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

[logical4u]

Or Muslim.

Yeah, they were removed by one of the "friendly" moderators.

One was about Ben Frankilin with other FF, where he suggested that they had prayed for victory in the war, but they were men, stumbling blindly trying to form the gov't. Why not pray again that the Almighty guide us to make the gov't. (paraphrased)
Online Speech Bank: Benjamin Franklin's Prayer Speech at the Constitutional Convention of 1787

Paine in "common sense" used sentences with "the will of the Almighty" and such, again paraphrased.
" for the will of the Almighty as declared by Gideon, and the prophet Samuel, expressly disapproves of government by Kings."
Common Sense by Thomas Paine

Allan, said he was not a "Christian", but said he was unsure if he was a deist. He did not say that he did not believe in "God". You got me there!

Jefferson, we have been discussing.....

I found nothing to indicate that Franklin, Jefferson, Paine, or Allan ever denied being Jewish.

I suppose that means they were.

Was Jefferson a member of a synagogue or a mosque? Oh, that's right, he was a member of a Christian church.

 

[Hollie]

Not in Philadelphia in 1787.

Just showing there were alternatives available.....

Are you saying the population was sooo Christian, that the FF were forced to add the date with the "the year of our Lord"?

You really are clueless.

Separation of Church and State Home Page

"The Year of Our Lord" and separation.

Despite the secular nature of our national government, there is one unambiguous reference to Christ in the Constitution. Article VII dates the Constitution in "the Year of our Lord one thousand seven hundred and Eighty seven." But what does this mean for the principle of religious liberty?

The answer is: nothing. Our dating system is an historical artifact of Western culture, and has no legal significance or implications for the meaning of the Constitution or the First Amendment. The American Colonies were established by Europeans; we naturally inherited the European practice of dating years from the birth of Christ. Nothing follows from this except the trivial observation that, in establishing our independence, we decided not to completely overthrow our cultural heritage.

In fact, the European dating system is infused with pagan holdovers that, if taken seriously, lead to exactly the opposite conclusions reached by accommodationists. We have a seven day week, after the model of ancient Israel, but we inherited Pagan names for these days; does the Constitution then establish Sun worship when it excepts Sunday from the ten days Presidents have to veto a bill before it becomes law? Does it establish worship of the Moon when it says that Congress will begin it's sessions on the first Monday of December? Does the use of European names for months mean that the Constitution establishes worship of Julius Caesar (July) or Augustus Caesar (August)? The issue was a serious one for some Christians; Quakers, for example, adopted numerical references for days and months precisely to avoid objectionable Pagan names. The rejection of the Quaker system suggests that the founders read very little into their dating practices. To base an argument on those practices is to stand on extraordinarily shaky ground.

To be sure, the Constitution could have avoided the words "Year of our Lord" in the date (as it does elsewhere when it refers to specific years), but it's hard to imagine why. "The Year of our Lord" was the standard way of dating important documents in the 1700s; its use was ritualistic, not religious. It is doubtful that anyone, Christian, deist, or otherwise, would have given the words a second thought, or ascribed to them any legal significance. And if the intent of the Constitution was to signal a favored status for Christianity, it could have done so in a thousand less ambiguous ways than including the words "in the Year of our Lord." That some accommodationists appeal to these words is silent testimony to how little evidence there is for the idea that the Constitution embodies Christian morality or thought.

 

[Hollie]

Or Muslim.

I found nothing to indicate that Franklin, Jefferson, Paine, or Allan ever denied being Jewish.

I suppose that means they were.

Was Jefferson a member of a synagogue or a mosque? Oh, that's right, he was a member of a Christian church.

So what?

Still nothing regarding my earlier request.



You may wish to review some statistics here: How many North Americans go regularly to church?

There is a real disconnect between christians, those who claim to be christians and church attendance.

That's not at all surprising. What is surprising is your frantic attempt to make people christian who were not.

You would make a good prospect for the Taliban.

 

[logical4u]

Not in Philadelphia in 1787.

Are you saying the population was sooo Christian, that the FF were forced to add the date with the "the year of our Lord"?

You really are clueless.

Separation of Church and State Home Page

"The Year of Our Lord" and separation.

Despite the secular nature of our national government, there is one unambiguous reference to Christ in the Constitution. Article VII dates the Constitution in "the Year of our Lord one thousand seven hundred and Eighty seven." But what does this mean for the principle of religious liberty?

The answer is: nothing. Our dating system is an historical artifact of Western culture, and has no legal significance or implications for the meaning of the Constitution or the First Amendment. The American Colonies were established by Europeans; we naturally inherited the European practice of dating years from the birth of Christ. Nothing follows from this except the trivial observation that, in establishing our independence, we decided not to completely overthrow our cultural heritage.

In fact, the European dating system is infused with pagan holdovers that, if taken seriously, lead to exactly the opposite conclusions reached by accommodationists. We have a seven day week, after the model of ancient Israel, but we inherited Pagan names for these days; does the Constitution then establish Sun worship when it excepts Sunday from the ten days Presidents have to veto a bill before it becomes law? Does it establish worship of the Moon when it says that Congress will begin it's sessions on the first Monday of December? Does the use of European names for months mean that the Constitution establishes worship of Julius Caesar (July) or Augustus Caesar (August)? The issue was a serious one for some Christians; Quakers, for example, adopted numerical references for days and months precisely to avoid objectionable Pagan names. The rejection of the Quaker system suggests that the founders read very little into their dating practices. To base an argument on those practices is to stand on extraordinarily shaky ground.

To be sure, the Constitution could have avoided the words "Year of our Lord" in the date (as it does elsewhere when it refers to specific years), but it's hard to imagine why. "The Year of our Lord" was the standard way of dating important documents in the 1700s; its use was ritualistic, not religious. It is doubtful that anyone, Christian, deist, or otherwise, would have given the words a second thought, or ascribed to them any legal significance. And if the intent of the Constitution was to signal a favored status for Christianity, it could have done so in a thousand less ambiguous ways than including the words "in the Year of our Lord." That some accommodationists appeal to these words is silent testimony to how little evidence there is for the idea that the Constitution embodies Christian morality or thought.

You were the one that said there was not a single reference to God in the Constitution. You were wrong. No one said that the Constitution was a "religious" document. As far as that being in the Constitution, I think it was very important to someone or it would not have been written there. Since the Constitution was hand written, not typed, the above seems to be just an opinion. You can keep pushing your "belief" that it meant nothing if you want to, but you have provided no evidence to back it up.

 

[logical4u]

Or Muslim.

Was Jefferson a member of a synagogue or a mosque? Oh, that's right, he was a member of a Christian church.

So what?

Still nothing regarding my earlier request.



You may wish to review some statistics here: How many North Americans go regularly to church?

There is a real disconnect between christians, those who claim to be christians and church attendance.

That's not at all surprising. What is surprising is your frantic attempt to make people christian who were not.

You would make a good prospect for the Taliban.

I used Jefferson's actions and words. You used others' opinions of his actions and words. Have you ever been to Monticello? I cannot imagine walking out of that house and not thanking the Lord for the day.

 

[Hollie]

Are you saying the population was sooo Christian, that the FF were forced to add the date with the "the year of our Lord"?

You really are clueless.

Separation of Church and State Home Page

"The Year of Our Lord" and separation.

Despite the secular nature of our national government, there is one unambiguous reference to Christ in the Constitution. Article VII dates the Constitution in "the Year of our Lord one thousand seven hundred and Eighty seven." But what does this mean for the principle of religious liberty?

The answer is: nothing. Our dating system is an historical artifact of Western culture, and has no legal significance or implications for the meaning of the Constitution or the First Amendment. The American Colonies were established by Europeans; we naturally inherited the European practice of dating years from the birth of Christ. Nothing follows from this except the trivial observation that, in establishing our independence, we decided not to completely overthrow our cultural heritage.

In fact, the European dating system is infused with pagan holdovers that, if taken seriously, lead to exactly the opposite conclusions reached by accommodationists. We have a seven day week, after the model of ancient Israel, but we inherited Pagan names for these days; does the Constitution then establish Sun worship when it excepts Sunday from the ten days Presidents have to veto a bill before it becomes law? Does it establish worship of the Moon when it says that Congress will begin it's sessions on the first Monday of December? Does the use of European names for months mean that the Constitution establishes worship of Julius Caesar (July) or Augustus Caesar (August)? The issue was a serious one for some Christians; Quakers, for example, adopted numerical references for days and months precisely to avoid objectionable Pagan names. The rejection of the Quaker system suggests that the founders read very little into their dating practices. To base an argument on those practices is to stand on extraordinarily shaky ground.

To be sure, the Constitution could have avoided the words "Year of our Lord" in the date (as it does elsewhere when it refers to specific years), but it's hard to imagine why. "The Year of our Lord" was the standard way of dating important documents in the 1700s; its use was ritualistic, not religious. It is doubtful that anyone, Christian, deist, or otherwise, would have given the words a second thought, or ascribed to them any legal significance. And if the intent of the Constitution was to signal a favored status for Christianity, it could have done so in a thousand less ambiguous ways than including the words "in the Year of our Lord." That some accommodationists appeal to these words is silent testimony to how little evidence there is for the idea that the Constitution embodies Christian morality or thought.

You were the one that said there was not a single reference to God in the Constitution. You were wrong. No one said that the Constitution was a "religious" document. As far as that being in the Constitution, I think it was very important to someone or it would not have been written there. Since the Constitution was hand written, not typed, the above seems to be just an opinion. You can keep pushing your "belief" that it meant nothing if you want to, but you have provided no evidence to back it up.

It's true. There is not a single reference to god in the constitution.

The rest of your frantic diatribe has been addressed previously.

You still have provided no proof that Franklin, Jefferson, Paine, or Allan ever denied being Jewish.

 

[logical4u]

You really are clueless.

Separation of Church and State Home Page

"The Year of Our Lord" and separation.

Despite the secular nature of our national government, there is one unambiguous reference to Christ in the Constitution. Article VII dates the Constitution in "the Year of our Lord one thousand seven hundred and Eighty seven." But what does this mean for the principle of religious liberty?

The answer is: nothing. Our dating system is an historical artifact of Western culture, and has no legal significance or implications for the meaning of the Constitution or the First Amendment. The American Colonies were established by Europeans; we naturally inherited the European practice of dating years from the birth of Christ. Nothing follows from this except the trivial observation that, in establishing our independence, we decided not to completely overthrow our cultural heritage.

In fact, the European dating system is infused with pagan holdovers that, if taken seriously, lead to exactly the opposite conclusions reached by accommodationists. We have a seven day week, after the model of ancient Israel, but we inherited Pagan names for these days; does the Constitution then establish Sun worship when it excepts Sunday from the ten days Presidents have to veto a bill before it becomes law? Does it establish worship of the Moon when it says that Congress will begin it's sessions on the first Monday of December? Does the use of European names for months mean that the Constitution establishes worship of Julius Caesar (July) or Augustus Caesar (August)? The issue was a serious one for some Christians; Quakers, for example, adopted numerical references for days and months precisely to avoid objectionable Pagan names. The rejection of the Quaker system suggests that the founders read very little into their dating practices. To base an argument on those practices is to stand on extraordinarily shaky ground.

To be sure, the Constitution could have avoided the words "Year of our Lord" in the date (as it does elsewhere when it refers to specific years), but it's hard to imagine why. "The Year of our Lord" was the standard way of dating important documents in the 1700s; its use was ritualistic, not religious. It is doubtful that anyone, Christian, deist, or otherwise, would have given the words a second thought, or ascribed to them any legal significance. And if the intent of the Constitution was to signal a favored status for Christianity, it could have done so in a thousand less ambiguous ways than including the words "in the Year of our Lord." That some accommodationists appeal to these words is silent testimony to how little evidence there is for the idea that the Constitution embodies Christian morality or thought.

You were the one that said there was not a single reference to God in the Constitution. You were wrong. No one said that the Constitution was a "religious" document. As far as that being in the Constitution, I think it was very important to someone or it would not have been written there. Since the Constitution was hand written, not typed, the above seems to be just an opinion. You can keep pushing your "belief" that it meant nothing if you want to, but you have provided no evidence to back it up.

It's true. There is not a single reference to god in the constitution.

The rest of your frantic diatribe has been addressed previously.

You still have provided no proof that Franklin, Jefferson, Paine, or Allan ever denied being Jewish.

I have no need to provide that, you have chosen to prove you are an idiot, instead!

 

[JakeStarkey]

So what? What public affirmation of faith that Jesus was his Savior did he ever make?

Or Muslim.

I found nothing to indicate that Franklin, Jefferson, Paine, or Allan ever denied being Jewish.

I suppose that means they were.

Was Jefferson a member of a synagogue or a mosque? Oh, that's right, he was a member of a Christian church.

 

[JakeStarkey]

The Constitution does not mention "God" or "Jehovah" or "Jesus" or "Messiah" or "Christ" at all. Religious test oaths are forever banned, though.

Are you saying the population was sooo Christian, that the FF were forced to add the date with the "the year of our Lord"?

You really are clueless.

Separation of Church and State Home Page

"The Year of Our Lord" and separation.

Despite the secular nature of our national government, there is one unambiguous reference to Christ in the Constitution. Article VII dates the Constitution in "the Year of our Lord one thousand seven hundred and Eighty seven." But what does this mean for the principle of religious liberty?

The answer is: nothing. Our dating system is an historical artifact of Western culture, and has no legal significance or implications for the meaning of the Constitution or the First Amendment. The American Colonies were established by Europeans; we naturally inherited the European practice of dating years from the birth of Christ. Nothing follows from this except the trivial observation that, in establishing our independence, we decided not to completely overthrow our cultural heritage.

In fact, the European dating system is infused with pagan holdovers that, if taken seriously, lead to exactly the opposite conclusions reached by accommodationists. We have a seven day week, after the model of ancient Israel, but we inherited Pagan names for these days; does the Constitution then establish Sun worship when it excepts Sunday from the ten days Presidents have to veto a bill before it becomes law? Does it establish worship of the Moon when it says that Congress will begin it's sessions on the first Monday of December? Does the use of European names for months mean that the Constitution establishes worship of Julius Caesar (July) or Augustus Caesar (August)? The issue was a serious one for some Christians; Quakers, for example, adopted numerical references for days and months precisely to avoid objectionable Pagan names. The rejection of the Quaker system suggests that the founders read very little into their dating practices. To base an argument on those practices is to stand on extraordinarily shaky ground.

To be sure, the Constitution could have avoided the words "Year of our Lord" in the date (as it does elsewhere when it refers to specific years), but it's hard to imagine why. "The Year of our Lord" was the standard way of dating important documents in the 1700s; its use was ritualistic, not religious. It is doubtful that anyone, Christian, deist, or otherwise, would have given the words a second thought, or ascribed to them any legal significance. And if the intent of the Constitution was to signal a favored status for Christianity, it could have done so in a thousand less ambiguous ways than including the words "in the Year of our Lord." That some accommodationists appeal to these words is silent testimony to how little evidence there is for the idea that the Constitution embodies Christian morality or thought.

You were the one that said there was not a single reference to God in the Constitution. You were wrong. No one said that the Constitution was a "religious" document. As far as that being in the Constitution, I think it was very important to someone or it would not have been written there. Since the Constitution was hand written, not typed, the above seems to be just an opinion. You can keep pushing your "belief" that it meant nothing if you want to, but you have provided no evidence to back it up.

 

[JakeStarkey]

I am sure that Jefferson felt gratitude to his deistic lord for the creation.

Was Jefferson a member of a synagogue or a mosque? Oh, that's right, he was a member of a Christian church.

So what?

Still nothing regarding my earlier request.



You may wish to review some statistics here: How many North Americans go regularly to church?

There is a real disconnect between christians, those who claim to be christians and church attendance.

That's not at all surprising. What is surprising is your frantic attempt to make people christian who were not.

You would make a good prospect for the Taliban.

I used Jefferson's actions and words. You used others' opinions of his actions and words. Have you ever been to Monticello? I cannot imagine walking out of that house and not thanking the Lord for the day.

 

[JakeStarkey]

There is no testament or affirmation of faith by any of them that Jesus was their Lord.

You were the one that said there was not a single reference to God in the Constitution. You were wrong. No one said that the Constitution was a "religious" document. As far as that being in the Constitution, I think it was very important to someone or it would not have been written there. Since the Constitution was hand written, not typed, the above seems to be just an opinion. You can keep pushing your "belief" that it meant nothing if you want to, but you have provided no evidence to back it up.

It's true. There is not a single reference to god in the constitution.

The rest of your frantic diatribe has been addressed previously.

You still have provided no proof that Franklin, Jefferson, Paine, or Allan ever denied being Jewish.

I have no need to provide that, you have chosen to prove you are an idiot, instead!

 

[JakeStarkey]

The conservative Christian right makes some basic mistakes. Among them are: that they are anything like the Christians of the first century; that the Founders and their generation are anything like them today.

The basic heresy of the Christian evangelicals and fundamentalists of our day is their mistaken beliefs that they represent the will of the Christian God and that they reflect the will of the Founders.

The reflect neither.

 

[Hollie]

You were the one that said there was not a single reference to God in the Constitution. You were wrong. No one said that the Constitution was a "religious" document. As far as that being in the Constitution, I think it was very important to someone or it would not have been written there. Since the Constitution was hand written, not typed, the above seems to be just an opinion. You can keep pushing your "belief" that it meant nothing if you want to, but you have provided no evidence to back it up.

It's true. There is not a single reference to god in the constitution.

The rest of your frantic diatribe has been addressed previously.

You still have provided no proof that Franklin, Jefferson, Paine, or Allan ever denied being Jewish.

I have no need to provide that, you have chosen to prove you are an idiot, instead!

That's odd. The premise of your argument regarding Jefferson was that he never denied being christian.

Did you forget you made this repeated demand:

Jakey, I have been here all along, you did not provide evidence where these men [Franklin, Jefferson, Paine, or Allan] denied they were Christians.

Did you forget you wrote that? I'm just using your (juvenile, silly, irrevelant, assinine) "standards" here.

So tell us, can you provide evidence where these men [Franklin, Jefferson, Paine, or Allan] denied they were Jewish?

 

[JakeStarkey]

You can always turn a conservative far right Christian Dominionist inside out. Simply apply the inverse of standards they create to themselves, and they fall apart every time.

 

[Hollie]

You were the one that said there was not a single reference to God in the Constitution. You were wrong. No one said that the Constitution was a "religious" document. As far as that being in the Constitution, I think it was very important to someone or it would not have been written there. Since the Constitution was hand written, not typed, the above seems to be just an opinion. You can keep pushing your "belief" that it meant nothing if you want to, but you have provided no evidence to back it up.

It's true. There is not a single reference to god in the constitution.

The rest of your frantic diatribe has been addressed previously.

You still have provided no proof that Franklin, Jefferson, Paine, or Allan ever denied being Jewish.

I have no need to provide that, you have chosen to prove you are an idiot, instead!

Show me a single reference to god in the constitution.

 

[JakeStarkey]

Answer the question, logical4u. Where is God mentioned in the Constitution. Not just the Christian God, any god.

 

[logical4u]

The conservative Christian right makes some basic mistakes. Among them are: that they are anything like the Christians of the first century; that the Founders and their generation are anything like them today.

The basic heresy of the Christian evangelicals and fundamentalists of our day is their mistaken beliefs that they represent the will of the Christian God and that they reflect the will of the Founders.

The reflect neither.

false witness, again Jakey? Where did I ever say that "I" represented the will of the Lord? Where did I ever say that "I" reflected the will of the Founders? Where did "I" ever say that I was anything like the Christians of the first century or the Founders?

 

[logical4u]

It's true. There is not a single reference to god in the constitution.

The rest of your frantic diatribe has been addressed previously.

You still have provided no proof that Franklin, Jefferson, Paine, or Allan ever denied being Jewish.

I have no need to provide that, you have chosen to prove you are an idiot, instead!

That's odd. The premise of your argument regarding Jefferson was that he never denied being christian.

Did you forget you made this repeated demand:

Jakey, I have been here all along, you did not provide evidence where these men [Franklin, Jefferson, Paine, or Allan] denied they were Christians.

Did you forget you wrote that? I'm just using your (juvenile, silly, irrevelant, assinine) "standards" here.

So tell us, can you provide evidence where these men [Franklin, Jefferson, Paine, or Allan] denied they were Jewish?

Yo, idiot, that would have been at the same time they denied they were dogs and cats.

 

[logical4u]

It's true. There is not a single reference to god in the constitution.

The rest of your frantic diatribe has been addressed previously.

You still have provided no proof that Franklin, Jefferson, Paine, or Allan ever denied being Jewish.

I have no need to provide that, you have chosen to prove you are an idiot, instead!

Show me a single reference to god in the constitution.

How does Jakey say it.... it has already been shown.

 

[Hollie]

I have no need to provide that, you have chosen to prove you are an idiot, instead!

Show me a single reference to god in the constitution.

How does Jakey say it.... it has already been shown.

False. There is no reference to god in the constitution.