| Topic: |
Religions > Atheism |
| User: |
"Sharon" |
| Date: |
24 Dec 2004 03:20:04 PM |
| Object: |
"A LETTER FROM PAUL HARVEY" |
Sharon: This email was passed along to me. Found it interesting
----- Original Message -----
From: "Kevin"
Date: Fri, 24 Dec 2004 09:10:42 -0800
Hi everyone,
A letter I sent to a number of family members this morning, in response
to the rant/letter from "Paul Harvey" below.
.....
Sincerely,
Kevin
-----Forwarded Message-----
From: Kevin
Date: Fri, 24 Dec 2004 08:48:18 -0800
Dear Grandma, et. al,
I seriously doubt Paul Harvey wrote this letter.
The writer asks, "What's the big deal" with an ideal of Christian
religious purity?
In February of 1844, the city of Philadelphia experienced bloody riots
over which Bible to use to instruct school-children. The Catholics
wanted the Douay version; the Protestants wanted King James. Over the
years, ethnic and religious tensions mounted, and finally violence broke
out. "[R]ampaging mobs of Roman Catholics and Protestants shot,
clubbed, and otherwise attacked one another in what was known as the
"Philadelphia Bible Riots."" "[S]even dead on site with two more to die
later, and at least 20 wounded. Property damage totaled $250,000, big
money in the 1840's."
http://members.tripod.com/~candst/boston3.htm
The battles over religion almost always occur between members of faith,
not between the secular and the religious. Note the colonial practice
by establishment Christians of hanging Quakers because they wanted to
convert others to their faith within the commonwealth of Massachusetts.
The fifth commandment, "Thou shalt not kill," was overlooked in favor of
religious purity.
I ask instead, "What's the alternative to an ideal of Christian
religious purity?"
Religious liberty. The acceptance of everyones' right to religious
freedom of conscience.
This is not Jerusalem, Baghdad, or Beijing. This is America. The
writer below just doesn't get it.
The writer argues for mob rule with respect to religion. I.e., our side
is bigger than your side; our side has more churches; so suck it up and
prepare to get your face shoved in the snow. No. That's wrong. Our
Constitution explicitly protects the rights of the minority from the
majority in just these types of situations.
This is not the Soviet Union, where everyone has to atheistically pure.
This is America. The writer below just doesn't get it.
America was founded on Enlightenment principles of empathy, fairness,
equality, and responsibility. Instead of a divine Christian king, our
governing document, the Constitution, contains no reference to
Christianity or God. It explicitly rejects religious tests for public
office. The Bill of Rights' Establishment Clause forever separated
religion from government.
Founders James Madison, John Adams, Thomas Jefferson, George Washington,
Benjamin Franklin, were Deists, believers in an impersonal Creator no
longer interacting with the universe. I.e., not Christian. So was
Abraham Lincoln.
Religious purity only interests those so insecure in their faith that
they think 30-second football prayers and "Merry Christmas" instead of
"Happy Holidays" really make a difference. As Benjamin Franklin put it:
"When a Religion is good, I conceive it will support itself; and when it
does not support itself, and God does not take care to support it so
that its Professors are obliged to call for help of the Civil Power, it
is a sign, I apprehend, of its being a bad one." - Benjamin Franklin
(from a letter to Richard Price, October 9, 1780;)
Religious purity has never been the ideal of our government nor of our
Constitution. Those on the radical religious right just want you to
believe that.
Happy Holidays, Merry Christmas, who cares. Show a little love and
kindness to your fellow community members. I think that's what Jesus
was getting at.
Kevin
On Fri, 2004-12-24 at 07:17, Millie wrote:
----- Original Message ----- From: To:
Cc: Sent: Friday, December 24, 2004 12:10 AM
A LETTER FROM PAUL HARVEY
Paul Harvey says: -"I don't believe in Santa Claus, but I'm not >> going
to > sue
somebody for singing a Ho-Ho-Ho song in December. I don't agree
with > Darwin,
but I didn't go out and hire a lawyer when my high school
teacher taught > his
theory of evolution.
Life, liberty or your pursuit of happiness will not be endangered
because
someone says a 30-second prayer before a football game.
So what's the big deal? It's not like somebody is up there reading the
entire book of Acts. They're just talking to a God they believe in and
asking him to grant safety to the players on the field and the fans
going
home from the game.
"But it's a Christian prayer," some will argue. Yes, and this
is the > United
States of America, a country founded on Christian principles.
According to
our very own phone book, Christian churches outnumber all
others better > than
200-to-1. So what would you expect-somebody chanting Hare
Krishna? If I > went
to a football game in Jerusalem, I would expect to hear a Jewish
prayer.
If I went to a soccer game in Baghdad, I would expect to hear a Muslim
prayer. If I went to a ping pong match in China, I would expect to
hear
someone pray to Buddha. And I wouldn't be offended. It wouldn't bother
me
one bit. When in Rome..
"But what about the atheists?" is another argument. What about
them? > Nobody
is asking them to be baptized.. We're not going to pass the collection
plate. Just humor us for 30 seconds.. If that's asking too much, bring
a
Walkman or a pair of ear plugs. Go to the bathroom. Visit the
concession
stand. Call your lawyer! Unfortunately, one or two will make
that call. > One
or two will tell thousands what they can and cannot do. I don't think
a
short prayer at a football game is going to shake the world's
foundations.
Christians are just sick and tired of turning the other cheek while
our
courts strip us of all our rights. Our parents and grandparents
taught us > to
pray before eating, to pray before we go to sleep.
Our Bible tells us to pray without ceasing. Now a handful of people
and
their lawyers are telling us to cease praying. God, help us. And if
that
last sentence offends you, well..........just sue me.
The silent majority has been silent too long.. it's time we let
that one > or
two who scream loud enough to be heard, that the vast majority don't
care
what they want.. it is time the majority rules! It's time we
tell them, > you
don't have to pray.. you don't have to say the pledge of allegiance,
you
don't have to believe in God or attend services that honor Him.
That is > your
right, and we will honor your right.. but by golly, you are no
longer > going
to take our rights away . we are fighting back.. and we WILL WIN!
God bless us one and all, especially those who denounce Him... God
bless
America, despite all her faults, she is still the greatest nation of
all.....
God bless our service men who are fighting to protect our right
to pray > and
worship God...
May 2005 be the year the silent majority is heard and we put
God back as > the
foundation of our families and institutions.
Keep looking up..... In God WE Trust. If you agree with this,
please > p.a.s.s
it on. If not, delete.
.
|
|
| User: "Les Hellawell" |
|
| Title: Re: "A LETTER FROM PAUL HARVEY" |
25 Dec 2004 03:20:41 AM |
|
|
On Fri, 24 Dec 2004 21:20:04 +0000 (UTC), "Sharon"
<mail@creation-vs-evolution.us> wrote:
Sharon: This email was passed along to me. Found it interesting
----- Original Message -----
From: "Kevin"
Date: Fri, 24 Dec 2004 09:10:42 -0800
Hi everyone,
A letter I sent to a number of family members this morning, in response
to the rant/letter from "Paul Harvey" below.
....
Sincerely,
Kevin
-----Forwarded Message-----
From: Kevin
Date: Fri, 24 Dec 2004 08:48:18 -0800
Dear Grandma, et. al,
I seriously doubt Paul Harvey wrote this letter.
The writer asks, "What's the big deal" with an ideal of Christian
religious purity?
In February of 1844, the city of Philadelphia experienced bloody riots
over which Bible to use to instruct school-children. The Catholics
wanted the Douay version; the Protestants wanted King James. Over the
years, ethnic and religious tensions mounted, and finally violence broke
out. "[R]ampaging mobs of Roman Catholics and Protestants shot,
clubbed, and otherwise attacked one another in what was known as the
"Philadelphia Bible Riots."" "[S]even dead on site with two more to die
later, and at least 20 wounded. Property damage totaled $250,000, big
money in the 1840's."
http://members.tripod.com/~candst/boston3.htm
The battles over religion almost always occur between members of faith,
not between the secular and the religious. Note the colonial practice
by establishment Christians of hanging Quakers because they wanted to
convert others to their faith within the commonwealth of Massachusetts.
The fifth commandment, "Thou shalt not kill," was overlooked in favor of
religious purity.
I ask instead, "What's the alternative to an ideal of Christian
religious purity?"
Religious liberty. The acceptance of everyones' right to religious
freedom of conscience.
Only a right to religious liberty?
--
Les Hellawell
greetings from
YORKSHIRE - The White Rose County
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Pastor Dave" |
|
| Title: Re: "A LETTER FROM PAUL HARVEY" |
25 Dec 2004 05:00:47 AM |
|
|
On Fri, 24 Dec 2004 21:20:04 +0000 (UTC), while scaling
the Mt. Everest, "Sharon"
<mail@creation-vs-evolution.us> pontificated:
Founders James Madison, John Adams, Thomas Jefferson, George Washington,
Benjamin Franklin, were Deists, believers in an impersonal Creator no
longer interacting with the universe. I.e., not Christian. So was
Abraham Lincoln.
Impersonal? Is that why the Declaration of
Independence claims that out rights are granted by our
Creator?
Religious purity only interests those so insecure in their faith that
they think 30-second football prayers and "Merry Christmas" instead of
"Happy Holidays" really make a difference. As Benjamin Franklin put it:
Wrong. Purity is a commendable attribute.
--
Pastor Dave Raymond
"I have more understanding than all my teachers:
for thy testimonies are my meditation." - Psalm 119:99
/
o{}xxxxx[]::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::>
\
"And take the helmet of salvation, and the sword of
the Spirit, which is the word of God:" - Ephesians 6:17
.
|
|
|
| User: "R. Baldwin" |
|
| Title: Re: "A LETTER FROM PAUL HARVEY" |
25 Dec 2004 05:59:19 PM |
|
|
"Pastor Dave" <newsgroupmail@nospam-tampabay.rr.com> wrote in message
news:v1jqs0d3maslvbp0u6nao92d7c6qv4d8gf@4ax.com...
On Fri, 24 Dec 2004 21:20:04 +0000 (UTC), while scaling
the Mt. Everest, "Sharon"
<mail@creation-vs-evolution.us> pontificated:
Founders James Madison, John Adams, Thomas Jefferson, George Washington,
Benjamin Franklin, were Deists, believers in an impersonal Creator no
longer interacting with the universe. I.e., not Christian. So was
Abraham Lincoln.
Impersonal? Is that why the Declaration of
Independence claims that out rights are granted by our
Creator?
In fact, it is.
Thomas Jefferson, the principal author of the Declaration of Independence,
more than once wrote against the divinity of Jesus, and even wrote his own
version of the Gospels as he conceived they ought to have been written.
Jefferson activly worked to end the state establishment of religion in
Virginia. He was charged by his critics of being an Atheist, which wasn't
exactly true, but he certainly wasn't a believer in the Holy Trinity.
John Adams, one of the members of the committee charged with writing the
Declaration, played a key role in moving conservative Massachuesetts toward
religious freedom. While in Congress he sampled a variety of congregations.
Adams seems to have kept more traditional views on Religion than Jefferson,
but he did write against the superstitious nature of 18th and early 19th
century religion.
Franklin, the senior member of the committee, lived a long life and began
writing for the public when he was a teenager. As a youth he had run away
from the strict Puritans of Cotton Mather's Boston. His views on religion
changed over the years, and were sometimes colored by the false personae of
his pseuodonyms, but it is pretty clear he was at most indifferent to
Christianity.
[snip]
.
|
|
|
| User: "John Ings" |
|
| Title: Re: "A LETTER FROM PAUL HARVEY" |
25 Dec 2004 07:04:58 PM |
|
|
On Sat, 25 Dec 2004 23:59:19 +0000 (UTC), "R. Baldwin"
<res0k7yx@nozirevBACKWARDS.net> wrote:
Founders James Madison, John Adams, Thomas Jefferson, George Washington,
Benjamin Franklin, were Deists, believers in an impersonal Creator no
longer interacting with the universe. I.e., not Christian. So was
Abraham Lincoln.
Impersonal? Is that why the Declaration of
Independence claims that out rights are granted by our
Creator?
In fact, it is.
Thomas Jefferson, the principal author of the Declaration of Independence,
To say nothing of Thomas Paine, who wrote the first draft, and who
damn sure wasn't a Christian.
John Adams,
A Unitarian
## The Constitution was made to guard people against good intentions.
Daniel Webster
.
|
|
|
| User: "Michelle Malkin" |
|
| Title: Re: "A LETTER FROM PAUL HARVEY" |
25 Dec 2004 08:15:40 PM |
|
|
"John Ings" <nodamned@spam.org> wrote in message
news:ob4ss0lt1vj447jfvu1j36p827cea0mnnj@4ax.com...
On Sat, 25 Dec 2004 23:59:19 +0000 (UTC), "R. Baldwin"
<res0k7yx@nozirevBACKWARDS.net> wrote:
Founders James Madison, John Adams, Thomas Jefferson, George
Washington,
Benjamin Franklin, were Deists, believers in an impersonal Creator no
longer interacting with the universe. I.e., not Christian. So was
Abraham Lincoln.
Impersonal? Is that why the Declaration of
Independence claims that out rights are granted by our
Creator?
In fact, it is.
Thomas Jefferson, the principal author of the Declaration of
Independence,
To say nothing of Thomas Paine, who wrote the first draft, and who
damn sure wasn't a Christian.
Considering that Thomas Paine was not a member representative, how did he
manage to write the first draft?
John Adams,
A Unitarian
## The Constitution was made to guard people against good intentions.
Daniel Webster
.
|
|
|
| User: "Double Felix" |
|
| Title: Re: "A LETTER FROM PAUL HARVEY" |
25 Dec 2004 09:09:45 PM |
|
|
In article <JbOdnQEawNWLvlPcRVn-iw@comcast.com>,
"Michelle Malkin" <hypatiab7@comcast.net> wrote:
"John Ings" <nodamned@spam.org> wrote in message
news:ob4ss0lt1vj447jfvu1j36p827cea0mnnj@4ax.com...
On Sat, 25 Dec 2004 23:59:19 +0000 (UTC), "R. Baldwin"
<res0k7yx@nozirevBACKWARDS.net> wrote:
Founders James Madison, John Adams, Thomas Jefferson, George
Washington,
Benjamin Franklin, were Deists, believers in an impersonal Creator no
longer interacting with the universe. I.e., not Christian. So was
Abraham Lincoln.
Impersonal? Is that why the Declaration of
Independence claims that out rights are granted by our
Creator?
In fact, it is.
Thomas Jefferson, the principal author of the Declaration of
Independence,
To say nothing of Thomas Paine, who wrote the first draft, and who
damn sure wasn't a Christian.
Considering that Thomas Paine was not a member representative, how did he
manage to write the first draft?
He didn't. At least, that's the first time I've heard this claim. The
authors of the declaration were certainly influenced by Paine, though;
particularly by "Common Sense," IIRC.
- Felix
John Adams,
A Unitarian
## The Constitution was made to guard people against good intentions.
Daniel Webster
.
|
|
|
| User: "R. Baldwin" |
|
| Title: Re: "A LETTER FROM PAUL HARVEY" |
25 Dec 2004 09:39:28 PM |
|
|
"Double Felix" <nick@SKIPTHESECAPSbackpack.com> wrote in message
news:nick-091A76.19272225122004@news.west.cox.net...
In article <JbOdnQEawNWLvlPcRVn-iw@comcast.com>,
"Michelle Malkin" <hypatiab7@comcast.net> wrote:
"John Ings" <nodamned@spam.org> wrote in message
news:ob4ss0lt1vj447jfvu1j36p827cea0mnnj@4ax.com...
On Sat, 25 Dec 2004 23:59:19 +0000 (UTC), "R. Baldwin"
<res0k7yx@nozirevBACKWARDS.net> wrote:
Founders James Madison, John Adams, Thomas Jefferson, George
Washington,
Benjamin Franklin, were Deists, believers in an impersonal Creator
no
longer interacting with the universe. I.e., not Christian. So was
Abraham Lincoln.
Impersonal? Is that why the Declaration of
Independence claims that out rights are granted by our
Creator?
In fact, it is.
Thomas Jefferson, the principal author of the Declaration of
Independence,
To say nothing of Thomas Paine, who wrote the first draft, and who
damn sure wasn't a Christian.
Considering that Thomas Paine was not a member representative, how did he
manage to write the first draft?
He didn't. At least, that's the first time I've heard this claim. The
authors of the declaration were certainly influenced by Paine, though;
particularly by "Common Sense," IIRC.
The first draft was written by Thomas Jefferson on his lap desk in his
rented room in Philadelphia.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Nantko Schanssema" |
|
| Title: Re: "A LETTER FROM PAUL HARVEY" |
26 Dec 2004 03:12:23 AM |
|
|
"R. Baldwin" <res0k7yx@nozirevBACKWARDS.net>:
"Double Felix" <nick@SKIPTHESECAPSbackpack.com> wrote in message
news:nick-091A76.19272225122004@news.west.cox.net...
In article <JbOdnQEawNWLvlPcRVn-iw@comcast.com>,
"Michelle Malkin" <hypatiab7@comcast.net> wrote:
"John Ings" <nodamned@spam.org> wrote in message
news:ob4ss0lt1vj447jfvu1j36p827cea0mnnj@4ax.com...
On Sat, 25 Dec 2004 23:59:19 +0000 (UTC), "R. Baldwin"
<res0k7yx@nozirevBACKWARDS.net> wrote:
Founders James Madison, John Adams, Thomas Jefferson, George
Washington,
Benjamin Franklin, were Deists, believers in an impersonal Creator
no
longer interacting with the universe. I.e., not Christian. So was
Abraham Lincoln.
Impersonal? Is that why the Declaration of
Independence claims that out rights are granted by our
Creator?
In fact, it is.
Thomas Jefferson, the principal author of the Declaration of
Independence,
To say nothing of Thomas Paine, who wrote the first draft, and who
damn sure wasn't a Christian.
Considering that Thomas Paine was not a member representative, how did he
manage to write the first draft?
He didn't. At least, that's the first time I've heard this claim. The
authors of the declaration were certainly influenced by Paine, though;
particularly by "Common Sense," IIRC.
The first draft was written by Thomas Jefferson on his lap desk in his
rented room in Philadelphia.
Let me guess: Thomas Paine and several other lurkers supported
Jefferson in snail-mail.
regards,
Nantko
--
The invisible and the nonexistent look very much alike. (Delos McKown)
http://www.xs4all.nl/~nantko/
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "John Ings" |
|
| Title: Re: "A LETTER FROM PAUL HARVEY" |
26 Dec 2004 06:26:06 AM |
|
|
On Sun, 26 Dec 2004 02:15:40 +0000 (UTC), "Michelle Malkin"
<hypatiab7@comcast.net> wrote:
Thomas Jefferson, the principal author of the Declaration of
Independence,
To say nothing of Thomas Paine, who wrote the first draft, and who
damn sure wasn't a Christian.
Considering that Thomas Paine was not a member representative, how did he
manage to write the first draft?
"Thomas Jefferson has always been credited with having written the
Declaration of Independence but evidence now available reveals that
Thomas Paine produced the draft for this document. In Common Sense he
argues that a manifesto be published which could be sent to other
nations and would tell why America was forced to break ties with
Britain. The causes which impel the separation are proclaimed in
Common Sense.
"On 11th June 1776 Congress voted for such a document. A committee of
five was appointed but at the last moment one was obliged to answer a
call to his home and Jefferson took his place. Paine produced a draft,
of which the John Adams' family still retains a copy.
"This carries a clause to end slavery and this clause was omitted from
the Declaration. Had it been included, the Civil War, ninety years
later, would not have been fought. Why was this clause significant?
Because slavery appalled Paine but Jefferson, at his death, still
owned 200 slaves and any draft from him would not have included this
clause.
"The phrasing in the draft and the peculiar use of capitals and the
spelling of words brand it to be the work of Thomas Paine. It was
condensed, mutilated and then submitted to Congress by the chairman of
the Committee, Thomas Jefferson. It is far easier to modify a draft on
hand than to start with blank paper and, in twenty days, produce such
a Declaration of Independence.
"It was typical of the integrity of Paine that he never openly claimed
the credit, although it was hinted."
http://www.atheistfoundation.org.au/thomaspaine.htm
http://www.positiveatheism.org/hist/lewis/lewis02.htm
## No falsehood is so fatal as that which is made an article of faith
Thomas Paine
.
|
|
|
| User: "R. Baldwin" |
|
| Title: Re: "A LETTER FROM PAUL HARVEY" |
26 Dec 2004 11:31:55 AM |
|
|
"John Ings" <nodamned@spam.org> wrote in message
news:8hcts054h9imbrte0jrpk6njqq2vjhoqc6@4ax.com...
On Sun, 26 Dec 2004 02:15:40 +0000 (UTC), "Michelle Malkin"
<hypatiab7@comcast.net> wrote:
Thomas Jefferson, the principal author of the Declaration of
Independence,
To say nothing of Thomas Paine, who wrote the first draft, and who
damn sure wasn't a Christian.
Considering that Thomas Paine was not a member representative, how did he
manage to write the first draft?
"Thomas Jefferson has always been credited with having written the
Declaration of Independence but evidence now available reveals that
Thomas Paine produced the draft for this document. In Common Sense he
argues that a manifesto be published which could be sent to other
nations and would tell why America was forced to break ties with
Britain. The causes which impel the separation are proclaimed in
Common Sense.
"On 11th June 1776 Congress voted for such a document. A committee of
five was appointed but at the last moment one was obliged to answer a
call to his home and Jefferson took his place. Paine produced a draft,
of which the John Adams' family still retains a copy.
"This carries a clause to end slavery and this clause was omitted from
the Declaration. Had it been included, the Civil War, ninety years
later, would not have been fought. Why was this clause significant?
Because slavery appalled Paine but Jefferson, at his death, still
owned 200 slaves and any draft from him would not have included this
clause.
Jefferson also hated slavery, and his draft Declaration did include a clause
excoriating the King for allowing slavery.
http://www.ushistory.org/declaration/document/rough.htm
It was struck by the convention during the editing, while Jefferson watched
aghast and Franklin consoled him.
In any case, though the draft Declaration included the complaint about
England's role in slavery, it would not have been the proper document for a
clause ending slavery. It was intended to lay forth the reasons for
Independence, not regulate the behavior of the States.
Jefferson wrote against slavery a number of times, but he also knew that the
fragile Union would not survive a debate on the subject so he did put much
effort into ending it.
"The phrasing in the draft and the peculiar use of capitals and the
spelling of words brand it to be the work of Thomas Paine. It was
condensed, mutilated and then submitted to Congress by the chairman of
the Committee, Thomas Jefferson. It is far easier to modify a draft on
hand than to start with blank paper and, in twenty days, produce such
a Declaration of Independence.
What research backs up this assertion? And why wouldn't a person of
Jefferson's obvious intellect be capable of drafting a one-page document in
20 days?
"It was typical of the integrity of Paine that he never openly claimed
the credit, although it was hinted."
http://www.atheistfoundation.org.au/thomaspaine.htm
http://www.positiveatheism.org/hist/lewis/lewis02.htm
## No falsehood is so fatal as that which is made an article of faith
Thomas Paine
.
|
|
|
| User: "catshark" |
|
| Title: Re: "A LETTER FROM PAUL HARVEY" |
26 Dec 2004 05:44:12 PM |
|
|
On Sun, 26 Dec 2004 17:31:55 +0000 (UTC), "R. Baldwin"
<res0k7yx@nozirevBACKWARDS.net> wrote:
[...]
"This carries a clause to end slavery and this clause was omitted from
the Declaration. Had it been included, the Civil War, ninety years
later, would not have been fought. Why was this clause significant?
Because slavery appalled Paine but Jefferson, at his death, still
owned 200 slaves and any draft from him would not have included this
clause.
Jefferson also hated slavery, and his draft Declaration did include a clause
excoriating the King for allowing slavery.
http://www.ushistory.org/declaration/document/rough.htm
It was struck by the convention during the editing, while Jefferson watched
aghast and Franklin consoled him.
In any case, though the draft Declaration included the complaint about
England's role in slavery, it would not have been the proper document for a
clause ending slavery. It was intended to lay forth the reasons for
Independence, not regulate the behavior of the States.
Perhaps more importantly, neither the Articles of Confederation nor the
Constitution would have been ratified if there had been a prohibition of
slavery in it. The only sense in which an early fight over slavery would
have prevented the Civil War (opps, the War Between the States) is that
there would have been no United States to fight a civil war in.
Jefferson wrote against slavery a number of times, but he also knew that the
fragile Union would not survive a debate on the subject so he did put much
effort into ending it.
Um . . . "did *not* put much effort . . ."?
--
---------------
J. Pieret
---------------
In the name of the bee
And of the butterfly
And of the breeze, amen
- Emily Dickinson -
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Pastor Dave" |
|
| Title: Re: "A LETTER FROM PAUL HARVEY" |
25 Dec 2004 07:51:31 PM |
|
|
On Sat, 25 Dec 2004 23:59:19 +0000 (UTC), while scaling
the Mt. Everest, "R. Baldwin"
<res0k7yx@nozirevBACKWARDS.net> pontificated:
"Pastor Dave" <newsgroupmail@nospam-tampabay.rr.com> wrote in message
news:v1jqs0d3maslvbp0u6nao92d7c6qv4d8gf@4ax.com...
On Fri, 24 Dec 2004 21:20:04 +0000 (UTC), while scaling
the Mt. Everest, "Sharon"
<mail@creation-vs-evolution.us> pontificated:
Founders James Madison, John Adams, Thomas Jefferson, George Washington,
Benjamin Franklin, were Deists, believers in an impersonal Creator no
longer interacting with the universe. I.e., not Christian. So was
Abraham Lincoln.
Impersonal? Is that why the Declaration of
Independence claims that out rights are granted by our
Creator?
In fact, it is.
Thomas Jefferson, the principal author of the Declaration of Independence,
more than once wrote against the divinity of Jesus, and even wrote his own
version of the Gospels as he conceived they ought to have been written.
Jefferson activly worked to end the state establishment of religion in
Virginia. He was charged by his critics of being an Atheist, which wasn't
exactly true, but he certainly wasn't a believer in the Holy Trinity.
John Adams, one of the members of the committee charged with writing the
Declaration, played a key role in moving conservative Massachuesetts toward
religious freedom. While in Congress he sampled a variety of congregations.
Adams seems to have kept more traditional views on Religion than Jefferson,
but he did write against the superstitious nature of 18th and early 19th
century religion.
Franklin, the senior member of the committee, lived a long life and began
writing for the public when he was a teenager. As a youth he had run away
from the strict Puritans of Cotton Mather's Boston. His views on religion
changed over the years, and were sometimes colored by the false personae of
his pseuodonyms, but it is pretty clear he was at most indifferent to
Christianity.
[snip]
Now that you have made your speech, what does it have
to do with the fact that what I said is true?
--
Pastor Dave Raymond
"I have more understanding than all my teachers:
for thy testimonies are my meditation." - Psalm 119:99
/
o{}xxxxx[]::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::>
\
"And take the helmet of salvation, and the sword of
the Spirit, which is the word of God:" - Ephesians 6:17
.
|
|
|
| User: "R. Baldwin" |
|
| Title: Re: "A LETTER FROM PAUL HARVEY" |
25 Dec 2004 08:25:07 PM |
|
|
"Pastor Dave" <newsgroupmail@nospam-tampabay.rr.com> wrote in message
news:ta7ss0h8ls44c4eu384qtlh4fpq7upqh3j@4ax.com...
On Sat, 25 Dec 2004 23:59:19 +0000 (UTC), while scaling
the Mt. Everest, "R. Baldwin"
<res0k7yx@nozirevBACKWARDS.net> pontificated:
"Pastor Dave" <newsgroupmail@nospam-tampabay.rr.com> wrote in message
news:v1jqs0d3maslvbp0u6nao92d7c6qv4d8gf@4ax.com...
On Fri, 24 Dec 2004 21:20:04 +0000 (UTC), while scaling
the Mt. Everest, "Sharon"
<mail@creation-vs-evolution.us> pontificated:
Founders James Madison, John Adams, Thomas Jefferson, George
Washington,
Benjamin Franklin, were Deists, believers in an impersonal Creator no
longer interacting with the universe. I.e., not Christian. So was
Abraham Lincoln.
Impersonal? Is that why the Declaration of
Independence claims that out rights are granted by our
Creator?
In fact, it is.
Thomas Jefferson, the principal author of the Declaration of Independence,
more than once wrote against the divinity of Jesus, and even wrote his own
version of the Gospels as he conceived they ought to have been written.
Jefferson activly worked to end the state establishment of religion in
Virginia. He was charged by his critics of being an Atheist, which wasn't
exactly true, but he certainly wasn't a believer in the Holy Trinity.
John Adams, one of the members of the committee charged with writing the
Declaration, played a key role in moving conservative Massachuesetts
toward
religious freedom. While in Congress he sampled a variety of
congregations.
Adams seems to have kept more traditional views on Religion than
Jefferson,
but he did write against the superstitious nature of 18th and early 19th
century religion.
Franklin, the senior member of the committee, lived a long life and began
writing for the public when he was a teenager. As a youth he had run away
from the strict Puritans of Cotton Mather's Boston. His views on religion
changed over the years, and were sometimes colored by the false personae
of
his pseuodonyms, but it is pretty clear he was at most indifferent to
Christianity.
[snip]
Now that you have made your speech, what does it have
to do with the fact that what I said is true?
You'll have to refresh my memory. I thought I was answering your question.
What truth did you state?
.
|
|
|
| User: "Pastor Dave" |
|
| Title: Re: "A LETTER FROM PAUL HARVEY" |
25 Dec 2004 08:41:53 PM |
|
|
On Sun, 26 Dec 2004 02:25:07 +0000 (UTC), while scaling
the Mt. Everest, "R. Baldwin"
<res0k7yx@nozirevBACKWARDS.net> pontificated:
"Pastor Dave" <newsgroupmail@nospam-tampabay.rr.com> wrote in message
news:ta7ss0h8ls44c4eu384qtlh4fpq7upqh3j@4ax.com...
On Sat, 25 Dec 2004 23:59:19 +0000 (UTC), while scaling
the Mt. Everest, "R. Baldwin"
<res0k7yx@nozirevBACKWARDS.net> pontificated:
"Pastor Dave" <newsgroupmail@nospam-tampabay.rr.com> wrote in message
news:v1jqs0d3maslvbp0u6nao92d7c6qv4d8gf@4ax.com...
On Fri, 24 Dec 2004 21:20:04 +0000 (UTC), while scaling
the Mt. Everest, "Sharon"
<mail@creation-vs-evolution.us> pontificated:
Founders James Madison, John Adams, Thomas Jefferson, George
Washington,
Benjamin Franklin, were Deists, believers in an impersonal Creator no
longer interacting with the universe. I.e., not Christian. So was
Abraham Lincoln.
Impersonal? Is that why the Declaration of
Independence claims that out rights are granted by our
Creator?
In fact, it is.
Thomas Jefferson, the principal author of the Declaration of Independence,
more than once wrote against the divinity of Jesus, and even wrote his own
version of the Gospels as he conceived they ought to have been written.
Jefferson activly worked to end the state establishment of religion in
Virginia. He was charged by his critics of being an Atheist, which wasn't
exactly true, but he certainly wasn't a believer in the Holy Trinity.
John Adams, one of the members of the committee charged with writing the
Declaration, played a key role in moving conservative Massachuesetts
toward
religious freedom. While in Congress he sampled a variety of
congregations.
Adams seems to have kept more traditional views on Religion than
Jefferson,
but he did write against the superstitious nature of 18th and early 19th
century religion.
Franklin, the senior member of the committee, lived a long life and began
writing for the public when he was a teenager. As a youth he had run away
from the strict Puritans of Cotton Mather's Boston. His views on religion
changed over the years, and were sometimes colored by the false personae
of
his pseuodonyms, but it is pretty clear he was at most indifferent to
Christianity.
[snip]
Now that you have made your speech, what does it have
to do with the fact that what I said is true?
You'll have to refresh my memory. I thought I was answering your question.
What truth did you state?
To sum it up, the Creator is not impersonal, because
our rights are endowed by said Creator. If our Creator
was impersonal, then our Creator wouldn't have bothered
doing that for us. The Creator wouldn't have cared one
way or the other.
--
Pastor Dave Raymond
"I have more understanding than all my teachers:
for thy testimonies are my meditation." - Psalm 119:99
/
o{}xxxxx[]::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::>
\
"And take the helmet of salvation, and the sword of
the Spirit, which is the word of God:" - Ephesians 6:17
.
|
|
|
| User: "R. Baldwin" |
|
| Title: Re: "A LETTER FROM PAUL HARVEY" |
25 Dec 2004 09:37:29 PM |
|
|
"Pastor Dave" <newsgroupmail@nospam-tampabay.rr.com> wrote in message
news:g7ass05d4rui3fqeb991nsqddgdrb21ka0@4ax.com...
On Sun, 26 Dec 2004 02:25:07 +0000 (UTC), while scaling
the Mt. Everest, "R. Baldwin"
<res0k7yx@nozirevBACKWARDS.net> pontificated:
"Pastor Dave" <newsgroupmail@nospam-tampabay.rr.com> wrote in message
news:ta7ss0h8ls44c4eu384qtlh4fpq7upqh3j@4ax.com...
On Sat, 25 Dec 2004 23:59:19 +0000 (UTC), while scaling
the Mt. Everest, "R. Baldwin"
<res0k7yx@nozirevBACKWARDS.net> pontificated:
"Pastor Dave" <newsgroupmail@nospam-tampabay.rr.com> wrote in message
news:v1jqs0d3maslvbp0u6nao92d7c6qv4d8gf@4ax.com...
On Fri, 24 Dec 2004 21:20:04 +0000 (UTC), while scaling
the Mt. Everest, "Sharon"
<mail@creation-vs-evolution.us> pontificated:
Founders James Madison, John Adams, Thomas Jefferson, George
Washington,
Benjamin Franklin, were Deists, believers in an impersonal Creator no
longer interacting with the universe. I.e., not Christian. So was
Abraham Lincoln.
Impersonal? Is that why the Declaration of
Independence claims that out rights are granted by our
Creator?
In fact, it is.
Thomas Jefferson, the principal author of the Declaration of
Independence,
more than once wrote against the divinity of Jesus, and even wrote his
own
version of the Gospels as he conceived they ought to have been written.
Jefferson activly worked to end the state establishment of religion in
Virginia. He was charged by his critics of being an Atheist, which
wasn't
exactly true, but he certainly wasn't a believer in the Holy Trinity.
John Adams, one of the members of the committee charged with writing the
Declaration, played a key role in moving conservative Massachuesetts
toward
religious freedom. While in Congress he sampled a variety of
congregations.
Adams seems to have kept more traditional views on Religion than
Jefferson,
but he did write against the superstitious nature of 18th and early 19th
century religion.
Franklin, the senior member of the committee, lived a long life and
began
writing for the public when he was a teenager. As a youth he had run
away
from the strict Puritans of Cotton Mather's Boston. His views on
religion
changed over the years, and were sometimes colored by the false personae
of
his pseuodonyms, but it is pretty clear he was at most indifferent to
Christianity.
[snip]
Now that you have made your speech, what does it have
to do with the fact that what I said is true?
You'll have to refresh my memory. I thought I was answering your question.
What truth did you state?
To sum it up, the Creator is not impersonal, because
our rights are endowed by said Creator. If our Creator
was impersonal, then our Creator wouldn't have bothered
doing that for us. The Creator wouldn't have cared one
way or the other.
While I happen to myself believe in a personal relationship with God, I
dispute your argument. First, the sentiments of the committee that drafted
the Declaration of Independence are known to be at odds with a personal God.
Second, the language of the Declaration is consistent with the language of
the day, and might easily be dismissed as mere ornament, if not political
expediency. Third, the language is consistent with a deist view of an
impersonal Nature's God. Fourth, if one held the doctrine of an impersonal
God, it would not be difficult to imagine God defining rights and morality
for humanity in general without making it a personal act- just as Congress
and the States enacted the Bill of Rights without personal knowledge of each
American affected.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Pastor Dave" |
|
| Title: Re: "A LETTER FROM PAUL HARVEY" |
26 Dec 2004 08:17:10 AM |
|
|
On Sun, 26 Dec 2004 03:37:29 +0000 (UTC), while scaling
the Mt. Everest, "R. Baldwin"
<res0k7yx@nozirevBACKWARDS.net> pontificated:
To sum it up, the Creator is not impersonal, because
our rights are endowed by said Creator. If our Creator
was impersonal, then our Creator wouldn't have bothered
doing that for us. The Creator wouldn't have cared one
way or the other.
While I happen to myself believe in a personal relationship with God, I
dispute your argument. First, the sentiments of the committee that drafted
the Declaration of Independence are known to be at odds with a personal God.
Second, the language of the Declaration is consistent with the language of
the day, and might easily be dismissed as mere ornament, if not political
expediency. Third, the language is consistent with a deist view of an
impersonal Nature's God. Fourth, if one held the doctrine of an impersonal
God, it would not be difficult to imagine God defining rights and morality
for humanity in general without making it a personal act- just as Congress
and the States enacted the Bill of Rights without personal knowledge of each
American affected.
You've made a good argument. But I don't know how much
I buy into this argument, considering the Masonic
influence in our government at that time. While I am
certainly not arguing that they were all Christians, an
impersonal God seems to be a stretch to me. At the end
of this post, I have also responded to some of your
comments above, about it being ornament, etc..
The committee who was assigned to it, consisted of
Benjamin Franklin, Robert Livingston, Thomas Jefferson,
John Adams and Roger Sherman.
And don't forget, others still had to approve of it
before signing it.
BEN FRANKLIN:
Although Ben Franklin did have a Christian upbringing,
he doesn't appear to be a Christian. However, as far
as an impersonal God, Ben was the one who made the
motion to start each session of Congress with a prayer.
Whatever he pictured God to be, it would not seem to be
and impersonal God, since there would be no reason to
pray to an impersonal God. It would be futile. It
would be a waste of time.
ROBERT LIVINGSTON:
I haven't come across too much about him, although he
was a Mason and so it is not likely that he viewed God
as "impersonal" and he used a Bible to swear in George
Washington. A common practice, sure, but still, a
Bible was used. However, I can't say whether he did or
didn't believe in a personal Creator.
THOMAS JEFFERSON:
A known deist. How personal,or impersonal he viewed
God is a good question. I don't think he viewed God as
I do, for sure, but he did seem to refer to the OT
events at times and they certainly dealt with a
personal Creator. But I wouldn't argue Thomas'
beliefs. Put him in whatever category you choose.
As for Christianity, while you are saying that you
believe that the committee was at odds with a personal
God, take a look at these quotes...
JOHN ADAMS:
The general principles upon which the Fathers achieved
independence were the general principles of
Christianity. I will avow that I believed and now
believe that those general principles of Christianity
are as eternal and immutable as the existence and the
attributes of God.
[June 28, 1813; Letter to Thomas Jefferson]
We recognize no Sovereign but God, and no King but
Jesus! [April 18, 1775, on the eve of the
Revolutionary War after a British major ordered John
Adams, John Hancock, and those with them to disperse in
the name of George the Sovereign King of England." ]
ROGER SHERMAN:
He was the only man to sign all four of America's
founding documents.
The following is found on the tablet that marks his
resting place...
He ever adorned the profession of Christianity
which he made in youth;
And distinguished through life for public usefulness,
Died in the prospect of a blessed immortality.
Here's another quote from R.S....
I believe that there is only one living and true God...
That the scriptures of the old and new testaments are a
revelation from God and a complete rule to direct us
how we may glorify and enjoy Him.
And this one...
Let us live no more to ourselves, but to Him who loved
us, and gave Himself to die for us.
And as I said, don't forget, others still had to
approve of it before signing it. For example, I
certainly wouldn't sign a founding document that left
God out of the picture and many of these men who signed
it were Christians. While I may be open to a statement
about God, without getting specific, to avoid
persecution of others, I would never sign a completely
secular founding document. Not only would it be an
affront to me, but it would also leave every one of the
citizens' rights, including life, at the whim of
government, who would not be forced to recognize a
higher authority. There is no doubt that Thomas
Jefferson recognized that much and I know in my heart
that the Christians who signed it did also.
--
Pastor Dave Raymond
"I have more understanding than all my teachers:
for thy testimonies are my meditation." - Psalm 119:99
/
o{}xxxxx[]::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::>
\
"And take the helmet of salvation, and the sword of
the Spirit, which is the word of God:" - Ephesians 6:17
.
|
|
|
| User: "R. Baldwin" |
|
| Title: Re: "A LETTER FROM PAUL HARVEY" |
26 Dec 2004 12:41:49 PM |
|
|
"Pastor Dave" <newsgroupmail@nospam-tampabay.rr.com> wrote in message
news:3gfts0tsje49mpv0667jv5188fg5rteo54@4ax.com...
On Sun, 26 Dec 2004 03:37:29 +0000 (UTC), while scaling
the Mt. Everest, "R. Baldwin"
<res0k7yx@nozirevBACKWARDS.net> pontificated:
To sum it up, the Creator is not impersonal, because
our rights are endowed by said Creator. If our Creator
was impersonal, then our Creator wouldn't have bothered
doing that for us. The Creator wouldn't have cared one
way or the other.
While I happen to myself believe in a personal relationship with God, I
dispute your argument. First, the sentiments of the committee that drafted
the Declaration of Independence are known to be at odds with a personal
God.
Second, the language of the Declaration is consistent with the language of
the day, and might easily be dismissed as mere ornament, if not political
expediency. Third, the language is consistent with a deist view of an
impersonal Nature's God. Fourth, if one held the doctrine of an impersonal
God, it would not be difficult to imagine God defining rights and morality
for humanity in general without making it a personal act- just as Congress
and the States enacted the Bill of Rights without personal knowledge of
each
American affected.
You've made a good argument. But I don't know how much
I buy into this argument, considering the Masonic
influence in our government at that time. While I am
certainly not arguing that they were all Christians, an
impersonal God seems to be a stretch to me. At the end
of this post, I have also responded to some of your
comments above, about it being ornament, etc..
What makes you think Masonic influence in Government indicates a belief in a
personal God by the authors of the Declaration of Independence?
The committee who was assigned to it, consisted of
Benjamin Franklin, Robert Livingston, Thomas Jefferson,
John Adams and Roger Sherman.
Sherman and Livingston don't appear to have much influenced the proceedings
in the committee.
And don't forget, others still had to approve of it
before signing it.
BEN FRANKLIN:
Although Ben Franklin did have a Christian upbringing,
he doesn't appear to be a Christian. However, as far
as an impersonal God, Ben was the one who made the
motion to start each session of Congress with a prayer.
Whatever he pictured God to be, it would not seem to be
and impersonal God, since there would be no reason to
pray to an impersonal God. It would be futile. It
would be a waste of time.
ROBERT LIVINGSTON:
I haven't come across too much about him, although he
was a Mason and so it is not likely that he viewed God
as "impersonal" and he used a Bible to swear in George
Washington. A common practice, sure, but still, a
Bible was used. However, I can't say whether he did or
didn't believe in a personal Creator.
THOMAS JEFFERSON:
A known deist. How personal,or impersonal he viewed
God is a good question. I don't think he viewed God as
I do, for sure, but he did seem to refer to the OT
events at times and they certainly dealt with a
personal Creator. But I wouldn't argue Thomas'
beliefs. Put him in whatever category you choose.
As for Christianity, while you are saying that you
believe that the committee was at odds with a personal
God, take a look at these quotes...
JOHN ADAMS:
The general principles upon which the Fathers achieved
independence were the general principles of
Christianity. I will avow that I believed and now
believe that those general principles of Christianity
are as eternal and immutable as the existence and the
attributes of God.
[June 28, 1813; Letter to Thomas Jefferson]
We recognize no Sovereign but God, and no King but
Jesus! [April 18, 1775, on the eve of the
Revolutionary War after a British major ordered John
Adams, John Hancock, and those with them to disperse in
the name of George the Sovereign King of England." ]
The Unitarians claim Adams was one of their adherants:
http://www.uua.org/uuhs/duub/articles/johnadams.html
ROGER SHERMAN:
He was the only man to sign all four of America's
founding documents.
The following is found on the tablet that marks his
resting place...
He ever adorned the profession of Christianity
which he made in youth;
And distinguished through life for public usefulness,
Died in the prospect of a blessed immortality.
Here's another quote from R.S....
I believe that there is only one living and true God...
That the scriptures of the old and new testaments are a
revelation from God and a complete rule to direct us
how we may glorify and enjoy Him.
And this one...
Let us live no more to ourselves, but to Him who loved
us, and gave Himself to die for us.
And as I said, don't forget, others still had to
approve of it before signing it. For example, I
certainly wouldn't sign a founding document that left
God out of the picture and many of these men who signed
it were Christians. While I may be open to a statement
about God, without getting specific, to avoid
persecution of others, I would never sign a completely
secular founding document. Not only would it be an
affront to me, but it would also leave every one of the
citizens' rights, including life, at the whim of
government, who would not be forced to recognize a
higher authority. There is no doubt that Thomas
Jefferson recognized that much and I know in my heart
that the Christians who signed it did also.
I fail to see how your own personal motives can in any way imply what the
motives of the founders were.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Pastor Dave" |
|
| Title: Re: "A LETTER FROM PAUL HARVEY" |
26 Dec 2004 02:42:52 PM |
|
|
On Sun, 26 Dec 2004 18:41:49 +0000 (UTC), while scaling
the Mt. Everest, "R. Baldwin"
<res0k7yx@nozirevBACKWARDS.net> pontificated:
"Pastor Dave" <newsgroupmail@nospam-tampabay.rr.com> wrote in message
news:3gfts0tsje49mpv0667jv5188fg5rteo54@4ax.com...
On Sun, 26 Dec 2004 03:37:29 +0000 (UTC), while scaling
the Mt. Everest, "R. Baldwin"
<res0k7yx@nozirevBACKWARDS.net> pontificated:
To sum it up, the Creator is not impersonal, because
our rights are endowed by said Creator. If our Creator
was impersonal, then our Creator wouldn't have bothered
doing that for us. The Creator wouldn't have cared one
way or the other.
While I happen to myself believe in a personal relationship with God, I
dispute your argument. First, the sentiments of the committee that drafted
the Declaration of Independence are known to be at odds with a personal
God.
Second, the language of the Declaration is consistent with the language of
the day, and might easily be dismissed as mere ornament, if not political
expediency. Third, the language is consistent with a deist view of an
impersonal Nature's God. Fourth, if one held the doctrine of an impersonal
God, it would not be difficult to imagine God defining rights and morality
for humanity in general without making it a personal act- just as Congress
and the States enacted the Bill of Rights without personal knowledge of
each
American affected.
You've made a good argument. But I don't know how much
I buy into this argument, considering the Masonic
influence in our government at that time. While I am
certainly not arguing that they were all Christians, an
impersonal God seems to be a stretch to me. At the end
of this post, I have also responded to some of your
comments above, about it being ornament, etc..
What makes you think Masonic influence in Government indicates a belief in a
personal God by the authors of the Declaration of Independence?
Well first of all, many of them did. :)
Secondly, Masonics claim to worship God, but allow for
different religious backgrounds.
The committee who was assigned to it, consisted of
Benjamin Franklin, Robert Livingston, Thomas Jefferson,
John Adams and Roger Sherman.
Sherman and Livingston don't appear to have much influenced the proceedings
in the committee.
Maybe, maybe not, but they were on the committee, so it
isn't logical to think that they had no input and they
did sign it.
And don't forget, others still had to approve of it
before signing it.
BEN FRANKLIN:
Although Ben Franklin did have a Christian upbringing,
he doesn't appear to be a Christian. However, as far
as an impersonal God, Ben was the one who made the
motion to start each session of Congress with a prayer.
Whatever he pictured God to be, it would not seem to be
and impersonal God, since there would be no reason to
pray to an impersonal God. It would be futile. It
would be a waste of time.
ROBERT LIVINGSTON:
I haven't come across too much about him, although he
was a Mason and so it is not likely that he viewed God
as "impersonal" and he used a Bible to swear in George
Washington. A common practice, sure, but still, a
Bible was used. However, I can't say whether he did or
didn't believe in a personal Creator.
THOMAS JEFFERSON:
A known deist. How personal,or impersonal he viewed
God is a good question. I don't think he viewed God as
I do, for sure, but he did seem to refer to the OT
events at times and they certainly dealt with a
personal Creator. But I wouldn't argue Thomas'
beliefs. Put him in whatever category you choose.
As for Christianity, while you are saying that you
believe that the committee was at odds with a personal
God, take a look at these quotes...
JOHN ADAMS:
The general principles upon which the Fathers achieved
independence were the general principles of
Christianity. I will avow that I believed and now
believe that those general principles of Christianity
are as eternal and immutable as the existence and the
attributes of God.
[June 28, 1813; Letter to Thomas Jefferson]
We recognize no Sovereign but God, and no King but
Jesus! [April 18, 1775, on the eve of the
Revolutionary War after a British major ordered John
Adams, John Hancock, and those with them to disperse in
the name of George the Sovereign King of England." ]
The Unitarians claim Adams was one of their adherants:
http://www.uua.org/uuhs/duub/articles/johnadams.html
People can claim whatever they want. What does that
have to do with the quotes I provided?
ROGER SHERMAN:
He was the only man to sign all four of America's
founding documents.
The following is found on the tablet that marks his
resting place...
He ever adorned the profession of Christianity
which he made in youth;
And distinguished through life for public usefulness,
Died in the prospect of a blessed immortality.
Here's another quote from R.S....
I believe that there is only one living and true God...
That the scriptures of the old and new testaments are a
revelation from God and a complete rule to direct us
how we may glorify and enjoy Him.
And this one...
Let us live no more to ourselves, but to Him who loved
us, and gave Himself to die for us.
And as I said, don't forget, others still had to
approve of it before signing it. For example, I
certainly wouldn't sign a founding document that left
God out of the picture and many of these men who signed
it were Christians. While I may be open to a statement
about God, without getting specific, to avoid
persecution of others, I would never sign a completely
secular founding document. Not only would it be an
affront to me, but it would also leave every one of the
citizens' rights, including life, at the whim of
government, who would not be forced to recognize a
higher authority. There is no doubt that Thomas
Jefferson recognized that much and I know in my heart
that the Christians who signed it did also.
I fail to see how your own personal motives can in any way imply what the
motives of the founders were.
You are avoiding the quotes I provided. The fact is,
that I provided quotes of founding fathers who signed
the document and professed belief in a personal God and
quotes that professed belief in Jesus Christ as Lord
and Saviour, so to say that the founding fathers did
not believe in a personal God, is not reasonable. And
to say that they believed that a persons faith has no
part in their role in government, is also not
reasonable. You are acting like these men professed
belief in a personal God outside their jobs and then
became atheists when they entered the doors to meet for
Congress. That's ridiculous.
--
Pastor Dave Raymond
"I have more understanding than all my teachers:
for thy testimonies are my meditation." - Psalm 119:99
/
o{}xxxxx[]::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::>
\
"And take the helmet of salvation, and the sword of
the Spirit, which is the word of God:" - Ephesians 6:17
.
|
|
|
| User: "Sharon" |
|
| Title: Re: "A LETTER FROM PAUL HARVEY" |
26 Dec 2004 04:02:24 PM |
|
|
"Pastor Dave" <newsgroupmail@nospam-tampabay.rr.com> wrote in message
You are acting like these men professed
belief in a personal God outside their jobs and then
became atheists when they entered the doors to meet for
Congress. That's ridiculous.
What you are saying is that *if* some of the Founding Fathers believed in
and worshipped the man on the moon as a god, then we must accept these men
as new our immortal popes (in exchange for the one sitting in the Vatican)
and implementing their beliefs as our new state religion -- implementing
into law that kids to eat green cheese every Friday for school lunch?
It does not matter what religion they believed in or what god they assumed
to exist.
It does not matter if they were atheist, christian, buddhist, or muslim.
[That is the whole point of the documents they penned.]
They had no intention of forcing their *personal religious beliefs* on any
other American.
The religious/spiritual views of the Founding Fathers is moot.
This is all that matters for insight into what they intended:
"[...]shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or
prohibiting the free exercise thereof."
The founding fathers were open minded, and the documents were intended to
free men to worship however they so chose to do -- without state powers
forcing the founding fathers' beliefs on you, me, or anyone.
Like some of the founding fathers, I too am a Deist, and I do not want
creation science in the schools because I know it is a biased myth. In my
opinion, it belongs in the library side by side with other ancient
mesopotamian mythology. Certainly not in our schools taught to
impressionable young minds as "science". If you want to teach kids that
nonsense, have some of your own children and teach it to them. But not my
kids. *If* I had that power to stamp out the ignorance of the Bible -- the
Bible itself -- I would be treading on the precious freedom and liberty
people *should have* as a free soul under *God* [whatever God that is, if
any.]
As a Deist, if I had the power to stamp out the Bible -- I would not do it,
I would not want to be blamed for forcing my belief system on anyone else.
(Insight into why the Founding Fathers did not implement another state
religion of their own). I believe in the freedom of religious expression.
But do I believe in the Bible, even remotely? No.
In 200 years from now, some creation scientist will come along and digging
up my post and saying "See! See! She believed in a god -- therefore that
means she supported the Bible and the Christian God." [ Not hardly. I may be
a deist, but I am not a complete fool once I saw what the evolutionists have
been saying -- and saw the mythology in that book that some call sacred. One
day, hopefully I'll have acquired half of the knowledge which Thomas
Jefferson had acquired about the Bible.] They had the sense to know it was a
ripe time the Bible should be removed out of government... they retired it
from politics. I speak as a Deist.
I've read many quotes from the founding fathers, and they were not so very
fond of the Bible. If Thomas Jefferson and the founding fathers had been
alive today, with access to the writings of Darwin -- and scientists who
followed in the wake of his discoveries, the evidence of evolution... how
would they have written those same documents? Would they have done more (?)
to emphasize "separation of church and state means keep creation science out
of the schools", since it is a personal religious belief system without
empirical evidence to support it.
--
Pastor Dave Raymond
"I have more understanding than all my teachers:
for thy testimonies are my meditation." - Psalm 119:99
/
o{}xxxxx[]::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::>
\
"And take the helmet of salvation, and the sword of
the Spirit, which is the word of God:" - Ephesians 6:17
.
|
|
|
| User: "Pastor Dave" |
|
| Title: Re: "A LETTER FROM PAUL HARVEY" |
26 Dec 2004 06:15:04 PM |
|
|
On Sun, 26 Dec 2004 22:02:24 +0000 (UTC), while scaling
the Mt. Everest, "Sharon"
<mail-@-creation-vs-evolution.us> pontificated:
"Pastor Dave" <newsgroupmail@nospam-tampabay.rr.com> wrote in message
You are acting like these men professed
belief in a personal God outside their jobs and then
became atheists when they entered the doors to meet for
Congress. That's ridiculous.
What you are saying is that *if* some of the Founding Fathers believed in
and worshipped the man on the moon as a god, then we must accept these men
as new our immortal popes (in exchange for the one sitting in the Vatican)
and implementing their beliefs as our new state religion -- implementing
into law that kids to eat green cheese every Friday for school lunch?
You're twisting my words, but that doesn't surprise me.
--
Pastor Dave Raymond
"I have more understanding than all my teachers:
for thy testimonies are my meditation." - Psalm 119:99
/
o{}xxxxx[]::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::>
\
"And take the helmet of salvation, and the sword of
the Spirit, which is the word of God:" - Ephesians 6:17
.
|
|
|
| User: "Sharon" |
|
| Title: Re: "A LETTER FROM PAUL HARVEY" |
26 Dec 2004 06:54:34 PM |
|
|
"Pastor Dave" <newsgroupmail@nospam-tampabay.rr.com> wrote in message
news:t1mus0llmsbun7qq0gs9djssqvphtsovug@4ax.com...
On Sun, 26 Dec 2004 22:02:24 +0000 (UTC), while scaling
the Mt. Everest, "Sharon"
<mail-@-creation-vs-evolution.us> pontificated:
"Pastor Dave" <newsgroupmail@nospam-tampabay.rr.com> wrote in message
You are acting like these men professed
belief in a personal God outside their jobs and then
became atheists when they entered the doors to meet for
Congress. That's ridiculous.
What you are saying is that *if* some of the Founding Fathers believed in
and worshipped the man on the moon as a god, then we must accept these men
as new our immortal popes (in exchange for the one sitting in the Vatican)
and implementing their beliefs as our new state religion -- implementing
into law that kids to eat green cheese every Friday for school lunch?
You're twisting my words, but that doesn't surprise me.
No, I am not twisting your words. What I am saying is their religious
beliefs are irrelevant.
--
Pastor Dave Raymond
"I have more understanding than all my teachers:
for thy testimonies are my meditation." - Psalm 119:99
/
o{}xxxxx[]::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::>
\
"And take the helmet of salvation, and the sword of
the Spirit, which is the word of God:" - Ephesians 6:17
.
|
|
|
| User: "Pastor Dave" |
|
| Title: Re: "A LETTER FROM PAUL HARVEY" |
27 Dec 2004 08:28:28 AM |
|
|
On Mon, 27 Dec 2004 00:54:34 +0000 (UTC), while scaling
the Mt. Everest, "Sharon"
<mail-@-creation-vs-evolution.us> pontificated:
"Pastor Dave" <newsgroupmail@nospam-tampabay.rr.com> wrote in message
news:t1mus0llmsbun7qq0gs9djssqvphtsovug@4ax.com...
On Sun, 26 Dec 2004 22:02:24 +0000 (UTC), while scaling
the Mt. Everest, "Sharon"
<mail-@-creation-vs-evolution.us> pontificated:
"Pastor Dave" <newsgroupmail@nospam-tampabay.rr.com> wrote in message
You are acting like these men professed
belief in a personal God outside their jobs and then
became atheists when they entered the doors to meet for
Congress. That's ridiculous.
What you are saying is that *if* some of the Founding Fathers believed in
and worshipped the man on the moon as a god, then we must accept these men
as new our immortal popes (in exchange for the one sitting in the Vatican)
and implementing their beliefs as our new state religion -- implementing
into law that kids to eat green cheese every Friday for school lunch?
You're twisting my words, but that doesn't surprise me.
No, I am not twisting your words. What I am saying is their religious
beliefs are irrelevant.
You told me what I was saying and then misrepresented
what I was saying. That is word twisting.
--
Pastor Dave Raymond
"I have more understanding than all my teachers:
for thy testimonies are my meditation." - Psalm 119:99
/
o{}xxxxx[]::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::>
\
"And take the helmet of salvation, and the sword of
the Spirit, which is the word of God:" - Ephesians 6:17
.
|
|
|
| User: "Sharon" |
|
| Title: Re: "A LETTER FROM PAUL HARVEY" |
27 Dec 2004 11:08:19 AM |
|
|
"Pastor Dave" <newsgroupmail@nospam-tampabay.rr.com> wrote in message
news:d280t0tcl2f33fnns9mqk72j9bbbg0eth9@4ax.com...
"Pastor Dave" <newsgroupmail@nospam-tampabay.rr.com> wrote in message
You are acting like these men professed
belief in a personal God outside their jobs and then
became atheists when they entered the doors to meet for
Congress. That's ridiculous.
If they held a belief in God, did they mingle it in their professional
lives? Did they impose their beliefs on others? Is it possible to separate
one's religious belief from their political career?
Funny but my computer was produced by emachines -- and there's not a single
sign of what religion was of those who assembled it.
You told me what I was saying and then misrepresented
what I was saying. That is word twisting.
You are twisting the words of the Founding Fathers. PD might hold a
political position and mingling his religious beliefs with his political
work, but just because you do, does not mean I do, or that President Bush
should, or Bill Clinton would or our founding fathers. Some people actually
know how to separate their job from personal convictions. [Though Bush, I
don't know about sometimes.]
You made the assertion the founding fathers could not hold a personal
spiritual belief without it affecting their writings that helped to create
this country. You are saying an atheist is incapable of creating a fair
constitution? -- you are saying these men held beliefs in a god, therefore
it might as well be the Christian one -- and that they intended God be
forced on all Americans?
.
|
|
|
| User: "Sharon" |
|
| Title: PD falls silent? |
27 Dec 2004 12:24:30 PM |
|
|
"Pastor Dave" <newsgroupmail@nospam-tampabay.rr.com> wrote in message
You are acting like these men professed
belief in a personal God outside their jobs and then
became atheists when they entered the doors to meet for
Congress. That's ridiculous.
You are saying an atheist is incapable of creating a fair constitution? --
you are saying these men held beliefs in a god, therefore it might as well
be the Christian one -- and that they intended God be forced on all
Americans?
When I asked this question, what to expect except silence from Dave.
"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"
Except when they're atheist or agnostic or believe evolution and reject a
creator, huh?
It's people like you Dave, that the need existed for such documents as the
Declaration of Independence, Constitution, Bill of Rights.............
Notice they wrote it they believe all men are created equal by "their"
creator -- in other words an evolutionist may be an atheist pantheist and
his creator is the stuff the cosmos is made of, [...] and have inalienable
rights -- it does not say that they must necessarily believe in a creator to
have those rights.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Christopher A. Lee" |
|
| Title: Re: PD falls silent? |
27 Dec 2004 12:57:56 PM |
|
|
On Mon, 27 Dec 2004 18:24:30 +0000 (UTC), "Sharon"
<mail-@-creation-vs-evolution.us> wrote:
"Pastor Dave" <newsgroupmail@nospam-tampabay.rr.com> wrote in message
You are acting like these men professed
belief in a personal God outside their jobs and then
became atheists when they entered the doors to meet for
Congress. That's ridiculous.
You are saying an atheist is incapable of creating a fair constitution? --
you are saying these men held beliefs in a god, therefore it might as well
be the Christian one -- and that they intended God be forced on all
Americans?
When I asked this question, what to expect except silence from Dave.
"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"
Except when they're atheist or agnostic or believe evolution and reject a
creator, huh?
It's people like you Dave, that the need existed for such documents as the
Declaration of Independence, Constitution, Bill of Rights.............
Notice they wrote it they believe all men are created equal by "their"
creator -- in other words an evolutionist may be an atheist pantheist and
his creator is the stuff the cosmos is made of, [...] and have inalienable
rights -- it does not say that they must necessarily believe in a creator to
have those rights.
Exactly. This atheist was created by two other atheists a year after
they got married just after WW1.
I don't think the framers allowed for the sociopathy, ignorance,
illiteracy or stupidity of the citizenry.
If you read Lincoln's speeches, he was addressing farmers etc, not the
educated classes. Yet they understood the issues and arguments far
better than the brainewashed ignorant of today
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Pastor Dave" |
|
| Title: Re: PD falls silent? |
27 Dec 2004 04:23:38 PM |
|
|
On Mon, 27 Dec 2004 18:24:30 +0000 (UTC), while scaling
the Mt. Everest, "Sharon"
<mail-@-creation-vs-evolution.us> pontificated:
"Pastor Dave" <newsgroupmail@nospam-tampabay.rr.com> wrote in message
You are acting like these men professed
belief in a personal God outside their jobs and then
became atheists when they entered the doors to meet for
Congress. That's ridiculous.
You are saying an atheist is incapable of creating a fair constitution? --
you are saying these men held beliefs in a god, therefore it might as well
be the Christian one -- and that they intended God be forced on all
Americans?
When I asked this question, what to expect except silence from Dave.
You are a liar. I answered the post. Now I will give
you an opportunity to withdraw your accusation, before
I prove to all that you are a liar.
Your psychosis is starting up again, Sharon. I knew it
would only be a matter of time.
--
Pastor Dave Raymond
"I have more understanding than all my teachers:
for thy testimonies are my meditation." - Psalm 119:99
/
o{}xxxxx[]::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::>
\
"And take the helmet of salvation, and the sword of
the Spirit, which is the word of God:" - Ephesians 6:17
.
|
|
|
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
