Exodus

Update: Jim Burroway notes that the essay, posted as Charisma's headline article under "7/20/2012," dates back to 2004. However, the article reads, "Six states, plus Washington, D.C., have legalized same-sex marriage, and legal battles are waging in nearly every other state to accomplish the same," which was not true until last year.

Update II: It appears Charisma has removed the article from its website, but can be read in its entirety below.

Update III: Chambers now says the article does not reflect his current views and has been edited by Charisma:

I am on the beach, literally, with my family enjoying the dog days of summer. I have no idea why Charisma decided to reach so deep, edit and republish an 8 year old article that I am embarrassed that I ever wrote. Our PR team has asked them to remove the article and not to repost it. When I am back in town I will contact them, as well.

****

Alan Chambers of Exodus International faced an onslaught of attacks from his Religious Right colleagues after he said gay Christians could go to Heaven and distanced Exodus from promoting sexual orientation conversion therapy, but today in Charisma Magazine, Chambers appears to be trying to win back his anti-gay allies with his lament that the “land of the free and the home of the brave is morphing into a homosexual haven.” Chambers describes his escape “from the seemingly unbreakable bondage of homosexuality” and also thanks his parents for teaching him that “homosexuality was anti-creation and anti-God.”

He argues that gay rights advocates are using public schools and absent parents to, like “Hitler and Marx,” attempt to “radically influence the hearts and minds of young people” through the media and education. “The gay lobby has taken America hostage,” Chambers warns, asserting that “if this process is not stopped, the gaying of the United States will begin to affect religious freedom.” Have you noticed that America is becoming a gay nation? The land of the free and the home of the brave is morphing into a homosexual haven.

Gay activists want much more than legalized gay marriage. Are you comfortable with their vision for our future?

Have you noticed that America is becoming a gay nation? The land of the free and the home of the brave is morphing into a homosexual haven.

Just look at the top programs on television or listen to the most popular actors and musicians. They are celebrating all things gay: gay marriage, gay adoptions, gay cruises, gay politics, Gay Days at Disney World, gay-friendly businesses and, of course, gay churches. And more and more Americans are applauding what was once considered perverse.

How did this happen? We have been naive targets of the most successful marketing campaign in history.

We shouldn't be surprised that a few powerful people were able to lure mainstream Americans into accepting homosexuality as a lifestyle. Marshall Kirk and Erastes Pill predicted in 1987 that this would happen. In an article called "The Overhauling of Straight America," Kirk and Pill wrote in Guide magazine:

"You can forget about trying to persuade the masses that homosexuality is a good thing. But if only you can get them to think that it is just another thing, with a shrug of their shoulders, then your battle for legal and social rights is virtually won."

Kirk and Pill called for a "large-scale media campaign" to change the image of gays in America. This campaign, they said, would involve six steps: (1) Talk about gays and gayness as loudly and often as possible; (2) Portray gays as victims, not as aggressive challengers; (3) Give protectors a just cause; (4) Make gays look good; (5) Make the victimizers look bad; and (6) Solicit funds.

All six of these objectives have been successfully accomplished in only 17 years. We now live in a society in which some of the most influential individuals are either living as homosexuals or relentlessly promoting how normal it is to live this way.

Most members of the Hollywood media elite are involved in this subversive campaign. Homosexuality has become a part of almost every movie plot, sitcom, song, acceptance speech or liberal political campaign mantra.

And we all know what happens to those who refuse to conform to the groupthink mentality of the politically correct. Just ask Laura Schlessenger, the popular talk-show host whose TV show was canceled because she had the audacity to suggest that homosexuality is a biological abnormality.

She only said what many pro-gay organizations' websites imply in more couched terms. Yet Dr. Laura's sponsors pulled their support.

So much for freedom of speech.

You may wonder how I can be so direct and opinionated about this issue. I believe I have a right to warn people about the gay agenda because I was at one time trapped in a homosexual lifestyle. My attractions were exclusively homosexual, and I bought into the lie that I must have been born gay.

Though I grew up in a Christian home and accepted Jesus as my Savior at age 6, I was still susceptible to sexual immorality. Though I never chose my homosexual feelings (who would?), I did choose to act on them.

I tried going to a gay church to see if I could reconcile homosexuality with Christianity. I attended gay pride rallies and volunteered to work for AIDS organizations. I lived in a shame-based cycle of sexual encounters that left me empty--until the day God sent two Christians into a gay bar to encourage me, walk me out the door and help me overcome my unhealthy behavior pattern.

Twenty years later I am a different man. After much counseling, prayer, obedience, tears, deliverance and daily submission to God's will, I am free from the seemingly unbreakable bondage of homosexuality. I am living testimony that gays can change.

As a homosexual I suffered in one broken relationship after another and struggled to find inner peace. I fought for satisfaction through sex, social acceptance and the pursuit of rights. But I finally realized that only Jesus Christ can fill the voids of life. So I chose to follow Him.

Brainwashing America

My parents had a very different view of homosexuality than most young people today. When I was growing up, the only thing I ever heard about homosexuality was negative.

My dad's office was in downtown Orlando, Fla., near a local scenic spot called Lake Eola. At that time the park near this lake had a bad reputation because so many gay men went there for anonymous sex. My dad often told me and my brother when we were making our clothing choices that he didn't want us to grow up and become "like the queers down at Eola Park."

Obviously my father lacked compassion for homosexuals, and no one should use such unkind remarks to refer to other people. My dad did not understand the complex psychological, medical and emotional reasons people become gay. But he did understand that homosexuality is innately wrong.

My parents' generation was the last to see this issue in such absolute terms, unfortunately. Many of today's GenXers think being gay is just an "alternative lifestyle." They've seen enough episodes of Will & Grace and listened to enough media propaganda to conclude that homosexuality is just one more way to express love.

Because my parents knew homosexuality was anti-creation and anti-God, they instilled in me some of those "old-fashioned" values that are greatly lacking in so many homes today. I'm thankful they did.

But many kids today are not so fortunate. From the public school system to the entertainment industry to government and military to businesses, homosexuality is now perhaps the most protected, promoted and endorsed lifestyle in our world.

We promote homosexuality on a daily basis when we subscribe to cable TV services, buy designer clothes or go to the bank. It's hard to find even one company essential to daily life in the 21st century that does not overtly or passively fund the advancement of homosexuality.

The growing trend in American society for the last 30 years has been for both parents to work (if a child is lucky enough to have a mother and father under the same roof) so that their families can enjoy the "good life." With this trend came the routine that children in these homes go to school, come home, eat alone, watch television, surf the Internet and put themselves to bed--not to mention engage in sexually promiscuous behavior.

Pro-homosexual leaders realized the same truth employed by Hitler and Marx: To advance their agenda they must radically influence the hearts and minds of young people.

Because Mom and Dad are working all day and Susie and Junior are in school and then home alone, activists came up with a plan: Use public schools, television, the Internet and other youth-friendly venues to influence the way young people view homosexuality.

Under the guise of AIDS education, groups such as the Gay Lesbian Straight Education Network gained access into public schools. Similarly, pro-homosexual activists ran for school board positions and partnered with every kid's favorite after-school babysitter, MTV. Teenagers got hooked on the Internet, which opened them up to a 24-hour source of temptation and perversion.

The plan worked. If you ask the average kid, even the average Christian kid, how they feel about homosexuality, nine out of 10 will tell you they believe it is genetic, normal and just like heterosexuality. We have allowed an entire generation of young people to be brainwashed with an alternate morality.

The Power of Words

Much of this brainwashing has come by way of buzzwords and phrases. For example, everyone has become accustomed to talking about "sexual orientation." Brilliant homosexuals intent on legitimizing homosexual behavior used this phrase to generalize all sexual conduct. Whether one is heterosexual, homosexual, bisexual or even pedophilic, all are lumped under this term.

Though homosexuality, bisexuality and pedophilia bring up negative, unpleasant or adverse reactions, "sexual orientation" seems nonoffensive. Lumping homosexuality in with heterosexuality under one definition helped homosexuality gain new credibility as at least a runner up, if not an equal to, heterosexuality.

Once "sexual orientation" was introduced into our vocabulary, it was then propagated throughout the media. Oprah Winfrey, Katie Couric and Peter Jennings inundated us with this new phraseology. Those battling for the acceptance of homosexuality experienced newfound respect from a culture that at one time used the unflattering term "sodomy" to denote homosexual practice.

With this new vocabulary ingrained in our subconscious, gay activists began fighting for protection from discrimination. They purposed to make it impossible for anyone to refuse restaurant service, housing, jobs, raises and promotions based on sexual orientation.

The Human Rights Campaign, the world's largest homosexual-rights advocacy group, reports that in 2002 more cities and counties added sexual orientation to their anti-discrimination ordinances than in any other year (a total of 15). In all, more than 140 cities and counties have ordinances protecting lesbians and gay men from discrimination, and 53 cities and counties now also protect the transgendered. Fourteen cities and two counties added gender identity to their anti-discrimination ordinances in 2002, an increase of more than 300 percent over 2001.

Where is this headed? And can we stop this process?

Sadly, much of the damage is already done. Our nation's moral fabric is unraveling and most of us don't even realize it.

The Supreme Court has legalized sodomy. Six states, plus Washington, D.C., have legalized same-sex marriage, and legal battles are waging in nearly every other state to accomplish the same. The mayor of San Francisco acted illegally by marrying same-sex couples, and yet he was not penalized for his actions.

Now, perhaps too late, we are waking up from a three-decade sleep to realize that the gay lobby has taken America hostage. I hope we are not so naive that we think their agenda stops with legalizing same-sex marriages. Ultimately, if this process is not stopped, the gaying of the United States will begin to affect religious freedom:

Churches will be forced to hire gay people in staff positions.

Christian broadcasters will be penalized or even shut down if they air programs that call homosexuality a sin.

Religious people will be jailed for violating "hate speech" laws--because they describe homosexuality as abnormal or immoral.

I hope we wake up soon. The apathy that has gripped the church for so long has been costly.

Martin Luther King Jr. said it best: "The church is neither the master of the state nor the servant of the state but rather the conscience of the state." The moral crisis we face today is the result not of sinners running loose but rather of Christians remaining passive and prayerless. Only if we repent, recommit and remobilize do we have hope for reformation.

Liberty Counsel Chairman Mathew Staver floated a boycott of Starbucks today on Freedom’s Call, Staver’s daily news alert. Staver was addressing the controversy over Starbucks CEO Howard Schultz’s cancelled appearance at the Global Leadership Summit at Willow Creek church, which in the past had ties to the ex-gay group Exodus International.

Staver alleges that Schultz was “intimidated” by “homosexual activists” into withdrawing from the conference, falsely arguing that the petition to Schultz was about the church’s view on marriage while it was actually regarding Willow Creek’s connections to the ex-gay ministry. In fact, marriage is nowhere mentioned in the petition. Staver also claimed that “Schultz and Starbucks have routinely been pro-abortion in their policies and actions” and that Schultz is beholden to “his homosexual constituency.”

“Since Starbucks is so pro-homosexual,” Staver said, “probably the people that buy Starbucks ought to consider patronizing another place”:

Liberty Counsel previously endorsed a boycott against McDonalds for allegedly working with “militant homosexual activists” and pressure campaigns against schools that permit students to participate in the “Day of Silence,” which protests anti-gay bullying.

Staver’s weighing of a Starbucks boycott is especially ironic because his deputy at Liberty Counsel, Matt Barber, accused gay rights advocates of “economic terrorism” for protesting companies that were part of the CGBG, a commercial group that allowed customers to grant proceeds to the Family Research Council, Focus on the Family, and Liberty Counsel.

But for Religious Right groups, pressure campaigns are only tolerated when they are the ones organizing them.

Janet Porter’s proposed “heartbeat bill” in Ohio, which would criminalize abortion in the vast majority of cases, is so extreme that the Ohio Right to Life Society refuses to back it, but for some anti-choice radicals, it does not go far enough. As we’ve previously reported, Personhood USA wants to put a personhood amendment on the Ohio ballot in 2012, and Personhood Ohio is no fan of Porter’s “heartbeat bill.”

While the personhood movement may appear to be a fringe group, since proponents oppose even draconian legislation like the “heartbeat bill,” the personhood movement is backed by Mike Huckabee, the American Family Association, Liberty Counsel and the Family Research Council. In fact, earlier this year personhood amendment advocates berated Porter on a conference call sponsored by The Oak Initiative’s Transformation Michigan, telling Porter that her bill was not anti-choice enough.

Writing today in WorldNetDaily, Personhood Ohio director Patrick Johnson condemns Porter’s bill for banning abortion in most instead of all cases, the goal of personhood amendments. Johnson is outraged that the bill has exceptions for cases where the life of the mother is at stake, which he says is “never justified,” and is angered that it doesn’t require the state to charge women with murder for having an abortion: “This bill specifically exempts the mother from prosecution. Why does the bill exempt accomplices?” Johnson writes:

The advocates of the Heartbeat Bill have proven their willingness to push one person out of the boat to try to save another. How? By way of the bill's exceptions, its inappropriate penalties, and its counterfeit moral standard.

…

What is the moral standard that is invoked in the Heartbeat Bill? Is it the Constitution, which says that the government shall not deprive another of life or liberty without a trial by jury? No. Is it the law of God, which says "Do no murder" in Exodus 20 and mandates a public execution for convicted murderers? No, of course not.

In subsections H, I, and J, this bill specifically cites the federal judiciary as the standard of morality and justice. This bill prescribes into law the supremacy of the Supreme Court over both the law of God and the state and federal constitutions. This bill bows the knee to a counterfeit standard of morality at the altar of judicial tyranny. Thus, this bill is rotten to its very foundation. Its design is not to protect the preborn, not to give them justice and certainly not to please "the Father of the fatherless." God's Word is the standard for morality and justice, and His Word is supreme over the opinions of men, but the Heartbeat Bill gets on the wrong side of God's line in the sand.

Even if the Heartbeat Bill did overturn Roe v. Wade and return the issue back to the states, it would not protect preborn children in Ohio. It is our hope that the Ohio Personhood Amendment to the Ohio Constitution would protect the God-given rights of every Ohioan.

It is no secret that Bryan Fischer wants to see our nation governed by the Bible, going so far as to demand that whales, bears and other wild animals be put to death in accordance with scriptural mandates.  So it was no surprise to see that he has written a new post defending the use of the death penalty as entirely biblical: 

The King James version, “Thou shalt not kill,” has led some to erroneously believe that God was prohibiting killing of every kind, but he most certainly was not. The Sixth Commandment is specifically a command against cold-blooded murder. Killing in self-defense, war, and as punishment for murder are not only permitted but prescribed in the Scripture.

In fact, on the next page on the book of Exodus, in chapter 21, there are six specific crimes for which capital punishment is the prescribed penalty. As an aside, it’s worth noting that the death penalty was mandated for participation in the slave trade: “Whoever steals a man and sells him, and anyone found in possession of him, shall be put to death” (Exodus 21:16).

In other words, if the United States had simply followed the standards found in Scripture, slaves never would have appeared on our shores, slavery never would have been an issue, and the Civil War would never have been fought. Then, as always, the Scriptures show us the way forward not just personally but politically as well.

It is a little hard to understand how Fischer can claim that if the US had just followed Scripture, slavery would have been illegal since just a few passages later in Exodus 21: 20-21 it is made pretty clear that it was not slavery that warranted the death penalty, but theft:

When a man strikes his slave, male or female, with a rod and the slave dies under his hand, he shall be avenged. But if the slave survives a day or two, he is not to be avenged, for the slave is his money.

So if you beat a slave to death, you are to be punished but if the slave recovers, there will be no punishment ... yet somehow Fischer thinks that this should have been our guide to "show us the way forward not just personally but politically as well."

For what it is worth, the Exodus 21 passage Fischer cites also mandates death for anyone who strikes or curses his mother or father, so maybe he thinks we ought to enact that into law as well.

And we already know that Fischer wants to see homosexuality criminalized, so given that he wants Scripture to show us the way forward politically, one has to wonder whether he thinks Leviticus 20's "Punishments for Sexual Immorality" ought to be enacted into law as well:

10 If a man commits adultery with the wife of his neighbor, both the adulterer and the adulteress shall surely be put to death.

...

13 If a man lies with a male as with a woman, both of them have committed an abomination; they shall surely be put to death; their blood is upon them.

I'd encourage others to ask Fischer that question but we all know that trying to get Fischer to actually defend or explain his views is just an exercise in futility.

Texas Gov. Rick Perry raised eyebrows yesterday when, while campaigning in South Carolina, he likened the struggles of corporations resisting paying their fair share in taxes to the civil rights movement. When told that he was visiting a town where civil rights advocates held a sit-in fifty years ago, Perry mused that the corporate fight against taxes and regulation is an extension of the civil rights movement: “I mean we’ve gone from a country that made great strides in issues of civil rights,” Perry said, “And as we go forward, America needs to be about freedom. It needs to be about freedom from over-taxation, freedom from over-litigation, freedom from over-regulation.”

Immediately, critics rightfully questioned how the fight against “over-taxation” and “over-regulation” could be seen as an outgrowth of a movement that fought for social and economic justice.

But it is important to remember that Perry’s fight for lower taxes and regulations for corporations (on the backs of low-income families) is not just an economic position but also a spiritual issue. Before his Response prayer rally earlier this month, Perry told The 700 Club that he would be praying to end “government’s over-taxed, over-regulated, over-litigated” policies that have “caused roadblocks to economic prosperity.”

In an interview with televangelist James Robison in May, Perry claimed that the current economic crisis was God’s way of ending our “slavery” to government. Like civil rights leaders who used the story of Exodus in their struggle against discrimination, Perry contended that “Pharaoh” exists today in the form of government and “we’ve become slaves to government”:

• Sarah Palin's "Hey, Please Pay Attention To Me" tour will suddenly resume, just in time for her to show up in Iowa this weekend.
• FRC says Barack Obama is "a President who not only doesn't listen [but] doesn't care about what's on the minds of those in the Midwest."
• It looks like Janet Porter has now added Dutch Sheets to her "Heartbeat Bill" rally next month.
• Peter LaBarbera is going to be protesting Willow Creek Community Church's for ending its relationship with Exodus International." Hate Crime!
• Finally, Christine O'Donnell reads from her forthcoming book, which makes her just about the only person who will actually read it.

Texas Gov. Rick Perry is working with yet another extreme organization ardently opposed to gay rights. The virulently anti-gay American Family Association is the host of Perry’s prayer rally, and another endorser of The Response is David Kubal of Intercessors for America, an organization which claims to helps Christians who recognize “the need for God to intervene in U.S. governmental and cultural issues” about current political and cultural issues.

Among the issues Intercessors For America focuses on include the threat of microchips implanted into humans, the so-called North American Union, and the supposed wrongdoings of the Obama Administration. Most recently, Intercessors for America asked members to be wary of the Dalai Lama’s visit to Washington, D.C.: “Pray that any occult spirits from the Dalai Lama and monks of Tibetan Buddhism will be bound and unable to bring harm to Washington, D.C. or the U.S.A. May they and those they seek to influence, or have influenced in the past, be set free from the power of darkness and come to know the light of life in Jesus Christ!”

Kubal’s Intercessors for America is also a harsh critic of gay equality and a vocal proponent of ex-gay reparative therapy. An endorser of the ex-gay group Exodus International, Intercessors For America hosted Bob Ragan, formerly of Exodus International, to give a speech on “Freedom From Homosexuality.” Furthermore, the group prayed to stop anti-bullying laws to protect LGBT and LGBT-perceived youth, warning they “can only lead to God’s judgment,” and that support for marriage equality “leads a soul to eternal damnation”:

Marriage equality in New York: By the signing of this measure into law it has opened the door by inviting the spiritually blind to walk in degradation, accepting a reduction in rank, dignity, standing, losing their honor of a sound reputation, accepting humiliation, and moral and intellectual decay which eventually leads a soul to eternal damnation unless they repent.

Ask the Heavenly Father to bind this edict from gaining acceptance in the hearts of the populace of New York. Ask the Lord to loose the power of His holy and eternal love to each of those who will turn back to God and denounce this unrighteous lifestyle.

Gay rights: Pray that this "homosexual" agenda initiated by an extremely small minority of individuals be exposed to the whole of our U.S. citizenry, and that a proper response and correction be made to this attempted corruption of our governmental principles. Ask the Lord to raise up leaders to bring this corrupt movement to a halt.

Anti-LGBT bullying: Ask God to help us to speak the truth in love to young people who are being affected by the "LGBT" lifestyle. Ask the Lord to protect those “bullied” by any corrupt government effort to promote sinful sexual practice among our youth. Ask the Lord to help our citizenry to stand courageously against these misguided “bullying” efforts which can only lead to God's judgment!

Student Non-Discrimination Act: (H.R.998 & S.555) These parallel bills both prohibit public school students from being excluded from participating in, or subject to discrimination under, any federally-assisted educational program on the basis of their actual or perceived sexual orientation or gender identity or that of their associates. S.555 Bill Summary & Status 112th Congress (2011 - 2012) Legal experts believe that, if passed, this bill will actually empower the homosexual community to dictate curriculum in all our schools, public and private. As a result, our schools may become a form of "indoctrination centers" for the gay lifestyle. (Contributors: Library of Congress, Capitol Hill Prayer Partners)

Greater is He that is in us than He that is in the world! Ask the Lord to forgive the sponsors of these bills for they know not what they do.

In another stinging defeat for the burgeoning “personhood” movement, a Louisiana personhood bill which would ban all abortions was defeated in the state legislature. The legislation, sponsored by Republican State Rep. John LaBruzzo, was hailed by Personhood USA as one of their best chances to pass a personhood law this year.

Personhood legislation gives legal rights to zygotes, banning all abortion without exception along with procedures to treat problem pregnancies, certain forms of contraception, and even in-vitro fertilization. Incidentally, the federal Hyde Amendment, which bars federal funds for abortion procedures, was the rationale used by the bill’s opponents to table the measure to send it back to committee. Personhood USA lamented that “The Hyde Amendment had a chilling effect on prolife legislators.”

Personhood USA is still counting on Mississippi voters to pass a personhood amendment this November, a referendum backed by other Religious Right groups like the American Family Association and Liberty Counsel along with top Republican politicians. The Mississippi effort is led by a proponent of Christians creating their own separate, theocratic country in America. In 2006 and 2008, personhood amendments were overwhelmingly defeated in Colorado.

The Associated Press reports:

A Metairie lawmaker's attempt to force a direct challenge to the Roe v. Wade decision by banning abortion outright in Louisiana was derailed Wednesday to the House budget committee.

The 65-30 vote of the House to send Rep. John LaBruzzo's bill to the House Appropriations Committee could shelve the measure for the legislative session.

"This would basically defeat the bill by running out the clock," LaBruzzo said. Only two weeks remain in the legislative session. LaBruzzo is proposing to define a fetus as a person from the moment of conception, which would ban abortion entirely, in violation of current federal law. Anti-abortion groups are split on the worth of the idea.

Lawmakers who supported sending the bill to the Appropriations Committee cited the possibility it could jeopardize $4.5 billion in federal health care funding Louisiana receives for its Medicaid program. A financial analysis said the proposal would put Louisiana at odds with a 1976 federal law requiring Medicaid to cover abortion services to save the life of the mother or in cases of rape or incest. Rep. Jim Fannin, D-Jonesboro, chairman of the Appropriations Committee, pushed for the diversion of the bill.

"I am truly and completely opposed to abortion, but that's off the table," he said.

LaBruzzo, R-Metairie, disagreed with the financial analysis done by the Legislative Fiscal Office.

In the second part of the televised interview on The Daily Show, David Barton claims that the Constitution contains “four references to God” in Article VII. Article VII reads: “The Ratification of the Conventions of nine States, shall be sufficient for the Establishment of this Constitution between the States so ratifying the Same.”

That’s it.

Barton is presumably referring to the following line: “Done in Convention by the Unanimous Consent of the States present the Seventeenth Day of September in the Year of our Lord one thousand seven hundred and Eighty seven and of the Independence of the United States of America the Twelfth.” As noted in People For the American Way’s Barton’s Bunk, “Barton claims that this passing reference to the Declaration of Independence incorporates that document and its reference to rights endowed by a Creator into the U.S. Constitution, making the Constitution a religious document that reflects and requires a national acknowledgment of God’s hand in our founding, history, and prosperity.”

Barton dodges Stewart’s question about presidential oaths. As Stewart rightly claims, the oath outlined in the US Constitution does not specify the use of the Bible. Moreover, Article II even allows Presidents to make an “Affirmation” rather than an Oath: “Before he enter on the Execution of his Office, he shall take the following Oath or Affirmation: — ‘I do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will faithfully execute the Office of President of the United States, and will to the best of my Ability, preserve, protect and defend the Constitution of the United States.’” In fact, Franklin Pierce decided to affirm rather than swear during his inauguration, John Quincy Adams “took the oath upon a volume of law,” and Teddy Roosevelt didn’t use a Bible in his rushed inauguration.

Barton has also repeatedly asserted, including in Wednesday’s WallBuilders Live radio program, that the Bible was used as the basis for republican form of government (Exodus 18:21), the separation of powers (Jeremiah 17:9), and the three branches of government (Isaiah 33:22).

So let’s check his citations:

Exodus 18:21 You should also look for able men among all the people, men who fear God, are trustworthy, and hate dishonest gain; set such men over them as officers over thousands, hundreds, fifties and tens. (Barton: Republican government)

Jeremiah 17:9 The heart is devious above all else; it is perverse — who can understand it? (Barton: Separation of powers)

Isaiah 33:22 For the Lord is our judge, the Lord is our ruler, the Lord is our king; he will save us. (Barton: Three branches of government)

Now, if the Bible was the foundation for republican government, where the citizenry and not a monarch occupy the power of government, then what does Barton have to say about all the prominent monarchies in the Bible, like King David and King Solomon?

In addition, where in Federalist Numbers 47 and 51, which many historians point to as the basis for the separation of powers and the three branches of government, does James Madison cite Jeremiah or Isaiah, let alone any Biblical passage? In Federalist No. 47, Madison frequently cites Montesquieu, but not the Bible; Madison also doesn’t use the Bible or any theological explanation in Federalist No. 51.

While Barton can find passages in the Bible that may reflect a similar opinion or sentiment of the Founding Fathers, he is consistently unable to demonstrate how the Founders specifically used the Bible or “Biblical principles” to develop the Constitution.