The U.S. WAS Founded as Christian

[Dark Virtue]

BTW, regarding David Barton & The Treaty of Tripoli, I'd be very careful giving his material much weight.

His research has been called into question by the Baptist Joint Committee on Public Affairs as well as numerous other sources.

 

[Avesther]

I wouldn't put a lot of trust in the BJC either, their only reason of existance is to argue against the likes of David Barton. Their position on David Barton is highly biased against him long before his pen ever hits the paper.

 

[Dark Virtue]

What, exactly, are the "likes of David Barton"?

BTW, has anyone read Thomas' Paines', "Age of Reason"? I think it's a pertinent read for this discussion.

 

[Thaddius]

No...I havn't. I'm really not interested in what the athiests bible has to say.

Cory

 

[Mr.Bill]

And yet we read your texts. Mmm...hypocrisy?

 

[Didasko]

And yet we read your texts. Mmm...hypocrisy?

hhmm...that doesn't fall under the definition of hypocrisy that I learned (or read in the dictionary for that matter). I think it's called choice. You chose to read his texts. Thaddius never claimed to read yours ...or want to, so no hypocrisy whatsoever.

Now if he claimed to read yours and didn't, or faulted you for not reading his and then didn't read yours...that would be hypocrisy

 

[Bowser]

And yet we read your texts. Mmm...hypocrisy?

What?

And one other thing...

Mr. Bill, please learn some common sense, post your own thoughts and ideas, and stop following DV around and repeating/backing up everything he has to say. Sometimes I wonder if he became a Christian if you'd be right there behind him, because you blindly follow him everywhere and agree with him on everything. Stop being an imitator and start figuring some things out for yourself. If you remain an atheist, or whatever it is you call yourself, then that's fine, but at least believe in whatever it is you choose to believe in on your own behalf.

If Dark Virtue wants to remain in what I believe is the dark; that's fine. If you want to, too; then that's fine as well. But, don't let another man's foolishness, whether it's mine or Dark Virtue's or anyone else's, be a path for you to follow. Start asking your own questions, and do your own research. You'll never get anywhere or figure anything out if it's always done in the shadow of someone else.

 

[Didasko]

How can you create a country based on religious freedom and base it upon a religion?

You truly don't understand? Just because I am a Christian does not mean that I want to take your rights of being a soft atheist away (though I pray that you will see the light )

I think everyone needs to look at the framers of the consitution with a true historical eye, an unbiased eye.

I agree...but obviously from a different point of view.

Remember that these events took place during the Age of Enlightenment and try and remember what that actually meant.

I grew up in the sixties and seventies...but I'm not a hippie and never was.

Ah yes, the Vast Atheist Conspiracy!

lol...there aren't enough of you out there to worry about

The first amendment is contrary to the first commandment, is it not? If America was founded as a Christian nation, why give everyone the right to follow any religion they chose when it goes against God's first commandment, "Thou shalt have no other gods before me"?

The first amendment was written to keep the Feds from placing one Christian denomination above all the others. There was no worry at the time of any other 'religion' being sponsored by the government.

Even if you don't agree with that (and I am quite sure you don't), God is the ultimate Judge. Those who follow other gods will get there reward, it is not our place to force their belief (it's not possible anyway).

Let me post this again, because I think it's the REAL point of this topic:


Quote:
America was founded by mostly Christian men. America is still mostly a Christian nation, according to polls. But, America was not founded as a Christian nation. I can find no founders saying otherwise in Federer's book of quotations. If it were otherwise, its founding document would say so, wouldn't it?"?

This nation was founded with a Federal government that was not supposed to have the power to interfere with the obviously Christian states. Reading the various state constitutions, they were obviously founded Christian. The U.S. Constitution along with the First Amendment were written in such a way as to allow the states to be Christian and not interfere with their right to be Christian.

You need to remember that a major purpose of the constitution was to protect the states rights.

The states were Christian states. A union made up of Christian states that intentionally weakened the federal government to prevent it from infringing on those rights is a Christian nation.

 

[Mr.Bill]

What?

And one other thing...

Mr. Bill, please learn some common sense, post your own thoughts and ideas, and stop following DV around and repeating/backing up everything he has to say. Sometimes I wonder if he became a Christian if you'd be right there behind him, because you blindly follow him everywhere and agree with him on everything. Stop being an imitator and start figuring some things out for yourself. If you remain an atheist, or whatever it is you call yourself, then that's fine, but at least believe in whatever it is you choose to believe in on your own behalf.

If Dark Virtue wants to remain in what I believe is the dark; that's fine. If you want to, too; then that's fine as well. But, don't let another man's foolishness, whether it's mine or Dark Virtue's or anyone else's, be a path for you to follow. Start asking your own questions, and do your own research. You'll never get anywhere or figure anything out if it's always done in the shadow of someone else.

Hmm? I'm a little surprised that you feel that way... I'll be the first to admit that I admire DV for his ability to conjure and support an argument, and that we share many common beliefs, but that does not mean that I'm his lapdog or something. It is to be expected that we share so many beliefs, as we're both secular humanists. And even so, we've been known to disagree on several points. To name some, we disagree on the fundamental nature of homosexuality, the ethical feasibility of the death penalty, and origin of morality. On this issue, yes, DV and I agree that there is no such Christian origin to the United States. Our agreement, however, does not mean that my belief in this area is directly contingent upon Mr. DV; Our brains, I assure you, are very much seperated. I personally feel that, after analysing the evidence for both sides, it would be foolhardy to difinitively claim that the United States was intended to be founded as a Christian nation. Some of our founding fathers were Christian, some of them were not; I feel that their religious beliefs, whether desireable or no, should not have any emphasis on the fundamental principles of our nation. The USA is not Thomas Jefferson, or John Adams, or James Madison. It is a country, founded on principles that are completely unrelated to any religious doctrine. It is interesting to consider, but the logic does not hold through.

I appologize if I have been sounding like a mindless robot...it is probably due to my infrequent posting habits of late. I'm doing a lot more reading now, only chiming in when I feel it's necessary. And I often don't feel that it's necessary...for as I'm sure you are aware, DV posts an awful lot, often making points that I would have made, but didn't get the chance to. So if I happen to reiterate something that DV said, please remember that I'm merely agreeing with him, much akin to the way I am sure you do with your like-minded fellows. I am a strong proponent of the open mind, and so I would hate to be hypocritical.

 

[Avesther]

What, exactly, are the "likes of David Barton"?

Meaning if anybody has an opinion or understanding that is contrary to the BJC, they appear to argue them for the sake of arguement. They appear to take the road of, we are right and everybody else must be wrong when it comes to seperation of church and state. And when I say, the "likes of David Barton," it means those who happen to have a PoV that is differing from the BJC.

 

[Dark Virtue]

No...I havn't. I'm really not interested in what the athiests bible has to say.

Cory

Eh? Thomas Paine wasn't an atheist, he was a DEIST.

Maybe you SHOULD read it

 

[Dark Virtue]

What?

And one other thing...

Mr. Bill, please learn some common sense, post your own thoughts and ideas, and stop following DV around and repeating/backing up everything he has to say. Sometimes I wonder if he became a Christian if you'd be right there behind him, because you blindly follow him everywhere and agree with him on everything. Stop being an imitator and start figuring some things out for yourself. If you remain an atheist, or whatever it is you call yourself, then that's fine, but at least believe in whatever it is you choose to believe in on your own behalf.

If Dark Virtue wants to remain in what I believe is the dark; that's fine. If you want to, too; then that's fine as well. But, don't let another man's foolishness, whether it's mine or Dark Virtue's or anyone else's, be a path for you to follow. Start asking your own questions, and do your own research. You'll never get anywhere or figure anything out if it's always done in the shadow of someone else.

Exactly how am I "in the dark"?

 

[Dark Virtue]

Originally Posted by Dark Virtue
How can you create a country based on religious freedom and base it upon a religion?

You truly don't understand? Just because I am a Christian does not mean that I want to take your rights of being a soft atheist away (though I pray that you will see the light )

That has ABSOLUTELY NOTHING to do with what I said. This topic is about America being founded as a Christian Nation, not whether or not the majority of Americans are Christian.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Dark Virtue
I think everyone needs to look at the framers of the consitution with a true historical eye, an unbiased eye.


I agree...but obviously from a different point of view.

No matter, it can still be viewed objectively, can it not?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Dark Virtue
Remember that these events took place during the Age of Enlightenment and try and remember what that actually meant.


I grew up in the sixties and seventies...but I'm not a hippie and never was.

What the heck does that have to do with the Age of Enlightenment?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Dark Virtue
Ah yes, the Vast Atheist Conspiracy!


lol...there aren't enough of you out there to worry about

Obviously someone is.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Dark Virtue
The first amendment is contrary to the first commandment, is it not? If America was founded as a Christian nation, why give everyone the right to follow any religion they chose when it goes against God's first commandment, "Thou shalt have no other gods before me"?


The first amendment was written to keep the Feds from placing one Christian denomination above all the others. There was no worry at the time of any other 'religion' being sponsored by the government.

Even if you don't agree with that (and I am quite sure you don't), God is the ultimate Judge. Those who follow other gods will get there reward, it is not our place to force their belief (it's not possible anyway).

I'd really, REALLY love to see you prove that. Or is evidence too much to ask for?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Dark Virtue
Let me post this again, because I think it's the REAL point of this topic:


Quote:
America was founded by mostly Christian men. America is still mostly a Christian nation, according to polls. But, America was not founded as a Christian nation. I can find no founders saying otherwise in Federer's book of quotations. If it were otherwise, its founding document would say so, wouldn't it?"?


This nation was founded with a Federal government that was not supposed to have the power to interfere with the obviously Christian states. Reading the various state constitutions, they were obviously founded Christian. The U.S. Constitution along with the First Amendment were written in such a way as to allow the states to be Christian and not interfere with their right to be Christian.

You need to remember that a major purpose of the constitution was to protect the states rights.

The states were Christian states. A union made up of Christian states that intentionally weakened the federal government to prevent it from infringing on those rights is a Christian nation.

I would suggest a little bit of research done with an objective viewpoint.

 

[Dark Virtue]

Hmm? I'm a little surprised that you feel that way... I'll be the first to admit that I admire DV for his ability to conjure and support an argument, and that we share many common beliefs, but that does not mean that I'm his lapdog or something. It is to be expected that we share so many beliefs, as we're both secular humanists. And even so, we've been known to disagree on several points. To name some, we disagree on the fundamental nature of homosexuality, the ethical feasibility of the death penalty, and origin of morality. On this issue, yes, DV and I agree that there is no such Christian origin to the United States. Our agreement, however, does not mean that my belief in this area is directly contingent upon Mr. DV; Our brains, I assure you, are very much seperated. I personally feel that, after analysing the evidence for both sides, it would be foolhardy to difinitively claim that the United States was intended to be founded as a Christian nation. Some of our founding fathers were Christian, some of them were not; I feel that their religious beliefs, whether desireable or no, should not have any emphasis on the fundamental principles of our nation. The USA is not Thomas Jefferson, or John Adams, or James Madison. It is a country, founded on principles that are completely unrelated to any religious doctrine. It is interesting to consider, but the logic does not hold through.

I appologize if I have been sounding like a mindless robot...it is probably due to my infrequent posting habits of late. I'm doing a lot more reading now, only chiming in when I feel it's necessary. And I often don't feel that it's necessary...for as I'm sure you are aware, DV posts an awful lot, often making points that I would have made, but didn't get the chance to. So if I happen to reiterate something that DV said, please remember that I'm merely agreeing with him, much akin to the way I am sure you do with your like-minded fellows. I am a strong proponent of the open mind, and so I would hate to be hypocritical.

Bowser, that was simply laughable

Just because Mr. Bill and I reside under the huge umbrella of atheism, doesn't mean we are identical in thought, nature or beliefs.

We could easily turn this around and claim you do the same thing, since Christianity rests its origins on traditions, could we not?

Please, stop making false, blanket accusations. You wouldn't accept them if they were levied at you, don't levy them at others.

 

[Dark Virtue]

Meaning if anybody has an opinion or understanding that is contrary to the BJC, they appear to argue them for the sake of arguement. They appear to take the road of, we are right and everybody else must be wrong when it comes to seperation of church and state. And when I say, the "likes of David Barton," it means those who happen to have a PoV that is differing from the BJC.

Isn't David Barton and his organization, Wallbuilders, guilty of doing that very same thing?

 

[Bowser]

Bowser, that was simply laughable

We could easily turn this around and claim you do the same thing, since Christianity rests its origins on traditions, could we not?

Actually, you can't. Every post you make Mr. Bill is right behind you. When have you seen me post in here? You've seen me rarely, so no, you cannot say the same about me.

Please, stop making false, blanket accusations. You wouldn't accept them if they were levied at you, don't levy them at others.

If you honestly think they're false accusations then you're as blind as Mr. Bill is. You two hang out in the same forums, and largely agree with each other much of the time. You enjoy blasting Christians, and you both claim you hold fast to some greater "knowledge". There's nothing wrong with having friends, but it seems, at least on his part, that he admires you in some foolish way; I've never seen him disagree with you on anything, and instead is always praising you. Above all else I try to remain as honest as I can, and that sometimes includes getting on to and correcting even my friends. But, I've never seen that in you two. To me, it seems like one guy is knowledgeable, but for some reason is denying an obvious truth. The other guy is merely his shadow.

Just because Mr. Bill and I reside under the huge umbrella of atheism, doesn't mean we are identical in thought, nature or beliefs.

You're right, and I don't think so either. I'm not saying you're identical; I'm saying that he follows you around everywhere blindly. A twin and a clone are two entirely different things; there's nothing wrong with thinking alike but there is something wrong with a foolish admiration.

If you saw someone going around and agreeing with and supporting everything I said wouldn't you be a little bit suspicious too? I rarely see Mr. Bill post on his own, but instead it's usually almost always in agreement with what you've already posted.

 

[Mr.Bill]

Sorry you feel that way Bowser; I don't know what else to tell you. I could show you the times where I have disagreed with DV, but honestly I don't think it's worth the effort. Please do not insult my intelligence; Apparently you don't know what you're talking about.

You might read this again:

Hmm? I'm a little surprised that you feel that way... I'll be the first to admit that I admire DV for his ability to conjure and support an argument, and that we share many common beliefs, but that does not mean that I'm his lapdog or something. It is to be expected that we share so many beliefs, as we're both secular humanists. And even so, we've been known to disagree on several points. To name some, we disagree on the fundamental nature of homosexuality, the ethical feasibility of the death penalty, and origin of morality. On this issue, yes, DV and I agree that there is no such Christian origin to the United States. Our agreement, however, does not mean that my belief in this area is directly contingent upon Mr. DV; Our brains, I assure you, are very much seperated. I personally feel that, after analysing the evidence for both sides, it would be foolhardy to difinitively claim that the United States was intended to be founded as a Christian nation. Some of our founding fathers were Christian, some of them were not; I feel that their religious beliefs, whether desireable or no, should not have any emphasis on the fundamental principles of our nation. The USA is not Thomas Jefferson, or John Adams, or James Madison. It is a country, founded on principles that are completely unrelated to any religious doctrine. It is interesting to consider, but the logic does not hold through.

I appologize if I have been sounding like a mindless robot...it is probably due to my infrequent posting habits of late. I'm doing a lot more reading now, only chiming in when I feel it's necessary. And I often don't feel that it's necessary...for as I'm sure you are aware, DV posts an awful lot, often making points that I would have made, but didn't get the chance to. So if I happen to reiterate something that DV said, please remember that I'm merely agreeing with him, much akin to the way I am sure you do with your like-minded fellows. I am a strong proponent of the open mind, and so I would hate to be hypocritical.

 

[Bowser]

Sorry you feel that way Bowser; I don't know what else to tell you. I could show you the times where I have disagreed with DV, but honestly I don't think it's worth the effort. Please do not insult my intelligence.

Fair enough, but understand that you don't have everything figured out yet, just as DV and I don't.

 

[Dark Virtue]

If you honestly think they're false accusations then you're as blind as Mr. Bill is. You two hang out in the same forums, and largely agree with each other much of the time. You enjoy blasting Christians, and you both claim you hold fast to some greater "knowledge". There's nothing wrong with having friends, but it seems, at least on his part, that he admires you in some foolish way; I've never seen him disagree with you on anything, and instead is always praising you. Above all else I try to remain as honest as I can, and that sometimes includes getting on to and correcting even my friends. But, I've never seen that in you two. To me, it seems like one guy is knowledgeable, but for some reason is denying an obvious truth. The other guy is merely his shadow.

The accusations you make are not only blind, but they are false and erroneous. The proof, unfortunately, rests in the old forum. We don't agree on everything as was evidenced in MANY threads. Nor do we enjoy "blasting" Christians. We've never done anything like that. According to you, there are two types of people, those that agree with you and those that don't.

Say what you will about me, but you owe Mr. Bill a HUGE apology.

Do you think we could dispense with the fingerpointing and name calling and focus on the topic?

 

[Bowser]

The accusations you make are not only blind, but they are false and erroneous. The proof, unfortunately, rests in the old forum. We don't agree on everything as was evidenced in MANY threads. Nor do we enjoy "blasting" Christians. We've never done anything like that. According to you, there are two types of people, those that agree with you and those that don't.

Say what you will about me, but you owe Mr. Bill a HUGE apology.

Do you think we could dispense with the fingerpointing and name calling and focus on the topic?

You sound like a lawyer, lol. Tell me, DV, did you always want to grow up to be a deciever? How are my accusations blind, false, and erroneous? It's obvious that you two hang out a lot together on these forums, and that you agree on many, many things.

And, I would like to apologize to Mr. Bill; I'm sorry, and please forgive me. I'd hate to shut out the possibility of talking to you again on IM, lol.