Contending for the Constitution

by Mark A. Beliles, Douglas S. Anderson

Contending for the Constitution is a companion volume to the popular work Defending the Declaration. As author Gary Amos did concerning the Declaration, Mark Beliles and Doug Anderson present their case that the Constitution is based on biblical principles and Christian influence. Using primary source evidence, the authors give an easy-reading history of the Constitutional Convention and the Founder's emphasis on religion being necessary for its success. They show how the spirit of the Constitution has greatly diminished today and issue a call for its defense.

Genres: Nonfiction, School

252 pages, Paperback

Published May 1, 2005

Reviews

[Whitebeard Books · Rating 1 out of 5]

This particular title is an effort by fundamentalist writers to suggest and support a totally invalid argument that the US Constitution is somehow based on the Bible. It is preposterous even for people who have read the Bible and grown up in a Christian household. An educated reader knows easily that the US Constitution is a document created by people who were escaping the slavery of church indoctrination and that the US is not a nation founded intentionally on the principles promoted by the Bible. Don't waste your time on this tripe.

[Kristen Rosener · Rating 4 out of 5]

An absolutely phenomenal piece of work and one that every American, as well as every Christian, ought to read.

[Matthew Christopher · Rating 1 out of 5]

I had to read this ridiculous piece of shi- ahem - "scholarship" for school. I've read some dumb stuff in my time, because I'll read just about anything, but this is the most dishonest book I have ever read in my life. It completely disregards essentially all of modern historiography and is an extremely disrespectful blight on the idea that history is even a knowable thing. From insinuations that the framers of the Constitution built the founding document on the foundations of ancient Israeli governance (wtf?) to the idea that federalism is somehow a biblical principle (WTF?) to the assertion that the last 100 years of judicial branch decisions are unconstitutional because it no longer follows along biblical principles and demands and judges shouldn't interpret the law (SERIOUSLY WTF WHAT IS WRONG WITH YOU?!?!?!?!?) this book has it all in terms of unbelievable batshit wingnut insanity. Do not read this book. Do not pick up this book. After you finish reading this review, do not even THINK about this book. This book has made me actively dumber. Run away! Save yourself! Think of me as the kindly old man in the fairy tales telling you "Beware, go no farther." Absolute unredeemable dreck and an insult to the very idea of facts in a shared reality between human beings. If I could give it negative stars I would.

[Ryan Patrick · Rating 5 out of 5]

Anti-Christians will HATE this book! As seen in other reviews there is a lot of anger toward this book for pointing out that our founding fathers were, in fact, Christians. Did they flee Europe to escape a certain type of religious persecution? Yes. They fled so that they could worship Jesus they way that the Bible instructs, free from the tyrannical Catholic Church (among others). People who attack this book are incapable of attacking anything the book says, so they attack the book itself without having to do the work of proving anything that they say. This boog does a GREAT JOB of pointing toward the inexplicable and suggesting that maybe GOD PLAYED A MAJOR ROLL in our nation's development. This book uses Historical FACTS and quotes to outline exactly why our country cant survive unless we adhere to the truths our founding fathers knew.
John Adams said "Our Constitution was made only for a moral and religious people."

[Austin · Rating 5 out of 5]

A no-nonsense approach to lifting off the secular legal bushel that has long been placed over the Biblical bedrock of American law. This work is a source of hope and confidence in the original intent of the United States. It deftly explains American law while shining a light on countless engaging historical moments in the process. My only desire is that I had been introduced to it sooner! A worthwhile endeavor for any American historian, legal practitioner, teacher, or citizen. Its primary hurdle to broad readership will always be the hardened hearts of those who have adopted the modern judiciary’s secular religion that it so carefully exposes.