YES, America CERTAINLY WAS FOUNDED as a CHRISTIAN NATION...

[Hollie]

One line that denies we have a leader "appointed" by the Lord (as Christian kings claimed to be) versus pages and pages of evidence that the FF were indeed Christian, spoke freely about their faith and their belief of how the Christian beliefs would improve the country. I am disappointed that you have chosen to join this bunch of braying donkeys.

They are using the same tactics that homosexual activists use with the Bible: "homosexuality" (the word) is not in the Bible, therefore, the Lord did not disagree with it..... They are fully aware of the homosexual acts referenced in the Bible, but just as in this case, they are being intellectually dishonest to promote their corrupt agenda.

Then they want to get on their high horses and pretend they are intellectuals.... they are fools for all to see.

Aside from the fact than any student of history knows most were deists and not christians, it matters less what the founding fathers believed individually than does the fact that they were smart enough not to want anyone imposing their beliefs on anyone else.

why is your religion so insecure that you need everyone else to have it forced on them?

Just one more example of intellectual dishonesty (and this one really can't handle facts, can you J): please, by all means list where I am "forcing" my religion onto everyone else. Do you even know what religion I belong to?

Again (warning, warning, repeat for donkeys): this nation was and is a predominantly Christian nation. That is totally different from having a Christian "dictator".

I think there is every reason to believe that without our secular constitution, Christian religious zealots in this country would be every bit as dangerous as pious Moslem fundies in Pakistan.

 

[logical4u]

They are not so insecure in their religious views that they feel they must spam the board with pages and pages of proof texts allegedly bolstering what they claim is the "truth."

Did you count their pages of repetative posting? Did you notice when they are proven wrong they go back to the the original disagreement (presumably to replay the entire posting, again)? Have you acknowledged the intellectual dishonesty they use? Talk to the hand!

People like you aren't interested in debate. They never are, as they have discovered the Truth™ and have no patience for any other perspective.

Feel free to call me another name, praise Jebus.

Oh, please, please present your side of a "debate".

Document where the FF where absolutely NOT Christians, how Christianity was not accepted in gov't legislatures, and how Presidents did not say public prayers calling on the Saviour, Christ.

The claims here are like a bunch of children saying that a play they doing at the church hall is not a "church" function. The members of the church are running it, the cast is made entirely of church members and it is being held at the church. But technically, the "church" is not involved.

Out of the millions of people that were in the colonies (many of them were here to worship the Lord as they chose), just how many can you document were not "Christian"?

List all the Hindus, Buddahists, and muslims that lived in the colonies when this country was formed, and please, use documentation.
I will be back tomorrow to check on your work.

 

[logical4u]

Aside from the fact than any student of history knows most were deists and not christians, it matters less what the founding fathers believed individually than does the fact that they were smart enough not to want anyone imposing their beliefs on anyone else.

why is your religion so insecure that you need everyone else to have it forced on them?

Just one more example of intellectual dishonesty (and this one really can't handle facts, can you J): please, by all means list where I am "forcing" my religion onto everyone else. Do you even know what religion I belong to?

Again (warning, warning, repeat for donkeys): this nation was and is a predominantly Christian nation. That is totally different from having a Christian "dictator".

I think there is every reason to believe that without our secular constitution, Christian religious zealots in this country would be every bit as dangerous as pious Moslem fundies in Pakistan.

The European countries prior to and including that time frame "dictated" the religion their "subjects" would follow. Now please provide some evidence of your ridiculous claim. This is not a "what if" thread. Please provide evidence that the FF were not Christian, rejected Christian prayers at gov't meeting or that Presidents do not offer public prayers that include God the Father, His only Son, Jesus Christ or the Holy Spirit.

And feel free to list the Hindu, Buddahist, and muslim populations that were in the colonies....

 

[UltimateReality]

In your rush to force your gods onto Ben Franklin, its obvious he wavered regarding belief in gods.

Benjamin Franklin

"When a religion is good, I conceive it will support itself; and when it does not support itself, and God does not take care to support it so that its professors are obliged to call for help of the civil power, 'tis a sign, I apprehend, of its being a bad one." - Benjamin Franklin, in a letter to Richard Price. October 9, 1790.

Pro

"I am fully of your Opinion respecting religious Tests; but, tho' the People of Massachusetts have not in their new Constitution kept quite clear of them, yet, if we consider what that People were 100 Years ago, we must allow they have gone great Lengths in Liberality of Sentiment on religious Subjects; and we may hope for greater Degrees of Perfection, when their Constitution, some years hence, shall be revised. If Christian Preachers had continued to teach as Christ and his Apostles did, without Salaries, and as the Quakers now do, I imagine Tests would never have existed; for I think they were invented, notso much tosecure Religionitself,as the Emoluments of it. When a Religion is good, I conceive it will support itself; and when it does not support itself, and God does not take care to support it so that its Professors are obliged to call for help of the Civil Power, it is a sign, I apprehend, of its being a bad one." (Benjamin Franklin, 1706-1790, American statesman, diplomat, scientist, and printer, from a letter to Richard Price, October 9, 1780 http://www.infidels.org/library/mode...uotations.html

Con "In this situation of this Assembly, groping as it were in the dark to find political truth, and scarce able to distinguish it when present to us, how has it happened, Sir, that we have not hitherto once thought of humbly applying to the Father of lights to illuminate our understandings?....I have lived, Sir, a long time, and the longer I live, the more convincing proofs I see of this truth - that God governs in the affairs of men." (Catherine Drinker Bowen. Miracle at Phaladelphia: The Story of the Constitutional Convention,MaytoSeptember1787. New York: Book-of-the-Month Club, 1966, pp. 125-126)

It is rarely noted that Franklin presented his motion after "four or five weeks" of deliberation, during which they had never once opened in prayer. More significantly, it is never mentioned that Franklin's motion was voted down! Fine Christians, these founding fathers. Furthermore, the context is usually ignored, too. He made the motion during an especially trying week of serious disagreement, when the convention was in danger of breaking up.Cathrine Drinker Bowen comments:

Yet whether the Doctor had spoken from policy or from faith, his suggestion had been salutary, calling an assembly of doubting minds to a realization that destiny herself sat as guest and witness in this room. Franklin had made solemn reminder that a republic of thirteen united states - venture novel and daring - could not be achieved without mutualsacrifice and a summoning up of men's best, most difficult and most creative efforts. (Bowen, p. 127) Quartz Hill School of Theology

A Parting Note.

About March 1, 1790, he wrote the following in a letter to Ezra Stiles, president of Yale, who had asked him his views on religion. His answer would indicate that he remained a Deist, not a Christian, to the end:

"As to Jesus of Nazareth, my Opinion of whom you particularly desire,I thin the System of Morals and his Religion, as he left them to us, the best the world ever saw or is likely to see; but I apprehend it has received various corrupt changes, and I have, with most of the present Dissenters in England, some Doubts as to his divinity; tho' it is a question I do not dogmatize upon, having never studied it, and I think it needless to busy myself with it now, when I expect soon an Opportunity of knowing the Truth with less Trouble...." (Carl Van Doren. Benjamin Franklin. New York: The Viking Press, 1938, p. 777.)

He died just over a month later on April 17. Quartz Hill School of Theology

Revisionist BS. Provide links.

The links are provided in my post.

Your primary contention is that your sweaty, frantic need to impose your religious beliefs on others fails when you don’t understand the subject matter.

Let's review some thoughts and opinions of Thomas Jefferson, shall we?


Thomas Jefferson

"I have examined all the known superstitions of the world, and I do not find in our particular superstition of Christianity one redeeming feature. They are all alike founded on fables and mythology. Millions of innocent men, women and children, since the introduction of Christianity, have been burnt, tortured, fined and imprisoned. What has been the effect of this coercion? To make one half the world fools and the other half hypocrites; to support roguery and error all over the earth."

SIX HISTORIC AMERICANS,
by John E. Remsburg, letter to William Short


Regarding Government Meddling With Religion

"I consider the government of the United States as interdicted by the Constitution from intermeddling with religious institutions, their doctrines, discipline, or exercises. This results not only from the provision that no law shall be made respecting the establishment or free exercise of religion, but from that also which reserves to the states the powers not delegated to the United States. Certainly, no power to prescribe any religious exercise or to assume authority in religious discipline has been delegated to the General Government. It must then rest with the states, as far as it can be in any human authority."
--Thomas Jefferson to Samuel Miller, 1808. ME 11:428

"In matters of religion, I have considered that its free exercise is placed by the Constitution independent of the powers of the general government. I have therefore undertaken on no occasion to prescribe the religious exercises suited to it; but have left them as the Constitution found them, under the direction and discipline of State or Church authorities acknowledged by the several religious societies."
--Thomas Jefferson: 2nd Inaugural Address, 1805. ME 3:378

"To suffer the civil magistrate to intrude his powers into the field of opinion and to restrain the profession or propagation of principles on supposition of their ill tendency is a dangerous fallacy which at once destroys all religious liberty, because he being of course judge of that tendency will make his opinions the rule of judgment and approve or condemn the sentiments of others only as they shall square with or differ from his own." --Thomas Jefferson: Statute for Religious Freedom, 1779. ME 2:302, Papers 2: 546

"It is proposed that I should recommend, not prescribe, a day of fasting and prayer. That is, that I should indirectly assume to the United States an authority over religious exercises which the Constitution has directly precluded them from. It must be meant, too, that this recommendation is to carry some authority and to be sanctioned by some penalty on those who disregard it; not indeed of fine and imprisonment, but of some degree of proscription, perhaps in public opinion. And does the change in the nature of the penalty make the recommendation less a law of conduct for those to whom it is directed?... Civil powers alone have been given to the President of the United States, and no authority to direct the religious exercises of his constituents."
--Thomas Jefferson to Samuel Miller, 1808. ME 11:428

"No man shall be compelled to frequent or support any religious worship, place, or ministry whatsoever, nor shall be enforced, restrained, molested, or burthened in his body or goods, nor... otherwise suffer on account of his religious opinions or belief... All men shall be free to profess and by argument to maintain their opinions in matters of religion, and... the same shall in no wise diminish, enlarge, or affect their civil capacities."
--Thomas Jefferson: Statute for Religious Freedom, 1779. ME 2:302, Papers 2:546


Regarding Religion Meddling with Government

"Whenever... preachers, instead of a lesson in religion, put [their congregation] off with a discourse on the Copernican system, on chemical affinities, on the construction of government, or the characters or conduct of those administering it, it is a breach of contract, depriving their audience of the kind of service for which they are salaried, and giving them, instead of it, what they did not want, or, if wanted, would rather seek from better sources in that particular art of science."
--Thomas Jefferson to P. H. Wendover, 1815. ME 14:281

"I do not know that it is a duty to disturb by missionaries the religion and peace of other countries, who may think themselves bound to extinguish by fire and fagot the heresies to which we give the name of conversions, and quote our own example for it. Were the Pope, or his holy allies, to send in mission to us some thousands of Jesuit priests to convert us to their orthodoxy, I suspect that we should deem and treat it as a national aggression on our peace and faith."
--Thomas Jefferson to Michael Megear, 1823. ME 15:434

"The clergy, by getting themselves established by law and ingrafted into the machine of government, have been a very formidable engine against the civil and religious rights of man."
--Thomas Jefferson to Jeremiah Moor, 1800.

"I am for freedom of religion, and against all maneuvers to bring about a legal ascendency of one sect over another."
--Thomas Jefferson to Elbridge Gerry, 1799. ME 10:78

"The clergy...believe that any portion of power confided to me [as President] will be exerted in opposition to their schemes. And they believe rightly: for I have sworn upon the altar of God, eternal hostility against every form of tyranny over the mind of man. But this is all they have to fear from me: and enough, too, in their opinion."
--Thomas Jefferson to Benjamin Rush, 1800. ME 10:173

"Believing... that religion is a matter which lies solely between man and his God, that he owes account to none other for his faith or his worship, that the legitimate powers of government reach actions only, and not opinions, I contemplate with sovereign reverence that act of the whole American people which declared that their Legislature should 'make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof,' thus building a wall of separation between Church and State."
--Thomas Jefferson to Danbury Baptists, 1802. ME 16:281

"History, I believe, furnishes no example of a priest-ridden people maintaining a free civil government. This marks the lowest grade of ignorance of which their civil as well as religious leaders will always avail themselves for their own purposes."
--Thomas Jefferson to Alexander von Humboldt, 1813. ME 14:21


Regarding Criminal Acts

"The declaration that religious faith shall be unpunished does not give immunity to criminal acts dictated by religious error."
--Thomas Jefferson to James Madison, 1788. ME 7:98

"If anything pass in a religious meeting seditiously and contrary to the public peace, let it be punished in the same manner and no otherwise than as if it had happened in a fair or market."
--Thomas Jefferson: Notes on Religion, 1776. Papers 1:548

"It is time enough for the rightful purposes of civil government, for its officers to interfere [in the propagation of religious teachings] when principles break out into overt acts against peace and good order."
--Thomas Jefferson: Statute for Religious Freedom, 1779. ME 2:302, Papers 2:546

"Whatsoever is lawful in the Commonwealth or permitted to the subject in the ordinary way cannot be forbidden to him for religious uses; and whatsoever is prejudicial to the Commonwealth in their ordinary uses and, therefore, prohibited by the laws, ought not to be permitted to churches in their sacred rites. For instance, it is unlawful in the ordinary course of things or in a private house to murder a child; it should not be permitted any sect then to sacrifice children. It is ordinarily lawful (or temporarily lawful) to kill calves or lambs; they may, therefore, be religiously sacrificed. But if the good of the State required a temporary suspension of killing lambs, as during a siege, sacrifices of them may then be rightfully suspended also. This is the true extent of toleration."
--Thomas Jefferson: Notes on Religion, 1776. Papers 1:547

Primary Source of Quotations:
Home - Thomas Jefferson - Subject Research Guides at UVa Library

Newsflash. We already knew Jefferson wasn't a Christian. As usual you are twisting the truth and have effectively ignored every other founding father, just like the Supreme court based much of their decision on a single letter Jefferson wrote.

 

[UltimateReality]

I know, everyone is wrong but poor, persecuted you.

Hollie, is this you under one of your many fake logins??

Aren't you the frantic, conspiracy theory addled fundie.

Why not support your acusation or acknowledge your claim as another lie.

Okay Rugged Touch. It wouldn't be the first time. Once a liar, always a liar.

 

[UltimateReality]

Hollie, is this you under one of your many fake logins??

Aren't you the frantic, conspiracy theory addled fundie.

Why not support your acusation or acknowledge your claim as another lie.

They are so very very quick to forget that "thou shall bear no false witness" commandment.

Wow, aren't you playing the fool by siding with Hollie? I have already proven he/she posts as a man and a woman, and he/she admitted it. I haven't forgotten anything. You are ASSuming my witness is false.

 

[UltimateReality]

Treaty of Tripoli, article 11.

/thread

One line that denies we have a leader "appointed" by the Lord (as Christian kings claimed to be) versus pages and pages of evidence that the FF were indeed Christian, spoke freely about their faith and their belief of how the Christian beliefs would improve the country. I am disappointed that you have chosen to join this bunch of braying donkeys.

They are using the same tactics that homosexual activists use with the Bible: "homosexuality" (the word) is not in the Bible, therefore, the Lord did not disagree with it..... They are fully aware of the homosexual acts referenced in the Bible, but just as in this case, they are being intellectually dishonest to promote their corrupt agenda.

Then they want to get on their high horses and pretend they are intellectuals.... they are fools for all to see.

Aside from the fact than any student of history knows most were deists and not christians, it matters less what the founding fathers believed individually than does the fact that they were smart enough not to want anyone imposing their beliefs on anyone else.

why is your religion so insecure that you need everyone else to have it forced on them?

Strawman. No one is forcing their religion. The 1st Ammendment still stands. The fight is to present the destruction of history by atheist materialist with an agenda.

 

[Crackerjack]

Did you count their pages of repetative posting? Did you notice when they are proven wrong they go back to the the original disagreement (presumably to replay the entire posting, again)? Have you acknowledged the intellectual dishonesty they use? Talk to the hand!

People like you aren't interested in debate. They never are, as they have discovered the Truth™ and have no patience for any other perspective.

Feel free to call me another name, praise Jebus.

Oh, please, please present your side of a "debate".

Document where the FF where absolutely NOT Christians, how Christianity was not accepted in gov't legislatures, and how Presidents did not say public prayers calling on the Saviour, Christ.

The claims here are like a bunch of children saying that a play they doing at the church hall is not a "church" function. The members of the church are running it, the cast is made entirely of church members and it is being held at the church. But technically, the "church" is not involved.

Out of the millions of people that were in the colonies (many of them were here to worship the Lord as they chose), just how many can you document were not "Christian"?

List all the Hindus, Buddahists, and muslims that lived in the colonies when this country was formed, and please, use documentation.
I will be back tomorrow to check on your work.

I didn't say they were absolutely not Christians. I did not say the vast majority of the first wave of settlement in North America were not Christians. All anyone has ever said on this thread is that the Supreme Being mentioned in the founding documents is not your 700 Club fundamentalist God. It's been pointed out upthread, but you and yours have simply taken that as an invitation to cut and paste more proof texts that are not terribly responsive to the question.

It's a shame your faith is so weak that you have to pretend to vanquish all opposition. Fortunately bigots like you aren't in charge of this country (yet), as I'm damned certain you'd love to have people like me shoveled into ovens.

 

[Crackerjack]

Hollie, is this you under one of your many fake logins??

Aren't you the frantic, conspiracy theory addled fundie.

Why not support your acusation or acknowledge your claim as another lie.

Okay Rugged Touch. It wouldn't be the first time. Once a liar, always a liar.

If you have proof of this sock account you seem to think Hollie is using, out with it. Put up or shut up.

 

[UltimateReality]

Dude, I have explained it wtwice already. What reason do I have that a third try will be any different?

You really dont give a shit, so why bother?

But for the lurkers out there, the treaty refers to a formal foundation of authority bsed on a religious claim related to the Divine Right of Kings which the churches gave to a king in Christendom.

Our Republic is not so founded on a religious instution giving its blessing or claim to rule by God's authority. Our Republic is based on the Will of the People for its claim to authority.

The references to the Lord were clearly shown in the "state" Constitutions. A "single" reference to the Lord was shown in the US Constitution. It has become back and forth of "this is blue", troll, "no it's not".

If someone is intellectulally dishonest, you cannot use facts. They have now started "braying".

The reference to "lord" in the constitution is, of course, not what you want it to be. In the context of these posts, the issue was in connection with references to a religious figure or ideology as having some meaningful impact in the formulation of the constitution. It did not.

Regardless of the context, you still got owned. You claimed it wasn't there and you were flat wrong.

 

[UltimateReality]

The references to the Lord were clearly shown in the "state" Constitutions. A "single" reference to the Lord was shown in the US Constitution. It has become back and forth of "this is blue", troll, "no it's not".

If someone is intellectulally dishonest, you cannot use facts. They have now started "braying".

The reference to "lord" in the constitution is, of course, not what you want it to be. In the context of these posts, the issue was in connection with references to a religious figure or ideology as having some meaningful impact in the formulation of the constitution. It did not.

You religious Taliban are in the wrong country.

America was founded on constitutional law not any state religion.

Strawman. No one is claiming this.

 

[UltimateReality]

They are not so insecure in their religious views that they feel they must spam the board with pages and pages of proof texts allegedly bolstering what they claim is the "truth."

Did you count their pages of repetative posting? Did you notice when they are proven wrong they go back to the the original disagreement (presumably to replay the entire posting, again)? Have you acknowledged the intellectual dishonesty they use? Talk to the hand!

People like you aren't interested in debate. They never are, as they have discovered the Truth™ and have no patience for any other perspective.

Feel free to call me another name, praise Jebus.

I think you are projecting again.

 

[logical4u]

People like you aren't interested in debate. They never are, as they have discovered the Truth™ and have no patience for any other perspective.

Feel free to call me another name, praise Jebus.

Oh, please, please present your side of a "debate".

Document where the FF where absolutely NOT Christians, how Christianity was not accepted in gov't legislatures, and how Presidents did not say public prayers calling on the Saviour, Christ.

The claims here are like a bunch of children saying that a play they doing at the church hall is not a "church" function. The members of the church are running it, the cast is made entirely of church members and it is being held at the church. But technically, the "church" is not involved.

Out of the millions of people that were in the colonies (many of them were here to worship the Lord as they chose), just how many can you document were not "Christian"?

List all the Hindus, Buddahists, and muslims that lived in the colonies when this country was formed, and please, use documentation.
I will be back tomorrow to check on your work.

I didn't say they were absolutely not Christians. I did not say the vast majority of the first wave of settlement in North America were not Christians. All anyone has ever said on this thread is that the Supreme Being mentioned in the founding documents is not your 700 Club fundamentalist God. It's been pointed out upthread, but you and yours have simply taken that as an invitation to cut and paste more proof texts that are not terribly responsive to the question.

It's a shame your faith is so weak that you have to pretend to vanquish all opposition. Fortunately bigots like you aren't in charge of this country (yet), as I'm damned certain you'd love to have people like me shoveled into ovens.

Do you have evidence of the "first wave of settlement" religions?
Where have I ever claimed that the Supreme Being was the "700 Club fundamentalist God"?

I do not "vanquish" all opposition. I do shine light on falsehoods.

Where was the evidence to support your statements?

 

[Crackerjack]

Did you count their pages of repetative posting? Did you notice when they are proven wrong they go back to the the original disagreement (presumably to replay the entire posting, again)? Have you acknowledged the intellectual dishonesty they use? Talk to the hand!

People like you aren't interested in debate. They never are, as they have discovered the Truth™ and have no patience for any other perspective.

Feel free to call me another name, praise Jebus.

I think you are projecting again.

There's no proof you do much thinking at all, so I'm not surprised you're so out of practice.

 

[UltimateReality]

Aside from the fact than any student of history knows most were deists and not christians, it matters less what the founding fathers believed individually than does the fact that they were smart enough not to want anyone imposing their beliefs on anyone else.

why is your religion so insecure that you need everyone else to have it forced on them?

Just one more example of intellectual dishonesty (and this one really can't handle facts, can you J): please, by all means list where I am "forcing" my religion onto everyone else. Do you even know what religion I belong to?

Again (warning, warning, repeat for donkeys): this nation was and is a predominantly Christian nation. That is totally different from having a Christian "dictator".

I think there is every reason to believe that without our secular constitution, Christian religious zealots in this country would be every bit as dangerous as pious Moslem fundies in Pakistan.

I think you are right. Just look at the rest of the world and all the suicide Christian bombers wreaking havoc across the globe.

 

[UltimateReality]

People like you aren't interested in debate. They never are, as they have discovered the Truth™ and have no patience for any other perspective.

Feel free to call me another name, praise Jebus.

Oh, please, please present your side of a "debate".

Document where the FF where absolutely NOT Christians, how Christianity was not accepted in gov't legislatures, and how Presidents did not say public prayers calling on the Saviour, Christ.

The claims here are like a bunch of children saying that a play they doing at the church hall is not a "church" function. The members of the church are running it, the cast is made entirely of church members and it is being held at the church. But technically, the "church" is not involved.

Out of the millions of people that were in the colonies (many of them were here to worship the Lord as they chose), just how many can you document were not "Christian"?

List all the Hindus, Buddahists, and muslims that lived in the colonies when this country was formed, and please, use documentation.
I will be back tomorrow to check on your work.

I didn't say they were absolutely not Christians. I did not say the vast majority of the first wave of settlement in North America were not Christians. All anyone has ever said on this thread is that the Supreme Being mentioned in the founding documents is not your 700 Club fundamentalist God. It's been pointed out upthread, but you and yours have simply taken that as an invitation to cut and paste more proof texts that are not terribly responsive to the question.

It's a shame your faith is so weak that you have to pretend to vanquish all opposition. Fortunately bigots like you aren't in charge of this country (yet), as I'm damned certain you'd love to have people like me shoveled into ovens.

You are being a little dramatic, don't you think?

 

[Crackerjack]

Oh, please, please present your side of a "debate".

Document where the FF where absolutely NOT Christians, how Christianity was not accepted in gov't legislatures, and how Presidents did not say public prayers calling on the Saviour, Christ.

The claims here are like a bunch of children saying that a play they doing at the church hall is not a "church" function. The members of the church are running it, the cast is made entirely of church members and it is being held at the church. But technically, the "church" is not involved.

Out of the millions of people that were in the colonies (many of them were here to worship the Lord as they chose), just how many can you document were not "Christian"?

List all the Hindus, Buddahists, and muslims that lived in the colonies when this country was formed, and please, use documentation.
I will be back tomorrow to check on your work.

I didn't say they were absolutely not Christians. I did not say the vast majority of the first wave of settlement in North America were not Christians. All anyone has ever said on this thread is that the Supreme Being mentioned in the founding documents is not your 700 Club fundamentalist God. It's been pointed out upthread, but you and yours have simply taken that as an invitation to cut and paste more proof texts that are not terribly responsive to the question.

It's a shame your faith is so weak that you have to pretend to vanquish all opposition. Fortunately bigots like you aren't in charge of this country (yet), as I'm damned certain you'd love to have people like me shoveled into ovens.

Do you have evidence of the "first wave of settlement" religions?
Where have I ever claimed that the Supreme Being was the "700 Club fundamentalist God"?

I do not "vanquish" all opposition. I do shine light on falsehoods.

Where was the evidence to support your statements?

Weren't you leaving?

You didn't even read what I wrote, as shown in the bolded portions. Why should I waste time providing more that you obviously won't read?

 

[UltimateReality]

Aren't you the frantic, conspiracy theory addled fundie.

Why not support your acusation or acknowledge your claim as another lie.

Okay Rugged Touch. It wouldn't be the first time. Once a liar, always a liar.

If you have proof of this sock account you seem to think Hollie is using, out with it. Put up or shut up.

Already posted a link, pages back. Please try and keep up.

 

[Crackerjack]

Oh, please, please present your side of a "debate".

Document where the FF where absolutely NOT Christians, how Christianity was not accepted in gov't legislatures, and how Presidents did not say public prayers calling on the Saviour, Christ.

The claims here are like a bunch of children saying that a play they doing at the church hall is not a "church" function. The members of the church are running it, the cast is made entirely of church members and it is being held at the church. But technically, the "church" is not involved.

Out of the millions of people that were in the colonies (many of them were here to worship the Lord as they chose), just how many can you document were not "Christian"?

List all the Hindus, Buddahists, and muslims that lived in the colonies when this country was formed, and please, use documentation.
I will be back tomorrow to check on your work.

I didn't say they were absolutely not Christians. I did not say the vast majority of the first wave of settlement in North America were not Christians. All anyone has ever said on this thread is that the Supreme Being mentioned in the founding documents is not your 700 Club fundamentalist God. It's been pointed out upthread, but you and yours have simply taken that as an invitation to cut and paste more proof texts that are not terribly responsive to the question.

It's a shame your faith is so weak that you have to pretend to vanquish all opposition. Fortunately bigots like you aren't in charge of this country (yet), as I'm damned certain you'd love to have people like me shoveled into ovens.

You are being a little dramatic, don't you think?

I'm not the one claiming people are running sock accounts with no proof of same.

Seriously, what grade are you in?

 

[Crackerjack]

Okay Rugged Touch. It wouldn't be the first time. Once a liar, always a liar.

If you have proof of this sock account you seem to think Hollie is using, out with it. Put up or shut up.

Already posted a link, pages back. Please try and keep up.

You posted a link to your assertion that I'm a sock?

Number of the post. Thanks.