America Was Founded On Christian Principles

[drjean]

The US government is founded upon secular principles. These principles are things such as freedom of religion - which is contradictory to the first commandment. Our nation's foundation was focused on the rights of the people (not a focus of the Bible - the Biblical laws focus on what people shouldn't do rather than the things that they have a right to do) - murder is illegal because it deprives someone of their right to life. Theft is illegal because it violates someone's right to property.

The government isn't anti-religious - it's just non-religious. The founding fathers had seen what mixing religion with politics had done in Europe and were displeased with the results, which is why they decided that the best course of action would be to place a wall of separation between religion and government.

The founding fathers promoted freedom OF religion nor freedom FROM religion...a common mistake by non-believers.

 

[TheBear]

The founding fathers promoted freedom OF religion nor freedom FROM religion...a common mistake by non-believers.

What about Muslims, who ARE believers in God, but are non-believers of the Christian God?

 

[GoldenBoy89]

The founding fathers promoted freedom OF religion nor freedom FROM religion...a common mistake by non-believers.

If you have the right to choose any religion, why wouldn't the choice of "no religion" be included in that?

And the Supreme Court has ruled atheism as a "religion" to extend that constitutional protection to non-believers.

So what now?

 

[Queller]

[SIZE=+1]America’s Founding Fathers[/SIZE] Were the Founding Fathers Christians?
It can be easily demonstrated that a very high percentage – in fact, the overwhelming majority – of Founding Fathers were Christians, but certainly not all of them were. Today, citizens are regularly told about the lesser religious Founders (such as Benjamin Franklin, Thomas Jefferson, and Thomas Paine), but hear nothing about the prominent Christians among the Founders (for example, 29 of the 56 signers of the Declaration held what are today considered seminary or Bible school degrees, and many others of the signers were bold and outspoken in their personal Christian faith). Significantly, not one of the Founding Fathers was secular in his orientation; even Thomas Paine (certainly the least religious of the Founders) openly acknowledged God and announced his belief in his personal accountability to God, and he also directly advocated teaching creationism in the public school classroom (see “Thomas Paine Criticizes the Current Public School Science Curriculum&#8221. Over 250 individuals are historically considered Founding Fathers (e.g., the signers of the Declaration, the signers of the Constitution, the framers of the Bill of Rights, leading state governors and generals in the Revolution, etc.), but typically critics list only the handful of the least religious from among the 250 to claim that all the Founders were deists or secular.
for rest of information and links:

The position on school curriculums Paine advocates for would be a violation of the First Amendment.

Are you ever going to discuss anything or is your entire position simply argument via copypasta?

 

[Queller]

The founding fathers promoted freedom OF religion nor freedom FROM religion...a common mistake by non-believers.

When you force people of one religion to learn and follow the doctrines of a different religion, you are "prohibiting the free exercise" of their religion.

 

[GoldenBoy89]

[SIZE=+1]America’s Founding Fathers[/SIZE] Were the Founding Fathers Christians?
It can be easily demonstrated that a very high percentage – in fact, the overwhelming majority – of Founding Fathers were Christians, but certainly not all of them were. Today, citizens are regularly told about the lesser religious Founders (such as Benjamin Franklin, Thomas Jefferson, and Thomas Paine), but hear nothing about the prominent Christians among the Founders (for example, 29 of the 56 signers of the Declaration held what are today considered seminary or Bible school degrees, and many others of the signers were bold and outspoken in their personal Christian faith). Significantly, not one of the Founding Fathers was secular in his orientation; even Thomas Paine (certainly the least religious of the Founders) openly acknowledged God and announced his belief in his personal accountability to God, and he also directly advocated teaching creationism in the public school classroom (see “Thomas Paine Criticizes the Current Public School Science Curriculum”). Over 250 individuals are historically considered Founding Fathers (e.g., the signers of the Declaration, the signers of the Constitution, the framers of the Bill of Rights, leading state governors and generals in the Revolution, etc.), but typically critics list only the handful of the least religious from among the 250 to claim that all the Founders were deists or secular.
for rest of information and links:

WallBuilders - Issues and Articles - Frequently Asked Questions

Actually, they were pretty much all secularists.

Secular doesn't mean irreligious. A person can be both Christian and a secularist; Buddhist and secularist; Muslim and secularist. A secularist is someone who separates religion and government. America was founded on secularism and that is probably the most important of all American principles.

Where in the bible do we find that government and religion should operate separately?

 

[tulc]

The founding fathers promoted freedom OF religion nor freedom FROM religion...a common mistake by non-believers.

Ahhh! That would explain why the founding fathers made certain to institute all those religious tests a person had to take before they could hold office here in the United States, right? So I maybe don't know the Constitutions as well as I should, could you point out where those tests are in it? I suspect that once we see those they'll clear up any lingering questions people may have!
tulc(thanks you in advance!)

 

[morningstar2651]

Actually, this passage has nothing to do with men being superior to women. It is assigning a value to people's sacrifices based on what they, in that culture, can be reasonably expected to give. How do you reconcile your eisegesis with Galatians 3:28?

It's assigning value to the sacrifice of people. Human sacrifice.

Unless 1 month old children are making sacrifices.

Leviticus 27
6 for a person between one month and five years, set the value of a male at five shekels[f] of silver and that of a female at three shekels[g] of silver;​

Not sure where you got that idea. Nothing in the text says that first born sons are sacrificed, only that they are consecrated to God.

Something is lost in your translation.

Leviticus 27
28 “‘But nothing that a person owns and devotes[k] to the Lord—whether a human being or an animal or family land—may be sold or redeemed; everything so devoted is most holy to the Lord.

29 “‘No person devoted to destruction[l] may be ransomed; they are to be put to death.

k. Leviticus 27:28 The Hebrew term refers to the irrevocable giving over of things or persons to the Lord.

l. Leviticus 27:29 The Hebrew term refers to the irrevocable giving over of things or persons to the Lord, often by totally destroying them.
Read more at https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Leviticus+27&version=NIV#YyjebS3isiuBpfHM.99
​

 

[morningstar2651]

It's assigning value to the sacrifice of people. Human sacrifice.

Unless 1 month old children are making sacrifices.

Leviticus 27
6 for a person between one month and five years, set the value of a male at five shekels[f] of silver and that of a female at three shekels[g] of silver;​

Something is lost in your translation.

Leviticus 27
28 “‘But nothing that a person owns and devotes[k] to the Lord—whether a human being or an animal or family land—may be sold or redeemed; everything so devoted is most holy to the Lord.

29 “‘No person devoted to destruction[l] may be ransomed; they are to be put to death.

k. Leviticus 27:28 The Hebrew term refers to the irrevocable giving over of things or persons to the Lord.

l. Leviticus 27:29 The Hebrew term refers to the irrevocable giving over of things or persons to the Lord, often by totally destroying them.
Read more at https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Leviticus+27&version=NIV#YyjebS3isiuBpfHM.99
​

Human sacrifice is what it means to "devote someone to the Lord".

Joshua 6:21 New International Version (NIV)
21 They devoted the city to the Lord and destroyed with the sword every living thing in it—men and women, young and old, cattle, sheep and donkeys.

Read more at https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Joshua+6:21&version=NIV#Vjh5hV4EaODif4FA.99

[Num 31:25-30, 40-41 NIV] 25 The LORD said to Moses, 26 "You and Eleazar the priest and the family heads of the community are to count all the people and animals that were captured. 27 Divide the spoils equally between the soldiers who took part in the battle and the rest of the community. 28 From the soldiers who fought in the battle, set apart as tribute for the LORD one out of every five hundred, whether people, cattle, donkeys or sheep. 29 Take this tribute from their half share and give it to Eleazar the priest as the LORD's part. 30 From the Israelites' half, select one out of every fifty, whether people, cattle, donkeys, sheep or other animals. Give them to the Levites, who are responsible for the care of the LORD's tabernacle." ... 40 16,000 people, of whom the tribute for the LORD was 32. 41 Moses gave the tribute to Eleazar the priest as the LORD's part, as the LORD commanded Moses.
​

Judges 11:30-39New International Version (NIV)
30 And Jephthah made a vow to the Lord: “If you give the Ammonites into my hands, 31 whatever comes out of the door of my house to meet me when I return in triumph from the Ammonites will be the Lord’s, and I will sacrifice it as a burnt offering.”

32 Then Jephthah went over to fight the Ammonites, and the Lord gave them into his hands. 33 He devastated twenty towns from Aroer to the vicinity of Minnith, as far as Abel Keramim. Thus Israel subdued Ammon.

34 When Jephthah returned to his home in Mizpah, who should come out to meet him but his daughter, dancing to the sound of timbrels! She was an only child. Except for her he had neither son nor daughter. 35 When he saw her, he tore his clothes and cried, “Oh no, my daughter! You have brought me down and I am devastated. I have made a vow to the Lord that I cannot break.”

36 “My father,” she replied, “you have given your word to the Lord. Do to me just as you promised, now that the Lord has avenged you of your enemies, the Ammonites. 37 But grant me this one request,” she said. “Give me two months to roam the hills and weep with my friends, because I will never marry.”

38 “You may go,” he said. And he let her go for two months. She and her friends went into the hills and wept because she would never marry. 39 After the two months, she returned to her father, and he did to her as he had vowed. And she was a virgin.​

 

[USincognito]

How is it dishonest to consolidate posts to make them easier to follow?

Posts are very easy to follow. Every time you quote someone, there's a quote back link. That's why the quote says your user ID and the post number being quoted.

Going back and editing a post with responses to a response buries that post further back in the thread. The person who you are quoting and replying to my never even see your edited response.

It's a very dishonest tactic.

 

[drjean]

IDK about having a Christian conversation with those who are not Christians... discussing OT stuff versus NT stuff versus societal world views won't get us anywhere on this IMO.

I think people need to realize that no matter what they believe, the USA was founded on Christian Principles, and those who lived at the time claimed that as well.

Now, you don't have to want it to continue to be based upon Christian principles, and indeed many decisions today are hardly Christian.

What really irks me is that I'm bullied by those who demand I accept their opinions and I'm called names of racist, biased, intolerant and a multitude of other negative terms just because I hold to my own Christian world view and knowledge of some history. I wonder--and this topic of the USA being founded on Christian Principles lends itself to it quite well--why I'm "intolerant" when it's the other side calling me names for not taking their side of things?

 

[Teilhard]

Two thoughts.

1. America is heir to western European civilization. That civilization was deeply influenced by Christianity for about 1500 years. I think it is very hard to separate "Christian" from "Western" at the time of the founding. They are tied together in complicated ways and I think trying to completely untangle them is a fool's errand.

2. We don't like to talk about some of the founding principles of America. Principles like the goodness of race-based chattel slavery and the glory of conquest, genocide, and theft. America did those things. If America was founded on Christian principles, it seems one must concede that the things we aren't proud of are just as much the result of those principles as the things we are proud of.

This was a thing that pious white Christians once did. They purchased enslaved persons, stole their labor, and called them by names like Joseph or even Moses. This makes the “man of his time” excuses that much harder to swallow. Theirs was a generation that knew Joseph. That exempts them from even Pharaoh’s poor excuse. I tell you that on the day of judgment it will be more tolerable for the land of Egypt.​

http://www.patheos.com/blogs/slackt...arned-from-the-theologians-of-slavery-part-2/

 

[Archaeopteryx]

IDK about having a Christian conversation with those who are not Christians... discussing OT stuff versus NT stuff versus societal world views won't get us anywhere on this IMO.

I think people need to realize that no matter what they believe, the USA was founded on Christian Principles, and those who lived at the time claimed that as well.

Now, you don't have to want it to continue to be based upon Christian principles, and indeed many decisions today are hardly Christian.

What really irks me is that I'm bullied by those who demand I accept their opinions and I'm called names of racist, biased, intolerant and a multitude of other negative terms just because I hold to my own Christian world view and knowledge of some history. I wonder--and this topic of the USA being founded on Christian Principles lends itself to it quite well--why I'm "intolerant" when it's the other side calling me names for not taking their side of things?

What Christian principles? For goodness sake, you feel bullied by people asking you that rather obvious question? Every time this question is asked we are given a select bunch of the Founders' religious opinions and/or a list of principles that aren't even exclusive to Christianity, or principles that predate Christianity itself.

 

[Jeffwhosoever]

Ever read the Mayflower Compact?

Mayflower Compact - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

 

[AirPo]

Ever read the Mayflower Compact?

Mayflower Compact - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

the loyal subjects of our dread Sovereign Lord King James,

We are not subjects of any king anymore.

plant the first colony

Colonies don't exist anymore.

we promise all due submission

Doesn't sound like freedom to me.

 

[Loudmouth]

Two thoughts.

1. America is heir to western European civilization. That civilization was deeply influenced by Christianity for about 1500 years. I think it is very hard to separate "Christian" from "Western" at the time of the founding. They are tied together in complicated ways and I think trying to completely untangle them is a fool's errand.

Western philosophies include Roman and Greek influences. The political philosophies that undergird the US government and constitution were founded in the Renaissance which saw a great surge in rediscovering classic philosophers like Plato. It is impossible to separate "Western" from pagan Romans and Greeks.

Now you could argue that christian society in resource rich Europe allowed for an economy where intellectuals could sit around and think instead of toil away in the fields. However, pretending that the Renaissance was a movement based on christian principles alone would be ignoring massive amounts of history. The Renaissance saw the emergence of secular and humanist thought, and it also produce the Deist movement that many of the US founders belonged to.

 

[drjean]

What Christian principles? For goodness sake, you feel bullied by people asking you that rather obvious question? Every time this question is asked we are given a select bunch of the Founders' religious opinions and/or a list of principles that aren't even exclusive to Christianity, or principles that predate Christianity itself.

Hmmm. I don't know if there is confusion of what I wrote or if there is a genuine truth seeking.

I'm not feeling bullied by someone making a truthful statement. Bullying by some who insist on changing history and attacking because people disagree with their changes is either ignorance or insolence.

The OP as stated is truth. The OP content rejects that historical truth as it's premise, imo. It's much like bait and switch to me.

My suggestion since this has been asked and answered so many times is that a few of you take it to a formal debate.

 

[Jeffwhosoever]

We are not subjects of any king anymore.



Colonies don't exist anymore.



Doesn't sound like freedom to me.

This thread is about America being founded on Christian principals, not how we were politically governed at the time nor about colonies nor about freedom. Here is the relevant part of the Mayflower Compact that you didn't cherry pick to avoid stating:

"Having undertaken, for the Glory of God, and advancements of the Christian faith and honor of our King and Country, a voyage to plant the first colony in the Northern parts of Virginia, do by these presents, solemnly and mutually, in the presence of God, and one another, covenant and combine ourselves together into a civil body politic; for our better ordering, and preservation and furtherance of the ends aforesaid; and by virtue hereof to enact, constitute, and frame, such just and equal laws, ordinances, acts, constitutions, and offices, from time to time, as shall be thought most meet and convenient for the general good of the colony; unto which we promise all due submission and obedience."

 

[Loudmouth]

This thread is about America being founded on Christian principals, not how we were politically governed at the time nor about colonies nor about freedom.

We call them the Founding Fathers because they established how we are currently governed. I am sure that you can find statements from people who came to America looking for money, or looking to escape arrest warrants. That doesn't mean that this country was founded on greed.

Was America a nation of mostly christians? Yes. There is little doubt of that. However, that doesn't mean that the rules we chose to govern christian, infidel, and atheist were based on christian principles, just as the rules of baseball are not inherently christian even though they were devised in a christian nation.

 

[drjean]

And statements BY the founding fathers have no effect upon current opposing beliefs?