America Founded as a Christian Nation

[Porter Rockwell]

https://ia802604.us.archive.org/24/.../Christian_Life_and_Character_of_the_Civi.pdf

.
such that it may be but to not quote by past to refute it's content - the exercise of christian zealotry ...

What "Christian Zealotry"?

You understood that post?

I keep shepardizing the laws to find that national statute prohibiting the people from being Christian. Didn't find it. Now, these "Breezewood" cryptic posts???

I'm still trying to figure out today IF Benjamin Franklin were such a dedicated deist and rejected Christianity, why would he sign his name to a document acknowledging the Trinity AND our Lord? Was he devoid of principles OR could it be that we could challenge the man made doctrines of the church under the Christian concept of Liberty and remain free, so you didn't toss your Christian beliefs out the door just by questioning things?

 

[BreezeWood]

The secularists, deists, theists, atheists, and other believers try to prove that a founder was this or that, but sometimes what legal documents they sign their names to is REALLY TELLING. Take this one. It begins like this:

"In the name of the most holy and undivided Trinity.
It having pleased the Divine Providence"

And that legal document ends with these words:

"Done at Paris, this third day of September in the year of our Lord, one thousand seven hundred and eighty-three."

That was the Treaty of Paris of 1783 that ended the American Revolutionary War

Treaty of Paris (1783) - Wikisource, the free online library

John Adams, Benjamin Franklin, and John Jay signed that treaty. Why would secularists, atheists, humanists, deists, or theists be signing their names to legal documents acknowledging a Christian God they supposedly loathe and despise? Could it be that just because they were critical of mainstream churchianity, they still supported the existence of a Christian God?

.

John Adams, Benjamin Franklin, and John Jay signed that treaty. Why would secularists, atheists, humanists, deists, or theists be signing their names to legal documents acknowledging a Christian God they supposedly loathe and despise? Could it be that just because they were critical of mainstream churchianity, they still supported the existence of a Christian God?

no. progress through accommodation has been the hallmark of progressive refinement since the founding and writing of the u s constitution irregardless the intrusions by any and all zealots.

exp. of rockwell zealotry ...

forcing their religion to be advertised on u s currency - where they rely on a sympathetic court to justify their deviant behavior.

 

[Correll]

https://ia802604.us.archive.org/24/.../Christian_Life_and_Character_of_the_Civi.pdf

.
such that it may be but to not quote by past to refute it's content - the exercise of christian zealotry ...

What "Christian Zealotry"?

You understood that post?

I keep shepardizing the laws to find that national statute prohibiting the people from being Christian. Didn't find it. Now, these "Breezewood" cryptic posts???

I'm still trying to figure out today IF Benjamin Franklin were such a dedicated deist and rejected Christianity, why would he sign his name to a document acknowledging the Trinity AND our Lord? Was he devoid of principles OR could it be that we could challenge the man made doctrines of the church under the Christian concept of Liberty and remain free, so you didn't toss your Christian beliefs out the door just by questioning things?

I did not understand his post at all. It seemed to be the raving of an unhinged mind.

 

[BreezeWood]

https://ia802604.us.archive.org/24/.../Christian_Life_and_Character_of_the_Civi.pdf

.
such that it may be but to not quote by past to refute it's content - the exercise of christian zealotry ...

What "Christian Zealotry"?

.

What "Christian Zealotry"?

the document content could not be copied / past to provide your answer, of course you simply could read the document to see it for yourself.

 

[Correll]

https://ia802604.us.archive.org/24/.../Christian_Life_and_Character_of_the_Civi.pdf

.
such that it may be but to not quote by past to refute it's content - the exercise of christian zealotry ...

What "Christian Zealotry"?

.

What "Christian Zealotry"?

the document content could not be copied / past to provide your answer, of course you simply could read the document to see it for yourself.

Give it to me in a bullet point.

 

[Porter Rockwell]

#1097 reply to #1091.

Irrelevant, dumb ass

For the record I, as a Christian have not ever refuted the notion that America was ever a Christian nation.¥

#628 23948002

I think you are ignoring the influence that Christianity played. From education to law to values and principles Christianity touched every aspect of colonial life.

My immediate response to Ding, was that, “ I am not ignoring the influence that Christianity contributed to the founding of America. You are seriously wrong if you think that.”

Knowing that this FACT has been posted on this thread clearly and often, Porter Rockwell insults me as an Irrelevant, dumb ass and worse.

I will continue to explain why I think he does that as I continue to explain and take apart, brick by brick, why America was not “FOUNDED” as a Christian Nation.

I see you making a slow move toward backpedaling. I realize that you cannot bring yourself to look at the evidence presented and admit that you were wrong. You were wrong to dissuade Christians from participating with the language you opened with AND, since you didn't read the first post, you refused to acknowledge that the discussion didn't have anything to do with a theocracy.

So, if a country cannot be a theocracy, how can it be founded on Christian principles? THAT is what you prevented from being said. The next time a thread like this is created, you have helped me refine the points so that I can quickly point out how our system of jurisprudence is modeled on the common law, based on the Anglo Saxon Law with its roots in Christianity. So, the way we evaluate good v. evil; right from wrong; acceptable or unacceptable in a society is based upon the metric of biblical precepts.

The founders / framers took great pains to make sure it was kept that way by limiting who is eligible for naturalization and by making this a Republic. Their educational system, the oaths of office requiring people to believe, etc., etc. all testify to the nature that we would always judge ourselves by biblical precepts.

 

[Bezukhov]

On the other hand... The bottom line is that America has done some horrible things in it's history. Proof positive that it was founded as a Christian Nation.

 

[NotfooledbyW]

#1100 Thus sayeth the clown who posted an argument that the Declaration of Independence clearly states a reference to the CHRISTIAN god.

#1100

You have lost this debate.

How pitiful an excuse for a debate moderator is that?

FOR THE RECORD: Porter Rockwell and a Correll show signs that they continue to think they are debating some kind of anti-crusader in support spreading moral nihilism throughout all of Gods creation.

¥ Far be it anything like that. I have explained my philosophical and spiritual roots and principles in what I call Grandma and Butchie in Post #636.

I am not ignoring the influence that Christianity contributed to the founding of America. You are seriously wrong if you think that. This explains why;

My line of thinking or argument on this debate is valid whether it is myself as the thinker being (1) non-Christian but not anti/Christian.

My argument works if I am a (2) Protestant Christian in the traditional sense taking Jesus as a personal savior, etc.

My argument works if I am a (3) Real Christian in the Jeffersonian sense that’s been discussed here on this thread. That is having strong affinity and respect for the moral teachings of Jesus, the mortal man who Is not divine, not the Son of God, or not supernatural in any way. [/QUOTE

FOR THE RECORD: Perhaps they need this reminder as to how distorted and wrong about this v discussion they are.

If not, Suffice it to say that FOR THE RECORD other readers can know the truth and the facts,

 

[Correll]

#1100 Thus sayeth the clown who posted an argument that the Declaration of Independence clearly states a reference to the CHRISTIAN god.

#1100

You have lost this debate.

How pitiful an excuse for a debate moderator is that?

FOR THE RECORD: Porter Rockwell and a Correll show signs that they continue to think they are debating some kind of anti-crusader in support spreading moral nihilism throughout all of Gods creation.

¥ Far be it anything like that. I have explained my philosophical and spiritual roots and principles in what I call Grandma and Butchie in Post #636.

I am not ignoring the influence that Christianity contributed to the founding of America. You are seriously wrong if you think that. This explains why;

My line of thinking or argument on this debate is valid whether it is myself as the thinker being (1) non-Christian but not anti/Christian.

My argument works if I am a (2) Protestant Christian in the traditional sense taking Jesus as a personal savior, etc.

My argument works if I am a (3) Real Christian in the Jeffersonian sense that’s been discussed here on this thread. That is having strong affinity and respect for the moral teachings of Jesus, the mortal man who Is not divine, not the Son of God, or not supernatural in any way. [/QUOTE

FOR THE RECORD: Perhaps they need this reminder as to how distorted and wrong about this v discussion they are.

If not, Suffice it to say that FOR THE RECORD other readers can know the truth and the facts,

Wally, you went back to a point that was already refuted. Completely.


That is circular arguing, and I will not let you get away with it.

 

[Porter Rockwell]

On the other hand... The bottom line is that America has done some horrible things in it's history. Proof positive that it was founded as a Christian Nation.

You need some new material. But, the obvious counter is that if those things were done in the name of secularism, humanism, atheism, theism or deism, it is perfectable acceptable. Which side best represents you?

 

[NotfooledbyW]

#1111 reply to #1109

#1100 Thus sayeth the clown who posted an argument that the Declaration of Independence clearly states a reference to the CHRISTIAN god.

#1100

You have lost this debate.

How pitiful an excuse for a debate moderator is that?

FOR THE RECORD: Porter Rockwell and a Correll show signs that they continue to think they are debating some kind of anti-crusader in support spreading moral nihilism throughout all of Gods creation.

¥ Far be it anything like that. I have explained my philosophical and spiritual roots and principles in what I call Grandma and Butchie in Post #636.

I am not ignoring the influence that Christianity contributed to the founding of America. You are seriously wrong if you think that. This explains why;

My line of thinking or argument on this debate is valid whether it is myself as the thinker being (1) non-Christian but not anti/Christian.

My argument works if I am a (2) Protestant Christian in the traditional sense taking Jesus as a personal savior, etc.

My argument works if I am a (3) Real Christian in the Jeffersonian sense that’s been discussed here on this thread. That is having strong affinity and respect for the moral teachings of Jesus, the mortal man who Is not divine, not the Son of God, or not supernatural in any way. [/QUOTE

FOR THE RECORD: Perhaps they need this reminder as to how distorted and wrong about this v discussion they are.

If not, Suffice it to say that FOR THE RECORD other readers can know the truth and the facts,

Wally, you went back to a point that was already refuted. Completely.


That is circular arguing, and I will not let you get away with it.

Keep posting your cartoons clown. So grab some bench. You lost when you posted that our founders were petitioning the “Christian” God when they signed the Declaration.

your tactics of diversion, evasion and assault are brilliant, but your honesty is much too lacking to be scorekeeper on this debate.

 

[Bezukhov]

On the other hand... The bottom line is that America has done some horrible things in it's history. Proof positive that it was founded as a Christian Nation.

On the other hand... The bottom line is that America has done some horrible things in it's history. Proof positive that it was founded as a Christian Nation.

You need some new material. But, the obvious counter is that if those things were done in the name of secularism, humanism, atheism, theism or deism, it is perfectable acceptable. Which side best represents you?

No side represents me. I'm an Anarcho-Capitalist. Anyone, be they secularist, humanist, atheist or whatever who wants to lord over others should under no circumstance be allowed to do so.
The aim of my contributions to this thread were to show that the whole idea of Christians seizing and wielding earthly political power is the exact opposite of what Jesus wanted or expected of His followers. Yes, Porter I read those links. They were wrong, If you agree with them, you're wrong, too.

 

[Correll]

#1100 Thus sayeth the clown who posted an argument that the Declaration of Independence clearly states a reference to the CHRISTIAN god.

#1100

You have lost this debate.

How pitiful an excuse for a debate moderator is that?

FOR THE RECORD: Porter Rockwell and a Correll show signs that they continue to think they are debating some kind of anti-crusader in support spreading moral nihilism throughout all of Gods creation.

¥ Far be it anything like that. I have explained my philosophical and spiritual roots and principles in what I call Grandma and Butchie in Post #636.

I am not ignoring the influence that Christianity contributed to the founding of America. You are seriously wrong if you think that. This explains why;

My line of thinking or argument on this debate is valid whether it is myself as the thinker being (1) non-Christian but not anti/Christian.

My argument works if I am a (2) Protestant Christian in the traditional sense taking Jesus as a personal savior, etc.

My argument works if I am a (3) Real Christian in the Jeffersonian sense that’s been discussed here on this thread. That is having strong affinity and respect for the moral teachings of Jesus, the mortal man who Is not divine, not the Son of God, or not supernatural in any way. [/QUOTE

FOR THE RECORD: Perhaps they need this reminder as to how distorted and wrong about this v discussion they are.

If not, Suffice it to say that FOR THE RECORD other readers can know the truth and the facts,

Wally, you went back to a point that was already refuted. Completely.


That is circular arguing, and I will not let you get away with it.

Keep posting your cartoons clown. So grab some bench. You lost when you posted that our founders were petitioning the “Christian” God when they signed the Declaration.

your tactics of diversion, evasion and assault are brilliant, but your honesty is much too lacking to be scorekeeper on this debate.

And by "diversion" and "evasion" you mean holding on to the topic and holding you to the fact that you are jumping around dishonestly, to avoid admitting that your point(s) were already refuted, or dismissed with cause.


Admit that you lost this debate. YOu can see be a far lefty on the issues. You don't have to change anything. YOu don't have to start supporting Trump.


YOu can admit that this nation was founded by Christians for Christians and just be honest about the fact that you hate that and want to change what we are moving forward.

 

[Correll]

No side represents me. I'm an Anarcho-Capitalist. Anyone, be they secularist, humanist, atheist or whatever who wants to lord over others should under no circumstance be allowed to do so.
The aim of my contributions to this thread were to show that the whole idea of Christians seizing and wielding earthly political power is the exact opposite of what Jesus wanted or expected of His followers. Yes, Porter I read those links. They were wrong, If you agree with them, you're wrong, too.

It is fin of Christians to engage in the political process. Your desire for them not to, is your bigotry, not theirs.

 

[Bezukhov]

No side represents me. I'm an Anarcho-Capitalist. Anyone, be they secularist, humanist, atheist or whatever who wants to lord over others should under no circumstance be allowed to do so.
The aim of my contributions to this thread were to show that the whole idea of Christians seizing and wielding earthly political power is the exact opposite of what Jesus wanted or expected of His followers. Yes, Porter I read those links. They were wrong, If you agree with them, you're wrong, too.

It is fin of Christians to engage in the political process. Your desire for them not to, is your bigotry, not theirs.

Do you really believe that Jesus considers America to be a Christian Nation?

 

[Correll]

No side represents me. I'm an Anarcho-Capitalist. Anyone, be they secularist, humanist, atheist or whatever who wants to lord over others should under no circumstance be allowed to do so.
The aim of my contributions to this thread were to show that the whole idea of Christians seizing and wielding earthly political power is the exact opposite of what Jesus wanted or expected of His followers. Yes, Porter I read those links. They were wrong, If you agree with them, you're wrong, too.

It is fin of Christians to engage in the political process. Your desire for them not to, is your bigotry, not theirs.

Do you really believe that Jesus considers America to be a Christian Nation?

Tell me, why do you think that you can expect me to address your points, when you do not extent to me the same respect?

 

[Porter Rockwell]

It is easily ascertainable to find out the meaning of words. So, when the board troll stoops down to deny reality and call people names, it behooves us to tell the truth yet once again and to call the forces of darkness out.

The Declaration of Independence begins with stating a specific objective: to separate the POLITICAL bands that tied it to the rule of King George. Nothing is stated about the rejection of Christianity. To be simplistic, the Church of England was so strong that it pretty much ran government affairs when the colonists began fleeing to come here and seek Liberty.

The Declaration mentions the Laws of Nature and Nature's God. This has its roots in Christian history. The Christians who used such language were called "deists" by the mainstream as a slur. It's much like purists who are looked down on by saying Yahweh in place of Lord today. But, this tells us that the writer is representing a believing constituency.

In the second paragraph of the Declaration of Independence, we have mention of a Creator who bestows upon men their unalienable Rights. So there is an acknowledgment of a God. Going a bit further into the Declaration, we read of the reasons the colonists were rejecting the rule of King George:

"For taking away our Charters, abolishing our most valuable Laws, and altering fundamentally our Forms of Government."

Without multiplying all of these Charters, let us take one from Virginia. THIS is what Jefferson was referring to. Be mindful of the wording here:

"A perpetuity for the first Colony in Virginia Dated the twelwth of March. 1611.

JAMES by the grace of God King of England Scotland ffrance and Ireland Defender of the faith

To all to Whom these presents Shall come Greeting

Whereas at the humble Suit of Divers and Sundry our Loving Subjects as well adventurers as Planters of the first Colony in Virginia and for the propagation of Christian Religion and Reclaiming of people Barbarous to Civility and humanity"

Third Charter of Virginia (1612)

Jefferson also refers to a "Supreme Judge of the world" AND identifying same as "Divine Providence." Divine Providence is defined as:

"In theology, divine providence, or just providence, is God's intervention in the Universe."

Divine providence - Wikipedia


Which God are we talking about? The signers of the Declaration of Independence were Protestant Christians - almost to a man (IIRC.) More later.

 

[Bezukhov]

What point was that? This one?

It is fin of Christians to engage in the political process. Your desire for them not to, is your bigotry, not theirs.

I don't want any political process, no matter who's involved. So I can't be considered a bigot.

 

[Porter Rockwell]

On the other hand... The bottom line is that America has done some horrible things in it's history. Proof positive that it was founded as a Christian Nation.

On the other hand... The bottom line is that America has done some horrible things in it's history. Proof positive that it was founded as a Christian Nation.

You need some new material. But, the obvious counter is that if those things were done in the name of secularism, humanism, atheism, theism or deism, it is perfectable acceptable. Which side best represents you?

No side represents me. I'm an Anarcho-Capitalist. Anyone, be they secularist, humanist, atheist or whatever who wants to lord over others should under no circumstance be allowed to do so.
The aim of my contributions to this thread were to show that the whole idea of Christians seizing and wielding earthly political power is the exact opposite of what Jesus wanted or expected of His followers. Yes, Porter I read those links. They were wrong, If you agree with them, you're wrong, too.

You sound like a political opportunist that took a left turn to get here. Real Christians support the idea of LIBERTY. I don't know why you're here as your posts are nor related to the OP in any way, shape, fashion or form. If you weren't going to read the first post and access the links, you shouldn't have participated.

NOBODY supporting my position on this thread, including me, wants political power to dictate religion by way of government. We would like to have Freedom OF Religion... which you seem to oppose. But, that is not the subject of the OP. So, thanks for ignoring the first post and good luck out there.

 

[Bezukhov]

On the other hand... The bottom line is that America has done some horrible things in it's history. Proof positive that it was founded as a Christian Nation.

On the other hand... The bottom line is that America has done some horrible things in it's history. Proof positive that it was founded as a Christian Nation.

You need some new material. But, the obvious counter is that if those things were done in the name of secularism, humanism, atheism, theism or deism, it is perfectable acceptable. Which side best represents you?

No side represents me. I'm an Anarcho-Capitalist. Anyone, be they secularist, humanist, atheist or whatever who wants to lord over others should under no circumstance be allowed to do so.
The aim of my contributions to this thread were to show that the whole idea of Christians seizing and wielding earthly political power is the exact opposite of what Jesus wanted or expected of His followers. Yes, Porter I read those links. They were wrong, If you agree with them, you're wrong, too.

You sound like a political opportunist that took a left turn to get here. Real Christians support the idea of LIBERTY. I don't know why you're here as your posts are nor related to the OP in any way, shape, fashion or form. If you weren't going to read the first post and access the links, you shouldn't have participated.

NOBODY supporting my position on this thread, including me, wants political power to dictate religion by way of government. We would like to have Freedom OF Religion... which you seem to oppose. But, that is not the subject of the OP. So, thanks for ignoring the first post and good luck out there.

I told you already I read your links, I totally disagreed with them. They never answered my question: "Where did Jesus command His followers to seize and control earthly political power?!!!!!"
All the scriptures I posted strongly suggested the opposite view, namely that Jesus never wanted Christians involved with the dirty business of worldly politics.

One more thing. Why did it take soooo long for Christians to come up with the idea of "Liberty"? Why wasn't it readily apparent to the emperor Theodosius when he made Christianity the only legal religion in the Empire? Were Christians back then second class Christians, who didn't deserve Liberty?