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

a reply to: Krazysh0t

IE, a Protestant doctrine.

a reply to: windword

Gee it almost sounds like they need some kind of secular state to ensure they don't kill each other. Gee wiz, Windword, sure would be great if some group of people of different creeds read Luther's two kingdoms and established that nation to protect sects from each other.

That would be swell.

a reply to: Gorman91

No. It means taking the core of the idea of separating the Church (in this case, the RCC) from the government. THEN instead of stopping at JUST the RCC, Madison built upon it and extended it to its logical conclusion. You are manufacturing history by trying to claim this is a Protestant nation just because the idea for separating church and state came from Luther trying to get the RCC out of politics.

a reply to: Krazysh0t

No, actually I said they created a secular state to protect the sects from destroying each other. Like Luther intended. Like the Founding Fathers desired.

originally posted by: Gorman91
By claiming it comes from Paul, you're not doing any favors saying it isn't Christian.

I didn't imply that Paul's teachings, from which the Two Kingdoms was inspired, wasn't Christian.

Luther played a role in paving the way just as much as the Church of England and the Catholic Church… and more.

a reply to: SkepticOverlord

Yes. They did. Because it's a Christian doctrine, for a secular nation. But you think you can erase the 1700 years of history that lead to that invention. Why, idk.

originally posted by: Gorman91
a reply to: windword

Gee it almost sounds like they need some kind of secular state to ensure they don't kill each other. Gee wiz, Windword, sure would be great if some group of people of different creeds read Luther's two kingdoms and established that nation to protect sects from each other.

That would be swell.

Since your so stuck on this "Twin City" concept, let me point out that the concept doesn't originate from Luther but goes all the way back to when the Israelites petitioned Yahweh for a King and a kingdom with a temple. Yahweh gave them King Saul. King David conquered and founded Jerusalem, "The City of God", a twin city to the "Kingdom of Heaven". David again petitioned Yahweh for a temple, the temple that Solomon finally built, the "Seat of God" in the "City of God". (More twinning and even trinity-ing.)

Then, when Jerusalem fell to Babylon, Ezekiel's reinvigorated the people through his prophetic vision of the "New Jerusalem". Cyrus the Great liberated the Israelites from their captivity, and the 2nd Temple Era was established, representing the "Twin City" concept again.

The book of Revelation, probably written after the destruction of Jerusalem by the Romans, envisions another "New Jerusalem", a New Kingdom of God, a New Jerusalem descending from Heaven to the earth. As far as I know, Christian doctrine insists that we're still waiting for that to happen.

St. Augustine was the first Christian to embrace the concept of a "New Jerusalem" and the "Heavenly Jerusalem". Martin Luther follows much later.

There's no doubt that the founding fathers were familiar with the "New Jerusalem" concept, but you'll notice that the motto of the United States of America isn't "The New Jerusalem", it's "Out of many: One.... The New World Order"

I don't think anyone is upset about a agenda to convert a whole nation. I think Christians are just tired of the constant ridicule and attacks on their religion.

We are Americans, yet we can't accept people's differences. We lack tolerance and the ability to see life through the perspective of others. This doesn't exclude Christians either. Everyone is guilty.

Just some insight and religion is a malevolent spirit that is going to destroy mankind. Jesus only taught love, peace and forgiveness and taught us new ways of life other than what the old testament taught. True Christians live and walk with Christ and don't need a preacher, church or religion to be filled with the Holy Spirit and walk close to God.

Jesus criticized these religious leaders. Religion is a malevolent spirit. Matthew 23 New Living Translation (NLT)

Jesus Criticizes the Religious Leaders

23 Then Jesus said to the crowds and to his disciples, 2 “The teachers of religious law and the Pharisees are the official interpreters of the law of Moses.[a] 3 So practice and obey whatever they tell you, but don’t follow their example. For they don’t practice what they teach. 4 They crush people with unbearable religious demands and never lift a finger to ease the burden.

5 “Everything they do is for show. On their arms they wear extra wide prayer boxes with Scripture verses inside, and they wear robes with extra long tassels. 6 And they love to sit at the head table at banquets and in the seats of honor in the synagogues. 7 They love to receive respectful greetings as they walk in the marketplaces, and to be called ‘Rabbi.’[c]

8 “Don’t let anyone call you ‘Rabbi,’ for you have only one teacher, and all of you are equal as brothers and sisters.[d] 9 And don’t address anyone here on earth as ‘Father,’ for only God in heaven is your spiritual Father. 10 And don’t let anyone call you ‘Teacher,’ for you have only one teacher, the Messiah. 11 The greatest among you must be a servant. 12 But those who exalt themselves will be humbled, and those who humble themselves will be exalted.

13 “What sorrow awaits you teachers of religious law and you Pharisees. Hypocrites! For you shut the door of the Kingdom of Heaven in people’s faces. You won’t go in yourselves, and you don’t let others enter either.[e]

15 “What sorrow awaits you teachers of religious law and you Pharisees. Hypocrites! For you cross land and sea to make one convert, and then you turn that person into twice the child of hell[f] you yourselves are!

As far as hatred for gays, women and all of the other things you speak of, my church invites gays and one of our pastors is a very intelligent woman. We hate nobody. Jesus didn't teach hate, he taught love. Many of his followers were criminals, thieves, murderers, etc.. He accepted everybody. Of course, they changed their ways after meeting Jesus and following him.

originally posted by: Krazysh0t

originally posted by: hudsonhawk69
I'm admittedly confused... It seems to you that separating one from the other is so simple. I see semantics... Are a christian nation and a nation of christians really that different? Even if the USA is nation of christians does that somehow imply a perceived seperation of church and state? Or is there something else going on here that I'm simple failing to understand?

It really is that simple actually. A Christian Nation uses Christian dogma in its laws. A nation of Christians is a nation that has secular laws, but has a majority of Christians in it. This prevents laws like the first Commandment being legal law. As an agnostic, I would never want to be forced to honor the Christian god. Ever.

When someone talks about Islamic Nations I assume that are trying to tie church and state together to further their own political agenda... Huh? That's weird. That sounds remarkably like what I just did...

Now I'm really confused...

When politicians talk about Islamic Nations, they mean nations that have installed Islam as a state religion and uses Islamic dogma in their laws. These nations execute atheists or persecute people for speaking out against Islam. They force your to honor Islam traditions and not live and worship what you want.

Well that was simple enough. Thank you for clearing that up.

originally posted by: windword
a reply to: hudsonhawk69

So yes! When christians build a church I call it a christian church. They built it. They all worship there. Does it really matter if they didn't put their name on the sign? Who are we trying to kid here?

The United States of America isn't a church.

But it is a shop? Go ahead, don't be shy. post the whole quote. don't quote me out of context please.
It makes little difference what the building is. A building built by christians is a building for christaians... Or better still. A building inhabited by christians is a building FOR christians!

That's simple aye?!

a reply to: hudsonhawk69

Somewhere in the USA there is a small town full of Christians. They built a Winn Dixie grocery store. They shop there all the time. Would you call it a Christian grocery store? Or just simply a grocery store built and patronized by Christians?

Cheers

Just the fact that there is so much contention to this subject is evidence that this isn't a christian nation.

If god wants to come down and let us know unequivocally that this is a christian nation, I'm ready for him/her/it to do so... If he can't or won't, then there's not really much of a reason for people to worship because he has to rely on his flawed minions to do his legwork.

Until then, it's divisive as a nation to say that this nation is under a single god. Why can't religious people just worship who they want and let others worship (or not) who they want? We're not UNDIVIDED under god.

There's no document that specifically states a national religion and in fact there are numerous official documents that state otherwise. The founders remembered why we'd left England and how religious persecution leads to villainy and oppression.

I'm willing to change my mind when I see evidence of it, but I don't anticipate that happening any time soon.

a reply to: hudsonhawk69

That's simple aye?!

No. Just no.

Just checking to make sure the USA is still a non religious Nation ... upheld by constitutional law to protect the right of citizens to practice their religion in peace ...

Try as they might, personal opinions do not alter the truth of the matter

Do you think fundamentalists from other countries and religions realize they are fundamentalists?

Is there any reason to expect our own fundamentalists to be any different?

originally posted by: Deaf Alien
a reply to: hudsonhawk69

Somewhere in the USA there is a small town full of Christians. They built a Winn Dixie grocery store. They shop there all the time. Would you call it a Christian grocery store? Or just simply a grocery store built and patronized by Christians?

Cheers

Aaand back to the arbitrary shop example...

Yes. America is not a christian nation in the way that christianity is not officially or formally a part of it's political structure or design.

No. You can't convince me that the overwhelming christian population have have no affect or influence in American politics or political decision making.

Therefore. Your argument is as invalid as mine as we are both simply arguing about semantics!

Do you require further explanation or are you able to comprehend that simple explanation?

a reply to: hudsonhawk69

I am confused on which side you are on? I gave you a star for the other post where you thanked a guy for clearing it up.

You can't convince me that the overwhelming christian population have have no affect or influence in American politics or political decision making.

Give examples. We all know about gay weddings. What other examples?

Moral Majority failed miserably.

Do you require further explanation or are you able to comprehend that simple explanation?

I comprehend just fine.

a reply to: windword

Everything here points to America being the secular state Luther wrote about.

Thank you for confirming it even more.

a reply to: artistpoet

It's not non-religious. It's secular. There's a difference.

a reply to: Gorman91

It seems that you keep agreeing with us without knowing why. Of course it's a secular nation. That is not debatable here.