DOGE – Common Sense or Calvinism?
Are you shocked at my analogous description of government depravity associated to the animal behavior of dogs returning to their own vomit? The behavior of the media, statists, Demoncrats and devourers of your money, NGO’s1. All of these as well as other bureaucrats are described in Proverbs 2 this way
10[a] The great God who formed everything
Gives the fool his hire and the transgressor his wages.
11 As a dog returns to his own vomit,
So a fool repeats his folly.
12 Do you see a man wise in his own eyes?
There is more hope for a fool than for him.
We all believed that the Federal Government was out of control in that the bureaucracy was feeding the dogs of war, anti-constitutional ideologies and foundationally immoral ideologies
But I bet you are wondering why I am getting into such animal behavior in relationship to our present depraved reactionaries in the media
and demoncrat left? And what about all of those NGO’s, especially Lutheran and Catholic Charities, just to name two? I can talk about the taxpayer trough that those two feed from with my experience as ‘Chair of Finance and Vice-Chair’ of a government county board that I was on. I will leave that for another day.
What we are witnessing through the very Constitutional efforts of the 47th President are fools who are being brought out into the light of day, wanting to protect their folly and return to it. Those various entities, ideologies and political parties are accustom to gulping down billions of dollars that are from taxes or worse, borrowed. Now that the vomit of these bureaucrats’ indiscretions are on the floor, the analogy seems gross but it is factually correct. Dogs will eat their vomit for the little remaining nutrients that it contains. So too, the Demoncrats and their favorite ideological puppies hunger for what is left on the corporatists banquet room floor from the federal government, those putrid programs which enslaved the citizenry with debt as well as the ideologies that most often manipulate the world stage for power and personal gain.
What really has you rattled as you see the pack of ravenous rabid degenerates foaming at the mouth over the bloated guts of a declining nation is the subtitle of DOGE – Common Sense or Calvinism? It is more than obvious in a comparative study of foundation history to the last two hundred years, that both common sense and ubiquitous Calvinism have been lacking in this nation. I have to develop these elements another time since they are most uncommon in the Echo Chamber of our present. I ask you to hang in there with me because the bigger issue is the destructive use, by all parties, of democracy.
The unrestricted use of democracy over the 20th Century and into the present is due to the influence of the complexities of post-rationalism (see references and further mentioned later). For now and in short, post-rationalism is a subset of ‘Critical Theory2.’
The course of democracy and every subset of critical theory has been and continues fostering destructive systems, beliefs and policies in the Republic. What is shockingly occurring is that the shadows of foundational governance are emerging into the forefront through the ‘common grace’ of God resonating in ‘common sense.’ We are seeing in realtime reporting the exposure of the total depravity of mankind as both the Federalist and Anti-federalists understood it.
Now to hint about the answer in the sub-title. What we have with Trump 47 and DOGE in particular is prevailing common sense to preserve the Republic. Resurgence of Puritan Biblical Calvinism as in the First Great Awakening and first American Independence has yet to be seen in government, let alone in any form of a full reformation within the general Christian Church.
Taking a step back – Government Depravity
I have spoken often that the Federalists speculation of emerging rationalism at the founding would determine that constitutionalism should be a mechanism to minimizing the depravity in government and society. The Federalists believed that depravity being revealed in power mongering, bureaucratic oppression, fraud, waste and abuses in a system of government, most often a democracy, could be overcome through rational laws and principles of a republic. Foundationally, those who wrote the state and federal constitutions did so knowing that democracy was and still is, destructive to the liberties of the citizenry. Many at the time of the founding looked to John Adams for his comments on constitutionalism and government but few moderns have heard of or understand his views on ‘democracy.’ Just a quote from a letter to John Taylor, 17 December 1814,
What can I Say of The Democracy of France? I dare not write what I think and what I know… What was the Ambition of this Democracy? Nothing less than to propagate itself, its Principles, its System through the World, to decapitate all the Kings, destroy all the Nobles and Priests in Europe? And who were the Instruments employed by the Mountebanks behind the Scene, to accomplish these Sublime purposes? … Democracy is chargeable with all the blood that has been spilled for five and twenty years. Napoleon and all his Generals were but Creatures of Democracy as really as Rienzi Theodore, Mazzianello, Jack Cade or Wat Tyler. This democratical, Hurricane, Inundation, Earthquake, Pestilence call it which you will, at last aroused and alarmed all the World and produced a Combination unexampled, to prevent its further Progress.
And again to his wife Abigail,
I do not say that democracy has been more pernicious (having a harmful effect, especially in a gradual or subtle way) on the whole, and in the long run, than monarchy or aristocracy. Democracy has never been and never can be so durable as aristocracy or monarchy; but while it lasts, it is more bloody than either. … Remember, democracy never lasts long. It soon wastes, exhausts, and murders itself. There never was a democracy yet that did not commit suicide. It is in vain to say that democracy is less vain, less proud, less selfish, less ambitious, or less avaricious than aristocracy or monarchy. It is not true, in fact, and nowhere appears in history. Those passions are the same in all men, under all forms of simple government, and when unchecked, produce the same effects of fraud, violence, and cruelty. When clear prospects are opened before vanity, pride, avarice, or ambition, for their easy gratification, it is hard for the most considerate philosophers and the most conscientious moralists to resist the temptation. Individuals have conquered themselves. Nations and large bodies of men, never.
My simple point is that those that make inferences to democracy or argue that ‘our democracy in the United States is being destroyed,’ are correct in that the essence of democracy as foundationally understood, as well as being fostered in our modern time, must be destroyed to preserve the Republic. Democracy is an intent on waste, exhaustion, murder and the suicide of the nation. In fact we can see that the proponents of democracy in these United States are highly passionate, promoters of unchecked fraud, promoting violence and cruelty. They are vain, prideful, ambitious and full of avarice (extreme greed for wealth or material gain.)
Yes I am referring to the modern day democrats that are frothing from their jowls as mad dogs or those catty creatures who have groomed themselves so much that they cannot naturally digestively pass their self-groomed calamities but instead, hack up rancorous hairballs.
But where did this all start? Many think the ideologies of these political and bureaucratic elites began in the 20th Century with the ‘progressive movement’ of Woodrow Wilson. I say it began in the late 1700’s and was fully set in place at the Civil War.
At the Beginning
Remember that Madison in Federalist #55 wrote,
As there is a degree of depravity in mankind which requires a certain degree of circumspection and distrust, so there are other qualities in human nature which justify a certain portion of esteem and confidence. Republican government presupposes the existence of these qualities in a higher degree than any other form.
Madison presupposed the positive quality in republicanism but as we have seen in modern and now post-modern times, the drive has been to ‘democracy,’ which we know is depravity.
Reflecting further on ‘Securing the Republic’ from the Founders’ Constitution (my emphasis added),
The whole elaborated system of federalism, separation of powers, checks and balances, enumerated powers, secured rights, periodic accountability of officials to the electorate, and the other arrangements that were to give American constitutionalism its special character were so many barriers against the persistent and predictable forces that might make popular government a hollow or cruel mockery. But governmental institutions could go only so far. While a constitution and its institutions might elicit and shape certain kinds of conduct, it also was true that a corrupt or slavish people could ruin even a very good constitution. What really mattered, in the last analysis, was the kind of people who would make up the American public. Their strengths, their limits, were the outer boundaries of what was possible.
Over the last two hundred years, via the education system and bad theology, we have produced a ‘corrupt and slavish people.’ If you don’t think so, look at what is occurring all through the nation, at every institution, every level of government and across all of society. Yes, there is an awakening happening and the remnant of those who have an idealistic view of our Constitutional Republic are acting as responsible citizens with their voice and vote. Yet, not with knowledge of foundational constitutionalism nor moral strength, but with gut feelings of values, opinions or so called conservative philosophy (ideology). Consider this next paragraph from the same link to ‘Securing the Republic.’
The civic character of that public was neither a given, fixed beyond the power of statesmen to alter or redirect, nor an infinitely malleable substance to be shaped by institutions at will or whim. It was, after all, for this people in this land that a government was to be founded. American circumstances offered expanded possibilities, to be sure. Thus Americans could aim at a fuller measure of liberty and self-government than others had achieved.
Self-governing people need to have personal morals developed on foundational truth. What slowly brought this nation to the point of only having the inklings of true republicanism, constitutionalism and truth itself was a developed presupposition of virtue from a Montesquieuian perspective as again noted in ‘Securing the Republic,’
The thinker to whom political writers regularly recurred in these matters was Montesquieu. His Spirit of Laws (no. 3) had proposed a taxonomy of regimes based on their several principles–the spring or activating passion that constituted and sustained a particular regime. Popular or republican government depended on virtue, but virtue understood in a special sense. Montesquieu took pains to make it clear that he was speaking of political virtue, the virtue not of the Christian but of “the political honest man,” the man who loves the laws and is moved by that love. “Now, a government is like every thing else: to preserve it we must love it.”
Remember, Montesquieu became an agnostic, maybe a unitarian at best. He rejected the Biblical orthodoxy of Calvinism. I would like to point out, again with more specifics later, that the early Founders had the Puritan’s mind and Calvinist perspective of government lingering. This was proven in their development of State Constitutions and then the general form and acceptance of the 1787 covenant.
I want to mention at this moment that it would be prudent to get the best understanding of why Calvinism is the Biblical foundation of the United States from A HISTORY OF CALVINISM IN AMERICA, An Eight Part Series. Otherwise, as I do, you will end up reading all of the letters and works of various Puritans and the key founding people from the Reformation to the end of the 20th Century. This audio series will cause you to pause, think and understand. Now, with understanding just the basics of Biblical truth as explained in Calvinism, we can understand the total depravity of our present situation and the root cause of our social, cultural and political calamities.
Federalists First – Regarding Democracy’s Depravity
Starting with a couple quotes from Madison in Federalist #10 (emphasis added):
It may be concluded that a pure democracy, by which I mean a society consisting of a small number of citizens, who assemble and administer the government in person, can admit of no cure for the mischiefs of faction. A common passion or interest will, in almost every case, be felt by a majority of the whole;
And
Democracies have ever been spectacles of turbulence and contention; have ever been found incompatible with personal security or the rights of property; and have in general been as short in their lives as they have been violent in their deaths.
Theoretic politicians, who have patronized this species of government, have erroneously supposed that by reducing mankind to a perfect equality in their political rights, they would at the same time be perfectly equalized and assimilated in their possessions, their opinions, and their passions.
Another from Madison in Federalist #48
In a democracy, where a multitude of people exercise in person the legislative functions and are continually exposed, by their incapacity for regular deliberation and concerted measures, to the ambitious intrigues of their executive magistrates, tyranny may well be apprehended, on some favorable emergency, to start up in the same quarter.
The Federalist approach to the Constitutional Republic was in context to Enlightenment Reason. Simply, the ability to make law in the structure of a limited government would address the nature of mankind. They made their assumptions based on emerging humanism based on the theologies of Unitarianism and Universalism.
Anti-federalists Moral Foundation Not Enlightenment Rationalism
The Anti-federalists, for the most part held to the moral foundation of Calvinism which addresses government depravity. We can first consider Malichi Maynard, and Samuel Field. This was taken from The Hampshire Gazette of April 9, 1788 (emphasis added),
Here we conceive the people may be very materially injured, and in time reduced to a state of as abject vassalage as any people were under the control of the most mercenary despot that ever tarnished the pages of history. The depravity of human nature, illustrated by examples from history, will warrant us to say, it may be possible, if not probable, that the congress may be composed of men, who will wish to burden and oppress the people. In such case, will not their inventions be fruitful enough to devise occasions for postponing the elections?
This article was regarding the choice of bi-annual elections instead of annual. Most riveting is that congress would ‘burden and oppress the people.’ This has happened through codified unconstitutional agencies. Yet worse than the postponing or cancelling of elections is the superseding theft of elections. This is easier to do with less ruckus from the general population.
Looking back to ‘Securing the Republic’ introductions, The Anti-federalists looked beyond the arguments of John Adams that,
Only a system of well-digested laws could embody that degree of public-spiritedness. What could be expected of ordinary folk was a degree of “reverence and obedience to the laws” that would bend the actions of self-regarding men in public-regarding directions (no. 17). (See also J. Adams to S. Adams, 18 Oct. 1790, in ch. 11, no. 16.)
In response to Adams and the Federalists, the next paragraph reads,
For many Anti-Federalists this was not enough. The Virginian author of a Proposal for Reviving Christian Conviction (no. 19) argued that it is especially republican government that requires a support for moral rectitude. A desire for popularity would commend a lax enforcement of the laws; “the allurements of self-interest and self-gratification” would prove irresistible, whatever the cost in public welfare and happiness. To hold men to their duty something more than self-interest was needed: it was “necessary to call in the aid of religion.”
Government Depravity Results From Bad Theology
In our present we are in the classical battle of how to save the Republic. We can liken many of the modern political class of any party to the Unitarian Universalist Rationalist Federalists. Why? Because the adjectives that I just used for moderns are the common theological and philosophical positions as Madison’s and the majority of Federalist, rationalism without religion.
Federalist responses to the problem of republican manners were quite diverse. Some, like Madison (see ch. 4, no. 19), thought it futile to expect that religious exhortation would suffice to restrain injustice. However valuable it would be to have a people sharing enlightened faith and morals, these alone would not secure the conditions of self-government. The intricacies of institutional arrangements, the variety of modes of working and living in a large country, the gradual enlistment of enlightened self-interest in support of a government that met general expectations of fairness and security, the transmutation of politically ruinous passions into civilly acceptable levels of competition: all these would work more surely and quietly to preserve republic and republicans. Others, like Noah Webster, were less hopeful. Ultimately, corruption was the destiny of every people possessed by possessiveness; wealth and vices would flourish in tandem. That destiny might be retarded, or at least not accelerated, by a careful regard to a revolution in manners that ought to complement the act of political revolution. America had yet to declare its independence of European manners, European corruption. (See Remarks on the Manners . . . of the United States, 1787.) Still others, like Hamilton (see ch. 13, no. 38), thought the agitation over republican virtue mistaken and misleading. In time, growing economic inequality would strip the problem of any practical significance. “As riches increase and accumulate in few hands; as luxury prevails in society; virtue will be in a greater degree considered as only a graceful appendage of wealth, and the tendency of things will be to depart from the republican standard.” There was no point in viewing the political problem as one of virtue and vice contending for preeminence, still less in terms of an especially virtuous class of men struggling against the wicked. In actuality there were different kinds of vice, and here sound policy dictated favoring those kinds that were most likely to promote “the prosperity of the state.”
Richard Henry Lee and Samuel Adams comments regarding the slippery slope to government depravity,
Richard Henry Lee (no. 12) was ready to purge the Continental Congress of its scoffing Mandevilles “who laugh at virtue, and with vain ostentatious display of words will deduce from vice, public good!” Samuel Adams dreaded the new Massachusetts government’s easy slide into “Pomp & Parade,” seductive invitations from on high to a more general dedication to “Idleness Dissipation & Extravagancy” (no. 14).
At this point it is mandatory to have you recall that to get to and through the Colonies decision and war for Independence, the precursor was the First Great Awakening. This Great Awakening was foundational Biblical truth expressed by the theology of Calvinism. Yet, as I have spoken of often, by the mid to late 1700’s unitarianism and universalism was impacting education, politics and commerce. No Republic can survive with these theologies cultivating the resulting dualism of the aforementioned anti-trinitarian thinking and rationalism. They lost the reality that God is Sovereign, His law is predominant over all of society and government, thereby bolstering that man made law can legislate a civil society.
I would have you consider what R.J. Rushdoony wrote as being applicable to the Federalists of the close of the 18th Century leading to the rise of government depravity and dominance in the 19th Century, culminating with democracy over a republic in our present time. He puts the heart of the matter poignantly,
The more faithful the Church, the greater its visibility, i.e., the more clearly its witness to the word and power of Christ in this world. But the true church is not alone in claiming visibility, and claiming to be the visible representative of Christ’s invisible order. The state claims its own kind of visibility; the state sees itself as the visible expression of the true order of man, and, sometimes also, of whatever gods may be. It then becomes a contest, first, as to who represents God’s true order, and, second, what is the order which is to be represented.
The humanistic order strives for visibility, first, as the dominant force in man’s society, as the omnipresent fact on the human scene, and, second, as the new order of salvation. Accordingly, man’s dominant concern in the era of humanism is political, since politics is the area where the hidden deity becomes visible. The 19th century was thus the era of political visibility; the religion of most men tended increasingly to become political. “Democracy” as the hope of the world found its culminating messianic expression in Woodrow Wilson’s dream of making the world safe for democracy by war and diplomacy.
I contend that without the understanding that God is sovereign and having a Foundational Puritan view (Calvinism) of our history, that this following paragraph regarding ‘Securing the Republic’ is doomed to failure,
Securing the republic would demand the attention and care of statesmen and legislators at all levels, as well as of the general community from which they would be drawn. Readers of Burgh, Trenchard and Gordon, Sidney, Harrington, and Machiavelli knew that frequent recurrence to fundamentals, the formative principles of constitutions, was indispensable for safety and preservation. This was as true at the level of a small military unit (no. 5) as it was for the society as a whole (see Virginia Declaration of Rights, art. 15, in ch. 1, no. 3). Then, too, the objects of ambition could be redirected by judicious laws and institutional arrangements, and the pursuit of fopperies or domination replaced by the “sober, industrious and frugal” civility, the “conscious dignity, becoming Freemen” (no. 8). None of this presumed a radical transformation of human nature; projects premised on the sufficiency of high motives were doomed. Patriotism, to be sure, existed and had done much, but on its own could not support the conduct of a great and lasting war; “it will not endure unassisted by Interest” (Washington to Banister, 21 Apr. 1778). From all these devices–the resort to first principles, the taming of ambition, and the unsentimental reliance on self-interest–much good had been achieved and could yet be expected. But most promising of all, at least according to some of the most prominent Founders, was a properly constituted system of education.
Education Reform to Dissipate Government Depravity
Samuel Adams regarded education in this way In 1779:
If Virtue & Knowledge are diffusd among the People, they will never be enslavd. This will be their great Security. Virtue & Knowledge will forever be an even Balance for Powers & Riches. I hope our Countrymen will never depart from the Principles & Maxims which have been handed down to us from our wise forefathers. This greatly depends upon the Example of Men of Character & Influence of the present Day.
And again in 1780 regarding how Christian virtue matters and how people become controlled. More so, Sam addresses the points of manners and virtue which is discussed in ‘Securing the Republic.’ (my emphasis added),
Will Vanity & Levity ever be the Stability of Government, either in States, in Cities, or what, let me hint to you is of the last Importance, in Families? Of what Kind are those Manners, by which, as we are truly informed in a late Speech, “not only the freedom but the very Existence of Republics is greatly affected?” HOW fruitless is it, to recommend “the adapting the Laws in the most perfect Manner possible, to the Suppression of Idleness Dissipation & Extravagancy,” if such Recommendations are counteracted by the Example of Men of Religion, Influence & public Station? I meant to consider this Subject in the View of the mere Citizen. But I have mentioned the sacred Word Religion. I confess, I am surprised to hear, that some particular Persons have been so unguarded as to give their Countenance to such kind of Amusements. I wish Mr —— would recollect his former Ideas when his Friend Whitfield thundered in the Pulpit against Assemblies & Balls. I think he has disclaimed Diversions, in some Instances, which to me have always appeared innocent. Has he changed his Opinions, or has the Tendency of things altered? Do certain Manners tend to quench the Spirit of Religion at one time & are they harmless at another? Are Morals so vague as to be sanctified or dispensed with by the Authority of different Men? He does not believe this. But I will not be severe, for I love my Friend. Religion out of the Question for the present. It was asked in the Reign of Charles the 2d of England, HOW shall we turn the Minds of the People from an Attention to their Liberties? The Answer was, by making them extravagant, luxurious, effeminate. Hutchinson advised the Abridgment of what our People called English Liberties, by the same Means. We shall never subdue them, said Bernard, but by eradicating their Manners & the Principles of their Education. Will the judicious Citizens of Boston be now caught in the Snare, which their artful, insidious Enemies, a few years ago laid for them in vain? Shall we ruin ourselves by the very means, which they pointed out in their Confidential Letters, tho even they did not dare openly to avow them?
Samuel Adams perspective of what is education is sharply contrasted by Madison, Jefferson and others that have brought us to our present debacle of youth indoctrination on the public dole. Worse, these noble Federalists believed that the means of preserving and securing the republic was through laws and education of principles founded on rationalism.
Deepening that sharp contrast further from Samuel Adams expectation for education is the last five modern generations of progressivism in education. We have gone from foundational truth in Biblical Calvinism of the 1600’s to rationalism in the 1700’s through the 1900’s into introducing post-rationalism in the early 20th Century. Our present complexities in society, culture, politics and religion is the culminating expression of post-rationalism.3,4
Therefore, where there is no substantial concept of truth or believing that truth exists, there is no hope for true liberty.
Post-rationalism is seen fully expressed in the wailing media, the crowds of howling banshees with the ‘rage, anxiety, and depression’.5 Their very being is held together by a pseudoscience of humanism that has totally broken with reality. Therefore, when structure, rationalism and basic common sense challenge their illicit worldview and disregard for a constitutional continuum, they become fully deranged and wallow in the reminiscence of government depravity wishing to return to their folly.
The Final Moments – DOGE – common sense constitutionalism
I am being harsh in these final moments. Rightly so since what has been done to the Republic and in the individual States has been and is intolerant, despotic, illiberal, and often punitive austere policies of ‘democracy.’ The ravenous mixed breed6 dog pack in the combined system and structure of government are howling as they are corralled through the revelation of decades, generations of fraud, abuse and waste.
Some, especially the daemoncrats in Congress, are so dementedly sick in their ideologies that they are making every effort to protect for consumption their putridness spewed on the tax paying citizens.
The courage of any President properly exercising Article II authority, even at the potential cost of his life, and transparently acting on commitments made to the citizenry, is uncommon in modern times. The President has assigned superlative independent investigators to review process, procedures and systems within his departments of responsibility. The intrepidness of the DOGE team to carry out the lawful orders of the President is a necessity long in the waiting.
What we are seeing in real time is common sense constitutionalism in action. The sweeping heavy mace7 of the DOGE smashing at the great dog pack of political elites, leftists ideologues, et. all, who live on the floor of the corporatists8 table of democracy and globalism. These sad deranged and displaced bureaucrats have been and are antithetical to the sovereignty of the majority of the citizenry in our Constitutional Republic.
The intent of the 47th President is to restore republicanism with following the mechanisms laid out and confined within the US Constitution. This is seemingly a hard hitting reality designed in the principled approach of the Federalists. That being the mindful and purposeful execution of law within the constraints of foundational principles (see Epilogue: Securing the Republic in the Founders Constitution).
No Calvinism Nor Christian Nationalism
For those that might be looking for that Calvinism, it is not there. Don’t go looking for Christian Nationalism in any of the goings on in the Trump Administration. Just keep it simple and recognize that a reformation in the congregations of every local church is necessary to raise up leaders that understand real sovereignty in the genre of Anti-federalists of old.
With all of this said, you will have to take what DOGE is giving you for a short time that Trump 47 has it in effect. You will at least get Federalist principles of common sense constitutionalism by the common grace of God with a hope of reformation in the churches.
Yet sadly, as the new Barna Report9 titled ‘Most Americans Believe in a Supreme Power, But Not the God of the Bible’ brings out, the percentages of Americans who have Biblical understanding of God is low. It is not about revival. It is much more about getting back to the Foundational theology of Biblical Calvinism.
And yes, those clamoring for the status quo are ‘As a dog returns to his own vomit, So a fool repeats his folly.’
References:
- Post-rationalism organization
- Timeline of Rationalist movement
- On the Era of Post Rationalism
- Are we in a Post-Rationality Era?
- An interview with Tom Eyers, author of Post-Rationalism: Psychoanalysis, Epistemology and Marxism in Postwar France
End Notes
1NGO’s – Non Governmental Organizations
2Frankfurt School and Critical Theory – https://iep.utm.edu/critical-theory-frankfurt-school/
3Post-rationalism: The term “pos-trationalism” describes a movement, school of thought, or approach to dealing with complexity that recognizes the limitations of systems and institutions in an increasingly atomized world. Whereas “rationalism” focuses on determining what is true, post-rationalism looks beyond that to what is useful for human beings when truth may be impossible to determine even in principle. Postratinalism.org
4A post-rationalist is someone who believes the rationalist project is misguided or impossible, but who likes to use some of the tools and concepts developed by the rationalists. Rationalists, Post-Rationalists, And Rationalist-Adjacents by orthonormal, 13th Mar 2020
5Overcoming post-rationalist nihilism
6Consisting of demoncrats, leftist bureaucrats and post-rationalists.
7Mace – https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mace_(bludgeon)
8Corporatists are those who institute and manage corporatism: The Economic System of Corporatism
9American Worldview Inventory 2025 – Report 1, Most Americans Believe in a Supreme Power, But Not the God of the Bible