The United States was not founded as a Christian nation

You are right, Steve. I went to the web to search out this little known document. Hmmm. So that is why John Adams and Thomas Jefferson were at odds with each other. I also found out that Jefferson did not say:

Millions for defense; not one cent for tribute. It was , however, the beginning of the Marine Corps, and that explains the lyrics to the song.

0 Replies

That may be true.
But it is also true that MOST of the founder's believed in GOD.
So America may not have been founded as a CHRISTIAN nation, but it was founded as a nation with a GOD.

0 Replies

IN CONGRESS, JULY 4, 1776
The unanimous Declaration of the thirteen united States of America

When in the Course of human events it becomes necessary for one people to dissolve the political bands which have connected them with another and to assume among the powers of the earth, the separate and equal station to which the Laws of Nature and of Nature's God entitle them, a decent respect to the opinions of mankind requires that they should declare the causes which impel them to the separation.

We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness. ?- That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed, ?- That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness. Prudence, indeed, will dictate that Governments long established should not be changed for light and transient causes; and accordingly all experience hath shewn that mankind are more disposed to suffer, while evils are sufferable than to right themselves by abolishing the forms to which they are accustomed. But when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same Object evinces a design to reduce them under absolute Despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such Government, and to provide new Guards for their future security. ?- Such has been the patient sufferance of these Colonies; and such is now the necessity which constrains them to alter their former Systems of Government. The history of the present King of Great Britain is a history of repeated injuries and usurpations, all having in direct object the establishment of an absolute Tyranny over these States. To prove this, let Facts be submitted to a candid world.

He has refused his Assent to Laws, the most wholesome and necessary for the public good.

He has forbidden his Governors to pass Laws of immediate and pressing importance, unless suspended in their operation till his Assent should be obtained; and when so suspended, he has utterly neglected to attend to them.

He has refused to pass other Laws for the accommodation of large districts of people, unless those people would relinquish the right of Representation in the Legislature, a right inestimable to them and formidable to tyrants only.

He has called together legislative bodies at places unusual, uncomfortable, and distant from the depository of their Public Records, for the sole purpose of fatiguing them into compliance with his measures.

He has dissolved Representative Houses repeatedly, for opposing with manly firmness his invasions on the rights of the people.

He has refused for a long time, after such dissolutions, to cause others to be elected, whereby the Legislative Powers, incapable of Annihilation, have returned to the People at large for their exercise; the State remaining in the mean time exposed to all the dangers of invasion from without, and convulsions within.

He has endeavoured to prevent the population of these States; for that purpose obstructing the Laws for Naturalization of Foreigners; refusing to pass others to encourage their migrations hither, and raising the conditions of new Appropriations of Lands.

He has obstructed the Administration of Justice by refusing his Assent to Laws for establishing Judiciary Powers.

He has made Judges dependent on his Will alone for the tenure of their offices, and the amount and payment of their salaries.

He has erected a multitude of New Offices, and sent hither swarms of Officers to harass our people and eat out their substance.

He has kept among us, in times of peace, Standing Armies without the Consent of our legislatures.

He has affected to render the Military independent of and superior to the Civil Power.

He has combined with others to subject us to a jurisdiction foreign to our constitution, and unacknowledged by our laws; giving his Assent to their Acts of pretended Legislation:

For quartering large bodies of armed troops among us:

For protecting them, by a mock Trial from punishment for any Murders which they should commit on the Inhabitants of these States:

For cutting off our Trade with all parts of the world:

For imposing Taxes on us without our Consent:

For depriving us in many cases, of the benefit of Trial by Jury:

For transporting us beyond Seas to be tried for pretended offences:

For abolishing the free System of English Laws in a neighbouring Province, establishing therein an Arbitrary government, and enlarging its Boundaries so as to render it at once an example and fit instrument for introducing the same absolute rule into these Colonies

For taking away our Charters, abolishing our most valuable Laws and altering fundamentally the Forms of our Governments:

For suspending our own Legislatures, and declaring themselves invested with power to legislate for us in all cases whatsoever.

He has abdicated Government here, by declaring us out of his Protection and waging War against us.

He has plundered our seas, ravaged our coasts, burnt our towns, and destroyed the lives of our people.

He is at this time transporting large Armies of foreign Mercenaries to compleat the works of death, desolation, and tyranny, already begun with circumstances of Cruelty & Perfidy scarcely paralleled in the most barbarous ages, and totally unworthy the Head of a civilized nation.

He has constrained our fellow Citizens taken Captive on the high Seas to bear Arms against their Country, to become the executioners of their friends and Brethren, or to fall themselves by their Hands.

He has excited domestic insurrections amongst us, and has endeavoured to bring on the inhabitants of our frontiers, the merciless Indian Savages whose known rule of warfare, is an undistinguished destruction of all ages, sexes and conditions.

In every stage of these Oppressions We have Petitioned for Redress in the most humble terms: Our repeated Petitions have been answered only by repeated injury. A Prince, whose character is thus marked by every act which may define a Tyrant, is unfit to be the ruler of a free people.

Nor have We been wanting in attentions to our British brethren. We have warned them from time to time of attempts by their legislature to extend an unwarrantable jurisdiction over us. We have reminded them of the circumstances of our emigration and settlement here. We have appealed to their native justice and magnanimity, and we have conjured them by the ties of our common kindred. to disavow these usurpations, which would inevitably interrupt our connections and correspondence. They too have been deaf to the voice of justice and of consanguinity. We must, therefore, acquiesce in the necessity, which denounces our Separation, and hold them, as we hold the rest of mankind, Enemies in War, in Peace Friends.

We, therefore, the Representatives of the United States of America, in General Congress, Assembled, appealing to the Supreme Judge of the world for the rectitude of our intentions, do, in the Name, and by Authority of the good People of these Colonies, solemnly publish and declare, That these United Colonies are, and of Right ought to be Free and Independent States, that they are Absolved from all Allegiance to the British Crown, and that all political connection between them and the State of Great Britain, is and ought to be totally dissolved; and that as Free and Independent States, they have full Power to levy War, conclude Peace contract Alliances, establish Commerce, and to do all other Acts and Things which Independent States may of right do. ?- And for the support of this Declaration, with a firm reliance on the protection of Divine Providence, we mutually pledge to each other our Lives, our Fortunes and our sacred Honor.

?- John Hancock

New Hampshire:
Josiah Bartlett, William Whipple, Matthew Thornton

Massachusetts:
John Hancock, Samuel Adams, John Adams, Robert Treat Paine, Elbridge Gerry

Rhode Island:
Stephen Hopkins, William Ellery

Connecticut:
Roger Sherman, Samuel Huntington, William Williams, Oliver Wolcott

New York:
William Floyd, Philip Livingston, Francis Lewis, Lewis Morris

New Jersey:
Richard Stockton, John Witherspoon, Francis Hopkinson, John Hart, Abraham Clark

Pennsylvania:
Robert Morris, Benjamin Rush, Benjamin Franklin, John Morton, George Clymer, James Smith, George Taylor, James Wilson, George Ross

Delaware:
Caesar Rodney, George Read, Thomas McKean

Maryland:
Samuel Chase, William Paca, Thomas Stone, Charles Carroll of Carrollton

Virginia:
George Wythe, Richard Henry Lee, Thomas Jefferson, Benjamin Harrison, Thomas Nelson, Jr., Francis Lightfoot Lee, Carter Braxton

North Carolina:
William Hooper, Joseph Hewes, John Penn

South Carolina:
Edward Rutledge, Thomas Heyward, Jr., Thomas Lynch, Jr., Arthur Middleton

Georgia:
Button Gwinnett, Lyman Hall, George Walton

Quote:

As the Government of the United States of America is not, in any sense, founded on the Christian religion; as it has in itself no character of enmity agaisnt the laws, religion, or tranquility of Musselmen; and as the said States never have entered into any war or act of hostility against any Mehomitan nation, it is declared by the parties tha no pretext arising from religious opinions shall ever produce an interruption of the harmony existing between the two countries

I disagree. I think that what was being said here is not that the US wasn't founded on christian beliefs but rather those that govern it do not necessarily function within christian principles therefore the government itself is not founded on christian beliefs. However, the reason for the break off from Great Britain is because certain "unalienable rights" given to them by their Creator were being violated therefore it became the job of the government to protect those rights, regardless of their personal status within a "religion".

0 Replies

maybe I'm dense hep, but where does it specifically mention chistian as opposed to other faiths?

0 Replies

Christ, Chrisitianity or Christian is not mentioned in the Declaration.

Moreover within a few years as the Treaty with Tripoli shows, The Government of the United States specifically denies Christ, and does a deal with the Muslims.

0 Replies

The founding fathers were deists, and the early treaties were a necessity because the country was young and not financially sound.

0 Replies

Letty wrote:

The founding fathers were deists...

And free thinkers and intellectuals and a lot of them masons.

I started this thread because I'm reading Richard Dawkins The God Delusion and he mentioned the fact that The United States was specifically not founded as a Christian country...something too many Americans dont want to know imo.

0 Replies

Everybody that believes in a Creator or God does not have to be a Christian. Evidently those founding fathers believed in some Diety. One can be an intellectual and still believe in the Creator. Belief in God does not restrict your ability to think and imagine.

0 Replies

Mindonfire wrote:

Belief in God does not restrict your ability to think and imagine.

I heartily disagree. Thinking presupposes a rational process. Believing in a god involves faith, which is the suspension of reason. Faith and reason, IMO, cannot coexist. as soon as one suspends one's reason, anything goes.

That is not to say that humans are perfect, and that reasonable and rational people do not make mistakes. Often a person's knowledge is faulty, or incomplete. The problem is when a person relies on faith to provide the answers that he cannot access within his power of reasoning.

"Imagine"??? Anyone can imagine anything that they want, but that does not make their musings truth.

0 Replies

Quote:

Everybody that believes in a Creator or God does not have to be a Christian.

True

Quote:

Evidently those founding fathers believed in some Diety.

But not the Trinity or in Jesus as the Son of God.

Quote:

One can be an intellectual and still believe in the Creator.

again true, but the more educated/intelligent the person, the less likely they are to believe in a Creator.

Quote:

Belief in God does not restrict your ability to think and imagine.

I think it does, the Church has an embarrassing record of interference in scientific enquiry.

0 Replies

Phoenix32890 wrote:

Mindonfire wrote:
Belief in God does not restrict your ability to think and imagine.

I heartily disagree. Thinking presupposes a rational process. Believing in a god involves faith, which is the suspension of reason. Faith and reason, IMO, cannot coexist. as soon as one suspends one's reason, anything goes. . .

You are defining credulity. While it is true that faith is often defined as belief without proof, it is also defined as loyalty or confidence, qualities denoting a mental state based on reason. In fact, Paul defines faith as " . . . the assured expectation of things hoped for, the evident demonstration of realities though not beheld." (Hebrews 11:1)

The same error has been perpetrated by so called believers and their opportunistic priests. The history of mankind is stained with their blood.

0 Replies

Steve 41oo wrote:

Quote:
Everybody that believes in a Creator or God does not have to be a Christian.

True

Quote:
Evidently those founding fathers believed in some Diety.

But not the Trinity or in Jesus as the Son of God.

Quote:
One can be an intellectual and still believe in the Creator.
again true, but the more educated/intelligent the person, the less likely they are to believe in a Creator.
Quote:

Belief in God does not restrict your ability to think and imagine.
I think it does, the Church has an embarrassing record of interference in scientific enquiry.

Actually the more intelligent the person, the more likely they will come to the realisation that there is a Creator. Many of those whom you all consider to be intelligent are not really as intelligent as they think. To be considered intelligent in one field does not always translt to overall intelligence. You can't always measure intelligence with an SAT.

Secondly the Church has an embarrassing record of interference in scientific inquiry. The Church may interfere, but it cannot restrict what is in the Mind.

The problem is that the majority is not even aware of who or what God is. If you really knew who or what God is then you will find out that a lot of people actually believe in Him.

0 Replies

Phoenix32890 wrote:

Mindonfire wrote:
Belief in God does not restrict your ability to think and imagine.

I heartily disagree. Thinking presupposes a rational process. Believing in a god involves faith, which is the suspension of reason. Faith and reason, IMO, cannot coexist. as soon as one suspends one's reason, anything goes.

That is not to say that humans are perfect, and that reasonable and rational people do not make mistakes. Often a person's knowledge is faulty, or incomplete. The problem is when a person relies on faith to provide the answers that he cannot access within his power of reasoning.

"Imagine"??? Anyone can imagine anything that they want, but that does not make their musings truth.

You are making the classical mistake of assuming that all faith is limited to one kind and is only obtained by fools. You see people tend to forget that that there are two ways to arrive at faith, or two kinds of faith. Without any further evidence, One can just believe because somebody tells them something Or One can believe after someone tells them something and they experience and see the evidence for themselves. Now an example of faith which an intelligent person has, would be likened to the type of faith which is based on experience and evidence. For example; A child of 10 has faith that when he becomes hungry, a parent will supply him with an adequate amount of food. This is because ever since his birth, whenever he became hungry, his parents were always there to give him food. So, over the years has become aware of this fact. And now when he is hungry, he believes or has faith that his parents will feed him. Through those years these parents have proven themselves to be reliable and trustworthy. And through that reliability and trustworthiness, they have cultivated and strengthened that child's faith in them. Therefore, if anyone approaches that child and tells him that his parents will not feed him today, he will not believe them. This is sue to all of the years of overwhelming evidence which tells him otherwise.

Now if one were to study the Bible they will see that this is the type of faith which it advocates. God does not want fools; therefore, he does not want anyone following blindly. He asks you to hear first; then, conduct an investigation and gather your own evidence from reality. Everything that God does or everything that the Bible speaks of is based on reality. Unfortunately in the world today, this is not what has been happening. Believers are dismissing evidence and following presumptions and assumptions. They have taken the Bible out of this reality and placed it into another. This is why you have people trying to walk on water even though this reality says that it can't be done. And this is why the world is in the mess that it is currently in.

Believing in God requires an awareness of reality.

0 Replies

I say it with fewer words.

0 Replies

Chai Tea wrote:

maybe I'm dense hep, but where does it specifically mention chistian as opposed to other faiths?

You are right Chai. Because of the teachings through-out the last 17 years that I've submitted to it was very easy to fall into the belief that they must have been talking about the "Creator" that christianity is suppose to promote. Though it does not specifically say it. However I still stand that it was founded on a belief in a "Creator" of some sort that has given us certain "unalienable rights" that were being violated therefore it became the job of the government to protect those rights, regardless of their personal status within a "religion". And I personally still believe that "Creator" is the God that christianity is suppose to promote.

0 Replies

hephzibah wrote:

Chai Tea wrote:
maybe I'm dense hep, but where does it specifically mention chistian as opposed to other faiths?

You are right Chai. Because of the teachings through-out the last 17 years that I've submitted to it was very easy to fall into the belief that they must have been talking about the "Creator" that christianity is suppose to promote. Though it does not specifically say it. However I still stand that it was founded on a belief in a "Creator" of some sort that has given us certain "unalienable rights" that were being violated therefore it became the job of the government to protect those rights, regardless of their personal status within a "religion". And I personally still believe that "Creator" is the God that christianity is suppose to promote.

Well if they state that there is a Creator which gives you those rights, then it means that if there is no Creator then you don't have those rights.

0 Replies

hephzibah wrote:

Chai Tea wrote:
maybe I'm dense hep, but where does it specifically mention chistian as opposed to other faiths?

You are right Chai. Because of the teachings through-out the last 17 years that I've submitted to it was very easy to fall into the belief that they must have been talking about the "Creator" that christianity is suppose to promote. Though it does not specifically say it. However I still stand that it was founded on a belief in a "Creator" of some sort that has given us certain "unalienable rights" that were being violated therefore it became the job of the government to protect those rights, regardless of their personal status within a "religion". And I personally still believe that "Creator" is the God that christianity is suppose to promote.

Well, don't take this personally (because I know you're not the only person who thinks like this), but that is quite a reach.

With logic like that, if you were to extended it just a couple more steps, a person could be saying only christians have these rights.

It says what it says, not what you read into it.

Someone clever enough could start at point A and end up with a statement that pink elephants run the NRA, or AMA for that matter.

0 Replies

hephzibah wrote:

And I personally still believe that "Creator" is the God that christianity is suppose to promote.

The last time that we checked, The Creator created more than Christians.

Ephesians 4:6 One God and Father of all, who [is] above all, and through all, and in you all.

0 Replies

Mindonfire wrote:

Actually the more intelligent the person, the more likely they will come to the realisation that there is a Creator. Many of those whom you all consider to be intelligent are not really as intelligent as they think. To be considered intelligent in one field does not always translt to overall intelligence. You can't always measure intelligence with an SAT.

Secondly the Church has an embarrassing record of interference in scientific inquiry. The Church may interfere, but it cannot restrict what is in the Mind.

The problem is that the majority is not even aware of who or what God is. If you really knew who or what God is then you will find out that a lot of people actually believe in Him.

And who is god?

0 Replies

The United States was not founded as a Christian nation

Related Topics

Quick Links

My Account

able2know