D
Dark Jedi
Guest
Already said I was wrong in my statement. Try and read and not skim.
-
After 15+ years, we've made a big change: Android Forums is now Early Bird Club. Learn more here.
Seperation of church and state?
- Thread starter Crude
- Start date
Already said I was wrong in my statement. Try and read and not skim.
Again... source please?
You keep making this claim (or changing it little by little as it's disproven over and over again.
Please cite a source, so we can deal with this once and for all?
Google sth like "hitler enabling act" or nazi reichstag enabling act"
You will see
Doesn't deal with this.
How about posting an actual source?
No, they could actually remove the Chancellor. He WASN'T the executive. He actually had very little power to accomplish anything. Hence the Reichstag fire.
The leaders of the party were jailed, the officials of the party were jailed. Thousands of people were jailed because of the "fire". They were banned, just all jailed. So, there isn't much of a distinction there.
Source please.
LaTuFu
Android Expert
Sooooo...you're saying that many of the founding fathers of the Constitution were Christians who believed in God, but were outspoken critics of the contemporary Churches of their time? Sounds amazingly similar to Jesus Christ. Most of his ministry was devoted to outspoken criticism of the Churches (and leaders) of his time. The first ten books of the New Testament are written to Churches that Jesus and his Disciples felt were "doing it wrong". Most of his harshest criticisms and fiercest opposition recorded in the Bible were against organized religion of his time.
Most people who argue against Christianity either A) Don't truly understand who Jesus Christ really was, or B) have formed all of their views of Christianity based on the Churches themselves. Unfortunately, organized religion (Be it Islam, Judaism, or Christianity) has done more to shoot itself in the collective foot than any single movement outside of it.
Dragging it back more to the original point, the bottom line is this country was founded on basic Christian principles and the roots of the Constitution are firmly rooted in the Old and New Testaments. The arguments that it isn't, and the Founding Fathers were "Godless people" is a relatively new revisionist historical attempt to blur the truth.
It is absolutely fair to say that the Founding Fathers were wary of any one organized church organization of ANY faith having a say or control over the government. They were just as wary of this as they were of a large, centralized government.
They did not intend, however, to remove the fundamental influence of Christian principles from the Constitution.
The US is a nation founded on Christian principles and based on Biblical law. Just as many ME nations base their code of law on fundamental islamic principles.
Crude
Android Expert
That's pretty good. In would like to add from a "Christian" stand point that religion has been used against people to bring about conformity. History is littered with people following the whim of their religious leader and not the religion they prescribe to. For example, people think that christans aren't supposed to drink? But if to look at the bible it no where says not to drink. And the bible even talks about wine in various places. What it does say is that you shouldn't be drunk on strong drinks....nothing about social drinking? Some how religion has thought us that smoking is a sin, piercings and tattoo's are prohibited and that no christians should ever listen to rock and roll. What is important to understand is that the bible is very specific on some things and others are left to the individual.
Religion is a lot like government. Following our leader blindly corrupts the core. The bible is a lot like our constitution. Some things are spelled out others are not. Our founding fathers knew what happens when you let religion run the place and they knew how dangerous government is to liberty. They did not want either to destroy our liberties. The difference is that they knew religion was good but wanted to give people the liberty to chose what if any religion they wanted to follow and they knew that government is a necessary evil.
That's not what I said at all. Since when did deism become Christianity?
The rest of your post is all historically inaccurate and made me laugh.
mike114
Well-Known Member
Well your argument swayed me, especially where you were able to disprove his post point by point...oh wait, you didn't.
Saying it's inaccurate doesn't make you right. I'm a big fan of Andrew Wilkow and you should heed his advice, it's not good enough to just disagree, you have to break the argument, and you failed miserably.
Crude
Android Expert
/facepalm
LaTuFu
Android Expert
I whole-heartedly agree with everything you said. The Word and teachings of Jesus Christ are so dramatically different than how most Churches interpret them. In my opinion, more harm has been done "in the name of [insert your God here]" than for any other political or cultural reason in our combined histories. I don't give Christian "leaders" any more of a pass on this point than I do Islamic or Jewish "leaders". Jesus Christ would treat them all like Pharisees just as much today as 2,000 years ago.
Many of his harshest criticisms were directed at the "law" of many of the churches. iirc, there were something like 39 different laws relating to "you can't...on the Sabbath" when Jesus Christ began his Ministry. A woman couldn't look in a mirror, because she might then attempt to "freshen up" which of course would then be "work" and violate the Sabbath. When Jesus performed the miracle at Bethesda and the man walked for the first time in 38 years, the Church Leaders condemned the man for picking up his prayer rug on the Sabbath. It was absolutely silly. But none of those rules or laws are in the Bible. They were created by men later.
Human Beings are not perfect. Whenever they attempt to "interpret" the Word and use it to tell others how to live, it usually does not end well. I make the same statement in regards to the teachings of the Koran and the Torah/Tanakh as well.
LaTuFu
Android Expert
Deism is not Christianity. Deism is the belief in a God or existence of a God. You have to take a couple of crucial extra steps to be considered a Christ follower. Its not enough to just "believe that there is a God, not really sure what or who he is about."
I was simply pointing out that the position you took regarding the Founding Fathers and their attitude towards the contemporary churches of their time is remarkably similar to the attitude that Jesus Christ had towards the churches of his time. Its not surprising you took this as historically inaccurate. Very few people, particularly people who are hostile or dismissive of Christianity, actually realize Jesus Christ was so harshly critical of the churches during his ministry. (I must admit, I am often surprised by the number of people who call themselves "Christians" who don't know this as well...) Given the sad state of our public schools and universities now, its not surprising that you've been educated to believe the Founding Fathers did not use biblical principles to guide them in the creation of the Constitution.
I appreciate the fact that you can explain your views in a mature and well thought out manner when I did not give you the same courtesy. While I disagree that the country was founded on biblical or Christian principles, perhaps I need to research the founding fathers more to get a more rounded view on the formation of our country and constitution before furthering my disagreement.
However, I would just like to point out that I know full well that deism is not Christianity, and that is the point I was trying to make the whole time. Deism is the belief that there was a creator, but that all he did was set the universe in motion and does not interact with it. Many of the notable founding fathers were deists. Beyond that, I need to do my own research and avoid confirmation bias while doing so. Thanks again for not immediately jumping to hostilities since this clearly, like all religion threads, is very volatile.
LaTuFu
Android Expert
Well, I enjoy a healthy debate and discussion. Kinda hard to have one if you attack the person taking up the other side of the argument.
I have found that when people are willing to maintain an open mind and participate in a reasonable fashion, even politics and religion can be discussed openly. Unfortunately, most forum discussions seem to follow the old lawyer's adage, "If you have the facts on your side, pound the facts. If you have the law on your side, pound the law. When you have neither, pound the table." Since many of them are attempting to engage in a battle of wits completely unarmed, they tend to pound the table frequently.
I wholeheartedly encourage you to read further on the Founding Fathers. Most were, in fact, devout Christians. Thomas Jefferson, one of the principle authors of the Constitution, was deeply religious. He was also one of the most wary of big government and big religion, so revisionist historians in the last half century or so have attempted to paint him as a Deist or Agnostic, when he was in fact, neither.
None of the Founding Fathers had any thoughts of creating a government that was lead or directed by any single (human) religious authority, any more than they wanted any one person to have absolute control over the government. They did, however, intend for the code of law to follow the basic judeo-christian principles laid out in the Bible.
Does that mean the US is a "Christian" nation? Perhaps not, but I am very willing to say that our Country and our Government did a much better job of managing its affairs when it held itself to these principles. Once the "Godless" beliefs started creeping in, the decay of our nation began.
My personal belief is that most people that insist on "separation of Church and State" are simply wanting to make sure that no one form of religion has any control of the Government. (i.e. "5th Street Baptist Church" controls the Supreme Court or Congress) but they do want to know that our code of laws are largely based on Christianity.
Lastly, I did not mean to imply that you did not know what "Deism" meant. I was re-stating it in my comments to clarify what my understanding of the definition was.
LaTuFu
Android Expert
Based on the things I've read about him, in the Bible, and in commentary, He won't have much of a sense of humor about it.
hakr100
Android Expert
I wonder if he would start with:
"What gave you morons the idea to start up a 'new' religion in my name? I came into this world as a Jew, I lived as a Jew, and I died as a Jew. If it was good enough for me, why isn't it good enough for you?"
One aspect of Jesus I've never understood is the absolute lack of writings in his own hand. Jesus certainly was literate and with his alleged supernatural ancestry, writing in Aramaic, Hebrew, or Latin would have been an easy task. Yet...there is nothing.
LaTuFu
Android Expert
No, he wouldn't. He was not a Jew, he was the Son of God. He was raised in a Jewish family and followed Jewish customs in his childhood, but He did not see himself as anything other than the Son. He constantly implored the Jews to listen to him and realize that He was the one Moses wrote about and foretold of His coming. That ruffled a lot of feathers within the Church leadership of the day, because it forced them to backtrack on some of their beliefs and values. So, in typical short-sighted human fashion, they maneuvered to have him killed, thinking that would solve the problem.I wonder if he would start with:
"What gave you morons the idea to start up a 'new' religion in my name? I came into this world as a Jew, I lived as a Jew, and I died as a Jew. If it was good enough for me, why isn't it good enough for you?"
One aspect of Jesus I've never understood is the absolute lack of writings in his own hand. Jesus certainly was literate and with his alleged supernatural ancestry, writing in Aramaic, Hebrew, or Latin would have been an easy task. Yet...there is nothing.
On this note, I definitely have to say "way above my pay grade" to answer. My own opinion, based on what has been written about Him, is that he did not want anything written in His own hand. He wanted his disciples to spread the teachings. "Become fishers of men" and all that...
hakr100
Android Expert
Well, we certainly differ on that point. Everything I have read about Jesus indicated he was an itinerant rabbi, Jewish, and a teacher/interpreter of Judaism. And to what "Church" are you referring in your post?
D
Dark Jedi
Guest
No he died a baptist. As he was baptized by John the Baptist .I wonder if he would start with:
"What gave you morons the idea to start up a 'new' religion in my name? I came into this world as a Jew, I lived as a Jew, and I died as a Jew. If it was good enough for me, why isn't it good enough for you?"
One aspect of Jesus I've never understood is the absolute lack of writings in his own hand. Jesus certainly was literate and with his alleged supernatural ancestry, writing in Aramaic, Hebrew, or Latin would have been an easy task. Yet...there is nothing.
LaTuFu
Android Expert
I will not confess to be an expert on Jesus Christ. I can only speak/write from what I know and have read on my own and in study groups.
Jesus himself never described himself as anything other than the Son. Those around him who listened to him, approached him, spoke with him, etc. referred to him as "Rabbi" "Teacher" and so forth.
The "church" I refer to in my comments is the religious organization of his time. Whether they referred to it in their time as a Church, Tabernacle, Synagogue, Temple, they are all essentially the same body. Jesus viewed the Church to be the collective followers of God and the Son. It did not represent a specific building or piece of ground in his eyes.
hakr100
Android Expert
Bob Maxey
Android Expert
I forgot about Festivis, although Kwanzaa is a totally fake "holiday."
So, to greet all members of this list, no matter from where they hail . . .
Afrikander - "Een Plesierige Kerfees"
Arabic - "I'd Miilad Said Oua Sana Saida"
Argentine - "Felices Pasquas Y felices ano Nuevo"
Armenian - "Shenoraavor Nor Dari yev Pari Gaghand"
Basque - Eguberri on
Bohemian - "Vesele Vanoce"
Breton - "Nedeleg laouen na bloavezh mat"
Bulgarian - "Tchestita Koleda; Tchestito Rojdestvo Hristovo"
Chinese - [Mandarin] - "Kung His Hsin Nien bing Chu Shen Tan"
Chinese - [Catonese] - "Saint Dan Fai Lok"
Cornish - "Nadelik looan na looan blethen noweth"
Croatian - "Sretan Bozic i Nova Godina" (Merry Christmas & Happy New Year)
Czech - "Prejeme Vam Vesele Vanoce a stastny Novy Rok"
Danish - "Gl
hakr100
Android Expert
A totally "fake" holiday? Because it is a celebration of black culture? Because black people shouldn't have a holiday to celebrate their heritage? Nonsense. Frankly, I wish more blacks would push the issue of a true national Emancipation Day celebration, to formally remember all the generations of slavery in this country forced upon blacks by whites.
LaTuFu
Android Expert
Why? What purpose will it serve? How will it help move the country forward in a positive direction?
One of the major reasons this country is tearing itself apart at the seams now is because no one wants to be "American" any more. Everybody wants to be a hyphenated American.
It used to be, when you emigrated to the US, you learned the language and the culture and you became a part of the community. Sure, you may have lived in a "little italy" or "chinatown" and maintained significant portions of your heritage, but you saw yourself as an American and you celebrated that opportunity.
Now everyone wants the government to apologize to them for something that never happened to them in their lives, give them a check for the rest of their life, and take offense to anything that doesn't respect the hyphen.
We're all Americans. As the great John Winger once said: "The hell's the matter with you? Stupid! We're all very different people. We're not Watusi. We're not Spartans. We're Americans, with a capital 'A', huh? You know what that means? Do ya? That means that our forefathers were kicked out of every decent country in the world. We are the wretched refuse. We're the underdog. We're mutts!"
Let's get back to celebrating the fact that we're Americans, and celebrate the fact that today, we're all blessed to have freedoms that people in other countries would die to obtain. We may not have these freedoms much longer.
And yes, Kwanzaa is a totally fake holiday. Christmas is too, for that matter. Its no longer celebrated for the purpose in which it was created. Its a retail industry mechanism to drive revenue, nothing more. About the only "true" holidays I see observed in my community these days are Passover and Ramadan.