(Disclaimer: This transcript is auto-generated and may contain mistakes.)

One of America's most important founders was a man named Charles Thompson, who was said to have been closer to the events and people of the American Revolution than any other man of that era. Thompson was the congressional secretary from 1774 to 1789, all the way through the Revolution and the establishment of the federal government. He was also the man who made the final decisions for the design of the Great Seal of the United States, which can now be found on the back of America's dollar bill. Once the new American Republic was being founded, Thompson made a detailed history of the events that took place during the Revolution and of the men who were being celebrated as heroes across the country. Though he was compelled repeatedly to publish this history, Thompson declined. No, he said, I ought not, for I should contradict all the histories of the great events of the Revolution. Let the world admire the supposed wisdom and valor of our great men. He said, I shall not undeceive future generations. As a result, Thompson eventually destroyed his manuscript, and what may have been the truest account of the American Revolution was lost for all time. It might be said that any serious investigation into America's history should begin with Thompson's story and his decision not to undeceive future generations. What did Thompson mean? What was he hiding? And since we are the future generation, what have we been deceived about? I believe it's so important that we as Christians expose this wicked spirit of Antichrist among the founding fathers and not bring these guys into our churches and teach our children and our families and our brethren that these men were some kind of Christian heroes when they weren't Christian heroes at all. They were denying the gospel of our Lord. So our battle is not a political battle. The reason that men like David Barton want to take the founders and go into churches and try to convince you that these guys were Christians is because they want you to become entangled in the politics of this world. And to get your eyes and your focus off the spiritual battle that the scriptures tell us is the real fight that we're in. Today, the founding fathers of America are perhaps the most famous men in the world for setting forth a new form of government that has been the marvel of the modern age. But in the discussion over whether America was founded as a Christian nation, it is important to divide her history. Most agree that the pilgrims who landed at Plymouth in 1620 were undoubtedly Christians who built their cities and schools based on the teachings of the Bible. Yet 150 years would pass before the United States was founded as a result of the American Revolution. Because of the Christian influence early on, the revolutionary philosophies have been embraced in what might be called patriotic Christianity. Patriotic Christianity, which is the idea of America being founded as a Christian nation. And so we have many Christians who are going forward and they're being compelled because of this information about the founding fathers, they're told, well, the founders of the American Revolution, these were Christian men and that what they were trying to do was to set up a Christian nation. And therefore, we should honor their example and their philosophy by fighting for Christianity in America and to do so at a political level. Because the men who represent this information, men like David Barton and others who are representing this information and who are telling us that the founders were Christians, they don't simply want to prove that these men were Christians. What they want to do is they want to tell us that these men are Christians and then springboard from that into telling us that we need to get involved with American politics. We need to go out and vote for a Christian president. We need to go vote for Christian governors and congressmen and so on and become political activists because supposedly America was founded as a Christian nation. And the teachings of the founding fathers are being used in churches, they're being used in our home schools and so on to teach our children how Christian men think and operate in government. So our children are being taught that these men, men like Washington and Jefferson and Benjamin Franklin and others who are of the founding era, that their teaching, their example and those things that they declared, that these are all based on Christianity. And that these are Christian teachings and Christian principles that they're setting forth and therefore we should embrace them in the church, we should embrace them as somehow or other being really equal to the teachings of the Bible. But are they? That's the question that we're addressing in this film. Our journey begins with the revolutionary era and by examining the philosophies and beliefs of the men who were the chief influence in the founding of the new American republic. While often overlooked or marginalized by modern historians, the American Revolution in many ways begins with Thomas Paine. The Marquis de Lafayette said, a free America without her Thomas Paine is unthinkable. Thomas Paine wrote the pamphlet Common Sense and it is stated if you study historians, historians relate, that the pamphlet Common Sense was the writing that brought about the Declaration of Independence. In fact, Thomas Paine uses that phrase in Common Sense. Paine wrote that nothing can settle our affairs so expeditiously as an open and determined declaration for independence. What's interesting is that Thomas Paine at that point was not even an American citizen. He was an Englishman, he was in England and he met Benjamin Franklin and he was a radical guy and he was a writer and Franklin liked his writing style. Of course, Benjamin Franklin was a well-known printer. And so Franklin wanted Paine to come to America and encouraged him to write down his ideas in some kind of a pamphlet or a book or something. And so that's what inspired Paine, you know, it was Franklin who got Paine here into America and then helped him and encouraged him to write Common Sense, which he did. And he penned it and published it anonymously so nobody knew who it was. And then they found out later on that it was him and of course he becomes very famous. Paine also published the Crisis Pamphlet series, which were read aloud by George Washington to his troops. On Paine's tombstone is written that Common Sense was the pamphlet that stirred the American colonies to independence. It reads that John Adams said, without the pen of Paine, the sword of Washington would have been wielded in vain. And below it reads, history is to ascribe the American Revolution to Thomas Paine. So right there on his tombstone, they're openly ascribing the American Revolution to Thomas Paine and saying that at a literary level, at the level of setting forth a philosophy and the ideas, Paine's contribution was equal to that of George Washington, really, based on John Adams' quote, without the pen of Paine, the sword of Washington would have been wielded in vain. In other words, you needed Paine's philosophy and then Washington's military skills and that's what brought about victory, supposedly, for the American Revolution. Paine was also the first to coin the phrase, the United States of America. His influence is undeniable. But why has he been marginalized by modern historians? The answer, almost certainly, is because once the revolution was over, Paine then published his true thoughts about Christianity and the Bible in his nefarious work, The Age of Reason. He wrote, when I see throughout the greater part of this book, the Bible, scarcely anything but a history of the grossest vices and a collection of the most paltry and contemptible tales, I cannot dishonor my creator by calling it by his name. While some have accused Paine of being an atheist, his defenders are quick to point out that he most certainly believed in a God, just not the God of the Bible. What's powerful and disturbing is that Paine comes right out and he addresses and attacks the gospel itself. He says, literally, it is the fable of Jesus Christ as told in the New Testament and the wild and visionary doctrine raised thereon against which I contend. Paine is openly stating that he is contending against the gospel. He is contending against the teaching that Jesus Christ is the Son of God, that he died for our sins and that God raised him from the dead so that whosoever believes in him shall not perish but have everlasting life. That is what he's contending against and he's calling it a fable and then he goes on to say that the story, taking it as it is told, he says, is blasphemously obscene. The so-called obscenity Paine refers to is the virgin birth of Christ. He said, what is it the testament teaches us? To believe that the almighty committed debauchery with a woman engaged to be married and the belief of this debauchery is called faith. So he's specifically denouncing, as all of the enlightenment thinkers did, the supernatural elements of the gospel story. He's denouncing the virgin birth of Christ. He's ultimately going to denounce the idea of the resurrection and so on. The title of Paine's book, The Age of Reason, is very telling because really what he's describing is the belief of the enlightenment thinkers in Europe. And what they did in France with the French Revolution, the French Freemasons, they took the goddess of reason and they exalted her on a throne. Now this was well known even centuries before if you read the Geneva Bible and the footnotes in the Geneva Bible, the 1599 edition, they talk about how the pagans would enthrone the goddess of reason and the idea being that reason would govern, just like a god, reason would govern your understanding of things, whatever it was. And the way that they applied this to the Bible is that if anything in the Bible did not seem reasonable according to the powers of human reason, then it should be rejected. And the one thing that most of them pointed to was the virgin birth of Christ. Does it seem reasonable that a girl who has never been with a man should suddenly get pregnant? And they would say, well, no, that's not reasonable. And because it's not reasonable, therefore they would reject it. The exaltation of reason might be called the worship of the human intellect, which is why Thomas Paine wrote, I do not believe in the creed professed by any church that I know of. My own mind is my own church. Paine openly wrote that he detested the Bible and said, it would be more consistent that we called it the word of a demon than the word of God. He's completely denouncing Christianity as being a fable, as being a fraud and a counterfeit and so on. And he's denouncing the Bible. Well this thing sold hundreds of thousands of copies, the age of reason, and the American people saw what Thomas Paine believed. And immediately they thought, wait a minute, Thomas Paine, he was close to George Washington. He was close to Thomas Jefferson. He was close to Benjamin Franklin and so on. If this is what Paine believes, is this what the rest of the founders believe? To greater or lesser degrees, the philosophy of reason influenced most of the revolutionary founders. This is what inspired John Adams to write, when philosophical reason is clear and certain by intuition or necessary induction, no subsequent revelation supported by prophecies or miracles can supersede it. Now if you break that down, what he's saying, he's saying when philosophical reason is clear and certain by intuition, in other words, that which you know or you think or believe in your heart, or necessary induction, what he means by that is scientific induction, in other words you conduct a kind of scientific investigation into something, that no subsequent revelation supported by prophecies or miracles can supersede it or override it. So if you, if some seventeen year old girl comes in and she tells you that she's pregnant and that she's never known a man before, your intuition tells you that that doesn't happen, that women don't get pregnant unless they are somehow or other joined to a man. So then you conduct a scientific investigation. You get ten thousand women and you get ten thousand virgin women and you see if any of them gets pregnant without being joined to a man. Then you come to the conclusion that no, we examined ten thousand women and none of them got pregnant, therefore, no amount of revelation supported by prophecies like a prophecy saying that a virgin shall bear a child, that doesn't work, or miracles like an angel appearing and telling Mary that she's going to give birth to a son and so on. Those things cannot override what the powers of reason or reasoning have told you and this is what Adams is saying. He's saying specifically that philosophical reason must override the word of God where the word of God is in disagreement with the understanding of the natural man. That's what he's saying. It was this dedication to human reason that inspired Thomas Jefferson to write, We Hold These Truths to be Self-Evident in the Declaration of Independence. These words were engineered to specifically reject the idea of biblical revelation or prophecy that comes from heaven as the authority of human government. Instead, the new American republic would be governed only by the philosophic understanding which is self-evident in the minds of men. For the Christian, this is an important issue because the Bible warns, Beware lest any man spoil you through philosophy and vain deceit, after the tradition of men, after the rudiments of the world, and not after Christ. The Bible also shows that the wisdom of God is not the same as the wisdom of man. The apostle Paul wrote, We speak not in the words which man's wisdom teacheth, but which the Holy Ghost teacheth, comparing spiritual things with spiritual. But the natural man receiveth not the things of the Spirit of God, for they are foolishness unto him. To me, that verse, that passage in Corinthians, in 1 Corinthians chapter 2, clearly describes the founding fathers of America. While most of the revolutionaries held views similar to those of the Enlightenment thinkers, it was Thomas Paine who wrote about them most openly. It's like Thomas Paine, he spilled the beans on everything. He just, he let it all out. The other founders, many of them, were a lot more cautious and more reserved in terms of what they were willing to say publicly and what they were willing to put in writing. But if you examine their writings carefully, it becomes clear that they believed a lot of the same things that Thomas Paine was saying. It's just that he was much more vocal about it, much more radical than the other founders. And if I could give a comparison, you might compare it to Barack Obama and Jeremiah Wright. It's not that Barack Obama does not believe the things that Reverend Wright is shouting from the pulpit, it's just that Obama is much more reserved and much more moderate and careful about what he says in public. That's the difference between them. But it doesn't mean that Obama does not agree with much, if not most, of what Reverend Wright was preaching. Paine was clearly involved at some level with the secret societies of his day, as many of the founders were. It was from these societies that the Enlightenment doctrines against the Bible sprang forth. In the book, Fire in the Minds of Men, leading historian and Librarian of Congress, Dr. James H. Billington writes that the revolutionary faith was shaped not so much by the critical rationalism of the French Enlightenment, as is generally believed, as by the occultism and proto-romanticism of Germany. He says the flame of faith had begun its migrations a century earlier, when some European aristocrats transferred their lighted candles from Christian altars to Masonic lodges. The flame of occult alchemists, which had promised to turn dross into gold, reappeared, seeking to recreate a golden age. Billington's reference to Germany has to do with Bavaria and the influence of what some believe is the ultimate secret society, the Illuminati, an organization founded by a man named Adam Wysockt in 1776. The connection of this group with Freemasonry is acknowledged by even the highest levels of masonry today. The Illuminati was an organization created in Bavaria. A Freemason named Adam Wysockt created the Illuminati as an inner circle of Freemasons. And he was very definitely taken by the period of the Enlightenment. He saw liberal democracy and liberal government, not liberal in the sense that we use it today in political talk, but liberal in the sense of giving rights and freedoms to the citizen as an important way to improve the world. And his plan was to create this inner circle of Masons, called the Illuminati, that means the enlightened ones, and that this inner circle of Freemasons would then spread out among Masonic lodges, and then the Masons in turn would see to it that their members were put in prominent positions in government, and that then the Illuminati's influence would enable the liberal democratic principles of the Enlightenment to be spread throughout the world. You can become a member of the Illuminati today just by taking upon yourself this ideal of fairness and education and democracy, and what the Illuminati chose as its doctrine, you know, which was liberty and equality and fraternity. The Illuminati was founded in 1776, the same year the Declaration of Independence was set forth in America. This date is also shown on the base of the pyramid of the Great Seal. The coincidence is seen by occult leaders as proof of a connection between the Illuminati and the American Revolution. When the Illuminati was established as an organization, you know, he says, no longer are we going to take the orders of the monarchs in 1776. Now that's a pretty important date, isn't it? It's too direct and too precise not to know that these people who envisioned such a new world were actually combined in the underground secret societies of Europe. The Illuminati and Freemasonry were the real forces of the spreading of democracy in the world. Dr. Billington writes that while Freemasonry provided a symbolic vocabulary for revolutionary organization, it was Illuminism that provided its basic structural model. The organizational plan was simply lifted from the Bavarian order of Illuminists. To this day, when leaders in Freemasonry let down their hair, they openly claim that the Illuminati was the real inspiration for the philosophies set forth from the American Revolution onward. It was called the Perfectionablists. It was a student fraternity. It had three ideals, separation of church and state, controls on the power of the state, and the emancipation of women. Three planks in their platform, if you will. Now one could say that the Bavarian Illuminati won because that in effect defines Western society. Separation of church and state, controls on the power of the state, and the emancipation of all peoples. This of course did not go over well at the time because separation of church and state was considered to be an attack on the church, limiting the power of the state was considered to be an attack on the state, and the emancipation of women was considered to be an attack on the social order. It was, this was radical and revolutionary, and in 1776 when he started this, he started it in the wrong place, in a place where no one was going to accept what he was going on about. Thomas Jefferson writes that if, after having read some of Adam Weishaupt's writings, he wrote that if Weishaupt had tried to establish the Illuminati in America, he would have been welcomed with open arms, that he would not have had to have been a secretive society. Many people, that he said that, or that that would be the case, I suggest that if Weishaupt had been a professor in a university in America at that time, there would have been no need to start the Illuminati, that he might have been a, he might have been writing political tracts for George Washington. Of course, Adam Weishaupt did not write tracts for George Washington, at least not that we know of. Instead, it was Thomas Paine. But was there a connection between Paine and the Illuminati? The answer, eventually, is yes. Paine was brought to England by Benjamin Franklin, who was involved with a number of secret societies in America and Europe. Franklin was the master of the lodge in Paris, which was the epicenter of Illuminati activity in France. It was Franklin who encouraged Paine to write Common Sense, which was published after Paine was in America for less than a year, almost as if it were part of a greater plan. And we read this from Dr. James Billington, who writes that Thomas Paine lived in a menager trois with Nicholas Bonneville and his wife from 1797 to 1802. Billington goes on to write that Paine's roommate, Nicholas Bonneville, was directly involved with the Bavarian Illuminati. We read that Nicholas Bonneville was the decisive channel of Illuminist influence. He was converted to Illuminist ideas during the first two visits to Paris in June 1787 by Wysop's leading associate, Christian Bode. So it's a reference to Adam Wysop, and it's Wysop's top man, a guy named Christian Bode, converts this guy, Nicholas Bonneville, to the ideas of the Illuminati, and then Bonneville becomes roommates with Thomas Paine. So there you have a direct link between a member of the Illuminati and Thomas Paine, the man who specifically inspired the American Revolution. So don't let anybody tell you that there's no connection with the Illuminati. There's a very direct connection, and we could go on and on from there and talk about Benjamin Franklin being involved with the French Masonic Lodge, the Lodge of the Nine Sisters in Paris. Franklin became master of the lodge there for a time, and Franklin even initiated Voltaire, the famous French writer Voltaire, who was definitely an Enlightenment thinker. And Voltaire, interestingly, had been trained by Jesuit priests. They had educated him, and so he would have been very familiar with the different ideas that Adam Wysop was putting forth. And of course, the French Revolution was born out of that lodge there in Paris, and it was run ultimately by the French Freemasons and others who came alongside to join in with what was happening in the French Revolution. While he worked with many Freemasons, Thomas Paine's own membership in the society has been debated. Americans point to the fact that Paine wrote a history on the origin of Freemasonry, as if he knew about it personally. Paine also worked closely with some of the leading Masons of the Revolution, namely Benjamin Franklin and George Washington. Masonic author David Harrison writes that Paine's writing skills and friendship with Franklin and Washington enabled him to stay at the forefront of the political action, and he was made secretary to Congress's Committee for Foreign Affairs from 1777 to 1779. After Paine left this position, he continued to be active in foreign affairs, and letters from Paine to Washington reveal a personal friendship at this time, Washington arranging a hefty salary for Paine. When Paine left America, he joined up with the revolutionaries in France, and with the help of friends like Freemason, the Marquis de Lafayette, he entered the political arena, assisting in forging the new French Constitution. While in France, Paine lived for a time with Freemason, and later US President, James Monroe, while his close friend, Nicholas Bonneville, was also a Freemason. Harrison writes that a number of Masonic lodges in the USA were also named after Paine, and when he died, many lodges throughout America honored him. Some have suggested that Thomas Paine repented of his views on Christianity before he died. But two of his biographers, Moncure D. Conway and John E. Remsburg, document how Paine held fast to his unbelief to his final moments. Remsburg, an atheist who had no love of Christianity himself, writes that when on his deathbed, Paine was beset by emissaries of the church, pious nurses, bigoted priests, and illiterate laymen, who by entreaties and threats tried to compel him to renounce his deistic and anti-Christian opinions. According to Remsburg, one clergyman openly told Paine that whosoever does not believe in Jesus Christ shall be damned. In The Life of Thomas Paine, Moncure D. Conway documents the following account. While Paine was one day taking his usual after-dinner nap, an old woman called, and, asking for Mr. Paine, said she had something of great importance to communicate to him. She was shown into his bedchamber, and Paine, raising himself on his elbow, and turning towards the woman, said, What do you want with me? I came, said she, from God, to tell you that if you don't repent and believe in Christ, you'll be damned. Po, po, it's not true, said Paine. You are not sent with such an impertinent message. Send her away, pshaw. God would not send such a foolish, ugly old woman as you. Turn this messenger out. Get away. Be off. Shut the door. So the old woman packed herself off. In his last will and testament, Paine listed what he thought were his great contributions to the world, in which we find the following. I Thomas Paine, of the state of New York, author of the work entitled Common Sense, which awake America to a declaration of independence, author also of a work lately published entitled Examination of the Passages in the New Testament, quoted from the old, and called prophecies concerning Jesus Christ, and showing there are no prophecies of any such person. The death of Paine is a very interesting study. If you go and read his biography that was done by Moncure D. Conway, Conway put together Paine's writings. He has one publication that's all based on the writings of Thomas Paine, and he did another one on the biography of Paine, but he talks about how Paine, at one point it was given out that Thomas Paine was fearful of being alone, and this is as he got on in age and he was an older man now, and he was nearing death, and it was given out that he was afraid to be alone, and some people thought, well, the reason he's afraid to be alone is because he knows he's going to have to go and face the judgment of God, and so now he's going to have to give an account for having denied Christianity and so on, and Conway writes that no, that wasn't the real reason. He wasn't afraid of dying in that regard. What he was concerned about was the fact that there were Christians who were coming to see him on a regular basis, and they were all constantly warning him that if he did not repent of his unbelief, that he was going to die and go to hell, and so they're continually warning him and they're telling him that he needs to repent and so on, and Paine was concerned because he thought some of these Christians are fanatics, and he was concerned that if he was alone at home and somebody came to visit him, that they would talk to him for five or ten minutes and then go out and tell everyone that he had converted, that he had suddenly repented and now believes the gospel and that he died in a place of faith and so on, and he wanted to make sure that his unbelief was recorded and witnessed right up to his dying breath, so he made sure that there were witnesses in the room, his close friends had to be with him at all times because he wanted them to be able to testify that he never gave up his unbelief even unto death. He wasn't just somebody who disagreed with Christianity, he was very passionate about denouncing it completely. According to John Remsburg, in the end, there were some 20 deathbed witnesses, all affirming or admitting that Thomas Paine did not recant before he died. Those who believe that the United States was founded as a Christian nation must ask themselves, was Thomas Paine sent by God to inspire a Christian revolution? And if the pen of pain was the spirit behind the war of independence, what spirit was it? The Bible says, and every spirit that confesses not that Jesus Christ is come in the flesh is not of God, and this is that spirit of antichrist, whereof ye have heard that it should come, and even now already is it in the world. The scripture also says, who is a liar but he that denieth that Jesus is the Christ? He is antichrist that denieth the Father and the Son. We read that whosoever transgresseth and abideth not in the doctrine of Christ, hath not God. For many deceivers are entered into the world who confess not that Jesus Christ is come in the flesh. This is a deceiver and an antichrist. History shows how great measures were taken by many professing believers to somehow prove or declare that Thomas Paine recanted before his death. The question is, why were so many concerned? Was it just for Paine's salvation? Or was it because they knew that Paine had been so instrumental in spurring forth the American Revolution? Were they concerned that, however unwittingly, they had been inspired by the words of what the Bible calls a lying spirit, a deceiver, and an antichrist? Thomas Paine not only denied the Gospel but hoped that the Age of Reason would ultimately get rid of it. He said, the Christian theory is little less than the idolatry of the ancient mythologists and it yet remains to reason and philosophy to abolish the amphibious fraud. It now seems appropriate to explain the use of the word religion as understood by earlier generations. In spite of all that Thomas Paine had written against Christianity, Moncure D. Conway, Paine's biographer, said this about him. His attack on Christianity was indeed directed at the gross corruptions of it. Few or none of his sneers affect the religion of the New Testament. Notice that according to Conway, the religion of the New Testament had nothing to do with believing the Gospel. If one studies the founders carefully, it becomes clear that their ideas of the Christian religion had more to do with a moral code of conduct than faith in Jesus Christ. In other words, the religion that many of them refer to is not Christianity at all. While the Bible warns believers to beware of being spoiled through philosophy, one man who seems to have disregarded this warning was Thomas Jefferson. Jefferson is one of America's most important founders, the man who drafted the Declaration of Independence. He is often featured prominently by those who argue that America was founded on Christian principles. But his own letters make it clear that he had no great love for Christianity or the Bible. The idea that we have pastors and teachers who would somehow or other hold up Thomas Jefferson as an example of a godly man who in any way supported Christianity is just unbelievable. Jefferson, much like Thomas Paine and they were good friends, Jefferson not only did not embrace Christianity, but he made it his business to denounce Christianity at every turn. And at best he encouraged people toward unbelief and doubt and so on. But the idea that he somehow or other was representing a biblical view or representing Christian principles and so on is provably false based upon his own quotes. In a letter to General Alexander Smith on January 17, 1825, Jefferson was commenting on the book of Revelation. He said, Through the rest of his letter, Jefferson makes it clear that he had not repented of this view. You have people who try to defend the idea of America as a Christian nation and here they hold up Thomas Jefferson somehow as an example of a founding father who had a faith that any of us who are Christians should imitate or embrace. And it's sad and it's very disturbing because of the things that Jefferson said about the Bible and about the Gospel in particular. Some have tried to whitewash Jefferson because supposedly he thought Jesus was a fine teacher of morality. But here is what he actually said, And what he's talking about is the process that he went through as he was putting together his so-called Jefferson Bible. And the proper title, his original title, today it's known as the Jefferson Bible, but the original title is The Life and Morals of Jesus of Nazareth. And sometimes there are those who will even lift up the Jefferson Bible as an example that somehow or other Thomas Jefferson at some point embraced Christianity or the Lord Jesus Christ. But the truth is not at all. If you read his own letters, what Jefferson says in his own letters about his Jefferson Bible tells us what he was really thinking. And he's again expressing the Enlightenment view that he believed there were some things in the Bible, in the New Testament concerning the Lord Jesus Christ that were true and accurate, but that they had been covered up or mingled with this corrupt information that he says is the product of inferior minds. There are quotes where Jefferson is denouncing the Old Testament. There are quotes where Jefferson is denouncing the New Testament. Concerning the Old Testament, Jefferson wrote, Where get we the Ten Commandments? The Book indeed gives them to us verbatim. But where did it get them? For itself tells us they were written by the finger of God on tables of stone which were destroyed by Moses. But the whole history of these books is so defective and doubtful that it seems vain to attempt minute inquiry into it. And such tricks have been played with their text and with the texts of other books relating to them, that we have a right from that cause to entertain much doubt what parts of them are genuine. In the same letter to John Adams, he writes, In the New Testament there is internal evidence that parts of it have proceeded from an extraordinary man and that other parts are of the fabric of very inferior minds. It is as easy to separate those parts as to pick out diamonds from dung hills. When one reads the Jefferson Bible, it becomes clear what Jefferson was referring to when he mentioned dung hills. What he does in his Jefferson Bible is he specifically omits all of the supernatural elements of the Gospels. He omits the virgin birth of Christ, he omits the miracles that Jesus performed, obviously he omits the resurrection of Christ and so on, his ascension into heaven. Anything that was contrary to the philosophies of reason that had been set forth, he pushes out of his representation of the New Testament. And he not only omits those things, but in his letters he denounces them in the most derogatory language you can imagine, very insulting, very condescending. Concerning Jesus himself, Jefferson wrote, Among the sayings and discourses imputed to him, I find many passages of fine imagination, correct morality, and of the most lovely benevolence, and others, again, of so much ignorance, so much absurdity, so much untruth, charlatanism, and imposture. I separate, therefore, the gold from the dross, and leave the latter to the stupidity of some and roguery of others of his disciples. Of this band of dupes and impostors, Paul was the first corrupter of the doctrines of Jesus. And so the idea that he was in any way promoting Christianity is at best a deception, and teachers who are teaching that are either unfamiliar with the letters of Thomas Jefferson or they're simply lying to their congregation or their audience about what Jefferson really believed. From his letter there's the quote from Thomas Jefferson to his nephew, Peter Carr, who was at school studying and so on, and rather than admonish him, as the Puritans would have done, and you can read like the letters of William Penn, the founder of Pennsylvania, and William Penn is encouraging his children in reading the Bible, in Bible devotions, etc., and so on, but when Jefferson writes his letter to his nephew, he's not encouraging him in that way at all. He's really encouraging him toward doubt and toward unbelief. To his nephew, Jefferson wrote, you will next read the New Testament. It is the history of a personage called Jesus. Keep in your eye the opposite pretensions. One, of those who say he was begotten by God, born of a virgin, suspended and reversed the laws of nature at will, and ascended bodily into heaven. And two, of those who say he was a man of illegitimate birth, who set out without pretensions to divinity, ended in believing them, and was punished capitally for sedition by being gibbeted according to the Roman law. These questions are examined in the books I have mentioned. They will assist you in your inquiries, but keep your reason firmly on the watch in reading them all. Jefferson's appeal to reason shows his clear connection to the thinking of Thomas Paine and the enlightenment philosophers in France that were directly involved with secret societies. Jefferson spent five years in France as the American ambassador and, like Thomas Paine, was involved in helping the French Revolution. When Jefferson heard of the terrible bloodshed happening during the Reign of Terror and the countless thousands that were murdered during the French Revolution, he commented that, rather than it should have failed, I would have seen half the earth desolated. Were there but an Adam and Eve left in every country and left free, it would be better than as it now is. In other words, mass murder as many people as necessary in order to accomplish the cause of so-called freedom. But freedom for who? Certainly not for those who were being put to death. While he is often portrayed as a champion of liberty and human rights, Jefferson's macabre philosophy would become the typical view of radical revolutionaries across Europe and throughout the world, with the spread of communism and variant forms of fascism. Men like Stalin and Hitler would use the idea of liberty as a Trojan horse to seduce the masses right before they killed them. At one point, Hitler boasted that, this revolution of ours is the exact counterpart of the French Revolution. For those who might think that the influence of the French Enlightenment, which exalted the goddess of reason, is a thing of the past, we present the Georgia Guidestones. Erected in 1980 by a mysterious stranger, written on these granite blocks are what are sometimes called the Ten Commandments of the New World Order. The first command is to maintain humanity under 500 million people, a clear call for population control. With our current population of 6 billion in the world today, this would mean that many would have to die. On a stone slab near the monument are written the words, let these be Guidestones to an age of reason. A specific reference to the work by Thomas Paine. As we have seen, Paine's age of reason was an age of anti-Christian sentiment, an age against the Bible and against the God who inspired it. Furthermore, Paine's good friend, Thomas Jefferson, far from trying to establish a Christian nation, said he hoped the Gospel itself would be destroyed in the New World. He compared the Gospel to the ancient mystery religion of the ancient world. He said it was basically a spin-off of the ancient mystery religion and he goes so far as to say that he hopes the Gospel will be done away with in these United States of America. In a letter to John Adams, Jefferson wrote, And the day will come when the mystical generation of Jesus, by the Supreme Being as His Father in the womb of a virgin, will be classed with the fable of the generation of Minerva in the brain of Jupiter. But we may hope that the dawn of reason and freedom of thought in these United States will do away with all this artificial scaffolding and restore to us the primitive and genuine doctrines. How anybody could think that Jefferson wanted to set forth a Christian nation when he's hoping for the destruction of the Gospel is beyond belief. One of the most influential revolutionary fathers, the man known as a scientist, a patriot, and a spy, was Benjamin Franklin. Sir Walter Isaacson said that Benjamin Franklin was the most accomplished American of his age and the most influential in inventing the type of society America would become. This is very significant when one considers the direction America has taken since the time of the revolution. Franklin is one of the most significant founding fathers. He was the only founder who signed all of the establishing documents for the United States, the Declaration of Independence, the U.S. Constitution, and then the Treaty of Paris that brought an end to the war with England. Franklin, of course, known for having discovered or channeled electricity through flying the kite and so on, he was known as a scientist, an inventor, as a great mind, and indeed he was a brilliant man. He was also well known, Benjamin Franklin was well known as a Freemason. It was said that he only missed a handful of lodge meetings in his entire lifetime. You have a number of quotes that are attributed to Franklin. Franklin who says, Original sin was as ridiculous as imputed righteousness. Now as a Freemason, this would be a very important issue, because Masons definitely believe that it is their good deeds, their good works, that are going to get them into heaven. Their good works are symbolized by the Masonic apron that they wear. You can trace that apron all the way back to the Garden of Eden when Adam and Eve, they sinned against God and then they made aprons for themselves. They made a covering for themselves out of the fig leaves, and that's symbolizing the idea of man covering his own shame through his good deeds, and that's the belief in Masonry, that they can atone for their sins, again through the exercise of the knowledge of good and evil, and if they pursue things that are good more than that which is evil, then they believe in the end when they stand before God, they'll be justified, and that's what their apron symbolizes. And so a recurring theme that you find among the Founding Fathers is the idea of rejecting the righteousness that is represented in the Bible, and that is the righteousness of God by faith, that we're saved by God's grace, through faith, not of works, lest any man should boast. And so they rejected the notion that all you had to do was believe on the Lord Jesus Christ, and that His righteousness would be imputed to you because you believe in Him. During our investigations into the history of America, we interviewed Ed Decker, who has written and taught about Masonry and its relationship to Mormonism. Ed explains some of the significance of the Masonic apron, and how it pertains to America's Declaration of Independence. The Declaration of Independence is written on a Masonic white lambskin apron. You've got to remember that many of the people who were involved in the first Congress and were involved in the Declaration of Independence were Masons, and this was a very beautiful thing that was done. They thought this was, you know, just an outrageously phenomenal blessing to the nation that you could write the Declaration of Independence on a white lambskin apron. And of course, the white lambskin apron of Freemasonry is given to each of the new Masons through a ritual in which they're told that someday they'll be there covering when they stand before the great white throne judgment of God in that last day. And it's interesting because the great white throne judgment of God, that is the judgment of the damned, those dead not in Christ. It's not the judgment table that I'm going to go to. I'm going to go to the banqueting table. I'm not going to the judgment seat. Not the white throne judgment, no. And the other interesting thing about that is the white lambskin apron is the covering that the Mason must be buried in. It's his covering before God. In the Mormon temple ritual, we have the apron as well. And that's our covering before God. And that covering, again, temple Mormons are buried with their apron on. Masons are buried with their apron on. It's their covering. But you got to go back to Genesis. Adam and Eve, they disobeyed God. And then when he came to the garden, they were hiding. The scripture says, and they knew that they were naked and they sewed fig leaves together and made themselves aprons. And they came out with fig leaf aprons, trying to fit fig leaf covering their nakedness. But then God covered them with animal skins in Genesis. That was the first sin offering, the first shedding of blood and the covering. It was a pointer to Jesus Christ, right in the first acts of the book of Genesis, the first acts of creation, the first acts of mankind on earth, the sin and the blood and the covering and so the Masons missed that whole point. It's Jesus Christ who's the covering before God, not a lambskin apron. The concept of a work's righteousness was also with Thomas Jefferson, who said concerning the character of Jesus, it is not to be understood that I am with him in all his doctrines. He preaches the efficacy of repentance toward forgiveness of sin. I require counterpoise of good works to redeem it. While it is today disputed whether or not Jefferson was a Mason, it is worth noting that he often appears on the list of Masonic presidents given by the Masonic lodges. A confirmed Mason was George Washington. While he was not as vocal on the issue of work's righteousness, his motto was deeds, not words. Yet Benjamin Franklin was much more direct, openly confessing a widely held Masonic belief. But Masonry was just one of the secret orders to which Franklin belonged. Franklin was a member of secret societies, mainly Freemasonry, in America, in England and in France. And those were the three countries that were involved in the American Revolution. He was master of the Masonic lodge of Philadelphia, and while over in France, master of the lodge in Paris, from which sprang the French Revolution. Over in England, Franklin was involved with a group known as the Hellfire Club. And this is very well documented. You even find in Time Magazine, Time Magazine talks about Franklin's involvement in the Hellfire Club. The History Channel has documented his involvement in the Hellfire Club. There's a number of books and articles and essays and things like that that you can read about him being involved with this group that was known as the Monks of Medmanham Abbey. That was their original name. And then they were kind of nicknamed the Hellfire Club later on. We read that the Hellfire Club was an exclusive English club that met sporadically during the mid-18th century. Its purpose, at best, was to mock traditional religion and conduct orgies. At worst, it involved the indulgence of Satanic rites and sacrifices. The club to which Franklin belonged was established by Francis Dashwood, a member of Parliament and friend of Franklin. The club allegedly took part in basic forms of Satanic worship. In addition to taking part in the occult, orgies and parties with prostitutes were also said to be the norm. The Hellfire Club was said to be a Satanic occult organization that operated underground there in England. And they even had a phrase over the front door of their hideaway. And it was taken from the French priest Francois Rabelais. And it was, do what you will shall be the whole of the law. And of course, that same phrase is picked up in the 19th and 20th century by Lester Crowley. And Crowley adopts the phrase, do what thou wilt. Franklin's connection to the Hellfire Club is disturbing enough, but becomes especially dark when one considers the grisly discovery made 200 years after his death. On February 11th, 1998, the Sunday Times of London reported that, workmen have dug up the remains of ten bodies hidden beneath the former London home of Benjamin Franklin, the founding father of American independence. The remains of four adults and six children were discovered during the restoration of Franklin's home at 36 Craven Street. The Times reported that, initial estimates are that the bones are about 200 years old and were buried at the time Franklin was living in the house. Most of the bones show signs of having been dissected, sawn or cut. One skull has been drilled with several holes. The article goes on to suggest that the bodies may have been the result of the experiments of Dr. William Hewson, who was a friend of Benjamin Franklin. Hewson apparently ran his medical school for two years in Franklin's home. For the record, the Benjamin Franklin House officially agrees with this explanation. But there are others who still suspect the dead bodies may have been the result of human sacrifices conducted by the Hellfire Club. The associated content even published an article titled, Ben Franklin and His Membership in the Hellfire Club, Founding Father or Satanic Killer. The original Times article reported that the bones were deeply buried, probably to hide them because grave robbing was illegal. Later reports would reveal that not only were human remains found, but animal remains as well. From the published photographs, some of the bones appear to be blackened or charred as if by fire. It is well documented that Satanists perform ritual killings of both humans and animals alike. Could Franklin and his Hellfire friends have been working with Dr. Hewson to provide him with fresh bodies? Or if the humans were simply medical cadavers, where did they come from, and why were they disposed of like so much trash beneath the house? Why not give them some kind of proper burial? If thieves could sneak into a graveyard to steal a body, they could certainly sneak in to put one back. It is worth noting that Dr. Hewson's body was also found in the Hellfire Club. It is worth noting that Dr. Hewson developed an infection from working on one of his cadavers and died from it. Not surprisingly, Benjamin Franklin's view of Christianity was in agreement with the Enlightenment thinkers of Europe. Shortly before he died, Benjamin Franklin realized he gets a letter inquiring about his faith and what his view is concerning the Lord Jesus Christ. What's interesting is that this letter comes late in his life and when he's writing his response, it's about a month before he dies, which is very significant when you consider what he says. The following is from a letter that Benjamin Franklin wrote to Ezra Stiles, who was then President of Yale University. He said, As to Jesus of Nazareth, my opinion of whom you particularly desire, I think the system of morals and his religion, as he left them to us, the best the world ever saw or is likely to see. But I apprehend it has received various corrupt changes, and I have, with most of the present dissenters in England, some doubts as to his divinity. From the first part of his response, Franklin's views about Jesus seem very similar to those of Paine and Jefferson, making reference to corrupt changes in the Gospel record. Like many others, he compliments the morality of Christ while rejecting his authority. This was typical of the Founding Fathers. And here again, Franklin is expressing the commonly held view of the Enlightenment thinkers of that time. But this is also what the Apostle Paul warned the Church of when he wrote that in the last days, perilous times shall come, for men shall be lovers of their own selves, having a form of godliness, but denying the power thereof. The power of godliness comes from faith in Jesus himself as the Son of God, as the Messiah prophesied in the Old Testament. The Bible says, As many as received him, to them gave he power to become the sons of God, even to them that believe on his name. Without Jesus, the form of godliness that men create through morality is a deception. Furthermore, Paul does not tell believers to embrace such men, but rather, he says, from such, turn away. In the rest of his letter, Benjamin Franklin spoke further about the divinity of Jesus Christ. He said, It is a question I do not dogmatize upon, having never studied it. And I think it needless to busy myself with it now, when I expect soon an opportunity of knowing the truth with less trouble. Franklin is acknowledging that he believes he is close to death. He believes he is getting ready to die. And rather than investigate the claims of Christians in every generation concerning the Lord Jesus Christ, he says it is needless for him to busy himself with it now. And this is why, sadly enough, these men, Franklin, Jefferson, Washington, John Adams, Thomas Paine, these were great men. These men walked like giants upon the earth in their day. And it is why their moments, their lives are recorded right up to their dying moments. There was somebody with them when they died. And sadly, we do not have any evidence that Benjamin Franklin ever repented of this view before his death. It is unfortunate that, while at death's door, Franklin felt it needless to seek out the truth of Christ. The Bible says that without faith it is impossible to please God and that faith is the evidence of things not seen. Waiting to appear before the throne of Christ before one believes in him is not the way of salvation. The scripture says, He that believeth on the Son hath everlasting life. And he that believeth not the Son shall not see life, but the wrath of God avideth on him. Most Americans are enamored of men like Franklin because he walked as a mighty man upon the earth. But the Bible warns us that the great day of the Lord is near and that the mighty man shall cry there bitterly. John Adams was America's second president and first vice president. He worked with Thomas Jefferson in helping to draft the Declaration of Independence. While it does not appear that Adams was a member of any secret group, he was a Unitarian and shared views against Christianity, much like the other revolutionaries. John Adams is often portrayed, in fact I have friends of mine who are Christians, who will tell you that Adams was a Christian man. And Adams, there are a number of quotes from Adams where he talks about Christian principles and so on and how he believes that it was Christian principles that brought about the founding of the United States. But Adams did not mean that the United States was founded on Christian principles alone, but rather on a mix of Christian and pagan philosophies. He said, These are what are called revolution principles. They are the principles of Aristotle and Plato, the principles of nature and eternal reason. Adams wrote that, The general principles on which the fathers achieved independence were the general principles of Christianity. In favor of these general principles, in philosophy, religion and government, I could fill sheets of quotations from Rousseau and Voltaire. Adams' reference to Rousseau and Voltaire is strange to say the least, since these two Enlightenment thinkers were both well known for their anti-Christian views. Voltaire, in particular, wanted the end of Christianity. He wrote that, Christianity is the most ridiculous, the most absurd and bloody religion that has ever infected the world. He also said, It took twelve ignorant fishermen to establish Christianity. I will show the world how one Frenchman can destroy it. By combining the principles of Christianity with Voltaire, it is as though Adams is saying that the general principles of the founding of America were both the principles of God and the devil at the same time. With this in mind, consider that Adams once wrote to Thomas Jefferson, I should have given my reason for rejoicing in Voltaire and company. It is because I believe they have done more to propagate religious liberty than Calvin or Luther. Voltaire and Rousseau were so closely associated with the American founders that they are shown in this image beside Benjamin Franklin, as if they all represented the same ideals. But when men like Voltaire spoke about liberty, the freedom they wanted was to be free from Christianity. Is it possible that such a view influenced men like John Adams? The answer largely depends on how you define Christianity. If you study the founding fathers and the enlightenment thinkers of this era, it's important to pay attention to the word religion, because the word religion to them has to do with a framework of morality. When they say religion, they don't mean what we would mean today as bible-believing Christians in the world today. What they mean by religion is just a system of conduct, really. They don't mean the testimony that Jesus is the Son of God and so on. And so, for men like John Adams, the Christian religion did not mean the gospel. Even in his lifetime, Adams himself knew full well that his doctrinal views were rejected by Orthodox Christians. He said to them famously, Ye will say I am no Christian. I say ye are no Christians. And there the account is balanced. As said before, Adams was a Unitarian, and he was a Unitarian. And the Unitarian belief specifically rejects the doctrine of the Christian Trinity. The idea of God the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit. Adams wrote that the Pythagorean, as well as the Platonic philosophers, probably concurred in the fabrication of the Christian Trinity. Furthermore, Adams did not believe that Jesus was the Son of God, or that he was God manifest in the flesh. He said, The Europeans are all deeply tainted with prejudices, which they can never get rid of. They are all infected with creeds and confessions of faith. They all believe that great principle which has produced this boundless universe came down to this little ball to be spit upon by Jews. And until this awful blasphemy is got rid of, there never will be any liberal science in the world. The reason Adams rejected the doctrine that Jesus is God was because of his view that God is unknowable, and therefore for the Bible to say that the person of God was revealed in Jesus Christ was to him an awful blasphemy. Adams wrote to Jefferson that, When we say God is a spirit, we know what we mean. Let us be content, therefore, to believe him to be a spirit, that is, an essence that we know nothing of. But where did Adams get his belief? The pagan origin of his faith was revealed by him in a letter to Thomas Jefferson, where he made reference to an allegedly 5,000-year-old Indian book, The Shasta, the first book of Brahmin theology. He said, Where is to be found theology more orthodox or philosophy more profound than in the introduction to the Shasta? God is one, creator of all, universal sphere. Search not the essence and the nature of the eternal who is one. Your research will be vain and presumptuous. The eternal willed to communicate of his essence and of his splendor to beings capable of perceiving it. The eternal willed, and he created Burma, Vitsnau, and Sib. These doctrines, Adams says, sublime if ever there were any sublime, Pythagoras learned. In contrast to Adams' belief that God cannot be known, in the Bible, Jesus said, And this is life eternal, that they might know thee, the only true God, and Jesus Christ, whom thou hast sent. In Hosea, God says, For I desired mercy, for I did not know thee. In the Bible, Jesus said, And this is life eternal, that they might know thee, the only true God, and Jesus Christ, whom thou hast sent. In Hosea, God says, For I desired mercy, and not sacrifice, and the knowledge of God, more than burnt offerings. And while Adams Shasta says it is vain to seek God, Jesus said, Seek, and ye shall find. Knock, and it shall be opened unto you. For everyone that asketh receiveth, and he that seeketh findeth, and to him that knocketh it shall be opened. It was during the presidency of John Adams that the much debated Treaty of Tripoli was signed. The treaty bears, perhaps, the most contrary statement against the idea of the United States as a Christian nation. And the Treaty of Tripoli is, I think, the clearest declaration that the original founders of the United States of America did not believe that they were setting forth a Christian nation. Why? Because they specifically said so in this treaty. And what you have are patriots, die-hard patriots, who will try to spin the Treaty of Tripoli and somehow or other state that it doesn't mean what it says. But if you read the entire treaty, there's no reason for them to come right out and say that the government of the United States of America is not in any sense founded on the Christian religion. There's no reason to say that if they don't mean it. So they declare this, and according to the history, it was unanimously agreed to on the floor of the Senate. Now why was it unanimously agreed to? The question, of course, is, well, wait a minute. Where were all the Christian founders to leap to their feet and to lift up a shout against this treaty once they heard it? You would think that there would be at least one Christian who would have jumped up and said something. The answer seems to come from a Christian man named Dr. Bird Wilson. And Bird Wilson was somebody who had spent years of his life investigating the faith of the founding fathers. In a famously controversial sermon he preached in 1831, Dr. Wilson said, The founders of our nation were nearly all infidels. When the war was over, the Constitution was framed and God was neglected. He was not merely forgotten. He was absolutely voted out of the Constitution. The proceedings, as published by Thompson, the secretary, show that the question was gravely debated whether God should be in the Constitution or not. And after a solemn debate, he was deliberately voted out of it. Dr. Wilson went on to say that those who have been called to administer the government have not been men making any public profession of Christianity. And he's saying this in the early part of the 19th century. It's important to remember not all of the Christians, when the American Revolution happened, the impression of many church leaders was not that this was a Christian revolution. The impression of many leaders was not that the revolutionaries were Christians who were somehow or other following the example of Jesus and the apostles by launching this revolution. The absence of Christians in the early American government would explain why no one objected to Article 11 of the Treaty of Tripoli. Yet while this treaty was confirmed under President John Adams, the origin of Article 11 may represent the unkindest cut of all. According to 19th century historian Moncure D. Conway, the controversial Article 11 was drafted by none other than George Washington. Conway said, President Washington, the first time he ever came in treaty with a non-Christian people, Tripoli, sent to the Senate a treaty which opened with the following, as the government of the United States of America is not in any sense founded on the Christian religion. There is the statement, Conway says, from the great Washington. The Treaty of Tripoli was drafted toward the end of Washington's presidency and then confirmed under John Adams. If Washington himself authored Article 11, it would further explain why no one would dare to question it. But also compels us as we continue this journey to investigate the real faith of the man who was at the heart of the American Revolution. Undoubtedly, the most famous person to have survived the American Revolution is the man known as the father of our country, George Washington. But was he a Christian? Many die-hard patriots would say so. But even during his lifetime, Washington's true faith was a mystery. And there were many who sought out a clear answer as to what he really believed about God and about Jesus Christ. There are some who put forth about Washington, they'll say that nobody ever questioned his faith in his lifetime or that nobody ever questioned whether or not he was a Christian in his lifetime. Now this is provably false. Washington was the President of the United States. And while he was President, he was well known for getting up and walking out of church on Sundays when they did Communion. He was well known for refusing to partake in Communion. We read that the Reverend Dr. Wilson in his famous sermon on the religion of the presidents says, when the Congress sat in Philadelphia, President Washington attended the Episcopal Church. The rector, Dr. Abercrombie, told me that on the days when the sacrament of the Lord's Supper was to be administered, Washington's custom was to rise just before the ceremony commenced and walk out of the church. We further read that the doubt rests again on the recollection of Nellie Custis, General Washington's step-granddaughter, who states that the General was accustomed on Communion Sundays to leave the church with her, sending the carriage back for Mrs. Washington. The reason Washington sent the carriage back for his wife is because Martha Washington was a regular partaker of Communion. But he would get up specifically and leave the church. And at one point, his pastor, the Reverend Abercrombie, confronted him about how he was setting a bad example for others. In his famous sermon, Dr. Wilson wrote that Washington's refusal to take Communion became a subject of remark in the congregation. In a letter, Reverend Abercrombie wrote that, I acknowledge the remark was intended for the president, and as such, he received it. A few days after, a senator told me the president said that he had received a very just reproof from the pulpit, for always leaving the church before the administration of the sacrament, and that he would not again give cause for the repetition of the reproof. Accordingly, he never afterwards came on the morning of sacramental Sunday. Washington's response to this rebuke was to stop going to church on Communion Sunday. While no one would disagree that Washington was a very moral man and a great hero of the revolution, it was his own pastors, the clergy, who knew him best at a spiritual level, who gave the most disturbing insights into his real faith. These men, all of them, there were three in particular. You have Bishop White. Bishop White was Washington's pastor for more than 20 years. You have the Reverend James Abercrombie. Abercrombie also knew Washington for many years. Then you have Dr. Ashbel Green. Dr. Green was the congressional chaplain during the eight years of Washington's presidency, and was said to have lunch with the president on a weekly basis. The testimonies of those spiritual guides, the pastors who knew Washington personally, their testimony collectively about George Washington and what he believed where Christianity is concerned cannot be denied. Perhaps most prominent among these was Bishop William White. He was known as the father of the Protestant Episcopal Church in America and served as chaplain to the Continental Congress. Bishop White ministered to George Washington and his family over a period of more than 20 years. For obvious reasons, many people sought this man hoping he could give a clear testimony of Washington's Christian belief. His reply on one occasion was, I do not believe that any degree of recollection will bring to my mind any fact which would prove General Washington to have been a believer in the Christian revelation, further than as may be hoped from his constant attendance upon Christian worship in connection with the general reserve of his character. In other words, beyond the fact that he went to church on a regular basis and was of generally moral character, Bishop White knew of no other proof that George Washington was a Christian. Furthermore, images such as these of Washington kneeling in prayer are famously shown by those who promote the Christian heritage of America. But according to Bishop White, the idea of Washington kneeling reverentially seems to have been greatly exaggerated. In a letter to Reverend Parker of Massachusetts, Bishop White specifically addressed the issue. He wrote, His behavior in church was always serious and attentive, but as your letter seems to intend an inquiry on the point of kneeling during the service, I owe it to the truth to declare that I never saw him in the said attitude. Although I was often in company with this great man and had the honor of dining often at his table, I never heard anything from him which could manifest his opinions on the subject of religion. If he was a Christian, Washington's silence concerning what he believed about the Gospel is at best unusual. The Bible says that believers should be ready always to give an answer to every man that asketh you a reason of the hope that is in you. Jesus said, Whosoever therefore shall confess Me before men, him will I confess also before My Father which is in heaven. But whosoever shall deny Me before men, him will I also deny before My Father which is in heaven. The Scripture also says that if thou shalt confess with thy mouth the Lord Jesus and shall believe in thine heart that God has raised him from the dead, thou shalt be saved. Sadly, there is no evidence that George Washington believed this, and much evidence to suggest he did not. Another of Washington's pastors was the Reverend James Abercrombie, who was also sought for an understanding of what George Washington believed. It was Abercrombie who had confronted Washington about turning his back on the Lord's Supper. We read that, Long after Washington's death, in reply to Dr. Wilson, who had interrogated him as to his religious views, Dr. Abercrombie's brief but emphatic answer was, Sir, Washington was a deist. To me, the most disturbing part about George Washington is that in the diary of Thomas Jefferson, it is recorded that before George Washington left office as President of the United States, that the clergyman in Philadelphia, which is where Washington was President, that they wanted him to make a public confession of his faith as a Christian, and they wanted to do this for posterity's sake. In his diary, Thomas Jefferson wrote, February 1st, Dr. Rush tells me that he had it from Asa Green, that when the clergy addressed General Washington on his departure from the government, it was observed in their consultation that he had never on any occasion said a word to the public which showed a belief in the Christian religion. And they thought they should so pen their address as to force him at length to declare publicly whether he was a Christian or not. They did so. However, he observed, the old fox was too cunning for them. He answered every article in their address particularly, except that, which he passed over without notice. I know that Governor Morris has often told me that General Washington believed no more in the system, Christianity, than he did. And so, we read about this in Thomas Jefferson's diary, and then we find it again in an account given by a relative of Dr. Ashbel Green. And again, Dr. Ashbel Green was the congressional chaplain for the eight years that Washington served as President. And it's in that quote where he confirms that the Philadelphia clergy wanted Washington to make this confession a faith. The quote comes from A.B. Bradford, a relative of Dr. Ashbel Green, or Asa Green as he was called by Thomas Jefferson. Bradford wrote about what he says Dr. Green had often told him. He explained more at length the plan laid by the clergy of Philadelphia at the close of Washington's administration as President, to get his views of religion for the sake of the good influence they supposed they would have in counteracting the infidelity of pain and the rest of the revolutionary patriots, military and civil. The reason that they wanted Washington to make the confession a faith, he says, is to counter the infidelity of pain and the other revolutionaries. And he's talking about Thomas Paine, obviously. So, what they wanted was they wanted George Washington to give a confession of Christianity so that it could offset the infidelity of Thomas Paine and the other revolutionaries. Now, what that tells us is that the clergy, the Bible-believing men of God of that time, did not believe that these revolutionaries were Christian men. And they had not checked their brain at the door and just assumed that anybody that went to church was a Christian. They were paying attention to the fact that George Washington had never made a public confession of his faith in Jesus Christ. A.B. Bradford continued to relate what Dr. Green had said to him. He confirmed the words of Thomas Jefferson, saying, But I well remember the smile on his face and the twinkle of his black eye when he said, The old fox was too cunning for us. He affirmed in concluding his narrative that from his long and intimate acquaintance with Washington, he knew it to be the case that while he respectfully conformed to the religious customs of society by generally going to church on Sundays, he had no belief at all in the divine origin of the Bible or the Jewish-Christian religion. Perhaps the quote used most by Patriot Christians is when Washington wrote to the Delaware Indians, saying, But the full context of the quote reveals that Washington was only answering the request of the Indians, who said they wanted to learn about the ways of the English settlers and the Christian religion. He was not evangelizing them. When he wrote to Congress about his comments, Washington said, The deputies from the Delaware nation arrived at headquarters two days ago. They presented me with a long memorial on various points. I was a little at a loss what answer to give, but as an answer could not be avoided, I thought it safest to couch it in general but friendly terms. Though there is reason to believe they have not adhered to their pretended friendship, it appeared to me to be our present policy at least to conciliate, and in this spirit, my answer was conceived. He was known for being a man of few words, and on the issue of religion, he said very little. But when he talked about Christianity, he usually talked about it from the position of being an outsider. In a letter to his fellow Freemason, the Marquis de Lafayette, Washington wrote, Being no bigot myself to any mode of worship, I am disposed to indulge the professors of Christianity in the Church, that road to heaven, which to them shall seem the most direct, plainest, easiest, and least liable to exception. What I believe Washington is referring to is the Christian gospel message, which is, Believe on the Lord Jesus Christ, and you shall be saved. And so what he's saying is for the Christian, this is the easiest way to go to heaven. You just believe in Jesus, and you're saved, you go to heaven. Whereas Washington's view as a Mason was deeds, not words. In other words, Washington really believed that his path to God was really through his good deeds, not just believing in the word of God or the words that Jesus spoke and the promises of God. As the Bible says, faith comes by hearing and hearing by the word of God. So, but when he's talking about Christianity, he's talking about it from the position of being really an outsider. It's also very significant that he's talking to the Marquis de Lafayette in this quote, and Lafayette was a French Freemason. So it's from one Freemason to another that he's saying, it's almost like he's letting his hair down and saying, Well, you know, Lafayette, I indulge the professors of Christianity. By which he would probably mean that he goes to church and takes part in the Christian ceremonies and that kind of thing, with the exception, of course, of communion. Yet beyond all this, the most bizarre account about the true faith of Washington is yet to come. As incredible as it seems, it has been documented that George Washington was baptized into the Roman Catholic faith just a few hours before his death by a Jesuit priest named Father Leonard Neil. While the account is absent from the official record, the story was handed down by Washington's own slaves and members of the Catholic Church. The Denver Register, in February of 1957, reported that, These and other facts about George Washington are reported in the Paulist Information magazine by Doran Hurley. The story is that Father Leonard Neil of the Society of Jesus was called to Mount Vernon from St. Mary's Mission across the Piscatone River four hours before Washington's death. Washington's body servant, Juba, is the authority for the fact that the general made the sign of the cross at meals. He may have learned this from his Catholic lieutenants, Stephen Moylan or John Fitzgerald. At Valley Forge, Washington forbade the burning in effigy of the pontiff on Pope's Day. Several times as president, he is reported to have slipped into a Catholic church to hear Sunday Mass. Pope's Day was the American version of Guy Fawkes Night in England, the annual remembrance of the Gunpowder Plot of 1605, when the Pope and the Jesuit Order attempted to blow up the Parliament of England. George Washington forbade burning the Pope in effigy, as was the custom, to keep Catholic allies in Canada from being offended. In another article, the Denver Register wrote that, that weeping and wailing occurred in the quarters, that Massa Washington had been snared by the Scarlet Woman of Rome, whom they had been taught to fear and hate. Supposedly, Father Neil was rode across the Piscatone by Negro oarsmen, and men often talked freely when slaves were nearby, confidently ignoring their presence. Even more interesting is that the Catholic publication, the Angelus, openly proclaims that the account is true, saying, Washington died a Catholic. The facts concerning this have been well publicized and would seem to leave little room for doubt. Four hours before Washington's death, Father Leonard Neil of the Society of Jesus, was called to Mount Vernon from St. Mary's Mission across the Piscatone River, where he baptized President Washington. But is there additional evidence to show a link between George Washington and the Jesuit Order? The well-known book, George Washington's Rules of Civility and Decent Behavior, which determined his code of conduct, was actually written by French Jesuits in 1595. There is also Washington Hall at Notre Dame University, which is said to have been named by its founder, Father Sorin, because of his belief in the deathbed story about Washington's conversion to Catholicism. Also worth noting is that inside the U.S. Capitol, is the ceiling fresco of George Washington floating among the clouds. The fresco was painted by a Vatican painter named Constantino Brumidi. The work is called The Apotheosis of Washington. The word apotheosis is an ancient pagan term. It was applied to men who had done great deeds. After their deaths, they were said to ascend into godhood. With this in mind, next consider that inside the Jesuit churches in Rome, are other ceiling frescoes depicting Ignatius Loyola, the founder of the Jesuit Order. Like George Washington, Loyola is floating among the clouds. The fresco is called The Apotheosis of St. Ignatius. Could this be just a coincidence? Meanwhile, Washington's interaction with the Jesuit Order is well documented. He sent representatives to Canada, which included Benjamin Franklin, along with the Jesuit Archbishop John Carroll, and his cousin Charles Carroll of Carrollton. Charles Carroll was famously the longest surviving signer of the Declaration of Independence. He was a devout Catholic who had been educated by Jesuit priests. His other cousin, Daniel Carroll, was a signer of the Constitution, and was also educated by Jesuits. Daniel Carroll is remembered for donating the land on which the U.S. Capitol was built. His brother, Archbishop John Carroll, was a member of the Catholic Church. His brother, Archbishop John Carroll, would then become the founder of Georgetown University nearby. One of the presidents of Georgetown was Father Leonard Neal, the Jesuit who is said to have baptized George Washington. In his book, Rulers of Evil, author F. Tupper Saucy presents convincing arguments of the Jesuit involvement in the American Revolution. The Jesuits shared a common enemy with the American colonists, as they had been fighting against Protestant England for more than 200 years since the Reformation. Supposedly, they provided the original flag for the Continental Army, the Grand Union flag, which was based on the flag of the British East India Company, which had been under the control of the Jesuits at the time. The story of where this flag came from was documented by 19th century author Robert Allen Campbell in his book, Our Flag, or The Evolution of the Stars and Stripes. Campbell writes of a mysterious professor who met with Washington and Benjamin Franklin to come up with the flag's design. F. Tupper Saucy argues that this professor was really Lorenzo Ricci, the superior general of the Jesuit order at the time. Saucy says that Ricci provided the flag so that Americans would be fighting under the private flag of an international mercantile corporation controlled by Jesuits. In time, the design was developed into the well-known Stars and Stripes. But perhaps the most direct link to the Jesuits is the American doctrine of what is called religious freedom. George Washington said, the establishment of civil and religious liberty was the motive that induced me into the field. But how did Washington define religious liberty? In a letter to George Mason, he wrote, no man's sentiments are more opposed to any kind of restraint upon religious principles than mine are, if of the denomination of Christians, or declare themselves Jews, Mohammedans, or otherwise. In other words, religious liberty was a license to allow all religions an equal place in America, not just the right to worship, but to seek offices of power in government. But where does this doctrine come from? It does not come from the Bible, since God's first commandment is, I am the Lord your God, you shall have no other gods. While it certainly fits with the universalist ideas of Freemasonry, it was specifically designed a century earlier by the Jesuits in England, back in 1688 during the reign of King James II. The doctrine was called the Declaration of Indulgence, or the Declaration for Liberty of Conscience. Because of all the attempts by Rome to overthrow the government of England, there were many restraints upon the rights of Catholics in that country. These restraints also extended to the American colonies. King James II, who was a Catholic monarch, set forth the declaration to remove any limitations on citizens because of their religion. Rather than make it just for Catholics, which would have been too obvious, it was made for all religions to mask its real intent. Tolerance for all meant tolerance for Rome. In 1688, English Protestants refused the declaration and deposed King James from the throne. 19th century Anglican bishop J.C. Ryle explained the reason why. He said, The liberty James wanted them to proclaim was neither more nor less than indulgence to the Jesuits and the whole church of Rome. Men knew the hand from which it came and saw the latent intention. Under the specious plea of toleration and liberty, the object of the declaration was to advance potpourri and give license to the church of Rome and all its schemes for reconquering England. While the declaration failed in England, it was reformatted in the American colonies and written into the U.S. Constitution. Is it possible that this was a deal with the devil that Washington and the other founders made to secure the aid of the Jesuits and the Roman Catholic Church? During this same era, Jesuit leaders were on record for how they seduced those who were seeking power. They were known to say to them, We alone possess the art of consolidating governments. Lay hold on the anchor of safety which Rome offers you. Call upon those who alone are powerful to save you. Alone, what could you do against the impending catastrophes? Take refuge then with us, and we will teach you to tame this mass before whom you are now trembling. But this help did not come without a price. The Jesuits also spoke of the need for loyalty and devotion to the Pope. They said of him, He in whom Jesus Christ continually dwells, whom He has established as His representative, He whom the angels proclaim as the Doctor of Doctors, the Infallible, the Supreme Chief of all the monarchs of the universe, He claims your zeal, your arms, your devotion, and it may be your life. Most Protestant patriots tend to believe that the Founding Fathers would have shunned the Popes, because the Dark Ages represented tyranny and oppression. It is odd then that they chose to model the U.S. Capitol to look like St. Peter's Basilica in Rome, even placing an obelisk directly in front of it as in St. Peter's Square. It is even more odd that inside the Capitol are the busts of two Roman Catholic Popes, Innocent III and Gregory IX, the two Popes that, in history, were responsible for the Great Inquisition. In 1895, Pope Leo XIII would declare that the American colonies with Catholic aid achieved liberty and independence. In 1825, Jesuit leaders revealed what may have been their ultimate motivation for declaring liberty for all religions. They said, the true Church, as St. Paul says, makes itself all things to all men, in order to gain, if it be possible, the whole world. In the 20th century, Rome and the Jesuit order expanded its doctrine of religious freedom through the declarations of Vatican Council II, redefining the official position of the Catholic Church on nearly all the religions of the world. Pope John Paul II would later play a pivotal role in developing a worldwide ecumenical movement, gathering over a hundred religious leaders in Assisi, Italy in 1986 at the Prayer for Peace Conference. That same year, the Pope went to New Delhi to kneel at the tomb of Mahatma Gandhi, where he declared that the purpose of peace between the world religions was to establish a new world order. I have come here to pay homage to Mahatma Gandhi, hero of humanity. Mahatma Gandhi told that if all men and women, whatever the differences between them, cling to the truth with respect for the unique dignity of every human being, a new world order, a civilization of love, can be achieved. May God guide us and bless us as we strive to walk together, hand in hand, and build together a world of peace. Mahatma Khandiji Amarachen, may Gandhi live forever. Satyajinsa Amarache, may truth and non-violence live forever. Just as Rome's doctrine of religious liberty was used to create a more perfect union in America, it is today used to unite all nations on behalf of world peace. But the Apostle Paul warned that the cry of peace would be a sign foretelling the end of the world. He wrote, The day of the Lord so cometh as a thief in the night, for when they shall say peace and safety, then sudden destruction cometh upon them, as travail upon a woman with child, and they shall not escape. The scripture also warns of a man of sin who is called the Antichrist, saying, He shall magnify himself in his heart, and by peace shall destroy many, presumably because he promotes a false peace that compels men to betray the true gospel. The scripture warns that, them that obey not the gospel of our Lord Jesus Christ shall be punished with everlasting destruction from the presence of the Lord, when he shall come to be glorified in his saints. Worst of all is that so many Protestant Christian leaders have been seduced, forgetting the warnings of scripture they find themselves bowing to the Pope. This was happening even in the late 19th century, during the time of Charles Spurgeon, the man known as the Prince of Preachers. Spurgeon warned his fellow Evangelical Christians against the papal deception that was clearly taking place. He wrote, Evangelical churchmen, lovers of the Lord Jesus, how long will you remain in alliance with the defilements of potpourri? Protestantism owed much to you in past ages. Will you not now raise your voice and show the detestable errors of the Romus church? Your brethren in Christ cannot but wonder how it is that you remain where you are. You are children of light, and yet you aid and abet a system by which darkness, a system by which darkness is scattered all over the land. Beware lest you be found in union with Antichrist when the Lord cometh in his glory. Over the past few years, in doing the work on our Secret Mysteries of America series, I get a lot of questions about early America. Sometimes people believe that what I'm saying is that I don't believe America has any kind of Christian history. And I always try to make it clear, as I did at the beginning of our presentation, that if we talk about Pilgrim America, I do believe that that early America, for the first 100 to 150 years, was a Christian country, generally speaking, because I believe the Pilgrims and the Puritans were Christians. It's very clear from their own writings that they were. My contention, as I said before, is with American Revolutionary America and what the beliefs of the founders of the American Revolution were. Well, in that contention, I'm often asked, OK, well, what about David Barton? And David Barton, for those who don't know, is very well known in the Christian community for promoting the idea of America as a Christian nation. And one of his favorite tactics is to come out on stage with some old parchment-looking paper and so on and tell his audience that he's using original source documents, which I agree can be useful if you quote them in their full context. He contends that the American revolutionaries were somehow or other trying to support or promote Christianity in the formation of the United States. And I believe, of course, that that is, you know, provably wrong. It's a provably false argument based upon the available evidence. So in this section, what I want to do is talk about David Barton and talk about how he represents his information and how I really believe he manipulates historical data to make it look like the founders believed things that they didn't really. But to do that, to explain this to you, it's going to take a little while. But the first thing I want to do is to present you with two modern examples, two people that you know very well from our own government today. And I'm going to present you with a couple of quotes from these people and show you the kind of thing that I think David Barton is doing. So let's take a look. All right, my first extreme example is somebody that we all know, Barack Obama, president of the United States. And here we see a picture of Obama, right, and a quote out to the side. And it says, I believe that Jesus Christ died for my sins and I am redeemed through him. Barack Obama, 44th president of the United States. Now, if you don't believe me, did Obama really say this? Well, here, let me show you an original source video clip of Barack Obama actually being interviewed by America's pastor, Rick Warren. The first one is Christianity. Now, you've made no doubt about your faith in Jesus Christ. What does that mean to you? What does it mean to you to trust in Christ? And what does that mean on a daily basis? I mean, what does that really look like? Well, as a starting point, it means I believe that Jesus Christ died for my sins and that I am redeemed through him. That is a source of strength and sustenance on a daily basis. Yeah, I know that I don't walk alone. And it means that those sins that I have on a fairly regular basis hopefully will be washed away. So there, you just saw an original source video clip of Barack Obama making a very clear confession of faith with Rick Warren, America's pastor, one of the best-selling Christian authors of the 20th and 21st century. Now, just imagine, guys, imagine if we're 200 years in the future and you're flipping through a book written by David Barton XII or somebody like that, and here they've just got a picture of Obama and they've got a quote out to the side. I believe that Jesus Christ died for my sins and I am redeemed through him. Well, what would you think? So your immediate thought would be, wow, look at that. Even in the 21st century, they were electing Christian presidents because they wanted to promote Christian values and principles in America. That's incredible, right? That's what you would think. Because you would have 200 years from now, you would have no other information on Barack Obama to go on. You would just see a picture and you would see a quote out to the side. All right, so now let's look at, you're flipping through this book here, 200 years in the future, you see this picture of Obama and now David Barton, he has another picture. Oh my goodness, look at that. It's Nancy Pelosi. And Nancy Pelosi says, my favorite word is the word and that is everything. It says it all for us. And you know the biblical reference, you know the gospel reference of the word. We have to give voice to what that means in terms of public policy in keeping with the values of the word. Nancy Pelosi, first female speaker of the house. Nancy Pelosi, first female speaker of the house. Nancy Pelosi, first female speaker of the house. Wow, amazing, isn't it? Well, now some of you might question whether or not Nancy Pelosi actually said this, but here let's take a look. They ask me all the time, what is your favorite this? What is your favorite that? What is your favorite that? And at one time, what is your favorite word? And I said, my favorite word, that is really easy. My favorite word is the word. And I said, my favorite word is the word. Is the word. And that is everything. It says it all for us. And you know the biblical reference, you know the gospel reference of the word. And that word is, we have to give voice to what that means in terms of public policy that would be in keeping with the values of the word. The word. Isn't it a beautiful word when you think of it? It just covers everything. The word. Fill it in with anything you want, but of course we know it means the word was made flesh and dwelt among us. And that is the great mystery of our faith. It will come again. It will come again, so we have to make sure we are prepared to answer. In this life or otherwise, as to how we have measured up. Okay. Are you now convinced that Nancy Pelosi and Barack Obama are both Christians who are promoting Christian values in America? Well, how would it be if somebody like David Barton came to your church and they put up a picture of Barack Obama and they showed this quote from Obama that says, wow, this is proof that Obama is a Christian and he's really, no, he's not a closet Muslim. No, he's really a Christian. Why? Because we've got an original source of document here that says he's Christian. Okay. And if they then put up Nancy Pelosi and showed you this quote and tried to insist that she was a Christian, would you receive what they were saying? Probably not. If you're like most Christians that I know, you're immediate consensus is that you're a Christian. My immediate concern would be, hey, wait a minute. If these guys are Christians, then how can they support things like gay marriage? How can they support things like partial birth abortion, this wicked and evil practice where they're literally stabbing babies in the back of the neck as they come out of their mother's womb to kill them? How could any real follower of our Lord Jesus Christ support such things? And that's what David Barton does. David Barton presents individual quotes about America's founders, but he detaches that information from the full context of who those men were and what they really believed in their lifetime. And so now that I've shown you these modern examples of what I think David Barton is doing, I'm going to show you some examples of what I think David Barton is doing not that he would do that, not with Obama and Pelosi, but the only reason he doesn't do it with Obama and Pelosi is because Christians in our generation today, we know too much about these people. And hopefully what I've shown you in this presentation is that the Christian clergymen who were alive through the American Revolution did not believe that the revolutionaries were Christians. They believed generally that those men were infidels. Okay, so now what I want to do is I want to show you a couple of examples from David Barton's website of founders and how he manipulates their quotes and so on. And he withholds the fact that these guys were not only not Christian, but they were actually antichrists. Let's take a look. Okay, now that you've considered these two, all right, I'm going to show you two more. These two are two that you'll find on David Barton's website, and they're just two examples. Obviously we could go on with this stuff indefinitely, but I want to just give you some examples of some of those that we've examined. All right, so now you go to David Barton's website or you read one of his books, and you might find an image of John Adams, and out to the side it says, the Christian religion is above all the religions that ever prevailed or existed in ancient or modern times. John Adams, signer of the Declaration and so on, okay? And now Christians go to Barton's website and they read his materials and they see a quote like that, and of course David Barton is not going to tell him that John Adams denied the reality of the Holy Ghost. David Barton is not going to tell him that Adams blasphemed God and said that the idea that Jesus is God manifest in the flesh is an awful blast for me that needs to be got rid of. He's basically saying that we need to get rid of the gospel. He's saying the same thing Thomas Jefferson said. They both said we need to get rid of the gospel, and Thomas Paine said the same thing. You've got three founders who all three openly said in their declarations, we need to get rid of the gospel of Jesus Christ. And yet David Barton doesn't even blush to present this guy in a church like and sound like that he was some kind of Christian. And you will also find Thomas Jefferson on Barton's website. And one of the quotes that he has from Jefferson, Jefferson says, I am a real Christian. That is to say, a disciple of the doctrines of Jesus Christ. I am a Christian in the only sense in which he wished anyone to be, right, Thomas Jefferson and so on. Now, what Jefferson is saying in that quote, when he says I am a real Christian, what he means, brethren, is he means you are not real Christians if you believe that Jesus is the son of God. You're not a real Christian if you believe that he was born of a virgin and that he died on the cross for your sins and that God raised him from the dead and that by faith in him you have salvation and eternal life. Oh, you're not real Christians if you believe that. You're dupes. You're believing stupidity and falsehood and imposture to use Jefferson's own words about the teachings of the gospel. And you're not a real Christian if you believe that. Jefferson's saying, I am a real Christian because I don't believe that stuff. I am a real Christian because I don't believe Jesus is the son of God. That's what he's saying. And so as God says in the scripture that even the offering of the wicked is abomination in his sight, so is this confession, a so-called confession from Thomas Jefferson. It's really an abomination because what he's doing is by that he's mocking the gospel and he's mocking those who believe the gospel. And it's shameful that somebody like David Barton would present quotes from Thomas Jefferson like this and separate them from the full context of who Jefferson was. The view of Jefferson and John Adams was much like that of the ancient Jews that opposed Christ. When Jesus said to them, I and my father are one, they took up stones to stone him. The scripture says, Jesus answered them, many good works have I showed you from my father. For which of those works do you stone me? The scripture is saying, for a good work we stone thee not, but for blasphemy, and because that thou, being a man, makest thyself God. In the same way, Adams and Jefferson did not object to the good work that Jesus did or to his example of morality. But concerning the doctrine that Jesus is God manifest in the flesh as the Bible clearly teaches, at this they were incensed and like the Pharisees of old wanted him got rid of. They were very much like the Sadducees 2,000 years ago who did not believe in miracles or angels or the supernatural. That was very much the thinking of Thomas Jefferson and John Adams and really the whole enlightenment movement that was taking place over in Europe. I'm going to show you something that David Barton did when he not too long ago actually went on the Glenn Beck program. He went on the Glenn Beck program and he was talking about John Adams and Thomas Jefferson and the letters that they wrote back and forth to each other and I want you to listen to what he says. You have the letter sitting in front of right there. This is from John Adams to John Adams. This is from John Adams to Benjamin Rush. And Benjamin Rush has told John I had this dream, it's really strange, I thank God gave me this dream and I think you need to know about it. What Barton is describing is a conflict that existed between Thomas Jefferson and John Adams and how it was Benjamin Rush who helped to repair their disagreement supposedly through a dream he had. This led to Adams and Jefferson writing many letters to each other and he goes through this theological thing that I think God gave you the dream. I'm willing to do this. Let's get back together. That is the letter they got those two guys reconciled. They did end up writing volumes of letters back and forth to each other from which we benefit today. All right, so these letters, the letters that he's referring to when he says oh we benefit from these letters today and he's trying to make it out like these letters if you listen he tries to make it out like these letters were inspired by God, like God had inspired Jefferson and Adams to write these letters. That's the way that he tries to make it out and those letters that he's referring to are the letters that in which Adams and Jefferson are blaspheming God and they're denouncing the gospel and they're denying the Lord Jesus Christ over and over again and exalting their pagan ideas. Those are the letters and in fact when Jefferson's papers were first published there was a very different view of them that was held by the clergy at that time. It is interesting to compare David Barton's view of Jefferson's letters with that of Dr. Ashbel Green, the congressional chaplain who as we showed earlier lived during the founding era. It was only after Jefferson died that his private papers were published and the extent of his hatred against Christianity revealed. This was done at Jefferson's own request. Far from trying to make him out to be some kind of godly hero Dr. Ashbel Green called Jefferson a coward and said it is clear that he dreaded to meet the consequences of a public avowal of his sentence. on this side of the grave and yet he possessed such an inveterate hatred to reveal truth that he could not be content to leave it unassailed. He has left a monument of his blasphemous impiety which we are satisfied will cause his memory to be held in abhorrence by every American Christian to the end of time. The Christians of our land will never hear the name of Jefferson without such an association of it with his hatred of Christianity. Not all the lauding and birthday celebrations will durably sustain the reputation of the reviler of Christ and his cause. The memory of the just is blessed but the name of the wicked shall rot. Well, when David Barton was on the Glenn Beck program, probably the biggest misquote and misrepresentation of history that he's done is this quote from John Adams about the Holy Ghost and he uses this on the Glenn Beck program and then I'm going to show it to you again when he uses it in a church when he's doing a church presentation. Here, look. This is John Adams quote right here. He's talking to Benjamin. He says, but my friend Benjamin, there's something very serious in this business. He said the Holy Ghost carries on the whole Christian system and his truth, not a baptism, not a marriage, not a sacrament can be administered by the Holy Ghost and he goes through this theological thing. I don't know if you've ever seen one of John Adams' letters. I brought one just in case you might want to see one. It's signed on the back by John Adams here. I want you to see the kind of stuff that John Adams would write in his letters. I've got the letter up here where you can see it. I'm going to read from the bottom paragraph right there and you may see where the arrow is pointing. It says the Holy Ghost, look what John Adams declares in this letter. He says the Holy Ghost carries on the whole Christian system and there is no authority, civil or religious. There can be no legitimate government but what is administered by the Holy Ghost. There can be no salvation without it or without its rebellion and perdition or in more orthodox words, damnation. I don't think I saw that on the HBO special. While David Barton cuts this quote short, the full context of Adams' letter reveals that he was in no way supporting the authority of the Holy Ghost and not using it and even mocked it as the orthodox belief of Christians. As we showed earlier, Adams was a well-known Unitarian and did not even believe the Holy Ghost existed. How David Barton, who has such a vast knowledge of the founding fathers, could have overlooked this, we can only wonder. Beginning where Adams left off, the actual letter reads, there is no authority, there can be no legitimate government but what is administered by this Holy Ghost. There can be no salvation without it. All without it is rebellion and perdition or in more orthodox words, damnation. Although this is all artifice and cunning, yet they all believe it so sincerely that they would lie down their lives under the axe or the fiery faggots for it. Alas, the poor, weak, ignorant, dupe, human nature. There is so much kingcraft, priestcraft, and devil's craft in the world that it seems a desperate and impractical project to undeceive it. What makes Barton's misquote so awful is that Adams and Jefferson often wrote to each other about the God of nature and nature's laws, by which they meant the understanding about God that could be perceived by the natural man. In rejection of things that are supernatural or miraculous, which they believed was superstition and foolishness. This is why Jefferson wrote about the pretensions of those who say that Jesus suspended and reversed the laws of nature at will by performing miracles, which Jefferson believed was not credible because it was contrary to reason. In other words, the laws of nature suggest that miracles are simply not possible. Therefore, they believed that our understanding of God should be limited to only what we can prove through nature. This is what they meant by nature's God and the God of nature. These references are intended to specifically reject the claims of a supernatural God in the Bible. In fact, John Adams was so against the idea of the Holy Ghost that the whole concept of world government was really a struggle between mankind versus the Christian belief in heavenly authority. In one of his many letters to Thomas Jefferson, Adams wrote, The question before the human race is whether the God of nature shall govern the world by his own laws or whether priests and kings or in other words, whether authority is originally in the people or brought down from heaven by the Holy Ghost in the form of a dove. Adams and Jefferson both believed that the people should hold the place of God in government and obey only those things that are self-evident to their natural wisdom. Adams and Jefferson were so bound that both concluded that it was not possible to know God. Adams said, God is an essence that we know nothing of, while Jefferson agreed saying, of the nature of this being we know nothing. When we consider these quotes along with their references to natural wisdom, the warnings of the book of Jude compelled the church to earnestly contend for the faith because he said, There are certain men crept in unawares who were before of old ordained to this condemnation, ungodly men denying the only Lord God and our Lord Jesus Christ. These speak evil of those things which they know not but what they know naturally as brute beasts and things they corrupt themselves. Woe unto them! These are spots in your feasts of charity, raging waves of the sea, foaming out their own shame, wandering stars to whom is reserved the blackness of darkness forever. What I want to do next is to go over this book by David Barton which is called The Question of Freemasonry and the Founding Fathers. And in this book, is he attempts to argue that Freemasonry had no real influence in the founding of the United States of America. And I'm going to show you why we strongly disagree with him. Not only that, but he also attempts to argue that original American Masonry, the Masonry of George Washington and the other founders was somehow or other a Christian organization, that it was originally a Christian organization and I disagree with that view as well. And I'm also going to show you that the Masonic philosophies that David Barton himself acknowledges in this book are the same philosophies that were held by the Founding Fathers of the United States and they're the very philosophies that we've been going over in this presentation. So let's get started. Perhaps most significant by making an appeal to the Christian perspective. Right here at the beginning in the front of this book, he says this question will be examined from a Christian perspective, illuminating not only historical occurrences but also biblical considerations. Now I contend against David Barton that that statement is false. He does not consider this from a Christian perspective or with biblical considerations. What I contend against David Barton on that issue is I don't believe he really is examining these things, the founders, from a Christian perspective and he's certainly not judging according to the Bible. And the chief reason that I say that is that David Barton leads tours throughout Washington D.C. trying to convince people that the architecture and the design there is somehow or other evidence of our godly heritage or godly heritage, we would assume, and yet the architecture is surrounded with all of these pagan statues of gods and goddesses throughout the ancient world that the Bible calls demons. The Bible says very clearly that Neptune and Apollo and Athena and Hermes and so on, all of these gods that are there in Washington D.C., the Bible says they're demons. In the Bible, we read about how the early church in Corinth got involved with the various temple practices of ancient Greece. Those who were Christians were joining themselves to those who still worshiped the gods and goddesses of the pagan world. As the early church got involved with the temple practices of ancient Greece, those who were Christians were joining themselves to those who still worshiped the goddesses of the pagan world. As a result, the apostle Paul wrote and warned them, saying, I say that the things which the Gentiles sacrifice, they sacrifice to devils and not to God, and I would not that you should have fellowship with devils. You cannot drink the cup of the Lord and the cup of devils. You cannot be partakers of the Lord's table and the table of devils. And when Paul is writing that, he's writing to the Corinthians, who were Greeks. The Corinthians had, they worshiped, the unbelieving Corinthians, worshiped all of those gods and goddesses, those Greek and sometimes Roman gods and goddesses that we find in Washington, D.C. The Bible says they're demons, but David Barton says, no, don't be concerned about that. They're just part of classical literature that the founding fathers were educated in. He says the choice of those three framers does not indicate any type of paganism on their part. Barton argues that the reason many modern Christians reject pagan symbols in Washington, D.C. is because Americans in recent generations have not been trained in classical literature, a training that was routine in the founding era, he says. Yet, even 200 years earlier, the danger of so-called classical studies was defined by the 16th-century scholar Erasmus, who said that under the cloak of reviving ancient literature, paganism tries to rear its head, as there are those among Christians who acknowledge Christ only in name, but inwardly breathe heathenism. Now, we've already seen from the writings of the founders like Ben Franklin and John Adams and Thomas Jefferson that these guys were the ones who were the founders of God. And so they're talking about God and they're involved either with Freemasonry or they are into, like, John Adams. Adams is very clearly making reference to pagan writings to formulate his ideas about God. John Adams is preferring the description of God in some Indian ancient book, the Shasta. And so he's talking about the description of God in some Indian ancient book, the Shasta. Above anything he ever read in the Bible. And he's calling the Bible blasphemy because it doesn't agree with his pagan view of God, of who God is. He's saying that Americans in recent generations have not been trained in classical literature, a training that was routine in the founding era. Therefore, present-day Americans are not inclined to consider structures from the ancient empires, et cetera, and so on, or to be familiar with their heroes such as Cato, Cicero, and Aeneas, or even with their writers such as Homer, Virgil, Herodotus, and especially Plutarch. And he goes on. Homer and Virgil, let's just take Homer, a lot of people know Homer from the writing of the Iliad and the Odyssey. Okay. What's Homer writing about? Homer's writing about Odysseus, or Eulens, or Eulens. He's writing about Odysseus going on his journeys and encountering all the various gods and goddesses of the ancient world. That's what he's writing about. All of those gods that are being talked about, the Bible calls demons. The Bible says these are demonic powers and principalities. And the same is true of all these other writers. In fact, the Goat of Mendes in the 19th century that was the first book that was developed with the Baphomet by Eliphas Levi. Eliphas Levi developed his philosophies about that through the writings of Herodotus, who's writing about the pagan mysteries of the ancient world and how the Greeks and the Romans were interacting with the Egyptians and so on. Now, if David Barton was judging this from a biblical perspective, then he would acknowledge that these various gods and goddesses are called demons, according to the Bible. All right. Now, here's the incredible statement from David Barton right here. All right. Notice what he says. It is historically and irrefutably demonstrable that Freemasonry was not a significant influence in the formation of the United States. It is not a significant influence in the formation of the United States. I think that the most — there's a lot of evidence that we could present to prove that he's wrong about that. I think the clearest and the most decisive is the declaration that we have from Congress in 2007. The 110th Congress, when Nancy Pelosi became Speaker of the House, that Congress put forth House Resolution 33 in honor of the Freemasons of America. And here's what it said. The resolution recognized the thousands of Freemasons in every state in the nation. It said specifically, whereas the founding fathers of this great nation and signers of the Constitution, most of whom were Freemasons. Furthermore, the resolution was put forth by former Congressman and 33rd degree Freemason Paul Gilmore. Most of the founders and most of the signers of the U.S. Constitution. Now, that's not from some conspiracy writing. That's the U.S. Congress. That's the congressional record. All right. So now David Barton recognizes — let's look over here. All right. In his book, David Barton acknowledges what Freemasonry is. Notice what he says. He says, finally, Masonry includes a very religious component that is highly universalist and deistic. The God recognized by Masonry is whatever God any individual Mason might recognize, whether the Judeo-Christian God or a pagan or pantheistic God. To avoid religious controversy, all deities are recognized in Masonry by a single deistic name, Gautu, the great architect of the universe. Okay. Now, he says that. He acknowledges that that's the Masonic view. Then you move forward, and he's giving his history of Freemasonry that largely he does not understand. But let's look at — he follows up with that now, and he does a comparison now here between Masonry and Christianity. And he says that according to Masonry, there is a mystery. Jesus of Nazareth was but a man like us or his history, but the unreal revival of an older legend. Because a lot of the thinking in Masonry is that Jesus is just like a latter-day version of Mithras or Horace or whatever. But this is exactly what the founders believed. This is exactly what Jefferson and Adams believed. It doesn't matter if Jefferson or Adams were themselves Freemasons in the sense that they were literally a member of a Masonic lodge somewhere. That doesn't matter. They believed in the same philosophy that Masonry does. They believed that Jesus of Nazareth was just a man like anybody else. They rejected the idea that he was God manifest in the flesh. Think about what Jefferson says when he says that the day will come when the story of Jesus, born of a virgin, will be classed with the fable of Minerva, an older legend. That's exactly what Thomas Jefferson believed. And it's what Benjamin Franklin believed. And it's what John Adams believed. And again, it doesn't matter if they were literally members of Masonry or not. And he goes on to give a quote here from Albert Mackey that the true Mason realizes with the divine illumination of his lodge that as a Mason, his religion must be universal. Christ, Buddha, or Muhammad, the name means little. And then he goes on. Why did George Washington go into battle? According to Washington's own statement, George Washington took the field. He went to Washington took the field. He went to war and fought the American Revolution, not for Christianity, but so that Christians and Jews and Muslims and any other religion could be practiced on American soil. George Washington went to war and he fought for the God of Masonry and for the Masonic version of religion. That's what he fought for. No, it is not of God. No, it is not of God to teach people that they have the right to bow down and worship whatever God they want to worship. God would not send a Christian man onto the field of battle to fight for the principle of allowing people to worship demons. I know of nothing in the Bible where God says, yes, go into all the world and make sure that people have the right to worship idols. And you need to risk your life and lay down your life for my sake to make sure that people can worship demon gods. All right, so David Barton continues now and he's drawing this contrast between Freemasonry and Christianity. And he admits what the Masonic philosophy and viewpoint is. According to Masonry, the absolute is reason. If God is, he is by reason. Now, isn't that what we've been talking about from most of the founding fathers? Thomas Paine wrote The Age of Reason. We have Thomas Jefferson talking about keep reason firmly in your grasp and so on. John Adams is arguing philosophic reason against the idea of divine revelation. There are even quotes from Benjamin Franklin on human reason. There's a quote from George Washington where Washington says that religion cannot exist without the other. The one is as necessary to reason as reason is to religion. The one cannot exist without the other. All right, so that's the quote from Washington. But notice now the contrast. David Barton admits he acknowledges what the Christian view is. The Christian view is that God is period. His existence makes possible human reason. He is whether human reason exists or not. Now, we commend David Barton for declaring the Christian position. However, we've got to confront him and say, David Barton, you need to acknowledge the founding fathers did not agree with Christianity. George Washington did not agree with your understanding as a Christian. But it gets even worse. Okay, now let's look at what David Barton says over here. When he's again, he's going on showing his contrast. And I'll say, you know, to his credit, to his credit, I'm glad David Barton took the time to give his official view and to defend Christianity against Masonic philosophy. But what he refuses to acknowledge is that the philosophy of America's founders was the philosophy of Freemasonry. So, so he says, here, Masonry's view is that Masonry recognizes deity and proceeds only after asking divine guidance, but it does not specify any particular deity. You can worship any god you please and be a Mason. Christianity, this is the Christian view, he says, and the Judeo-Christian tradition. Only one god is worshipped, and that god is not the universalist deity of God. And that god is not the universalist deity of God. That's the theistic god that Masonry denotes as the great architect of the universe. Gautu, right? The god of Christianity is not the great architect of the universe. Now, what David Barton does, what's incredible in this book is you keep reading this book, and as we go on, beginning in page 110, he then tries to convince you that George Washington was a Christian. He tries to convince you that George Washington was a Christian, and he completely avoids the fact that the god of George Washington by Washington's own admission was the great architect of the universe. So what is he saying? He's actually saying that the god of George Washington is not the god of Christianity, because George Washington repeatedly in his letters made reference to the great architect of the universe. In fact, here I'll show you, these are some of the letters of George Washington that you can go online and look at on the Library of Congress website, and you can actually see Washington's own letters written in his own hand where he makes reference to the great architect of the universe several times. He refers to the grand architect of the universe and even the supreme architect of the universe. These are all in letters that Washington wrote to the Masonic Lodges. If you read those letters, I believe it's very clear that George Washington was a lot more comfortable writing to his fellow Masons. He felt much more of a kinship with them than he ever seemed to with the Christians, with the pastors and so on, that he would write to in his correspondence. It's my observation, reading his letters, I would encourage others to read his letters and draw their own conclusion. To his brothers of the Grand Lodge of Pennsylvania, Washington wrote, permit me to reciprocate your prayers and to supplicate that we may all meet hereafter in that eternal temple whose builder is the great architect of the universe. He's very comfortable with the great architect of the universe, but what David Barton is saying, the problem is he just does not make the connection in his book that George Washington worshiped the great architect of the universe. And yet he's saying without realizing it that the God of George Washington is not the God of Christianity. That's what he's saying. But he just doesn't put the pieces of the puzzle together in the way that he should. So then he goes down a list of people here and he's trying to argue about the great architect of the universe and he goes down a list of people here and he's trying to argue about who was and who was not a Freemason. And here this is probably the biggest part, the thing that's very, very important to discuss and talk about. Notice what he says. He says period two. He's talking about the different periods and he's saying original American Masonry, okay, through the American Revolution until approximately 1813. American Masonry was an organization that not only adhered to but even adhered Orthodox Christian doctrinal teachings as part of its practice. Now obviously we know that's not true because Benjamin Franklin was a very famous Freemason. Again, he was master of the lodge in Philadelphia. It was said he only missed like five lodge meetings in his whole lifetime. But he most definitely did not believe Orthodox Christian doctrinal anything. He didn't believe that stuff. He stated it and he was well known for it. Franklin, he didn't adhere to those doctrines or those beliefs. And yet he was a very famous Mason, very prominent and very, very influential in Freemasonry. So right there off the bat, probably one of the most famous Masons of all time, Benjamin Franklin, stands contrary to what David Barton is saying. What he's trying to do is he's trying to say that American Masonry was Christian and it only became this kind of esoteric occult organization after the American Revolution, after guys like George Washington were gone. That's what he's trying to do. But what he's saying is provably false. Barton argues that American Masonry only embraced paganism in the 19th century. He writes that the two individuals most influential were Albert Mackey and Albert Pike. Their writings filled with beliefs and practices, openly heretical to Christianity, breathed a new life and spirit into American Freemasonry, a new and pagan philosophy by Mackey and Pike. So part of continuing his idea that Freemasonry became corrupt only after the American Revolution, he introduces Albert Pike and Albert Mackey as two of these agents of corruption. The reality is that what happened was that after the American Revolution, occultism was legalized in America and throughout Europe because of the American Revolution and then you had the French Revolution and then all of these revolutions are happening across Europe. And what happened was once Christianity was essentially cast down and no longer were governments being judged in Europe and America according to the teachings of the Bible, the diocese of America were essentially cast down and no longer were governments being judged in Europe according to the teachings of the Bible, the doctrine of religious liberty so-called. What that did was it legalized the worship of idols. It legalized witchcraft and demonology and all of this stuff. And so what happened was the people, what Albert Pike is doing and Eliphas Levi and Albert Mackey and others, they're not inventing new ideas about what they're doing. They're not inventing new ideas about what they're doing. They're not inventing new ideas about what these secret societies were all about. Not at all. What they're doing is they're now publishing openly, because it's legal, they are publishing openly what they had been practicing in private secretly for centuries. That's what was going on. It would be just like if the government legalized marijuana and cocaine. What would happen? You'd have all of these people coming out of the woodwork and they'd be smoking pot and they'd be drinking coffee and they'd be writing books on how to grow pot in your basement and all this other kind of stuff. People would be going hog wild. It doesn't mean that it wasn't going on in our country before it was made legal. No, it's been going on for years. The same is true with these elements of occultism. They didn't just spring up out of nowhere. They had always been part of the inner doctrines of Freemasonry and occultism. They had always been part of the inner doctrines of Freemasonry and occultism. They were part of all of these secret groups. But what happened was, as a result of the American Revolution and the other revolutions in Europe, religious liberty legalized demonology. There's no other way to say it. It became legal, so they had nothing to fear in writing and publishing these books and getting this information out there. After Mackey and I mean you first have Eliphas Levi, then Albert Pike, Albert Mackey, then you get Madame Alastair Crowley, and then Manley Hall in the 20th century. They were all a whole stream of spiritual licentiousness that had been engineered by the founding fathers of America. They're the ones who originally gave license to devil worship. In the 20th century, Manley P. Hall would become known as Masonry's greatest philosopher, a title given to him by his fellow Freemasons. Hall wrote extensively about pagan philosophies and especially about the founding of America. In his book, The Secret Destiny of America, he describes what may be the real reason the founding fathers concealed their true beliefs and outwardly presented themselves as Christians. He says, the founding fathers of America were the real reason the founding fathers concealed their true beliefs and outwardly presented themselves as Christians. He says, the rise of the Christian church broke up the intellectual pattern of the classical pagan world. By persecution, it drove the secret societies into greater secrecy. The pagan intellectuals then re-clothed their original ideas in a garment of Christian phraseology, but bestowed the keys of the symbolism only upon those duly initiated and bound to secrecy by their vows. According to Hall, these pagan intellectuals intentionally deceived those around them. While professing things that sounded Christian outwardly, they inwardly breathed heathenism, which is the fulfillment of certain biblical traditions. The pagan intellectuals then re-clothed their ideas in a garment of Christian phraseology, but bestowed the keys of the symbolism only upon critical warnings. Jesus said, Beware of false prophets, which come to you in sheep's clothing, but inwardly they are ravening wolves. He had also said to the Pharisees, Ye are like unto whited sepulchres, which indeed appear beautiful outward, but are within, full of dead men's bones and of all uncleanness. Even so, ye also outwardly appear righteous unto men, but within ye are full of hypocrisy, anger, and iniquity. Ye serpents, ye generation of vipers, how can ye escape the damnation of hell? Some might think that God has changed his position on the idea of religious freedom. They might think, well, for this time, God wants us to have this religious freedom. God wants us to have this religious freedom. So we don't have to be in that freedom, etc. and so on. But that's just not the case biblically. I mean if we look at the scriptures and we see what's happening in the book of Revelation, God is pouring out plagues and disasters and so on. He's pouring out judgments upon the earth and when He does, it says, and still the people would not repent of their worship of idols. That mankind still refused to repent. You see the gospel is not God's suggestion. It's not God's recommendation for mankind. That's why Paul, when Paul stood on Mars Hill and he preached to the Athenians, he looked out at all of their gods and then he told them that they had a misunderstanding about who God is. And so he says the times of this ignorance God winked at in times past. But now He commands that all men everywhere repent because He's appointed a day in which He will judge the world in righteousness by that man whom He has ordained. And He's given assurance unto all men in that He has raised Him from the dead, the Lord Jesus Christ. That's the commandment of God. This is why John writes in 1 John chapter 3 and verse 23. He says, and this is His commandment that we believe on the name of His Son, Jesus Christ. This is a commandment from God. The problem with the doctrine of religious freedom as it's set forth in the Constitution is that it's being called a God-given inalienable right. That our Creator God has endowed us with this right to worship whatever God we please or to worship God in whatever way we want. That's not at all what the Bible says. Now it would be one thing if our government alone were guilty of this false doctrine, but it goes beyond that because the church has now been roped in and we've got pastors and teachers and leaders that are going around telling everybody, this is your God-given inalienable right to believe whatever you want to about God. And then it seems like a complete contradiction to come back and tell them, well wait a minute, you've got to believe on the Lord Jesus Christ or you can't be saved. The Bible doesn't promote freedom of thought. The Bible says that we're called to bring every thought captive into the obedience of Christ. If we were founded as a Christian nation, that would be the admonition. It would be just like the declaration of Harvard University that every student shall earnestly consider that the main end of his life and studies is to know God and Jesus Christ for this is eternal life. That would be what our Constitution and our declaration and so on would have been about that doctrine. Not necessarily forcing people into some kind of a thought life, but that being the focus and the purpose of America. In the scriptures, we are told to consider the faith of those who have come before us. The book of Hebrews says, concerning the saints of old, these all died in faith, not having received the promises, but having seen them afar off and were persuaded of them and embraced them and confessed that they were strangers and pilgrims on the earth. For they that say such things declare plainly that they seek a country and truly if they had been mindful of that country from whence they came out, they might have had opportunity to have returned. But now they desire a better country, that is a heavenly, wherefore God is not ashamed to be called their God. For he hath prepared for them a city, for here we have no continuing city, but we seek one to come. In the name of Jesus Christ, amen. Amen. Amen.