The Founding of America

Sorry Marcy, but that is a popular tract that is laden with falsities. I ran across it several times when doing research on Wallbuilders.

Here is what one Christian had to say on the matter: LINK

Another Refutation

And another

As I have said before, these refutations are easy to find and are based on TRUTH and FACTS. Things aren't always what they seem. Consider the source, in this case Barton. People with agendas, unscrupulous ones, will do ANYTHING to get you to believe their side. Be OBJECTIVE in your research. Don't be willing to believe a lie.
 
In my search for truth on this topic, I came across another site with a lot of quotes. I will admit, I have not had a chance to research all of the, but I will throw it out for discussion anyway.

Was America founded as a Christian nation?

It still boggles the mind that there can be so many different opinions on something that happened not that long ago.

DV, thank you for the research on Wallbuilders
 
[b said:
Quote[/b] ]It still boggles the mind that there can be so many different opinions on something that happened not that long ago.
Click to expand...

It's called Revisionist History, and it is a very despicable thing.

EDIT: I did a quick once over at that site Gen, they borrow heavily from Barton's work. They also quote a few things out of context.

I wouldn't put too much stock in the site.

You'll understand what I mean if you look at the links I posted earlier.
 
But how do I know that the quotes that claim to say that America's founders are not Christians did not fall prey to Revisionist History as well. See the predicament? hhhhmmmm, I am beginning to sound like you DV LOL

ps I did look at the links and have Googled, but as many sites as there are on one side of this debate, there are on the other. Terribly confusing.
 
One word: Research
ghostface.gif
 
But how do you know your research is accurate and Bartons is not? It comes down to one persons word against another persons word and both claim to be able to validate what they are stating. Which side is the revisionists? I believe it is the atheists, you believe it is the Christians. Who is right?

How do you feel about this?

[b said:
Quote[/b] ]The phrase "separation of Church and State" is not found in the Constitution of the United States. It is found in the 'Constitution' of the former Soviet Union.
Click to expand...

Cory
 
Have you actually looked at the allegations made against Barton? Have you seen how he has had to backtrack supposedly researched material? I'm sorry, but I would NOT qualify Barton's work as accurate or objective.

This has nothing to do with Atheists VS Christians. This has to do with Right and Wrong, Truth VS Lies.

I'll see your quote and raise you a few...

[b said:
Quote[/b] ]ARGUMENT ONE: The phrase "separation of church and state" is not found in the Constitution

Absolutely true, and absolutely irrelevant. As noted earlier, separationists take this language from Thomas Jefferson's 1802 letter to the Danbury Baptists in which he argued that the Constitution created a "wall of separation between church and state." But, as noted above, separationists have never taken the phrase as anything more than a handy (if historically significant) summary of the intent of the religion clauses of the First Amendment. Separationist scholar Leo Pfeffer, for example, notes:

"No magic attaches to a particular verbalization of an underlying concept. The concept at issue here is more accurately expressed in Madison's phrase 'separation between Religion and Government,' or in the popular maxim that 'religion is a private matter.'" (Church, State, and Freedom, pp. 118-119).

Second, accommodationists don't apply this argument consistently. Pfeffer, for example, observes that:

(T)he phrase "Bill of Rights" has become a convenient term to designate the freedoms guaranteed in the first ten amendments; yet it would be the height of captiousness to argue that the phrase does not appear in the Constitution. Similarly, the right to a fair trial is generally accepted to be a constitutional principle; yet the term "fair trial" is not found in the Constitution. To bring the point even closer to home, who would deny that "religious liberty" is a constitutional principle? Yet that phrase too is not in the Constitution. The universal acceptance which all these terms, including "separation of church and state," have received in America would seem to confirm rather than disparage their reality as basic American democratic principles (pp. 118).
Click to expand...
LINK

[b said:
Quote[/b] ]Myth:
The phrase "separation of church and state" does not appear in the Constitution.

Response:
That is true, the phrase "separation of church and state" does not actually appear anywhere in the Constitution. There is a problem, however, in that some people draw incorrect conclusions from this fact. The absence of this phrase does not mean that it is an invalid concept or that it cannot be used as a legal or judicial principle.

There are any number of important legal concepts which do not appear in the Constitution with the exact phrasing people tend to use. For example, nowhere in the Constitution will you find words like "right to privacy" or even "right to a fair trial." Does this mean that no American citizen has a right to privacy or a fair trial? Does this mean that no judge should ever invoke these rights when reaching a decision?

Of course not - the absence of these specific words does not mean that there is also an absence of these ideas.
Click to expand...
LINK

[b said:
Quote[/b] ]Do the words "separation of church and state" appear in the Constitution?

The phrase, "a wall of separation between church and state," was coined by President Thomas Jefferson in a carefully crafted letter to the Danbury Baptists in 1802, when they had asked him to explain the First Amendment. The Supreme Court, and lower courts, have used Jefferson's phrase repeatedly in major decisions upholding neutrality in matters of religion. The exact words "separation of church and state" do not appear in the Constitution; neither do "separation of powers," "interstate commerce," "right to privacy," and other phrases describing well-established constitutional principles.
What does "separation of church and state" mean?

Thomas Jefferson, explaining the phrase to the Danbury Baptists, said, "the legitimate powers of government reach actions only, and not opinions." Personal religious views are just that: personal. Our government has no right to promulgate religion or to interfere with private beliefs.

The Supreme Court has forged a three-part "Lemon test" (Lemon v. Kurtzman, 1971) to determine if a law is permissible under the First-Amendment religion clauses.

1. A law must have a secular purpose.
2. It must have a primary effect which neither advances nor inhibits religion.
3. It must avoid excessive entanglement of church and state.

The separation of church and state is a wonderful American principle supported not only by minorities, such as Jews, Moslems, and unbelievers, but applauded by most Protestant churches that recognize that it has allowed religion to flourish in this nation. It keeps the majority from pressuring the minority.
What about majority rule?

America is one nation under a Constitution. Although the Constitution sets up a representative democracy, it specifically was amended with the Bill of Rights in 1791 to uphold individual and minority rights. On constitutional matters we do not have majority rule. For example, when the majority in certain localities voted to segregate blacks, this was declared illegal. The majority has no right to tyrannize the minority on matters such as race, gender, or religion.

Not only is it unAmerican for the government to promote religion, it is rude. Whenever a public official uses the office to advance religion, someone is offended. The wisest policy is one of neutrality.
Click to expand...
LINK

[b said:
Quote[/b] ]For decades, Robertson has insisted church-state separation is found in the constitution of the old Soviet Union, but not in the U.S. Constitution. He has insisted the United States was founded as a Christian nation.
_Robertson's apparent turnabout to prescribe separation of church and state as essential for Iraq is "startling," according to one the televangelist's chief critics.
___"Pat's conversion shows there is hope for even the most wayward soul," quipped Barry Lynn, executive director of Americans United for Separation of Church and State. "I sent him a letter of congratulations and an Americans United membership application in today's mail. We are always looking for new supporters, especially those with the kind of financial clout that Robertson has."
Click to expand...
LINK

[b said:
Quote[/b] ]MYTH 3: SEPARATION OF CHURCH AND STATE IS NOT AN AMERICAN PRINCIPLE BUT IS FOUND IN ARTICLE 53 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF THE SOVIET UNION.

This lie about separation of church and state still frequently espoused by religious broadcaster Pat Robertson is perhaps the most offensive to church-state separationists because it attempts to taint a vital American principle with the brush of communism. Even a brief review of the facts proves that this statement is nonsense. The modern Soviet state came into being after the Russian Revolution of 1917. The Soviet constitution was rewritten several times, and more recent versions included American-style guarantees of freedom of speech, press, religion and assembly. (These provisions, of course, were never obeyed by the Soviet government.)

Article 124 of the country's 1947 constitution has been translated by some scholars to read, "In order to ensure to citizens freedom of conscience, the church in the USSR is separated from the state, and the school from the church. Freedom of religious worship and freedom of anti-religious propaganda is recognized for all citizens."

Since Jefferson coined the phrase "wall of separation between church and state" in 1802, a full 145 years before the Soviet provision was written, it is obviously incorrect to suggest that the Soviets pioneered the separation principle.
Click to expand...
LINK
 
The bottom line: the enemy will not rest until He has torn God from everything. He has tried to destroy the Book, he wants God out of our history, and when it comes time for the mark of the beast, the one thing that we have daily with, "In God We Trust," will be gone, that of our monetary system. He would like to forget God, he wanted to be God, that is why he is in the perdicament that he is in now.

I find it very hard to believe sources that hate God's Word! According to the following, that is not where I should be receiving my information:

Psalm 1
1 Blessed is the man that walketh not in the counsel of the ungodly, nor standeth in the way of sinners, nor sitteth in the seat of the scornful.
2 But his delight is in the law of the LORD; and in his law doth he meditate day and night.
3 And he shall be like a tree planted by the rivers of water, that bringeth forth his fruit in his season; his leaf also shall not wither; and whatsoever he doeth shall prosper.
4 The ungodly are not so: but are like the chaff which the wind driveth away.
5 Therefore the ungodly shall not stand in the judgment, nor sinners in the congregation of the righteous.
6 For the LORD knoweth the way of the righteous: but the way of the ungodly shall perish.
 
Oh Marcy, you've made me very sad.

[b said:
Quote[/b] ]The bottom line: the enemy will not rest until He has torn God from everything
Click to expand...

The REAL bottom line is God isn't IN everything. You can't tear God away from the history of this Country because He wasn't there to begin with.

[b said:
Quote[/b] ]I find it very hard to believe sources that hate God's Word!
Click to expand...

There's a distinctive line between HATING God's word and simply not believing in it.
 
You know I am not trying to make you feel sad! Stop that! D.V., it is just that I trust the men of God who have searched out history and the evidence that they have found. I beieve they are honest men. I am on their side of the issue.

As for the hating God's Word remark, you do not need to take it personally. When I go to consider and understand your sources, that is the impression I walk away with.
 
Unfortunately, history is full of men bending and twisting history to make God more appealing and seem more real.

That is just as bad as launching Inquisitions and Crusades in the name of God.
 
At the opposite end of the balance, the same holds true.

A false balance is abomination to the LORD: but a just weight is his delight. Proverbs 11:1
 
A few tidbits from our founding fathers and men of notoriety.


God Bless America
Land that I love
Stand beside her and guide her...

Let Freedom Ring!

http://www.av1611.org/jmelton/kjvstuff.html#four
Taken from this link:
In the beginning of the contest with Britain, when we were sensible of danger, we had daily prayers in this room for Divine Protection. Our prayers, Sir, were heard -- and they were graciously answered. All of us who were engaged in the struggle must have observed frequent instances of a superintending Providence in our favor. . . . And have we now forgotten that powerful Friend? Or do we imagine we no longer need its assistance? I have lived, Sir, a long time, and the longer I live the more convincing proofs I see of this truth, that God governs in the affairs of men. And if a sparrow cannot fall to the ground without His notice, is it probable that an empire can rise without His aid?...We have also been assured, Sir, in the sacred writings, that 'except the LORD build the house, they labour in vain that build it.' (Psalm 127:1) I firmly believe this, and I also believe that, without His concurring aid, we shall succeed in this political building no better than the builders of Babel. . ." Benjamin Franklin's appeal to President Washington for a National Day of Prayer

It cannot be emphasized too strongly or too often that this great nation was founded, not by religionists, but by Christians, not on religions, but the gospel of Jesus Christ. Patrick Henry

It is impossible to rightly govern the world without God and the Bible. George Washington

The Bible is a Book in comparison with which all others in my eyes are of minor importance; and in all my perplexities and distresses has never failed to give me light and strength. Robert E. Lee

Must everything in our age be predigested? Does the Bible have to be reduced to pabulum? I refuse to believe that modern man, who split the atom and is exploring space, is unable to cope with the grandeur and glory of the King James Version. Winston Churchill

I sought for the greatness of America in her harbors and rivers and fertile fields, and her mines and commerce. It was not there. Not until I went into the churches and heard her pulpits flame with righteousness did I understand the greatness of her power. America is great because she is good; and if America ever ceases to be good, America will cease to be great. Alexis De Tocqueville (1805-1859), French politician, political scientist, and author

The deathless Book has survived three great dangers: (1) The negligence of it's friends, (2) the warfare of it's enemies, (3) and the false systems built upon it. Isaac Taylor

The destiny of America is to carry the gospel of Jesus Christ to all men everywhere. John Adams

That Book, Sir, is the Rock on which our republic stands. Andrew Jackson

Believe me, Sir, never a night goes by be I ever so tired but I read the word of God before I go to bed. Gen. Douglas MacArthur

I have made a covenant with my God that He send me neither visions, dreams, nor even angels. I am well satisfied with the gift of the Holy Scriptures, which give me abundant instruction and all that I need to know both for this life and for the life which is to come. Martin Luther

Amen! and Amen!

He which testifieth these things saith, Surely I come quickly. Amen. Even so, come, Lord Jesus. Revelation 22:10
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top