To your tents, O Israel!
The people of ancient Israel discovered that their militia-based confederation lacked the cohesion to protect them from foreign aggression. But when they created a strong central government with a standing army, their own liberties were endangered by that government. The American colonists and Founders closely studied Israel's experience, and tried to learn from it. That's the topic of my new article in the April 2007 issue of Liberty magazine. In HTML. In PDF.
[DK: I just fixed it. Thanks.]
Anyone remember when Harry Truman tried break a railroad strike, first by seizing the railroads, like a Latin American dictator, and then on May 25, 1946 by asking Congress for permission to draft the strikers? Would George Bush even ask permission?
Of course not--look how he has gone about nationalizing industries and drafting unwilling conscripts . . . oops, hasn't happened.
I'm assuming Jews would regard the book of Revelation rather the way Baptists would regard I Nephi, but I have to say, the "locusts" in Rev 20 sound a lot like helicopter gunships with chemical weapons.
I believe Hal Lindsay made this argument in The Late, Great Planet Earth or one of its sequels.
How much of a Bible-beater does one have to be to rely on scripture to tell you whether guns are more effective than swords and spears?
19 Now there was no smith found throughout all the land of Israel: for the Philistines said, Lest the Hebrews make them swords or spears:
20 But all the Israelites went down to the Philistines, to sharpen every man his share, and his coulter, and his axe, and his mattock.
21 Yet they had a file for the mattocks, and for the coulters, and for the forks, and for the axes, and to sharpen the goads.
22 So it came to pass in the day of battle, that there was neither sword nor spear found in the hand of any of the people that were with Saul and Jonathan: but with Saul and with Jonathan his son was there found.
One, however, should very careful in using the Old Testament to justify practices in the New.
And anybody that takes seriously what Hal Lindsey says needs to have their brains examined.
1 When Samuel grew old, he appointed his sons as judges for Israel. 2 The name of his firstborn was Joel and the name of his second was Abijah, and they served at Beersheba. 3 But his sons did not walk in his ways. They turned aside after dishonest gain and accepted bribes and perverted justice.
4 So all the elders of Israel gathered together and came to Samuel at Ramah. 5 They said to him, "You are old, and your sons do not walk in your ways; now appoint a king to lead [a] us, such as all the other nations have."
6 But when they said, "Give us a king to lead us," this displeased Samuel; so he prayed to the LORD. 7 And the LORD told him: "Listen to all that the people are saying to you; it is not you they have rejected, but they have rejected me as their king. 8 As they have done from the day I brought them up out of Egypt until this day, forsaking me and serving other gods, so they are doing to you. 9 Now listen to them; but warn them solemnly and let them know what the king who will reign over them will do."
10 Samuel told all the words of the LORD to the people who were asking him for a king. 11 He said, "This is what the king who will reign over you will do: He will take your sons and make them serve with his chariots and horses, and they will run in front of his chariots. 12 Some he will assign to be commanders of thousands and commanders of fifties, and others to plow his ground and reap his harvest, and still others to make weapons of war and equipment for his chariots. 13 He will take your daughters to be perfumers and cooks and bakers. 14 He will take the best of your fields and vineyards and olive groves and give them to his attendants. 15 He will take a tenth of your grain and of your vintage and give it to his officials and attendants. 16 Your menservants and maidservants and the best of your cattle [b] and donkeys he will take for his own use. 17 He will take a tenth of your flocks, and you yourselves will become his slaves. 18 When that day comes, you will cry out for relief from the king you have chosen, and the LORD will not answer you in that day."
19 But the people refused to listen to Samuel. "No!" they said. "We want a king over us. 20 Then we will be like all the other nations, with a king to lead us and to go out before us and fight our battles."
21 When Samuel heard all that the people said, he repeated it before the LORD. 22 The LORD answered, "Listen to them and give them a king."
Then Samuel said to the men of Israel, "Everyone go back to his town."
I'm also not sure all the founders shared the same outlook; Hamilton would have been quite happy with a king, and the early Federalists came up with the Alien and Sedition Acts. Jefferson just wanted a bunch of subsistence farmers and no trade at all. The Bill of Rights was not actually put in the Constitution, but added as an addendum.
Not sure I would agree that the Founders weren't religious at all; the key Founders weren't orthodox Christians, but rather followed a rational Enlightenment theology which was unitarian, not Trinitarian. They were devout theists, however.
Many of the pro-patriotic ministers like Samuel Langdon argued along the lines that Kopel desribes going so far as to term what the Ancient Israelites had a "republic." Arguably, though, this was a clever reimagining of the history of the Ancient Jews. Since this story fit perfectly with other Whig propaganda, the Founders didn't object.
If we read the Federalist Papers, written by Madison, Hamilton and Jay, we see none of the discussion of the Bible or the Ancient Jews and far more analogies made to the Pagan Greco-Roman Republics, for which the Founders had an affinity (indeed, they adopted Pagan Greco-Roman Pseudonyms when writing their pamphlets). And again, the Whigs propagandized and tended to "read in" to the Greco-Roman Republics anachronistic Whig Enlightenment ideals just as the patriotic preachers did with Ancient Israel.
While not necessarily a "Founder", Paine did write and speak a message that communicated strongly with the reading public. He also knew that almost every English-speaking person in the Colonies had learned to read from Scripture.
Whether or not the Christian Scripture was viewed as Holy Writ by all (especially the educated upper classes who were the political leaders of the Revolution and the new Republic), it was a dominant cultural influence.
However, as was mentioned above, the political and legal systems of Britain (and the American Colonies) owed more to the Greeks and Romans than to the Jews.
Do not mistake illustration for inspiration. That a standing army can more easily become a tool for centralized tyranny than a citizen militia is relatively obvious to a person who has thought about the problem. That realization does not require any particular classical source to inspire it. However, when introducing it to a person who has not thought about it, it is useful to use illustrations drawn from a common cultural source.