Slavery and the Antebellum South.

In Christ,
Kenith
 
Upvote 0

Reformationist

Non nobis domine sed tuo nomine da gloriam
Mar 7, 2002
14,273
465
52
✟44,595.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Single
Great thread everybody.

I'm not a history junkie (though I wish I was) and I don't wish to harp on the slavery issue but wasn't the Emancipation Proclamation limited to freeing the slaves of only those whose geographical fealty was with the states that seceded?

The reason I ask is that if that is true, claiming that you would have fought for the north because of their stance on slavery is a bit naive. There were plenty of nothern slave owners and as I said, if I'm not mistaken, the Emancipation Proclamation freed none of them.

God bless
 
Upvote 0

Reformationist

Non nobis domine sed tuo nomine da gloriam
Mar 7, 2002
14,273
465
52
✟44,595.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Single
Found this (from the Emancipation Proclamation):

Now, therefore I, Abraham Lincoln, President of the United States, by virtue of the power in me vested as Commander-in-Chief, of the Army and Navy of the United States in time of actual armed rebellion against the authority and government of the United States, and as a fit and necessary war measure for suppressing said rebellion, do, on this first day of January, in the year of our Lord one thousand eight hundred and sixty-three, and in accordance with my purpose so to do publicly proclaimed for the full period of one hundred days, from the day first above mentioned, order and designate as the States and parts of States wherein the people thereof respectively, are this day in rebellion against the United States, the following, to wit:

Arkansas, Texas, Louisiana, (except the Parishes of St. Bernard, Plaquemines, Jefferson, St. John, St. Charles, St. James Ascension, Assumption, Terrebonne, Lafourche, St. Mary, St. Martin, and Orleans, including the City of New Orleans) Mississippi, Alabama, Florida, Georgia, South Carolina, North Carolina, and Virginia, (except the forty-eight counties designated as West Virginia, and also the counties of Berkley, Accomac, Northampton, Elizabeth City, York, Princess Ann, and Norfolk, including the cities of Norfolk and Portsmouth[)], and which excepted parts, are for the present, left precisely as if this proclamation were not issued.

And by virtue of the power, and for the purpose aforesaid, I do order and declare that all persons held as slaves within said designated States, and parts of States, are, and henceforward shall be free; and that the Executive government of the United States, including the military and naval authorities thereof, will recognize and maintain the freedom of said persons.

And this:

President Abraham Lincoln issued the Emancipation Proclamation on January 1, 1863, as the nation approached its third year of bloody civil war. The proclamation declared "that all persons held as slaves" within the rebellious states "are, and henceforward shall be free."
Despite this expansive wording, the Emancipation Proclamation was limited in many ways. It applied only to states that had seceded from the Union, leaving slavery untouched in the loyal border states. It also expressly exempted parts of the Confederacy that had already come under Northern control. Most important, the freedom it promised depended upon Union military victory.

Just for the record, slavery should have never been acceptable, to anyone. I post this merely to enlighten those who may not know that the northern stance on slavery as espoused in the Emancipation Proclamation, though often confused with a more humane approach to the value of all human life, was primarily a political embargo against seceding territories.

Thought that might help.

God bless
 
Upvote 0

Cajun Huguenot

Cajun's for Christ
Aug 18, 2004
3,055
293
65
Cajun Country
Visit site
✟4,779.00
Faith
Protestant
Marital Status
Married
Reformationist said:
Great thread everybody.

I'm not a history junkie (though I wish I was) and I don't wish to harp on the slavery issue but wasn't the Emancipation Proclamation limited to freeing the slaves of only those whose geographical fealty was with the states that seceded?

The reason I ask is that if that is true, claiming that you would have fought for the north because of their stance on slavery is a bit naive. There were plenty of nothern slave owners and as I said, if I'm not mistaken, the Emancipation Proclamation freed none of them.

God bless

Lincoln's goal was to keep the United States in one piece no matter the cost.

Early on he offered the seceding states that he would work for a constitutional amendment guaranteeing the legality of Slavery in the Southern states If they would return to Union. Slavery was not the issue that Lincoln went to war over.

The Emancipation Proclamation freed no one. It only applied to those parts of the Confederacy under Confederate control. It did not apply to Union slave state (e.g. Maryland, Delaware) or to Confederate territory under Union control (Tennesse, SE Louisiana, etc...).

Deo Vindice,
Kenith

Ps. BTW General Grant maintained slves until forced to release them by the 13 Amendment. General Lee opposed slavery and had long before freed the slaves his wife had inherited.
 
Upvote 0

AndOne

Deliver me oh Lord, from evil men
Apr 20, 2002
7,477
462
Florida
✟28,628.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Calvinist
Marital Status
Married
Don,

Yea - I was trying to come at it from a personal point of view. I realize the Emancipation Proclamation was limited to the states which seceded - but - it still freed slaves - though it may not have been to all - it was a start. I'm not quite as naive as you might think and I stand by my statement never-the-less. From a modern perspective - banning partial birth abortion doesn't mean banning all abortions - but at least its a start.

Although slavery may not have been the issue Lincoln went to war over - it was still THE reason for many who did. I'm quite in agreement that the slavery issue was probably just a political hot button to get people fired up for the war - but who cares. It was the right thing to do. Obviously Generals Lee and Grant didn't go to war over the slavery issue - it still doesn't change the fact that many others did.
 
Upvote 0

Reformationist

Non nobis domine sed tuo nomine da gloriam
Mar 7, 2002
14,273
465
52
✟44,595.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Single
Behe's Boy said:
Don,

Yea - I was trying to come at it from a personal point of view. I realize the Emancipation Proclamation was limited to the states which seceded - but - it still freed slaves - though it may not have been to all - it was a start. I'm not quite as naive as you might think and I stand by my statement never-the-less. From a modern perspective - banning partial birth abortion doesn't mean banning all abortions - but at least its a start.

Although slavery may not have been the issue Lincoln went to war over - it was still THE reason for many who did. I'm quite in agreement that the slavery issue was probably just a political hot button to get people fired up for the war - but who cares. It was the right thing to do. Obviously Generals Lee and Grant didn't go to war over the slavery issue - it still doesn't change the fact that many others did.

First off, I apologize for intimating that you were naive. I meant no insult. I believe you are truly becoming a learned scholar of the reformed faith. All I was saying was that it is a naive approach to side with the North based on your feelings toward slavery, as if you and they collectively shared the same position regarding slavery. I agree that any effort put forth to improve the quality and equality of life for humanity is a good thing. I just didn't want you to be confused that their reason for outlawing slavery were as noble as many people think. As I said, it was merely a financial embargo meant to drive them into submission.

God bless
 
Upvote 0