protest follow-up

To begin, I would like to share this retort openly to all of you in response to a comment that was posted on my first protest that I blogged a couple weeks ago.  I had to respond to this persons comment, because it demanded one.  His original comment is below.  So here it is:

We can also quote people, which I’m about to do, to support each of our stances.  I will begin with John Adams. Who stated in 1765 that he considered America to be “the opening of a grand scene and design in Providence for the illumination of the ignorant and the emancipation of the slavish part of mankind all over the earth” and in 1813, he wrote that the “general principles on which the Fathers achieved independence were…the general principles of Christianity”

George Washington said in his farewell address in 1796, “Of all the dispositions and habits which lead to political prosperity, religion and morality are indispensable supports.”

The words “under God” were from the Gettysburg address given by Abraham Lincoln in 1863.  The Knights of Columbus added it and the President of the United States “agreed” and enacted that it be added to the Pledge in June 14, 1954 “Flag Day” as it is known.  President Eisenhower also stated on that day and paraphrasing in his own words a sermon that he believed in, “These words [“under God”] will remind Americans that despite our great physical strength we must remain humble. They will help us to keep constantly in our minds and hearts the spiritual and moral principles which alone give dignity to man, and upon which our way of life is founded.”

In my humble opinion, the above names of our forefathers, are all pointing to the God of Christianity, being proof that each was a believer.  I think those are pretty powerful names of the original writers of all important documents written of the day.  I would also state that Jesus dealt with the same type of issues as we do here in America today.  In Jesus’ day, if you’re familiar with the 4 Gospels, Jesus had to overcome the Sadducee’s and Pharisees of His day.  The issue of ‘Legalism’ in regards to the  Old Testament Law, rather than the ‘Spirit’ of the Law.  An example of that was when there was a crippled man whom Jesus healed on the Sabbath.  According the the OT ‘Law’ there was to be no work done on that day.  But, Jesus, acting in the ‘Spirit’ of the Law realized that this man needed to be healed that day-immediately when he saw him-not wait another day because the ‘Law’ said so.  The Constitution, Bill of Rights, The Amendments, etc. are written as ‘Law’, but the Spirit of the ‘Law’ is different.  Our Forefathers were trying to give rights to all, without giving away our need to praise and worship Jesus.  They realized the intolerance and bigotry that drove them and the original settlers to the New World.  It wasn’t about not being a Christian country…it was about independence and freedom to worship God without fear of persecution or ridicule.

According to you, if we were to analyze the United States of America and listened to your thoughts and views on it, we would be considered the Cold War Soviet Republic of the 21st century, with no churches or mosques or temples to speak of.  This is not a clear view of today’s society in America at all.  Sure it[“the 10 Commandments”] has ‘some’ good things?  What about coveting your neighbor’s house?  What about adultery?  What about honoring your father and mother?  Are those not sound words for those without religion?  What’s wrong with respecting the first 3 commandments anyway?  Is it a bad thing? 

Thank God for what He has given to us and thank God that we do have the 1st Amendment to the Constitution that gives us the right to free speech, free to exercise religion.  What about flag burning, is that OK too?  We might as well act like those who hate our country and burn the flag as well?  Have you forgotten 9/11?  Have you been outside of the United States?  Not North or South of the border either, but really been around the world and seen poverty?  Where poverty in the US would be considered middle class compared to some places around the world.

Let’s thank God together that we have a Great country that was built in the Spirit of Christianity and protected those rights and the rights of those who don’t want to believe as well.  But, nonetheless, were Believers themselves!


Original comment:

First of all, this country is not Christan, it is not based on “Christan values” (which Christan values? They change from version (of Christianity) to version) From day 1 this was a secularist nation. There is no mention of God in the Constitution and the only mention in the Declaration of Independents is vague and better fits Deism than Christianity. And the Treaty of Tripoli which states “As the government of the United States of America is not in any sense founded on the Christian Religion” (Treaty of TripoliThe word “God” was not originally part of the pledge of allegiance, that was added in the 50s during the cold war.The 10 commandments are not “positive, good, moral and just plain right”, sure it has some good things like “don’t steal” “don’t kill” (or murder, depends on translation) and “don’t bare false witness” but those are not unique to Judaism and Christianity, there apart of all morel systems. The first 3 commandments are “Do not have any other gods besides me” “don’t make any graven image or any likeness of any thing that is in heaven above, or that is in the earth beneath, or that is in the water under the earth.” and “don’t take the name of God on vain” Thats the first 3 commandments, not the no stealing, killing/murdering and lying commandments. Which is the opposite of the first amendment which guaranties us freedom of religion, speech and the press. Freedom of religion, the freedom to warship how we want, other gods or none at all. Freedom of speech, the freedom to take the name of God in vain and to make an a graven image of all that the 2nd commandment forbids.

3 Comments to “protest follow-up”

  1. Sammy,

    Yet another attempt by the anti-God crowd to rewrite history to be something that those with the motivation to fact-check know it not to be. Like I often say, never let the facts get in the way of good rhetoric.

    In fact, only the most disingenuous of arguments would claim that the Founding Fathers did not hold at least some recognition of a sovereign God and Creator and that such a belief did not carry a great deal of influence in their motivations for creating a free and independent nation. Quite the contrary, the Founders were widely understood to be men of faith – only over time have attacks on the veracity of our heritage of “Founders as men of God” has developed such a cache with the secular humanist crowd.

    From the Declaration of Independence:

    “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.”

    Since the Declaration was developed and signed prior to the Constitution (which, as we know, was a successor document to the Articles of Confederation), it is plainly clear that a primary motivation of the Founders was the pursuit of free life as provided for our Creator God. There was never an intent to develop a secular nation – rather, the intent with respect to religion / faith was creating a nation where men were free to worship their God as they chose and not only according to the state-sponsored denomination. It’s a massive difference, and one that the secular humanists attempt to obfuscate on a regular basis.

    As with many examples of revisionist history, one need only read the documents and see for him/herself the intent – it’s there in plain English.

    “Then you will know the truth, and the truth will set you free” John 8:32 (NIV)


  2. Thank you for posting this info.

  3. sammm1777: Suggestion, use smaller text.

    Your making the mistake of thinking that religious people would not believe in the separation of church and state. Thats not true, many religious people, many Christens believe that religion and government should be separate, all you’ve shown is that many of the founding fathers were religious, and thats true, many of them were religious but that doesn’t mean they didn’t believe that church and state should be separate. They did support a separation of church ans state, that means a secular government a government who’s opinion on God, gods, religion, non-religion, theism and atheism is “I don’t know, have no opinion and don’t care”
    yes most of the founding fathers were religious, thats common knowledge but they still believed in keeping government and religion separate.

    Levander Williams: The declaration of independents is not the basis for our laws, the constitution is.

    “Then you will know the truth, and the truth will set you free” John 8:32 (NIV)

    No one can know anything, to know something, anything would require omniscients something no one can ever attain. We can not know, we can believe, have opinion and think but not know.

    With out the separation of church and state we could not have the freedoms we have. In a country with as many religious people as the U.S. does. The major religions do not recognise freedom of speech or religion. A good example are the first three cammandments

    1. Thou shalt have no other gods before me.
    2. Thou shalt not make unto thee a graven image, nor any likeness of any thing that is in heaven above, or that is in the earth beneath, or that is in the water under the earth.
    Thou shalt not bow down thyself unto them, nor serve them, for I Jehovah thy God am a jealous God, visiting the iniquity of the fathers upon the children, upon the third and upon the fourth generation of them that hate me, and showing lovingkindness unto thousands of them that love me and keep my commandments.
    3. Thou shalt not take the name of Jehovah thy God in vain; for Jehovah will not hold him guiltless that taketh his name in vain.

    Compare that too the first amendment

    Freedome of speech, religion and the press

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: