Glenn Beck, the Constitution and Deuteronomy

Chris Rodda is awesome.

This installment of my series debunking the American history lies told on Glenn Beck is about a study published in 1984 in The American Political Science Review, and how that study is misrepresented to make it appear that our founding documents were based on the Bible, especially the Book of Deuteronomy.

You’ll have to read the rest here…

No, Mr. Beck, Our Constitution is Not Based on the Book of Deuteronomy : Dispatches from the Culture Wars.


I found it interesting that the Federalists (you know, Washington, Adams, etc…) use the bible quite infrequently, but beyond that, once people step back away from their perception of history, one will see that when the bible was used it was used as other forms of literature. Many of the men, especially the leading men, of the Revolution were Enlightened Deists. Why is it so difficult to see and then understand that?

Enhanced by Zemanta
Joel L. Watts
Joel L. Watts holds a Masters of Arts from United Theological Seminary with a focus in literary and rhetorical criticism of the New Testament. He is currently a Ph.D. student at the University of the Free State, analyzing Paul’s model of atonement in Galatians. He is the author of Mimetic Criticism of the Gospel of Mark: Introduction and Commentary (Wipf and Stock, 2013), a co-editor and contributor to From Fear to Faith: Stories of Hitting Spiritual Walls (Energion, 2013), and Praying in God's Theater, Meditations on the Book of Revelation (Wipf and Stock, 2014).

One thought on “Glenn Beck, the Constitution and Deuteronomy

  1. Religion and patriotism, at least as they are commonly accepted, are both systems of belief with much (structurally) in common. They both tend to involve belief in something much greater than the individual, something to die for and to be defended against naysayers at all costs. For the religious patriot who is, like all of us, constantly constructing a worldview, it’s easy for religion and love of country to be melted together in such a way that both are distorted. Once one is committed to such a blended religious nationalism, or nationalistic religion, the desire to see Church and State as complementary friends makes rose-tinted religious readings of our national origins very attractive.

    The idea that many of our founding fathers were highly unchristian and/or slave-owners is highly offensive to the idea of a vague national religion where “founding fathers” are almost saints, men whose opinion may be invoked to make our ideological opponents go away. If we grapple with the faults, the deep faults, of our founding fathers, we will have to look carefully at what our patriotism is and what our faith is. And that’s scary.

    If you’re looking for high ratings on a radio show, it’s just easier to tell yourself and your audience what you already want to hear.

Leave a Reply, Please!