NLBS #48: The United States Is Not, And Never Was, A Christian Nation

a reply to: Grimpachi

Yea none of this explains how Washington saying no superstition in government = not a Christian nation.

That's just one quote. The rest of the poop your smeared on the wall was even more tangential at times.

a reply to: dawnstar

Some good points, several I agree with.

originally posted by: Gorman91
a reply to: Barcs

I did. Luther's Two Kingdoms. You should probably read.

I didn't see any citations or sources, plus Martin Luther predates the founding of America by 200 years and is therefor irrelevant when discussing what the founding fathers meant by secular when establishing the foundations for America. Please provide a source (not a quote mine) to back up your assertion about that the founding fathers meant something different by secular. Good luck.

Yea none of this explains how Washington saying no superstition in government = not a Christian nation.

You should try proving the positive rather than not the negative. If you think America IS a christian nation, then prove it. Religious folk are the ones who claim it is Christian, when it isn't even close to that.

a reply to: Gorman91

I don't really care about Luther, all I care about is the fact the founding fathers didn't want the United States to have a state religion or impose religious rhetoric or morality into the Declaration of Independence, the Constitution or the laws of the land, like they had under King George and the oppressive Church of England. They created this nation, not to be an alternative religion or religious republic, they created this nation to be free of religious imposition, of any kind.

The founding fathers weren't of one mind, and held different religious and philosophical outlooks, influenced by Luther, Jesus Christ, Plato, Pythagoras, Solon, etc., etc., etc., The United States was NOT founded as a "Christian nation" and that's been established, again and again in this thread.

a reply to: windword

Well you probably should care about Luther because it's why the founding fathers didn't want a state religion, but seemed ok with limited religious presence in government affairs. Most US affairs have religious rhetoric. The Civil War was practically caused by it. Our founding documents say men were created with rights. Those two things are religious rhetoric.

They created this nation to ensure every sect had a right to exist. You're using our founding father's plurality of faith, ignoring the umbrella they were building to protect it. But all those sects, are under a particular kind of western, Judeochristian culture.

All this is in Luther's Two Kingdoms. But you seem comfortable to force your 21st century views on a 18th century document written in the shadow of a 16th century monk.

a reply to: Barcs

Martin Luther is a source. Two Kingdoms is a citation. You should probably learn what those words mean before saying I didn't.

You probably should care because America's separation of Church and State was based off Luther's Two Kingdoms doctrine. Without Luther, the United States would not have a separation of Church and State. The founding Fathers traced that doctrine as the source of that policy.

Oh I don't think America is a Christian nation as you define it. I think it's a secular nation. But not the way you define it. The way Luther defined it. The man they got the idea from.

a reply to: Gorman91

Most US affairs have religious rhetoric.

All this is in Luther's Two Kingdoms.

Please demonstrate how these ideas, of yours, are true. Please demonstrate how "natural law" and "biblical law" are one in the same in the sense of US governance and policy.

I can show you a thousand ways the USA doesn't behave in a "Christian" like manner. And I've already shown you just a few ways our government and its philosophy violates biblical law.

You've shown us that our war policies have nothing to do with Christianity, earlier in this thread.

a reply to: Gorman91

America also got the concept of a democracy from ancient Greece, but would you call America a democracy EXACTLY like Ancient Greece? You do realize that just about all new ideas are just old ideas that newer generations have taken in and improved upon right?

a reply to: windword

Did I not just reference the Civil War's Abolitionist and slave liberation movements who used religious rhetoric for the decades leading up to the war, tracing back to the revolutionary days? Shall I also directly quote Madison who said:

It is a pleasing and persuasive example of pious zeal, united with pure benevolence and of a cordial attachment to a particular creed, untinctured with sectarian illiberality. It illustrates the excellence of a system which, by a due distinction, to which the genius and courage of Luther led the way, between what is due to Caesar and what is due God, best promotes the discharge of both obligations.

Like, why are you so lazy you cannot go to google and search this yourself?

a reply to: Krazysh0t

Actually they used Ancient Greece as an example of what NOT to do. They wanted a republic. Zeno was far greater for them.

As to the amazing blindness you display, it's relevant because Luther was the origin of the PARTICULAR idea of the separation of church and state. Not the Republic. Don't mix unrelated links as some hilariously desperate attempt to create confusion.

originally posted by: Gorman91
a reply to: Barcs

Martin Luther is a source. Two Kingdoms is a citation. You should probably learn what those words mean before saying I didn't.

Martin Luther is a person and Two Kingdoms is a doctrine. Neither are sources or citations that prove the founding fathers meant something different by the word secular. The founding fathers might have loosely used Luther's concepts, but they certainly aren't the same thing and your claim that the founding fathers meant something else by secular still needs to be backed up.

Oh I don't think America is a Christian nation as you define it. I think it's a secular nation. But not the way you define it. The way Luther defined it. The man they got the idea from.

It's irrelevant who they got the general idea from. We're talking about their use of the word secular. Everything gets their concepts from somewhere else. Christianity did the same exact thing by using pagan holidays and traditions to establish their faith. Without paganism and other early religions, Christianity, as we know it, would not exist. That doesn't mean they are the same or even close for that matter. It's faulty logic.

a reply to: Gorman91

You apparently missed my point. The POINT is that just because someone gets an idea from a previous thinker, DOESN'T mean he is incorporating that idea word for word. They take that idea, discard the parts that don't make sense to them, refine it with their own ideas, then present it as a new idea. This is how ALL ideas are developed.

So just because the the founding fathers used Luther for the idea of Separation of Church and State doesn't mean that they followed his idea to the T.

originally posted by: Gorman91
You probably should care because America's separation of Church and State was based off Luther's Two Kingdoms doctrine.

That's a monumental stretch, even for Calvinists.

The doctrine is a bastardization of Paul's flesh/body against spirit/Sprit teachings, and defines that the left-hand kingdom (mortals on earth) is ruled by God and that even secular left-hand rule must answer to god. The right-hand world is heaven, where there is only faith. Hence the Lutheran phrase, "Christ alone."

Without Luther, the United States would not have a separation of Church and State. The founding Fathers traced that doctrine as the source of that policy.

There are many lines, in many directions, that can be traced back through history, some intersecting ancient Egyptians, that define the myriad of factors that led to the secular government of the US.

However, the founding fathers didn't look at it the same way you seem to be wanting to revise how they looked at it. On the subject, Madison wrote:
"America’s government illustrates the excellence of a system which, by a due distinction, to which the genius and courage of Luther led the way, between what is due to Caesar and what is due to God, best promotes the discharge of both obligations. The experience of the United States is a happy disproof of the error so long rooted in the unenlightened minds of well-meaning Christians, as well as the corrupt hearts of persecuting usurpers, that without a legal incorporation of religious and civil polity, neither could be supported. A mutual independence is found most friendly to practical Religion, to social harmony, and to political prosperity."

He's saying Luther led the way, and referenced, "between what is due to Caesar and what is due to God." And then makes this very important statement: "United States is a happy disproof of the error so long rooted in the unenlightened minds of well-meaning Christians." Here it's clear that while he acknowledges the ideas of antiquity, new ideas are not just necessary, but overdue.

The way Luther defined it. The man they got the idea from.

It's clear that Luther's Two Kingdoms, if you research it further, anticipates that the left-hand kingdom is still ruled by God, and that all secular rulers must answer to God. That's not the nexus of the separation the founding fathers created.

a reply to: Gorman91

There have been lots of arguments that have been fueled by religious rhetoric. The funny thing is, the religious can't agree on what their own Bible says, and used exactly the same verses to promote slavery as the the ones the abolitionists used to support their side. But, the Civil War wasn't fought over religious values, it fought over economic issues.

Woman's Suffrage wasn't won over religious ideals. Ultimately is was a constitutional issues, that actually violated biblical nonsense, that resulted in progressive changes in our society.

Prohibition was overthrown over constitutional and monetary issues, not religious issues.

Almost all of US laws violate the 10 Commandments and biblical laws.

Like, why are you so lazy you cannot go to google and search this yourself?

I don't know the key words to Google how brainwashed Christians have skewed history to back up their religious claims of superiority.

a reply to: Barcs

lol. Are you serious? Please, great scholar, show me a source or citation that is not a person/work.

The topic is the separation of church and state. The concept originates from Luther. If you think no connection exists, you're seriously hilarious.

a reply to: Krazysh0t

Except for the part where Madison said he paved the way.

a reply to: SkepticOverlord

Or, you know, it's just not present in many unenlightened minds of well-meaning Christians. How you pervert that to mean antiquity, idk. By claiming it comes from Paul, you're not doing any favors saying it isn't Christian.

a reply to: windword

Somehow you take Christians disagreeing on the bible = America isn't Christian....

a reply to: Gorman91

Except that doesn't mean what you are suggesting it does. Paving the way, just means laying the groundwork for you to build upon it.

originally posted by: Gorman91
a reply to: windword

Somehow you take Christians disagreeing on the bible = America isn't Christian....

No. It's that Christianity has no single united mind, and Christians can't even find common agreement among themselves. They indulge in attacking other different Christians more than they are concerned about society's problems.

If Christians have been unable agree with each other on even the basics of what their scripture says, how can you say that we are a Christian nation, especially when our laws and founding documents violate biblical laws all over the place!!??