MRamz said:
Like it or not, the United States WAS founded on Christian principles by mostly Christians. Not just believers in some religion or any ol' god (little g), but in the God of the Bible. The vast majority of the founders were so far 'right' of who many of you derisively call the 'far right' today they would probably hardly recognize this country as the one they fought for and in some cases died to establish. While Christianity exists in other countries to one degree or another, I cannot think of any other country whose very founding documents attribute the rights of their citizens as being unalienable due to their source being 'nature's God', and openly proclaiming that that same God is the 'Creator' (Capitalizations in original).
AND
LittleNipper said:
/snip nip's paranoid ranting about Big Brother/. Our Founding Fathers prayed at the signing of the Delaration of Indepandence. Our Founding Fathers prayed at the ratification of the Constitution. Our Founding Fathers prayed at the Inauguration of George Washington. Our Founding Fathers prayed at his leaving of that office. The Founding Fathers were VERY much aware that ONLY by the intervention of GOD did America become a new nation and not a defeated colony. And the Founding Fathers found unalienable rights existed only because they were endowed by THE CREATOR. So for a people that "held" prayer was no longer functional--------THEY CERTAINLY DID A LOT OF IT.
I challenge you NRamz /LittleNipper to name even ONE "Christian" principle that made it into any governing document of the US. What I am going to do now is post why I think this above claim is a bogus as they come (reposting an old message to challenge the perennial Relgious Right bovine scatology):
Just for openers, let's consider the first Amendment guarantee of freedom of religion. The very LAST thing Christianity would "guarantee" is "freedom of religion".
Take the first of the Ten Commandments "Thou shalt have no other gods before me". Doesn't look like to this commandment would be very "religious freedom friendly" to me (just on this one issue alone). Anyway, why bill1662 claim is false (recycling an old post).
It is the Constitution that is the basis of the government. Documents like the Declaration of Independence are irrelevant...WHY?==> no laws come from this document. Furthermore, the Constitution is a SECULAR document where god(s?) are not even mentioned.
The majority of the framers were Christians or Deists (theists at any rate) Given the fact that they were mostly Christians/theists, I would also expect them to venerate such teachings. What you are consistently and stubbornly refusing to face is this:
- They did not make their beliefs, however much they venerated them, in the law of the land, in the Constitution.
- They had every opportunity to do so, and did no such thing==>there was nothing to stop them from doing so, except the lessons of history.
I think that the founders simply looked at the what happened any time in THEIR past that religion became the "guiding" force of government and realized just how dangerous to the idea of personal liberty the endorsment of religion was by government.
To put it simply "there was a time when religion ruled the world and that time was called the Dark Ages". They just didn't want to create a climate that would recreate the "Dark Age" that Reason had just escaped (endorsing any particular religion , would give it the power to force it's particular dogma on everyone).
What I especially admire is that even though the majority were Christians/deists and had a golden opportunity to hardwire Christianity/deism into the fabric of government, they resisted the siren song of power and didn't do it. Why? All one has to do is open a history book or pick up a newspaper to read what a failure religion is when it overtakes and replaces or even just overly-influences (the "power behind the throne") secular authority. (Crusades, Inquisitions, Christian-on-Christian persecution, repression of scientific investigation, repression of free speech, Iran, the Taliban, the "Irish troubles", etc.).
Before bill1662 starts squawking, I challenge him or anyone else to
name just one religious government, past or present, that didn't disintegrate into a repressive tyranny. You may find yourself like Lot looking for a righteous man is Sodom or Gomorrah....you won't find one. I think the founders knew this and did indeed learn from history (they already had plenty of examples of religious tyranny)
But I digress, so back to the topic.....
How did Christianity contribute to the writing of the Constitution , especially in light of the fact that some Christains are alway trumpeting that this is a "Christian nation founded on Christian principles". But it that really true? Let's look at:
- A = Constitutional principle
- B = What the Bible says on the subject
Adapted/Quoted FROM
Christian Bible Foundations of the U.S.A
Sometimes now we hear that the United States is "founded on biblical principles", as a slightly softened version of the "Christian nation" idea. People making that claim don't give specifics on what foundations of the U.S. and what parts of the Bible they mean.
Of the many foundations of our country, I was able to find two which are supported in the Bible, and several which run contradictory to the Bible.
(A)FREEDOM OF SPEECH. I don't find in the Bible any defense of freedom of speech.
(B) On the contrary: "he that doubteth is d@mned" (Romans 14:23); "there are many unruly and vain talkers and deceivers...whose mouths must be stopped.." (Titus, 1:10-11); and "These six things doth the Lord hate: yea, seven are an abomination unto him: ......and he that soweth discord among brethren." (Proverbs 6:16-19). The last passage could be construed as being against democracy, since anyone who runs for office against an existing administration is sowing discord.
(A)RELIGIOUS TOLERANCE. This is embraced in both the original Constitution (Article VI, paragraph 3) and in the First Amendment. Yet in the Bible we have:
(B) "Thou shalt have no other gods before me" (Exodus 20:3) ; "Thou shalt not suffer a witch to live" (Exodus 22:18); "He that sacrifice unto any god save the Lord only, he shall be utterly destroyed" (Exodus 22:20); "He who is not with me is against me" (Matthew 12:30, Luke 11:23); "he that blasphemeth the name of the LORD, he shall surely be put to death, and all the congregation shall certainly stone him" (Leviticus 24:16). [Such stoning was actually carried out, in 1 Kings 21:13] Anyone proselytizing for another religion is to be put to death, and if that person is a member of your family, you are to strike the first blow to kill him or her (Deuteronomy 13:5-10). "But those mine enemies, which would not that I should reign over them, bring hither, and slay them before me." (Luke 19:27).
The practice of "shunning" someone who disagrees with you on religious matters is advised in 2 Thessalonians 3:14.
(A)A REPUBLICAN FORM OF GOVERNMENT. Our Constitution demands this (Article IV, Section 4). But I find nothing in the Bible to support it.
(B) On the contrary, Romans 13:1-7 tells people to obey authority because it is instituted by God. NOTE: For an interesting view of this go
HERE (libertarian)
(A)"CORRUPTION OF THE BLOOD" is forbidden by the Constitution (Article III, Section 3, paragraph 2). In the Bible, though:
(B) "Prepare slaughter for his children for the iniquity of their fathers (Isaiah 14:21). However, the Bible does contradict itself on this: "... neither shall the children be put to death for the fathers" (Deut 24:16)]. Also: "visiting the iniquity of the fathers upon the children unto the third and fourth generation" (Exodus 20:5, 34:7, Numbers 14:18, Deut. 5:9); "His blood be on us, and on our children" (Matthew 27:25). B@st@rds may not enter the temple, nor their descendants (Deut. 23:2). God even killed a baby because of a sin by its father (2 Samuel 12:14). Ahab escaped punishment for murder by making an elaborate apology, and his descendants were punished instead (I Kings 21:29). The doctrine of original sin is also against this part of the Constitution.
(A)SLAVERY. This was an important social and economic foundation of our country both before and after independence. It was an institution condoned by the founders and recognized and defended by the original Constitution (Article I, Section 2, paragraph 3; Article I, Section 9; Article IV, Section 2, paragraph 3). NOTE: This is the infamous
"Three-fifths Compromise"
(B)Slavery is also condoned in both the Old and New Testaments, but it is never condemned. On the contrary, it is codified, and made an inherited condition:
Exodus 21:4ff gives rules for keeping slaves. Leviticus 25:44-46 says that heathen may be purchased as slaves, that their children become slaves, and that they are inherited as property by the owner's children for ever. Other places that indicate that slavery is a hereditary condition are: Genesis 9:25, Exodus 21:4, Corinthians 7:20. Deuteronomy 20:10-14 says that when you conquer a city, if it surrenders then all people inside it become your slaves; but if it doesn't surrender, then all males are to be killed and all women and children "take unto thyself". Luke 12:47-8 shows that Jesus approves of slavery, for he describes the conditions under which one should give a severe beating to a slave. 1 Timothy 6:1-2 tells slaves to honor their masters.
In the book of Philemon, Paul sends a runaway slave, Onesimus, back to his former master. But this conflicts with the admonition in Deuteronomy 23:15 "Thou shalt not deliver unto his master the servant which has escaped..." So the Bible is on both sides of the 1857 Dred Scott case!
(A)TREATMENT OF THE INDIAN PEOPLE. Here is another place where one of the foundations of our country is justified by the Bible. NOTE: No Constitutional protection for the original inhabitants of this country................
(B)"Then ye shall drive out all the inhabitants of the land from before you, and destroy....And ye shall dispossess the inhabitants of the land, and dwell therein.." (Numbers 33:52-53). This biblical injunction was obeyed many times by Americans.
(A) WOMEN'S RIGHTS Not mentioned by the author of the previous website is women's rights which are ignored by the Constitution......
(B)The Bible is very clear on their inferior status as reinterated in these articles:
The First Blast of the Trumpet Against the Monstrous Regiment of Women, by John Knox (1558)
A 1993 DEFENSE of the Knox Hatred of Women(yes, you see correctly 1993, in the 20th Century and then there's the SBC's (Baptist) notion of "freedom" for women { their "all people are equal (men,women), but some people (men) are more equal than others (women)" Orwellian Newspeak)}
Looks like the "Christian" contributions of slavery and discrimination against women and minorities did indeed get into the Constitution. NOTE:Of course, Christians are not the only religious group with adherents guilty of promoting the slavery or discrimination. Not all Christians now support the submission of women and /or
slavery (views of Randall Terry,
a Christian Reconstructionist) And yes IMO the views of such Christains are
totally inimical to freedom in any shape, form, or fashion.
The bottom-line here is that the Constitution is a SECULAR document (begins with "We, the people, NOT We, the Christians), containing no mention of God or Christianity. There is even a provision
outlawing religious tests for holding office.
HISTORY OF "GOD' ON US CURRENCY, THE PLEDGED
The phrase "one nation, under God, was a LATE additionto the pledge of alligance. This change came about the height of the McCarthy communist witchhunts and represented the desire of some to distinguish the US from the "evil, godless communists".
The phrase "in God we trust"http://www.ustreas.gov/education/fact-sheets/currency/in-god-we-trust.html did not appear on a LIMITED set of coins until the mid 1860s (it didn't appear on the same coins in a consistent fashion, either). It didn't appear on the paper currency til 1957 (again as a counter to all those "evil, godless commies! Better dead than atheist-Red!)
Ball's now in your court... We await the enumeration of the alleged Christian principles that you both keep talking about but somehow never seem to be able to list and support.
