David Barton is a Dolt (Biblically Plagiarized Constitution Edition)

Did you know the Constitution was actually all taken from the Bible? Well, if you didn’t know that, then you aren’t evangelical minister and amateur pseudo-historian David Barton.  Not only did Thomas Jefferson crib the Declaration of Independence from sermons preached in American pulpits prior to 1763, but the folks at the Constitutional Convention basically summarized the Bible’s commandments on good government in order to craft this country’s new Law of the Land?

Just watch!

Again, with the quick flip-through of Biblical passages. Let’s see if he does better here than he did with his claims about Biblical tax policy. I mean, surely we should recognize the fundamental concepts and specific details of our Constitution through the passages he’s been so kind as to provide (and set forth as proof of his thesis).  Election of representatives, no religious tests, the mechanics of passing a bill, civilian power over the military, the ability to tax, trial by jury, full faith clauses between the states — I mean, I’m sure it’s all there  and illuminated by Barton’s proof-texts.

So, what core value or fundamental mechanic will he explicate first?

Article 1, Sec. 8 – Uniform Immigration: This article of the Constitution deals with Legislative powers, and the section has a long litany of things Congress can pass laws on. One small item falls under this heading:

To establish an uniform Rule of Naturalization, and uniform Laws on the subject of Bankruptcies throughout the United States;

That’s an odd power to focus on (and note that it actually uses the word “Naturalization” rather than “Immigration”).  Now to the Bible verse.

Leviticus 19:34:  “The foreigner residing among you must be treated as your native-born. Love them as yourself, for you were foreigners in Egypt. I am the LORD your God.”

So on the one hand, Congress can establish uniform rules as to how one can become a citizen.  On the other hand, we have an injunction to treat foreigners in the country like those born here (with no proviso that they are actually seeking citizenship — does Tom Tancredo know about this Bible passage?).  Despite the fact that  both passages deal with foreigners in the country, there’s really nothing there in the Constitution that strikes me as being cribbed from Leviticus.  (The Bible doesn’t mention anything about bankruptcy, either.)

Article 2, Sec. 1 – President Natural-Born: Of all the various requirements  to be President that are listed in that section, Barton focuses on:

No person except a natural born Citizen, or a Citizen of the United States, at the time of the Adoption of this Constitution, shall be eligible to the Office of President.

Now, you wouldn’t think that a requirement that the leader of the nation be born of that nation would be all that unusual — but Barton asserts this section is actually taken from this passage:

Deuteronomy 17:15: “… be sure to appoint over you a king the LORD your God chooses. He must be from among your fellow Israelites. Do not place a foreigner over you, one who is not an Israelite.”

Surprisingly enough, the Israelites preferred not to have a foreign-born ruler.  On the other hand, an elected president is not a king to be appointed.  There’s nothing about the appointed king having to be at least 35 years old.  Nor is there provision for someone who was born outside of Israel (but having been in Israel for at least 14 years) at the time of this Deuteronomical law being stated. Nor is the President Constitutionally prohibited from acquiring horses, taking many wives, or acquiring gold and silver (Deut. 17:16-17).

In other words, aside from the rather common-sensical idea of only having a chief executive (if one may so call a king) be from this country, there’s nothing that leads one to believe that the Founders stole the role of the Presidency from Deuteronomy’s idea of kingship.

Article 3, Section 3 – Witnesses: This section talks about Treason — really, the only crime dealt with in the Constitution.  It notes:

No Person shall be convicted of Treason unless on the Testimony of two Witnesses to the same overt Act, or on Confession in open Court.

And then we have Barton’s “source” Bible passage:

Deuteronomy 17:6: “On the testimony of two or three witnesses a person is to be put to death, but no one is to be put to death on the testimony of only one witness.”

So the Constitution says two witnesses; the Bible says two or three.  The Constitution is talking about treason.  The Bible is talking about worshiping other Gods (Deut. 17:2-3).  The Constitution says Congress can decide what the punishment should be.  The Bible declares a death penalty.  Aside from all that, it’s practically the same!

Article 3, Section 3 – Attainder: Same section on Treason as above.

The Congress shall have power to declare the Punishment of Treason, but no Attainder of Treason shall work Corruption of Blood, or Forfeiture except during the Life of the Person attainted.

And for the Bible:

Ezekiel 18:20: “The one who sins is the one who will die. The child will not share the guilt of the parent, nor will the parent share the guilt of the child. The righteousness of the righteous will be credited to them, and the wickedness of the wicked will be charged against them.”

In the 18th Century, Bills of Attainder usually had the sentence of treason in them, commonly with the clause of “Corruption of the Blood,” meaning that the child of the traitor would not inherit the traitor’s goods.

Of course, the Lord is not restricted by such suggestions:

Deut. 5:9:  “Thou shalt not bow down thyself unto them [idols], nor serve them: for I the LORD thy God am a jealous God, visiting the iniquity of the fathers upon the children unto the third and fourth generation of them that hate me, …”

Deut. 23:2-3: “A bastard shall not enter into the congregation of the LORD; even to his tenth generation shall he not enter into the congregation of the LORD.An Ammonite or Moabite shall not enter into the congregation of the LORD; even to their tenth generation shall they not enter into the congregation of the LORD for ever:”

While I think it’s keen that Ezekiel and the Constitution both avoid tarring the child with the sins of the parent, the lessons of the Bible make it clear that the Lord doesn’t follow that particular rule.  I can’t see the Constitution as being Biblically inspired in this rather particular point.

Separation of Powers:  Barton abandons specific Constitutional provisions in his PowerPoint presentation to talk more about general concepts.  Here’s his Biblical source for the idea of vesting different powers (and checks and balances) among different groups within the government.

Jeremiah 17:9:  “The heart is deceitful above all things and beyond cure. Who can understand it?”

Um … I … have no idea  what Barton’s talking about here.  A review of all of Jeremiah 17, or even Jeremiah 19:7 and 9:17, give me nothing.  Check back with us, David, when our PPT slides become inerrant.

Three Branches of Government: Ah, this looks more promising …

Isaiah 33:22:  “For the LORD is our judge, the LORD is our lawgiver, the LORD is our king; it is he who will save us.”

Um … what?  A three-piece description of God as judge, lawgiver, king (roles that the, well, king held as a single person in Israel), in the midst of a chapter all about how Zion is nifty and God will protect it … is supposed to be the basis for the three branches of government? I mean, the fact that Britain had a monarch, parliament, and courts had nothing to do with it?

Tax Exemptions for Churches:  This isn’t actually in the Constitution, I point out.

Ezra 7:24:  “You are also to know that you have no authority to impose taxes, tribute or duty on any of the priests, Levites, musicians, gatekeepers, temple servants or other workers at this house of God.”

An interesting passage — and one that I’m sure that my church’s choir members and our organist will be glad  to hear about!

The passage is a letter from King Artaxerxes of Persia, letting the Israelites go back to Jerusalem, declaring the Israelites can take whatever money they want for sacrifice and rebuilding the temple. He is instructing the tax collectors of “Trans-Euphrates” not to tax the priesthood, et al., of Israel, but instead give them a bunch of money and other goods. Ezra the Priest is also given permission to kill, banish, fine, or imprison anyone who disobeys God’s or the King’s Laws.

Oddly enough, the Constitution doesn’t include anything about funding churches (the opposite, in fact, in the First Amendment), or punishing blasphemy or sins against holy law with much of anything.  It’s difficult to see how this passage inspired the Founders — who, in fact, exempted churches from taxes both for the charitable work they did and so that taxation couldn’t be used as a tool to persecute particular sects.

Republicanism:  Yes, not only is apparently Republicanism a core Constitutional value (though the Republican party didn’t exist until sixty years after the Constitution was written), but it’s also Biblical.  Who’da thunk?

So let’s hear it, Barton!  Let’s hear about how tax-cutting, military-spending, gay-bashing, union-busting, immigrant-demonizing, small-government, anti-communist, anti-Muslim, anti-science politicos are Biblically founded.

Exodus 18:21: “But select capable men from all the people—men who fear God, trustworthy men who hate dishonest gain—and appoint them as officials over thousands, hundreds, fifties and tens.”

BWAH-HA-HA-HA-HA …

Really? Really?  That’s all you got, Barton — the GOP as “capable men from all the people — men who fear God, trustworthy men who hate dishonest gain”?  Really?

David Barton is a dolt.