PDA

View Full Version : American being based on Christianity is a Falacy.



Praxus
29 Sep 03,, 22:02
I hear so many people trying to justify the statue in Alabama by claiming that the United States was founded upon Christian principles. When anyone who even lightly studies the founding of this Country will find it to be false.

The first and most obvious reason of why we are not is that Thomas Jefferson the writer of the Declaration of Independence is a Deist and a Unitarian. He did not believe that Christ was God nor did he believe God could change reality. Now compare the Ten Commandments to the American Constitution.

The First Four Commandments order unquestionable obediance to God. The Fifth Ammendment orders you to honor your father and mother. Sugesting that Stalins doughter honor him is rediculis, it does not say "if they deserve honor" it just says "Honor your Father and Mother". The last five commandments are common in every law code dating back to the Code of Hamurabi. This statement is undefendable as soon as it is challanged.

Ironduke
29 Sep 03,, 23:43
I would say that the US is a Christian nation, but religion should be left out of state affairs.

Leader
30 Sep 03,, 00:29
The United States wasn't founded on the religion of Christianity but it was founded on the philosophy of Christianity. The country was however founded on a belief in a God or a Creator. You can look on the back of your money if you don't believe me.

Hawg166
30 Sep 03,, 02:24
Praxus you are right in some and off base in others. First of all the Ten Commandments are not Christian but Jewish. yes they exist in our Old Testament, however we are not bound to them. Theologically speaking they are part of the old dispensation. In the new dispensation man is judged solely by his faith in Gods Son or the lack of faith thereof. The Apostle Paul very clearly and forcefully lays this out in the Book of Romans in chapter 5.
To say that the tenets of the American culture were not Christian is a falacy. beacon Hill in Boston that city ona hill was on a hill so that the light of Gods people could shine. have you ever of Roger Williams ? The quakers ? the shakers ? the frikkin Pilgrims ? the puritans ? The point is is that while the big men or the founding fathers were highly influenced by the phlosophes of Europe and were indeed agnostic and deist and unitarian, the people that were the fabric of early America were Christian in their faith overwhelmingly.While TJ may have ben a deist, Washington was not. Dont think all of the big men were Agnostic or deist. Dont think American here Praxus think European. Untill the 19th century there was few indigenous Americans. Most were transplanted Europeans and to seperate Christianity from Europeans is a feat the greatest spinster and historians could never do. Western Civillization in iretievably connected to Christianity because the fibre of early Europe was woven with Judeo / Christian tenets.
The few men that penned the early documents of our nation were not the majority. Dont you know that pillars behind the Supreme Court Justices in DC are inscribed with the ten Commandments. If Judeo / Christian sentements were not ingrained in the most basic fibres of our American society surely this would not be.

Ziska
30 Sep 03,, 07:54
*rubs his hands together in anticipation*

Ohh ohh! An argument about religion! My favourite!

First up, I make a one important assumption. That the Bible (especially the King James Version) is the complete and accurate Word of God. This assumption is based on nothing more than my own personal faith. However, it is one shared my several billion people in this world.

You may disagree that the Bible is the only word of God, or that it applies to you, but that is beside the point. As my only proof is an intangible (faith), we will just have to wait till judgment day to see who's right. If you want to prove me wrong, you'll have to do so from the Bible. Otherwise, we can agree to disagree. I'm easy either way.

Ok, a couple of points.

1. Praxus is right. The United States, as defined by the Constitution, is NOT based on Christianity. If it was, it would defenitely acknowledge that God is the Head over all the nations. However it does not, and instead it seeks to divorce religion and civil authority (an impossibility). Most of the signatories of the Constitution didn't even believe in the Christian God.

2. America has a very strong Christian heritage, and it is to her detriment that she has has ignored this for so long. If so many Americans believe that Christ is the King of Kings, why do they deny this in their Constitution?

3. I make no distinction between the Jews of the Old Testament and modern-day Christians. It is a linear progression, ever since the time of Adam and Eve. We are called Christians because we believe that the sacrifice of Christ saved us. People have been looking towards the Messiah ever since the Fall.

Do you think that Abraham was saved in a different way to Daniel? Melchizedek to Peter? All who have been saved throughout history have been saved by the single sacrifice of Christ.

The 10 Commandments has held throughout all of history. Muder, lying, adultery, etc were sins right from the beginning, and continue to be sins today. Or do you think that Christ approved of lying, or adultery?

The ceremonial law of the old testament was done away with the coming of Christ, but the moral law stands still, ,and always will.

bigross86
30 Sep 03,, 13:34
I know that I'm the symbolic Jew standing alone aginst the hordes of Islam and Christianity on this board (just kidding guys, take it easy...) but I think I'm gonna sit on the sidelines and watch this one closely. Maybe later on I'll join in, but from prior experience even if both sides agree to disagree, trouble is still gonna happen. People are very serious about their religion and if someone knocks it they'll get hostile fast. I do find this topic very interesting however.

By the way, did you know that one of the main funders of the Amerian Revolution which was apparently headed by many firm Christian believers was a Jew? There's a pretty large square dedicated to him right outside the Kew Gardens Hills ("Jew Gardens Hills") Queens Public Library.

And here's just a little quote from George Washington:

"May the children of the stock of Abraham who dwell in this land continue to merit and enjoy the good will of the other inhabitants, while everyone shall sit in safety under his own vine and fig tree, and there shall be none to make him afraid."

America's new President, George Washington

Ziska
30 Sep 03,, 13:42
Hmm. I've been banned from boads for making my religious views about modern-day Jews clear, so I have to tread carefully.

Ben are you an orthodox Jew? My understanding of judaism is kinda limited. I know a stack about the Old Testament, have a basic grasp of the role of the Talmud, but thats about it. I don't know the difference between reform and orthodox Jews, and I would appreciate it if you would enlighten me.

bigross86
30 Sep 03,, 14:00
Yes, I'm an Orthodox Jew. As far as I know, there are three sects of Judaism, Orthodox, Reform and Conservative, though Orthodox Jews believe that the other two don't count as real Judaism.

I don't know too much about the other two, but I think Reform Jews edited the book to keep what they want and added things, and Conservative Jews keep the book, but just choose what they want and what they don't want to do. They don't add on.

Ziska
30 Sep 03,, 14:08
When you say 'the book' exactly what are you reffering to?

bigross86
30 Sep 03,, 14:24
The Torah, or what you would call the Old Testament. It contains 613 commandments, 248 "Thou Shalt"s and 365 "Thou Shalt Not"s

Ziska
30 Sep 03,, 14:28
Ok. What do you think about people who do not keep those 613 laws? Ie, are they doomed to hell, or what?

bigross86
30 Sep 03,, 15:00
Well, so much for staying out of this...

I look at them fro an Orthodox point of view. I believe that they recieve credit for the Commandmants (Mitzvot, plural of Mitzvah) that they keep, and recieve punishment for Commandments they disobey or disregard. I also believe that the commandments that were added on are null, void, and are worthless, for the Torah says "Thou shalt neither increase nor decrease from the word that I have given you here today"

Stinger
30 Sep 03,, 15:04
No they're doomed to talk to me on IM and message boards right BR :D:dbanana

Ziska
30 Sep 03,, 15:05
Heh, I'd say I was sorry for dragging you into this, but I'm not :)

So do you wear a yarmulke (sp?)? And what do you think about all the alliances Israel has made with gentile nations like the US?

Way I see it, thats like the many alliances Israel had with Egypt etc.

bigross86
30 Sep 03,, 15:16
Yes, I wear a yarmulka, though in Hebrew they are known as Kipa (Single) or Kipot (Plural)

About the peace: I have several opinions: First of all, I try not to have an opinion of my own when it comes to politics. I'm not quite center, but I'm definetely not right-wing.

Second of all: The Torah says that when you come upon a country with which you are going to wage war, you must first offer tham peace. This applies in a Milchemet Reshut (Non-Obligatory War) and in a Milchemet Chova (Obligatory War, excluding the Destruction, Eradication and removal of the memory of Amalek from upon this earth)

Third: It is obvious that until the days of Mashiach ben David (Messiah son of David) there won't be WWJD, or World Wide Jewish Domination. However, in the meantime until the War of Gog and Magog (What the Christians call Armageddon), I'll settle for evarlasting peace. We are on the road to peace with the treaties between Egypt and Jordan, close diplomatic ties Morocco and Turkey, etc...

Hawg166
30 Sep 03,, 15:38
Ziska I am right with you on all of the above I just didnt want to be the one to get my whole leg wet. I preffer to just get my toes wet on the boards.

TopHatter
30 Sep 03,, 15:51
Originally posted by bigross86
I'm the symbolic Jew

"Symbolic Jew"? :D Sorry sorry, something about that just struck me as funny...like you're a sacrifice or something offered up by Mark Aspen to the board :dbanana

Boy I havent heard this much theological discussion since I was a kid, especially that reference to Gog and Magog.

I've always been interested in learning about the 3 major religions of the world, particularly Judaism since as a Christian growing up, we would study from the Bible as a whole and I don't remember a huge distinction being drawn from what was called "the Hebrew Scriptures" and the "the Christian-Greek Scriptures". I don't recall them being referred to as Old and New Testament. Instead they were referred to by the original language they were written in.

bigross86
30 Sep 03,, 15:58
Mark Aspen. Why do I know that name from somewhere? It's on the tip of my tongue...

TopHatter
30 Sep 03,, 16:29
Uhhh....you got me?
Is there something I should know?

bigross86
30 Sep 03,, 16:36
I don't know. Maybe I know him from Whiskey Tango Foxtrot.. Who is Mark Aspen?

TopHatter
30 Sep 03,, 16:59
You're kidding right? You and he responded to each others posts on this board awhile back, discussing Ultra-Orthodox Jews serving (or not) in the IDF.

bigross86
30 Sep 03,, 17:40
Right!!! I was having a minor brain-belch. I should have checked the members roster...

Praxus
30 Sep 03,, 20:17
I do not remember saying that the US does not have a strong Christian heritage. I am saying the American Republic was not founded upon Christian principles.

Jesus teaches self-sacrifice and serving your community, but how does this fit with the rugged individualism of Americans.

Religion in general teaches one to be subserviant to some form of "Superior" life. Now how does this fit with Americans.


And here's just a little quote from George Washington:

"May the children of the stock of Abraham who dwell in this land continue to merit and enjoy the good will of the other inhabitants, while everyone shall sit in safety under his own vine and fig tree, and there shall be none to make him afraid."

George Washinton had nothing to do with the Constitution. What he did to secure this new country is limited to being a General and President, not a framer of the Constitution like Madison(I am well aware he was studying to be a minister in what is today Princeton, so don't bring that up or Jefferson.

"Fix reason firmly in her seat, and call to her tribunal every fact, every opinion. Question with boldness even the existence of a God; because, if there be one, he must more approve of the homage of reason, than that of blindfolded fear."
Thomas Jefferson

"In every country and every age, the priest had been hostile to Liberty. "
Thomas Jefferson

Ironduke
30 Sep 03,, 22:19
Originally posted by bigross86
I don't know. Maybe I know him from Whiskey Tango Foxtrot.. Who is Mark Aspen?
markaspen is an Israeli like yourself. He served in the IDF back in the 1980's in Lebanon.

TopHatter
30 Sep 03,, 22:31
Good 'ole Ben was having a brain-freeze. :dbanana Too many banana daiquiris.

Confed999
01 Oct 03,, 01:12
Originally posted by Ziska
.....Version) is the complete and accurate .......
ROTFL! "Version" and "complete and accurate" in the same sentence, that's funny. Sorry, I don't mean to step on your beliefs, but that is too good to let slip by. :D

Ziska
01 Oct 03,, 01:16
... I must be missing something. The Authorised Version, or King James Version of the Bible was the first complete translation of the Recieved Texts into english. It is not completely accurate in its translation, but it is the closest one out there. All our ministers have to learn ancient greek and hebrew anyway.

Confed999
01 Oct 03,, 01:23
Originally posted by Ziska
... I must be missing something. The Authorised Version, or King James Version of the Bible was the first complete translation of the Recieved Texts into english. It is not completely accurate in its translation, but it is the closest one out there. All our ministers have to learn ancient greek and hebrew anyway.
Noting to do with the Bible, just in general, "version" and "complete and accurate" don't go together.

Ziska
01 Oct 03,, 01:37
ahh. I see.

TopHatter
01 Oct 03,, 03:28
My biggest problem with the KJV is this: What's with the Olde English?? "Thee, thy, thou..." Nobody talks like that anymore. They sure as hell didn't talk like that in biblical times. So why keep it? What's the point? Because it sounds good? Gahhh...:mad:

Ziska
01 Oct 03,, 03:39
because they talked like that when they translated the Bible.

If there was a more accurate modern-englih translation, we'd use it. Unfortunately, there isn't. One day I'd like to work on a new translation, but it is a mammoth task.

Praxus
01 Oct 03,, 13:20
So you can waste several years of your life for something that will never advance your life in anyway.

Hawg166
01 Oct 03,, 13:58
Actually the version of Greek that the KJV was translated out of was called Coinae Greek (actually I dont remember how to spell it but thats what the dialect was). It was the purest dialect of Greek ever. When it was translated, it was translated into Elizabethen English at the height of its purity in terms of linguistics. This is the language of Shakespear and the other writers. Since then English has become a language of slang and and is considered diluted as compared to the Old English. This is why in theological / and Biblical Academic circles the KJV is considered the most accurate version of the original texts. it was translated from one pure language to another. Youre right noone speaks Old English anymore, thats what makes it such a clean version. It says what it means and means what it says.

TopHatter
01 Oct 03,, 14:30
Eh, I have to humbly disagree with the assertation that the KJV is an accurate translation. Most Bible scholars agree on this.
On the other hand, you are correct about the first part of your posts. The Bible was translated many times long before the KJV. I offer the Greek Septuagint as just one example.
I also understand that the New International Version is written in clear Modern English with no slang.
Getting back to the KJV, my biggest problem with it are the words and phrases that were used way back then but only confuse people now.
The Bible's original languages were Hebrew, Aramaic and Greek. At the time each book of the Bible was written, it was in the common language of the time. It was written for the common person. I would submit the opinion that the same should hold true today.

bigross86
01 Oct 03,, 15:09
I don't recall the Bible ever being written in Arameic...

TopHatter
01 Oct 03,, 15:17
Very small parts of some of the later parts were written in Arameic. The vast majority was written in Hebrew of course :)

Praxus
01 Oct 03,, 15:19
Aramaic is a dialect of Hebrew, if I am not mistaken. It was the language Jesus spoke, I don't know if that was the language in the Bible.

TopHatter
01 Oct 03,, 15:27
Good point about Aramaic, I didnt know that.
As I recall, the New Testament was written in Greek, the common Greek of the time, not the Classical Greek that the scholars spoke.

bigross86
01 Oct 03,, 16:11
Yes, Arameic and Hebrew are alike, but there are also some very striking simliraties between Arameic and English/German.

TopHatter
01 Oct 03,, 16:27
Same thing with Yiddish and German as I recall

bigross86
01 Oct 03,, 16:32
Yiddish is just a warped version of English and German. Same way that Ladino is a warped version of Spanish and Puertogese

TopHatter
01 Oct 03,, 16:41
My friend in NYC told me about a time her and her late husband were backpacking through Europe. They set up camp next a German couple who spoke no English. They were able to communicate though because her husband spoke Yiddish. Between their German and his Yiddish, they were able to communicate will enough.
I read somewhere that Yiddish was a combination of German and Hebrew. Anybody heard that too?

bigross86
01 Oct 03,, 16:43
That is later Yiddish, when people were already seriously settling Israel. Since some places actually forbade the speaking of Yiddish, being in the Holy Land and all, Hebrew was integrated into Yiddish to help people learn.

TopHatter
01 Oct 03,, 16:50
Ahhh...most interesting.
My friend has lamented that Yiddish is a dying language. She understands quite a bit but doesnt speak it as well as her late husband.

ZFBoxcar
01 Oct 03,, 17:02
BR, Im reform and I dont think we changed the Torah. We do what the Conservatives do, which is, whatever we want (lol), but we didnt change the book. In Canada at least, there has been a revival of tradition in the past few years and Reform Synagogues are more and more resembling the Conservative ones.

As for the US being founded on Christianity, I think that there were two reasons why Church and State were separated (there are many reasons why it should be that way, but I think only 2 really mattered back then). The first was because the a lot of visionaries wanted the US to become a new Roman Republic, and the other is because European nations didnt have a separation. The US was trying to show emphatically how uneuropean they were. Im not American and so I wasnt raised on US history so these points could be way off. If they are, please tell me.

bigross86
01 Oct 03,, 18:11
ZFBoxcar. Like I said, I really don't know too much about this stuff, and that's I seem to remember someone telling me thats what the difference was.

Yiddish is a dying language, and it's a sad thing. Most of the old generation speak it, and some of the younger generation speak, but very few of the newest generation speak it. Which is a trusy unfortunate thing because some of the elders only speak Yiddish and from personal experience, listening to and respecting one's elders never hurt anyone. In fact, I've learned almost as much from my grandparents as from my teachers have taught me in 12 years of school

Praxus
01 Oct 03,, 18:33
As for the US being founded on Christianity, I think that there were two reasons why Church and State were separated (there are many reasons why it should be that way, but I think only 2 really mattered back then). The first was because the a lot of visionaries wanted the US to become a new Roman Republic, and the other is because European nations didnt have a separation. The US was trying to show emphatically how uneuropean they were. Im not American and so I wasnt raised on US history so these points could be way off. If they are, please tell me.

If you are interested in what founding fathers meant by America being a Republic, check out "The Federalist Papers". One of them by James Madison explains it.

Here it is:
http://memory.loc.gov/const/fed/fed_39.html

Ziska
02 Oct 03,, 04:04
Originally posted by Praxus
So you can waste several years of your life for something that will never advance your life in anyway.

... I'll be the judge of that thanks mate.

Why are you so anti-Christian? I've never insulted you or yours, but you constantly attack Christianity.

tw-acs
02 Oct 03,, 18:42
The persons that left Europe for the new land made certain decisions in the creation of the United States of America.

Such as the seperation of church and state which at the time was not something that was very wide spread in Europe.

The United States was founded by persons that were gernerally christian so christianity influenced the United States a lot. Though it was not based on christianity nor the values of christianity.

It was formed under the values of the persons of the time of which the United States was created. Not of any organization or association.

All religions have there flaws. Christianity has a lot. I cannot comment on other religions for I am not as educated in the workings teachings and general nature of other religions.

The federalist papers were from extremists and thus not information showing general concensus of thought of the US or anyone except the authors of the papers.

Ray
03 Oct 03,, 06:04
Yiddish, a Germanic language, is the language of the Ashkenazic Jews who have connections with East and Central Europe. It is a mix of original German [85%] and Hebrew [10%]. Slav [5%] influence because of the movement of Jews also entered the language. It also has traces of French ad Romanian. The language differs from modern German.
Yiddish has two dialects. The western dialect is in German speaking areas of Europe and the larger following is on the Eastern dialect of the Baltic and Russian areas and their descendants The eastern dialect also has two variations.

The YIVO Institute of Hebrew or [Jewish? I dont remember] Researcg at New York can give more details.

TopHatter
03 Oct 03,, 06:13
Great details Ray, thanks. I've been fascinated by the origins of the Yiddish language for a couple years now. It's a very interesting language, as all polyglot languages are.

Ray
03 Oct 03,, 06:43
No religion is the BEST. All have EXCELLENT messages but it is for the educated to glean the same from the chaff. But then it is not for me to pontificate.

However, I will dwell on the academic issues of this thread.

Semitic Languages, one of the five subfamilies or branches of the Hamito-Semitic or Afro-Asiatic language family. Of the Semitic languages, Arabic was carried beyond its original home in the Arabian Peninsula and spread throughout the Arabian Empire and is spoken across North Africa to the Atlantic coast, and Arabic and Hebrew are used by Muslims and Jews in other parts of the world. The other Semitic languages are centered in a region bounded on the west by Ethiopia and on the north by Syria and extending southeast through Iraq and the Arab Peninsula, with some "islands" of Semitic speech farther east in Iran.
*Linguistic Groups*
Linguists divide the Semitic languages into four groups. The North Peripheral group is represented by Akkadian. The oldest attested Semitic language, with the oldest Semitic literature, Akkadian was spoken in Mesopotamia between about 3000 BC and 600-400 BC and used as a literary language until the 1st century AD.
The North Central group includes the ancient and modern Hebrew language; ancient tongues such as Ugaritic and Phoenician; and the Aramaic language, including Syriac, or Christian Aramaic.
The South Central group consists of literary or Standard Arabic and the modern spoken Arabic dialects. Maltese, an offshoot of Arabic, is spoken on the island of Malta and, because of its location, has been heavily influenced by Italian.
The South Peripheral group consists of the South Arabic dialects, now spoken in parts of the southern Arabian Peninsula (and in ancient times by peoples such as the Minaeans and Sabaeans); and the languages of Ethiopia. The latter include Gecez, or classical Ethiopic, now surviving only as a literary and liturgical language; Amharic, the official language of Ethiopia; and regional Ethiopian languages such as Tigré, Tigrinya, and Gurage.
*Characteristics*
In Semitic languages, words are typically based on a series of three consonants; this series, called the root, carries the basic meaning. Superimposed on the root is a pattern of vowels (or vowels and consonants) that signifies variations in the basic meaning or that serves as an inflection (such as for verb tense and number). For example, in Arabic the root ktb refers to writing, and the vowel pattern -a-i- implies "one who does something"; thus, katib means "one who writes." Other derivatives of the same root include kitab, "book"; maktub, "letter"; and kataba, "he wrote." The close relationship of the Semitic languages to one another can be seen in the persistence of the same roots from one language to another (slm, for example, means "peace" in Assyro-Babylonian, Hebrew, Aramaic, Arabic, and other languages). In Semitic languages, related consonants typically fall into three subtypes: voiced, unvoiced, and emphatic; an example is the series transliterated g, k, and q from Arabic and Hebrew (the q is pronounced farther back in the throat than k).
*Writing*
Except for two undeciphered scripts used by the ancient Canaanites, and the Latin alphabet as used for Maltese, Semitic languages have historically been written in three scripts. Assyro-Babylonian was written in cuneiform signs, and Ugaritic used a cuneiform alphabet. North Semitic, the early Semitic script, was an alphabetic script; one of its earliest examples is inscribed on the Moabite stone (9th century BC, discovered in 1868 and now in the Louvre, Paris). From the Aramaic variant of North Semitic, the modern Arabic and square Hebrew alphabets developed; North Semitic also gave rise to the Greek alphabet. Like ancient North Semitic, the Hebrew and Arabic scripts are alphabets of consonants only; special marks for vowels apparently came into use in about the 8th century AD. The third script, South Semitic or South Arabic, may or may not have been another variant of early North Semitic script. Also a consonantal alphabet, it was taken to Ethiopia in the 1st millennium BC and gave rise to the syllabic scripts used for modern Ethiopian languages.

Ray
03 Oct 03,, 06:44
Aramaic Language, it is a Semitic language closely related to Hebrew. Originally the language of the Aramaeans, it was used, in many dialectical forms, in Mesopotamia and Syria before 1000 BC and later became the lingua franca of the Middle East. Aramaic survived the fall of Nineveh (612 BC) and Babylon (539 BC) and remained the official language of the Persian Empire (539-337 BC). Ancient inscriptions in Aramaic have been found over a vast area extending from Egypt to China.
Before the Christian era, Aramaic had become the language of the Jews in Palestine. Jesus preached in Aramaic, and parts of the Old Testament and much of the rabbinical literature were written in that language. Christian Aramaic, usually called Syriac, also developed an extensive literature, especially from the 4th to 7th centuries.
The influence and diffusion of Aramaic began to decline in favor of Arabic at the time of the Arab conquest in the 7th century AD. Aramaic survives today in Eastern and Western dialects, mostly as the language of Christians living in a few scattered communities in Syria, Lebanon, Turkey, Iraq, and Iran.

Bill
03 Oct 03,, 07:28
The US was pretty clearly based on Judeo-Christian morals....whatever they are.

shield
03 Oct 03,, 08:56
I have always thought that America was founded upon Christian values, if not necessarily upon Christian scriptural law.

TopHatter
03 Oct 03,, 17:12
Originally posted by M21Sniper
The US was pretty clearly based on Judeo-Christian morals....whatever they are.


Originally posted by shield
I have always thought that America was founded upon Christian values, if not necessarily upon Christian scriptural law.

Agreed, it's fairly obvious from the laws of the land that it follows the Judeo-Christians laws and biblical principles. I mean, it's not like we can make the case that we are based on Hammurabi's Code of Laws, heh.

tw-acs
03 Oct 03,, 23:04
The United States was founded by persons that were gernerally christian so christianity influenced the United States a lot. Though it was not based on christianity nor the values of christianity.

It was formed under the values of the persons of the time of which the United States was created. Not of any organization or association.

Praxus
04 Oct 03,, 00:16
Agreed, it's fairly obvious from the laws of the land that it follows the Judeo-Christians laws and biblical principles. I mean, it's not like we can make the case that we are based on Hammurabi's Code of Laws, heh.

You still have not been able to give me one peice of evidence that American Law is connected to Christianity. Give me say 2 examples of Christianity.

Age of Reasoning was turning away from Religion toward Science and Reason.


The US was pretty clearly based on Judeo-Christian morals....whatever they are.

Christian Morals: Self-Sacrifice, Love your Enemys, and treat others as you would like to be treated.

The first one is not in line with American principles, we obviously don't "love" our enemies. We don't treat others like we would be treated, we treat them how they deserve.

Bill
04 Oct 03,, 05:14
"You still have not been able to give me one peice of evidence that American Law is connected to Christianity. Give me say 2 examples of Christianity."

1) Sodomy laws.

2) Restrictions to bars and car dealers(not allowed to open on sundays), and restrictions to hunting(can't hunt on sunday).

Sunday is, i believe, the Christian sabbath?

Ray
04 Oct 03,, 13:59
Thou shalt not covet your neighbour's wife.:wacko :P

It is obvious that Christainity influenced the maturing of the US since the initial settlers were Christians. Of course the US is not 'The Christian Republic of the US' in the like of 'the Islamic Republic of Pakistan'. And anyway, the US is not soaking with religion dripping through every pore. So, why make it an issue?

Donnie
04 Oct 03,, 20:17
the constitution was only meant to give us freedom "of" religion, not a freedom "from" religion.

the founders knew the follies of setting up a state religion, and so chose not to institute one, under the spirit of the constitution a judge should be free to put up any religious demarcation he sees fit, however every other religions should be allowed to respond in kind.

whether than allow an accommodation for ever religion, the federal courts went the way of make accommodations for none, this does not truly represent the founding fathers ideas in regards to freedom of religion at all.