Posted 11 October 2005 - 01:27 PM
Posted 11 October 2005 - 01:47 PM
The American Revolution, at its Foundation, was Unscriptural
At its foundation, our American revolution was unscriptural. Therefore I have a hard time seeing how our government could have been founded on Christian principles, when its very founding violated one:
Submit yourselves for the Lord's sake to every authority instituted among men: whether to the king, as the supreme authority, or to governors, who are sent by him to punish those who do wrong and to commend those who do right. (1 Peter 2:13-14)
No matter how you cut it, the founding fathers were revolting against the King of England. It should be remembered that Peter wrote these words while Israel was suffering under the domination of government far more oppressive than England ever was. In fact, compared to current taxes, our forefathers had nothing to complain about.
What Peter wrote seems perfectly clear and unambiguous; furthermore, it is consistent with what Jesus said about his kingdom not being a part of this world (John 18:23 and 36).
As a Christian, it would be very difficult to justify armed revolt against any ruler. Passive resistance to injustice and evil, as embodied in the concept of civil disobedience, however, does have Scriptural precedent (as for instance in the case of the early Christians described in Acts 5:28-29:
"We gave you strict orders not to teach in this name," he said. "Yet you have filled Jerusalem with your teaching and are determined to make us guilty of this man's blood."
Peter and the other apostles replied: "We must obey God rather than men!" (see also Acts 4:18-20)
Civil disobedience means obeying a higher, moral law, but willingly suffering the consequences of your actions and submitting to the authority of those in power to arrest or even kill you for your disobedience. Peter and the others were arrested, and many of them were ultimately martyred. But they never participated in violent protest, nor did they resist those in authority by violence.
Posted 11 October 2005 - 03:20 PM
I suppose if you put 8 on it's side it becomes a majority.
-7 if you consider that Paine was a propagandist and not a signatory to any of the documents
-6 If you actually inspect Madison's record
-5 if you examine the John Adams quotes as quite thin
-4 depending on how you judge Ben Franklin (he understood the resurrection)
-3 If you consider that Washington wasn't even close to a diest
Washington went to a Christian Church which requires communion at least once in your life, he attended faithfully, served as vestryman, and died in that Church, and buried with full Christian rites.
The whole Presidential Oath of Office ceremony comes from the actions of George Washington at his First Innaugural. He placed his right hand upon the Holy Bible, opened to Genesis Chapters 49 and 50, took the Oath of Office and added the words, 'So help me God' to the end of the Oath, and then bent down and kissed the Holy Bible. His example was followed by every US President up to Franklin Pierce, and then resumed after him. The last time that a US President bent down and kissed the Open Holy Bible was Dwight Eisenhower.
Which leaves the argument quite thin.
Posted 11 October 2005 - 03:47 PM
Posted 11 October 2005 - 03:48 PM
Get her off!
Posted 11 October 2005 - 04:02 PM
Posted 11 October 2005 - 04:50 PM
For 10 points does anyone know where that's from? CC is not allowed to answer.
I would say "The Blues Brothers", but I think John Belushi's comments were first person.
Posted 11 October 2005 - 07:02 PM
Hopefully we can eventually get it down to One.
But even on this thread we still have a couple of Yanks trying to re-write history.
The only rewriting of history I've seen here is the reduction of the number of Founding Fathers from 56 to 8.
Matthew 16:18 "And I also say to you that you are Peter, and on this rock I will build My church, and the gates of Hades shall not prevail against it.
Oh you meant the country!
Edited by InChristAlways, 11 October 2005 - 08:12 PM.
Posted 11 October 2005 - 07:49 PM
But even on this thread we still have a couple of Yanks trying to re-write history.
and here we have an Aussie who thinks he knows American History and who quite inaccurately thought that 8 (FF who were Deists) actually made up 51% of the total Founding Fathers.
Okay, here is a list of the Founding Fathers.
List of Founding Fathers
Signers of the Constitution
Johnson Gunning Bedford, Jr.
Daniel of St.
David Brearly (Brearley)
William Paterson (Patterson)
Spaight Hugh Williamson
Thomas Fitzsimons (FitzSimons; Fitzsimmons)
Gouverneur Morris John Rutledge
Charles Cotesworth Pinckney
James Madison Jr.
Signers of the Declaration
Robert Treat Paine
Charles Carroll of Carrollton
Richard Henry Lee
Thomas Nelson, Jr.
Hooper Joseph Hewes
Thomas Heyward, Jr.
Thomas Lynch, Jr.
Henry Lee III
George Mason, Father of the Bill of Rights
Thomas Paine Edmund
Randolph Peyton Randolph
And just for the record once again. I never believed nor have I ever claimed that America was founded on Christian principles. My point is that the claim that most Founding Fathers were Deists is an uninformed one.
As a matter of fact, no one claimed that American was founded on Christian principles on this thread, unless I missed something?
Edited by Dianne, 11 October 2005 - 10:48 PM.
Posted 11 October 2005 - 09:14 PM
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 refuted 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.
IF THEY RELIED ON GOD'S PROTECTION THEN THEY COULDN'T BE DEISTS, COULD THEY?
Edited by philonetwenty, 13 October 2005 - 02:43 PM.
Posted 12 October 2005 - 03:10 AM
Sorry. Patriotic Americans have me in stitches every time.
The best bit is when Dubya Bush asks "may God continue to bless America".
0 user(s) are reading this topic
0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users