The United States is not a Christian Nation

@Dmizer,

Nonetheless, it's my opinion that American Christians should work hard together, always, to keep our culture predominantly Christian, while faithfully acknowledging the need to maintain separation of church and state in governmental matters.

3 Replies

@Dmizer,

IMO no such thing as Separation of church and state.

0 Replies

@Pinochet73,

Dmizer;12030 wrote:

You must not have gone to school in the United States of America. Are you a US citizen?

Try this for an example of the type of government at Jamestown and throughout the colonies. Jefferson is either being misquoted or he was a liar and a scoundrel. I wonder how this would be applied today?

From the Articles, Laws , and Orders, Divine, Politic , and Martial for the Colony in Virginia : first established by Sir Thomas Gates Knight, Lieutenant General , the 24. of May 1610. exemplified and approved by the Right Honorable Sir Thomas West Knight, Lord Lawair, Lord Governor and Captaine General the 12. of June 1610. Again exemplified and enlarged by Sir Thomas Dale Knight, Martial ,and Deputy Governor,the 22. of June. 1611.

Personal Narratives from the Virtual Jamestown Project, 1575-1705

"article "1.5"
No man shall speak any word, or do any act, which may tend to the derision, or despite of Gods holy word upon pain of death: Nor shall any man unworthily demean himself unto any Preacher, or Minister of the same, but generally hold them in all reverent regard, and dutiful entreaty , otherwise he the offender shall openly be whipped three times, and ask public forgiveness in the assembly of the congregation three several Sabbath days .

article "1.6"
Every man and woman duly twice a day upon the first tolling of the Bell shall upon the working days repair unto the Church, to hear divine Service upon pain of losing his or her days allowance for the first omission, for the second to be whipped , and for the third to be condemned to the Galleys for six Months . Likewise no man or woman shall dare to violate or break the Sabbath by any gaming, public , or private abroad, or at home, but duly sanctify and observe the same, both himself and his family , by preparing themselves at home with private prayer, that they may be the better fitted for the public , according to the commandments of God, and the orders of our Church, as also every man and woman shall repair in the morning to the divine service, and Sermons preached upon the Sabbath day, and in the afternoon to divine service, and Catechising, upon pain for the first fault to lose their provision, and allowance for the whole week following, for the second to lose the said allowance, and also to be whipped , and for the third to suffer death."

0 Replies

@Pinochet73,

:headbang: :bangin: Tell me, Volunteer....are you from Tennessee?

1 Reply

@Pinochet73,

Pinochet73;12078 wrote:

:headbang: :bangin: Tell me, Volunteer....are you from Tennessee?

Negative, live in Virginia. Born and raised in Minnesota. Left there about 30 years ago, lived on four continents and visited more. Lived in Texas and New Mexico for a while too. FYI at some point volunteer may not be the same person, just a lable for people to use who anwser for the potential party.

Why? Disregard, I got it while shoveling snow. Tennessee, volunteer state.

0 Replies

@Dmizer,

Quote:

FYI at some point volunteer may not be the same person, just a lable for people to use who anwser for the potential party.

Are you talking about you handle on this site? If so i'd ask Brent before you do, not sure if it's allowed.

1 Reply

@Dmizer,

Volunteer, I was born in Minnesota, but grew up elsewhere. Once, while changing planes in Minneapolis on official business, sometime in my early 40s, I jokingly said to my colleagues, "Gentlemen, welcome to my birthplace." We landed on a clear day, in the afternoon, and spent some time marvelling at the area's seemingly infinite number of lakes while preparing to land. My colleagues responded enthusiastically. "Wow, what a neat place." "Minnesota, eh? Cool." Then one of them asked, "When were you home last?" When I said, "The summer of 1957", they fell silent. I could hear fundamental math grinding through their heads. After a while, somebody asked, "Just how old are you?" "Pretty damned old," I said.

0 Replies

@Drnaline,

Drnaline;12088 wrote:

Are you talking about you handle on this site? If so i'd ask Brent before you do, not sure if it's allowed.

Wilco when/if it comes to that.

0 Replies

@Dmizer,

Assuming you were born in the summer of 57, that would put you at sixty. Wonder whose older, you or Curmy? I thought Curmy to be the oldest on the site but you may have it?

1 Reply

@Drnaline,

Drnaline;12107 wrote:

Assuming you were born in the summer of 57, that would put you at sixty. Wonder whose older, you or Curmy? I thought Curmy to be the oldest on the site but you may have it?

Who are you talking about, me or Pinochet73? Your math is off by 10 years.

0 Replies

@Dmizer,

Sorry, should of quoted, Pinochet is who i was referring too.

0 Replies

@Dmizer,

Volunteer wrote
"You must not have gone to school in the United States of America. Are you a US citizen?

Try this for an example of the type of government at Jamestown and throughout the colonies. Jefferson is either being misquoted or he was a liar and a scoundrel. I wonder how this would be applied today?

From the Articles, Laws , and Orders, Divine, Politic , and Martial for the Colony in Virginia : first established by Sir Thomas Gates Knight, Lieutenant General , the 24. of May 1610. exemplified and approved by the Right Honorable Sir Thomas West Knight, Lord Lawair, Lord Governor and Captaine General the 12. of June 1610. Again exemplified and enlarged by Sir Thomas Dale Knight, Martial ,and Deputy Governor,the 22. of June. 1611.

Personal Narratives from the Virtual Jamestown Project, 1575-1705....."

Volunteer,
Your quote reeks of religious intolerence, Exactly the type of intolerance that Jefferson was speaking about. The text which you quote from refers to the 1600's and the English rule.
"Personal Narratives from the Virtual Jamestown Project, 1575-1705"
This was not even the same time period in which the birth of this nation occured. The revolution took place nearly a century later then the time period you are refering to.
You really should go back to school and learn some more of our nations history. You are using articles from the jamestown settlement to call Jefferson a liar? Your not even in the same ball park and your tryin to call balls and strikes.
The revolution and the origins of the United States was all about change from the Jamestown type colony to what the founding fathers (founders of the United States, not the Colonies, don't get the mixed up) hoped would be a bastion of liberty and freedom.

1 Reply

@Dmizer,

Dmizer;12132 wrote:

You really should go back to school and learn some more of our nations history. You are using articles from the jamestown settlement to call Jefferson a liar? Your not even in the same ball park and your tryin to call balls and strikes.
The revolution and the origins of the United States was all about change from the Jamestown type colony to what the founding fathers (founders of the United States, not the Colonies, don't get the mixed up) hoped would be a bastion of liberty and freedom.

You made some pretty broad statements in your first post. Just trying to address them and stay on thread.

First assertion by your post: OK, let's look at what he signed. Re-read the Declaration, then look at the signatures at the bottom. Is Jefferson's there?

In response to your emotional response about tolerance: Look at the religious intolerance (from the atheists and secular humanists) extant in the US today. Look at your intolerance of someone trying to create the conditions in which God's Word can be taught. The words of the majority of the founders indicate the opposite of your assertion.

Is your intolerance different? Is the secular humanists' or atheists' intolerance different? Why such emotion against the idea that God's Word should be available in the marketplace of ideas?

0 Replies

@Dmizer,

Big D quotes your post, saying: "Your quote reeks of religious intolerance," Yet i didn't see him quote anything religious or intolerant? I don't think any reasonable person would find anything remotely close either?
And the second half of the sentence: "Exactly the type of intolerance that Jefferson was speaking about."
I thought Jefferson said there was a "wall of separation between Church and State, not "of Church and state" If D is gonna use Jefferson's words literally it should include Jefferson's original wording and intent, which does not resemble his argument now? I think D is willing to give up some of our "liberty and freedoms" so he can feel happy about having an interpretation that our government is secular, but his version of secular does not include being religion neutral which is what i believe Jefferson originally meant? He discriminates against certain one's IMO.

0 Replies

@Dmizer,

No man shall speak any word, or do any act, which may tend to the derision, or despite of Gods holy word upon pain of death:

"according to the commandments of God, and the orders of our Church, as also every man and woman shall repair in the morning to the divine service, and Sermons preached upon the Sabbath day, and in the afternoon to divine service, and Catechising, upon pain for the first fault to lose their provision, and allowance for the whole week following, for the second to lose the said allowance, and also to be whipped , and for the third to suffer death."

"Yet i didn't see him quote anything religious or intolerant? I don't think any reasonable person would find anything remotely close either?"

LOL-- I sorry for being so blind, these Jamestown rules for it's citizens is truely the definition of religious tolerance. How could those quotes above have been interpreted any other way by a reasonable person. LOL, I guess it depends on your definition of reasonable! After all We all like to be first starved, then whipped, then finally killed.

Early colonial America was so religiously intolerant that the founding fathers knew the only way for the a new nation to survive was to have no religion involved in the governing of the people. It does not go to say that they themselves were not religious, but that they recognized that freedom and liberty go hand in hand with tolerance of different races and creeds.

"I thought Jefferson said there was a "wall of separation between Church and State, not "of Church and state" If D is gonna use Jefferson's words literally it should include Jefferson's original wording and intent, which does not resemble his argument now?

Jefferson wrote to the Danbury baptists and stated there in that a government of the people should "make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the exercise there of". By stating this he was infering that the only way to protect religious liberty of the various sects of religions, was to ensure that the government did not establish any religion in governing. The United States needs to remain decidedly secular to ensure religious liberty. Jefferson was not putting religion down, he was protecting it.

Drnaline and volunteer, how moral are you when dealing with people of different religions? I have seen your posts and your rhetoric regarding how you would treat muslims if given a chance. Is that the tolerance that you speak of.

whether you choose to believe it or not, most athiests that I know are decidely more moral then there counter parts, most certainly less prone to hypocrasy.

2 Replies

@Dmizer,

Dmizer;12162 wrote:

No man shall speak any word, or do any act, which may tend to the derision, or despite of Gods holy word upon pain of death:

"according to the commandments of God, and the orders of our Church, as also every man and woman shall repair in the morning to the divine service, and Sermons preached upon the Sabbath day, and in the afternoon to divine service, and Catechising, upon pain for the first fault to lose their provision, and allowance for the whole week following, for the second to lose the said allowance, and also to be whipped , and for the third to suffer death."

"Yet i didn't see him quote anything religious or intolerant? I don't think any reasonable person would find anything remotely close either?"

LOL-- I sorry for being so blind, these Jamestown rules for it's citizens is truely the definition of religious tolerance. How could those quotes above have been interpreted any other way by a reasonable person. LOL, I guess it depends on your definition of reasonable! After all We all like to be first starved, then whipped, then finally killed.

Early colonial America was so religiously intolerant that the founding fathers knew the only way for the a new nation to survive was to have no religion involved in the governing of the people. It does not go to say that they themselves were not religious, but that they recognized that freedom and liberty go hand in hand with tolerance of different races and creeds.

"I thought Jefferson said there was a "wall of separation between Church and State, not "of Church and state" If D is gonna use Jefferson's words literally it should include Jefferson's original wording and intent, which does not resemble his argument now?

Jefferson wrote to the Danbury baptists and stated there in that a government of the people should "make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the exercise there of". By stating this he was infering that the only way to protect religious liberty of the various sects of religions, was to ensure that the government did not establish any religion in governing. The United States needs to remain decidedly secular to ensure religious liberty. Jefferson was not putting religion down, he was protecting it.

Drnaline and volunteer, how moral are you when dealing with people of different religions? I have seen your posts and your rhetoric regarding how you would treat muslims if given a chance. Is that the tolerance that you speak of.

whether you choose to believe it or not, most athiests that I know are decidely more moral then there counter parts, most certainly less prone to hypocrasy.

Quote:

LOL-- I sorry for being so blind, these Jamestown rules for it's citizens is truely the definition of religious tolerance.

I stand by what i said. What in the post i quote you from do you deem intolerant of your quote from Volunteer?

Quote:

Early colonial America was so religiously intolerant that the founding fathers knew the only way for the a new nation to survive was to have no religion involved in the governing of the people.

Not much has changed since then, look at your point of view? Fairly intolerant of religion wouldn't you say? I think most "reasonable" people would say the same, shall we take a poll?

Quote:

Jefferson wrote to the Danbury baptists and stated there in that a government of the people should

"government of the people" would include the 80/85 % of America that has faith in a God. Would you conclude also that then 80/85 percent of American governments would reflect that percentage? Which in fact would make it a "government of the people"? Believing so puts you at odds with the assumption that our government is secular when infact it would be impossible to separate that large of a percentage, assumably forcing them to leave there faith at home? That's a lofty dream. Your right in the fact that we do have a "government of the people", which is decidely religous. Will our government ever in reality be secular, IMO Never!

Quote:

Drnaline and volunteer, how moral are you when dealing with people of different religions? I have seen your posts and your rhetoric regarding how you would treat muslims if given a chance. Is that the tolerance that you speak of.

You say Muslims, i would take that you would mean that in general? Can you quote where there would be any example of me being so to a "general" Muslim and not referencing to an extreme Muslims or what i like to call XMus. I'll let Volunteer speak for himself. In the same context of your question of me, can I name a few quote's from you about your intolerence to people of faith since we are on the subject? Intolerence is intolerence in your opinion right?

Quote:

whether you choose to believe it or not, most athiests that I know are decidely more moral then there counter parts, most certainly less prone to hypocrasy.

LOL, that's your opinion, a decidedly small minority in the scheme of things.

0 Replies

@Dmizer,

Dmizer;12162 wrote:

Jefferson wrote to the Danbury baptists and stated there in that a government of the people should "make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the exercise there of". By stating this he was infering that the only way to protect religious liberty of the various sects of religions, was to ensure that the government did not establish any religion in governing. The United States needs to remain decidedly secular to ensure religious liberty. Jefferson was not putting religion down, he was protecting it.

Drnaline and volunteer, how moral are you when dealing with people of different religions? I have seen your posts and your rhetoric regarding how you would treat muslims if given a chance. Is that the tolerance that you speak of.

You paint with a broad brush there Dmizer. It seems you didn't look before you started. I haven't seen anything from Drnaline that show any intent to treat muslims any way other than the golden rule. Quote something from volunteer that states any type of intent to promote bad treatment of muslims. Who mentioned muslims in the first place? Is that a hot button with you? Why?

Define moral. Can't have it both ways. If you define your own morals then anyone elses morals equals yours and there ain't no standard or place of agreement from which to establish a society.

Your statement was that the USA was not a Christian nation at its beginning. You went on to state that "the great T J" made a statement to that affect and stated what you inferred he meant as support for your theory. Inferrence is not what was stated. It is another way of saying it is your interpretation of what was said. That doesn't mean it is what was meant.

Volunteer was mearly providing evidence that, at the beginning of the nation, when the colonies were being established, when the fathers of the fathers of our nation came to these shores, they established a nation based on the ability and obligation of the common man to hear, read, and know God's Word; and teach it to his children.

0 Replies

@Dmizer,

Dmizer;11961 wrote:

The intent of the founding fathers was that these United States remain a Secular entity. They wanted freedom from any religious influence when it came to governing a multi-cultural, multi-religious society.

What I find interesting is that the phrase "seperation between Church and state" originated in a letter by Thomas Jefferson. He was writing to the Danbury Baptist church in Conneticut. His intent in these letters was to explain to the Danbury baptists that the local government (which was under heavy influence by another Christian sect) had no grounds in which to discriminate against them. He was stating that the speration of church and state was a principle that was to protect religious freedom, not limit it.

When dealing with Islam, Jewish, Hindu, Catholic, Baptist or any religion, we must preserve the secular status of our government or we lose our identity as a bastion of freedom and liberty.

Yo Dmizer, how many islamic, jewish, hindu, or catholic colonists were there in the first thirteen colonies?

By the way, have you been to Jamestown? I lived in Newport News for a few years and visited several times, not counting when I was a lad visiting from Minnesota. How about Williamsburg? How about Washington DC, and the Smithsonian, or the Library of Congress, or the National Archives, or the Capitol? If you did visit, what did you learn concerning the founding fathers and their intent? Surely not what you are stating.

OK, so I've got fat fingers and have to keep editing.

0 Replies

@Dmizer,

"The intent of the founding fathers was that.........."

I'm sorry, but I don't really care about what they intended. I only care about the triumph of WESTERN CHRISTIAN CULTURE. Amen.

1 Reply

@Pinochet73,

60? Oh, HELL no. I'm turning FITTY. That's old enough for me, at least for now, anyway. :banana: :approve: :mrt: :cavt-126-asard:

0 Replies

The United States is not a Christian Nation

Related Topics

Quick Links

My Account

able2know