"judeo-Christian vs Greco-Roman influences and the American Revol

It was always a no-brainer to me that many of the values expressed by the american revolutionary movement were derived from the Greco-roman world. The abolition of kings, the foundation of a republic, democracy, etc.

Many individuals from the Christian Right believe that The United States was founded on "Judeo-Christian" priciples, period. NO DISCUSSION.

I don't deny that religion played a role in the revolution. In fact some people in England referred to it as a Presbyterian uprising.

Does anyone have any thoughts on these issues? Where can I find scholarly literature on this subject??

Many individuals from the Christian Right believe that The United States was founded on "Judeo-Christian" priciples, period. NO DISCUSSION.

The same people who believe the earth is 6000 years old despite all available scientific evidence to the contrary? I rest my case.

I'm not sure if you're going to get many recommendations on scholarly literature about the American revolution as this is a Roman forum. But there is plenty of books on democratic Athens and Republican Rome out there.

The same people who believe the earth is 6000 years old despite all available scientific evidence to the contrary? I rest my case.

 

 

I'm not sure if you're going to get many recommendations on scholarly literature about the American revolution as this is a Roman forum. But there is plenty of books on democratic Athens and Republican Rome out there.

I brought up the subject because I respect the opinions of those who are well-versed in Roman History. There are many Classical scholars, but few are willing to address the issue I brought up. There is no question in my mind that the Roman legacy lives today in the modern governments found in America and Europe.

You bring up a valid point in that it appears to be battle between faith and reason, similar to the "debates" on creationism.

Where can I find scholarly literature on this subject??

I can't give you any specific title to look for, but try to find something about the so called Grande tour. Most of the direct influence come from this tradition, while I believe that the more subtle parts come from ancient literature.

The foundation draws from both really. There are many elements of Christian influence in colonial America and the revolution - personally, I don't know anyone on the far right that completely excludes the historical influences. Some may tend to look more earnestly for Christian thought processes in early America, but the people I know on the deeper right don't view it as a mutually exclusive thing. Of course, there's also those people on the far left that seemingly refuse to think that Judeo-Christian values have any positive influence whatsoever.

In any case, the influence of the Roman republic on the American system of government is fairly clear. People who don't realize it can be informed. Anyone who seriously refutes the notion despite already having been informed should be disregarded as intellectually inferior. My opinion only of course.

Haven't read it, but you can try this.

http://www.amazon.com/Founders-Classics-Gr...t/dp/0674314263 Dig around within similar books and you're bound to find something.

Anyone who seriously refutes the notion despite already having been informed should be disregarded as intellectually inferior. My opinion only of course.

 

Haven't read it, but you can try this.

http://www.amazon.com/Founders-Classics-Gr...t/dp/0674314263 Dig around within similar books and you're bound to find something.

I must be surrounded by those who are intellectually inferior, as you put it.

I agree with you that the Bible was certainly influential, but there are many who cannot see beyond that, and believe that all american values originate exclusively from the Bible.

Thanks for the reference. He also has a more recent book "greeks and romans bearing gifts"

I was under the impression that when the U.S. was founded, the aim was to specifically dissociate the state from religious influences, judeo-Christian or otherwise. I believe that Thomas Jefferson would be revolving in his grave if he heard the conservative right banging on about America being founded as a christian nation. On the other hand...

'Every citizen should be a soldier. This was the case with the Greeks and Romans, and must be that of every free state.' - Thomas Jefferson

I was under the impression that when the U.S. was founded, the aim was to specifically dissociate the state from religious influences, judeo-Christian or otherwise. I believe that Thomas Jefferson would be revolving in his grave if he heard the conservative right banging on about America being founded as a christian nation. On the other hand...

 

'Every citizen should be a soldier. This was the case with the Greeks and Romans, and must be that of every free state.' - Thomas Jefferson

Independent of defined state church, yes, but not independent of Judeo-Christian value systems. Of course, more important to the revolution itself is political circumstance, English common law traditions and revolutionary commentators of the time such as Locke and the Cato Letters. Unquestionably, if we speak directly of the American revolution we see far less of a biblical influence than if we look at the entire colonial period. However, the revolutionary period is a sum of all the eras that preceded it.

I agree and would never advocate that the revolution was a Judeo-Christian event, but I believe it's impossible to disassociate the influence on the culture. Despite the religious affiliations of some prominent founders, it's easy to see the existence of "Providence" throughout their letters and documents. It was not the primary force, and again, I'm not suggesting it was. Many colonists arrived in the new world as a revolt of sorts against the Church of England (and others) heavily influencing American ideology, but the revolution was political, not religious.

The American Revoltion continued as

various sectors of the population excluded

from the fruits of the early revolutionary

years struggled for their rights under the

inspiration of the Declaration of Independence.

It's interesting that African Americans

cited the Old Testament prophets, not the Greeks

or the French Enlightenment philosophers,

in the quest to expand democracy.

Independent of defined state church, yes, but not independent of Judeo-Christian value systems.

But were these values uniquely Judeo-Christian, or more universal, i.e. present in the value systems of other cultures, both western and eastern? For example there were many values of the Greek philosophers (stoics among others) that were not inconsistent with the values of the Christians.

Independent of defined state church, yes, but not independent of Judeo-Christian value systems.

 

But were these values uniquely Judeo-Christian, or more universal, i.e. present in the value systems of other cultures, both western and eastern? For example there were many values of the Greek philosophers (stoics among others) that were not inconsistent with the values of the Christians.

I agree that there isn't necessarily an inconsistency with either value system. However, it doesn't mean that the influences in the colonies should be ignored. Without delving too deeply the Puritan influence on the northeast is one that comes to mind immediately. The relationship between the colonial Puritans and the crown was strained throughout the colonial period. Summarizing here: they aligned themselves with anti establishment sentiment throughout the colonial period (the Glorious Revolution for example). Nearer to the time of the American revolution, New England Puritans were often at odds with Britain over the encroachment of the Episcopal Church, against their religious preferences. Their was a natural distrust among New Englanders when it came to their religious rights against the will of the crown. Boston, it should be noted, was the common man launching point of the revolutionary movement.

Puritanism was influenced by Revivalism which led to the Great Awakening of the 1740's - creating some sense of solidarity among the colonies. There are many who disagree with the idea of the "Great Awakening" but there is little question that there was an increased level of evangelism and politicizing of pulpits. The "preachers" of the era were often in the forefront of local revolutionary movements.

As a bit of an aside... While education was not limited to the northeast in colonial America, it's there that the modern system of educating children in an organized fashion took its roots. The Puritans were very much pro-education and literacy - a necessity in order to read and properly interpret the bible. Education was of course not limited to the colonial northeast, but can we dismiss that much of the written revolutionary rhetoric took hold in the very same place. Coincidence or not?

Another thought while driving home... The USA was undoubtedly founded as a Christian nation - not a theocracy of course, but a nation made up of Christian citizens. While the 1st amendment of the Constitution intends to protect religious freedoms, it was surely nvever intended to be interpreted as to exclude Christianity from the mainstream. It was the fear of federal sponsorship of a particular church over another (Catholic, Baptist, Episcopal, Lutheran, etc.) therefore limiting the right to worship freely, that was the most important aspect. NEVER (in my opinion) was it intended to imply a secular society... nor did it originally apply to individual states, but only to the federal government. It's interpretation today, while certainly valid in many cases, does not necessarily relate to what it meant at the founding. It is absolutely unquestionable that the vast majority of the revolutionary Americans were Christians, and there was little concern over such distant religions as Islam, Hindu, Buddhism etc. in their immediate future. There was however, a very real concern over one powerful church exerting its influence over another.

Without delving too deeply the Puritan influence on the northeast is one that comes to mind immediately. ...

Puritanism was influenced by Revivalism which led to the Great Awakening of the 1740's - creating some sense of solidarity among the colonies. There are many who disagree with the idea of the "Great Awakening" but there is little question that there was an increased level of evangelism and politicizing of pulpits. The "preachers" of the era were often in the forefront of local revolutionary movements. ...

....The Puritans were very much pro-education and literacy - a necessity in order to read and properly interpret the bible. Education was of course not limited to the colonial northeast, but can we dismiss that much of the written revolutionary rhetoric took hold in the very same place. Coincidence or not?

The puritans are a somewhat misunderstood group. Originally it referred to those who thought the church should be purged of all Roman influence, thereby purifying it. As more religious sects moved into the colonies, it became a more inclusive term for a wider range of protestant groups. There is a perception today that they were intolerant, narrorow-minded, sanctimonious, witch hunters. In reality they were very well educated not only in matters of the sciptures, but also in secular matters. Many of them learned Latin and Greek. They no doubt studied Classical History, Literature, Philosophy, Mathematics, and Science.

Do you think that the "Great Awakening" was a reaction to the enlightenment?

The American Revoltion continued as

various sectors of the population excluded

from the fruits of the early revolutionary

years struggled for their rights under the

inspiration of the Declaration of Independence.

 

It's interesting that African Americans

cited the Old Testament prophets, not the Greeks

or the French Enlightenment philosophers,

in the quest to expand democracy.

The colonists were not severely oppressed by the British, whereas the African Americans were slaves. Their access to intellectual literature was limited. Slave owners may have encouraged them to read the Bible as a means of controlling them. Are you familiar with Nietzsche's concept of the Master Morality and Slave Morality?

http://py111.wordpress.com/2008/02/14/niet...slave-morality/

And many Native Americans were fiercely independent and resistant to conversion to Christianity.

The native american chief, Metacomet chose the name King Philip after Philip II of Macedon because he was more impressed by the history of the ancient Greeks than he was with the Bible. He was a warrior, and he no doubt thought that "turn the other cheek" was a sign of weakness.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Metacomet

It