America was NOT founded on the Ten Commandments


By AL Whitney © copyround 2016
Permission is granted for redistribution if linked to original and AntiCorruptionSociety is acknowledged.

The “thou shalt nots” were not a part of the Declaration of Independence nor the original Constitution. The Holy Bible (let alone the controversial Old Testament) was not referenced in any of the original documents.

Thus, there is no basis for the claims made by Judge Anna von Reitz in her article Solid Resources and Brief Explanations about “the law of the land”:

The Law of the Land in the Western World is based on the Mosaic [pertaining to Moses] Law of the Bible, which is common to Judaism, Christianity, and Islam. The Ten Commandments are the basis of the Law of the Land, which in this country is American Common Law.

The basis for the establishment of our original form of government was a form of law (natural law) much greater than the words Moses (Pharaoh Akhenaten) supposedly got from a mythical god on Mount Sinai, known as the Ten Commandments. Emmerich de Vattel, whose work The Law of Nations inspired the founding fathers, defined mankind as uniquely different from animals – with the ability for creative reasoning – who was designed by a divine creator.

When you read Thomas Jefferson’s (author of the Declaration of Independence) papers you will discover that he was aware that religion could be used by the state to enslave the people. Therefore he was committed to keeping church and state separate – thus insuring the people the right to determine their own religion.

The following essay is both brilliant and inspiring. The author explains the influence Emmerich de Vattel’s work on natural law had in the founding of our country.

Vattel’s Natural Law

“The Law of Nations” and the Declaration of Independence

Richard W. Sharp, Jr,
March 17, 2014

“Life, Liberty, and The Pursuit of Happiness, How the Natural Law Concept of G. W. Leibniz Inspired America’s Founding Fathers.”

declaration of Independence 2

“When in the course of human events it becomes necessary for one people to dissolve the political bands which have connected them with another, and to assume among the powers of the earth, the separate and equal station to which the Laws of Nature and of Nature’s God entitle them, a decent respect to the opinions of mankind requires that they should declare the causes which impel them to the separation.”
{The Declaration of Independence, 1776}

One of the most widespread myths regarding American history is the claim that the American Revolution and the Declaration of Independence were based on the philosophy of John Locke. In fact, the the key organizers of the American Revolution were inspired by a desire to create a nation-state dedicated to a Leibnizian conception of happiness.

John Locke: ‘Life, Liberty and Property’

In his writings, John Locke clearly promoted an ideology that is coherent with an oligarchical system. Locke defended as Gods will the concentration of wealth in the hands of a few aristocrats. Locke’s philosophy defended the sanctity of life, liberty and property.

The leading opponent of Locke, Gottfried Leibniz, was the leader of the European republican movement. It was his philosophy that inspired the conceptions that were contained in the Declaration of Independence.

Locke vs. Leibniz

As the remainder of this article will discuss, the delegates to the Continental Congress, who drafted and signed the Declaration of Independence, studied Leibniz’s conception of natural law, through studying The Law of Nations, by Emmerich de Vattel.

For Excerpts from The Law of Nations:


Emmerich de Vattel was the most popular of all writers on the law of nations in America before, but especially after, the American Revolution. Vattel’s The Law of Nations arrived, shortly after its publication, in an America, which had already been greatly influenced by Leibniz. No later than 1770, it was used as a textbook in colleges. It was often quoted in speeches before judicial tribunals and legislatures, and used in formulating policy. Following the Revolution, Vattel’s influence grew. Vattel was cited far more often than Grotius and Puffendorf, in court proceedings, from 1789 to 1820.

Among those citing Vattel in legal cases and government documents, were Benjamin Franklin, John Adams, James Wilson, Alexander Hamilton, James Madison, John Jay, and John Marshall. John Adams, the future delegate to the Continental Congress, second President of the U.S., and father of President John Quincy Adams, recorded in his Diary on Feb. 1, 1763, that after spending the day frivolously, instead of reading and thinking, “The Idea of M. de Vattel indeed, scowling and frowning, haunted me.” In 1765, Adams copied into his Diary three statements by Vattel, “of great use to Judges,” that laws should be interpreted according to the intent of the author, and every interpretation which leads to absurdity should be rejected. In a letter to the Foreign Minister of Denmark, in 1779, Benjamin Franklin quoted Vattel, and “his excellent Treatise entitled Le Droit des Gens.” James Madison, as a member of the Continental Congress in 1780, drafted the instructions sent to John Jay, for negotiating a treaty with Spain, which quotes at length from The Law of Nations. Jay complained that this letter, which was probably read by the Spanish government, was not in code, and “Vattel’s Law of Nations, which I found quoted in a letter from Congress, is prohibited here.” Later, John Marshall, during his thirty-four years as Chief Justice of the U.S. Supreme Court, quoted Vattel by far the most among all authors on the law of nations.

The Law of Nations and The Declaration of Independence

Delegates to the First and Second Continental Congress, which produced the Declaration of Independence, often consulted The Law of Nations as a reference for their discussions. One important reason why the delegates chose to meet in Carpenters Hall, was that the building also housed the Library Company of Philadelphia. The librarian reported that Vattel was one of the main sources consulted by the delegates during the First Continental Congress, which met from Sept. 5 to Oct. 26, 1774. Charles W.F. Dumas, an ardent supporter of the American cause, printed an edition of The Law of Nations in 1774, with his own notes illustrating how the book applied to the American situation. In 1770, Dumas had met Franklin in Holland, and was one of Franklin’s key collaborators in his European diplomacy. He sent three copies to Franklin, instructing him to send one to Harvard University, and to put one in the Philadelphia library. Franklin sent Dumas a letter, Dec. 9, 1775, thanking him for the gift. Franklin stated, “I am much obliged by the kind present you have made us of your edition of Vattel. It came to us in good season, when the circumstances of a rising state make it necessary frequently to consult the law of nations. Accordingly, that copy which I kept, has been continually in the hands of the members of our congress, now sitting …”

The study of The Law of Nations by the delegates to the Continental Congress, to answer questions “of the circumstances of a rising state,” is reflected in the Declaration of Independence of July 4, 1776. The central ideas of that document are coherent with Vattel’s arguments on the criteria of a people to overthrow a tyrannical sovereign. The Declaration of Independence states that governments are instituted to fulfill the “inalienable rights” of “life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness,” and can be changed if they fail to meet these obligations to the people. Governments should not be changed for light and transient causes, but only after a long chain of abuses to the fundamental rights of the people, with repeated requests for redress of grievances, which were refused. Repeated appeals were made to our “British Brethren,” but since they “have been deaf to the voice of justice and of consanguinity,” we are prepared to face them either in war or in peace. Therefore, we declare ourselves independent of the British Crown, with the full powers of a sovereign government, “to levy war, conclude peace, contract alliances, establish commerce, and to do all other acts and things which Independent States may of right do.”

The inclusion of the central conception of The Law of Nations, Vattel’s Leibnizian concept of happiness, as one of the three inalienable rights, is a crucial statement of the Declaration’s Leibnizian character. The Declaration of Independence was prepared by a committee consisting of Benjamin Franklin, Thomas Jefferson, John Adams, Robert Livingston, and Roger Sherman. Jefferson was assigned by this committee to write the draft of the Declaration, after John Adams turned down the task, because of his numerous other responsibilities. The fact, that Jefferson was a strong proponent of the philosophy of John Locke by as early as 1771, is often used as evidence that the Declaration was based on Locke’s philosophy. However, Locke had argued, in his Two Treatises of Government, that the fundamental right of men is to “Life, Liberty, and Property.” The inclusion of “the pursuit of happiness,” rather than “property,” as an inalienable right, was a crucial statement, that the American Revolution would be a battle for the establishment of a true Republic, rather than merely a dispute between two groups of aristocrats over the division of property.


See also Vattel’s The Obligation to Cultivate Peace

12 responses to “America was NOT founded on the Ten Commandments

  1. The problem with your post is Vattel was a Calvinist. His dad was a Calvinist pastor and vattel went to the university of Geneva.

  2. To paraphrase / quote the Wellesley College grad / BAR Attorney candidate,
    what does it matter? –

    Judge Anna is 99.9999999999999 % right.
    Second, there is no gray. There are no blurred lines.
    One is connect to God or not. Disconnected from God means fallen as in satanic possession. Therefore, one is an American (free) or a US Citizen (slave)…YA can’t be both Anita / Al !!!
    YA can’t hedge your bets….

  3. Duh.. What’s your point. The founder were free masons, who most of them participated in satanic rituals. The ten commandments are a modep that God uses to give people a general idea of what is bad and not to do. I agree with this site wanting to stop corruption and give people freedom, but I don’t agree with your antiGod views. I noticed that Judge Dale if he’s even a real person noted that Jesus was just someone who revolted against the establishment. Jesus never lifted a finger against anyone, and was not arrested for his revolt against the Roman, but because he preached the word of Gid and was God.

    • Not accepting that the 10 Commandments were written by GOD – but were most likely written by Pharaoh Akenaten (Moses) claiming they were – is not anti-God.

      As the story goes, Jesus threw the money-changers out of the temple as was taken into custody and tried shortly thereafter. Most Jews don’t know that as they are forbidden from reading the New Testament. The story of Jesus is intentionally withheld from the Jews.

      • Please, point out what part of the ten commandments wouldn’t be of God? Why would Jesus speak of the ten commandments many times, and acknowledge the law if they weren’t written by God?

        • You missed the point. Natural Law has nothing to do with worshiping Atun or Amun. Neither god Atun nor god Amum were recognized by the authors of the Declaration of Independence. Here is a well recognized description of the pharaoh that some call Moses:

          Eventually the god Amun won out with the Egyptians, which is why they say “Amen” after praying in church. Nowhere in the Ten Commandments does it claim that god Atun created mankind, the earth or the universe, i.e. was the “divine creator”. Atun was just a fictitious deity that Moses wanted the people to worship.

          Who told you that Jesus spoke of the Ten Commandments?

          • It’s pretty well known that the founding fathers weren’t all Christian, and they worded things so that God could mean any God and they intentionally seperated church from state, because they probably already knew how the Roman Catholic church would find a way to control the state. The pilgrims were the ones who began to settle here, and yes our roots are Christian. As far as the ten commandments, you still ignore what I wrote in reference to the ten commandments being common sense things that a good God would require, and that Jesus himself who you seemed to acknowledge talked about the ten commandments, and neve said they were fake. I trust Jesus over you.

          • And you didn’t site where Jesus spread the “Moses Ten Commandments myth”.

          • This link should make it easy to research what Jesus said about Moses and his laws.

          • References to Moses in the New Testament doesn’t attribute praise of Moses to Jesus. Sorry. The evidence that Moses was actually Akenaten and just another evil Pharaoh is archaeological. Akenaten wanted the people to worship the god Atun. The Ten Commandments refer to fealty to a ‘god’ and don’t claim him to be the creator of humanity or Earth. Again, the god of the Ten Commandments was Atun.

  4. Spot on with the info. Thanks for spreading the word. You and the work you do are greatly appreciated. If the world only knew. Hopefully soon, they will. Tell next rime. Good luck and thanks again!

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s