Evangelicals and Trump

NotfooledbyW

Gold Member
Joined
Jul 9, 2014
Messages
10,847
Reaction score
1,313
Points
245
NOr does it change the fact that the nation that was founded, was massively Christian.
Going by your ‘majority gets to pick the nations religious identity’ rule - it appears that modern America is a DEMOCRAT CHRISTIAN NATION not a REPUBLICAN CHRISTIAN NATION.

8BC6D62E-1168-4BFC-B274-F3075ACCD167.jpeg


Grab some bench - America as not founded as a Christian Nation and it is not a right wing Republican Christian Nation now.
 

NotfooledbyW

Gold Member
Joined
Jul 9, 2014
Messages
10,847
Reaction score
1,313
Points
245
.... yes. It is a Christian Nation, with a fucked up secular elite that is increasingly out of touch with their people.
pretty sure you are just a religious bigot in touch with white evangelical Christian nationalists and out of touch with the multicultural pluralistic Christians who reject white Christian nationalism.

Here we have a white Reverend and a black Preacher. One (Baird) a white Christian Nationalist, The other a black preacher (Darby) who rejects the religious right’s Christian Nation propaganda.


More than 80 percent of evangelicals voted for Trump in 2016. The poll found that 80 percent of Republican (or Republican leaning) Southerners approve of Trump, while only 4 percent of Democrats do.​
The Rev. Dr. Kevin Baird, a conservative who pastors Charleston Legacy Church in West Ashley, said he thought there would have been less agreement among Southerners on whether the nation was founded as a Christian country.​
“Make America Christian Again: Christian Nationalism and Voting for Donald Trump in the 2016 Presidential Election,” by Andrew L. Whitehead, Samuel L. Perry and Joseph O. Baker, asserts that many evangelicals voted for Trump to preserve the United States’ perceived Christian heritage, even though they thought Trump behaved immorally.​
Baird, who said America was founded on Christian precepts, added that there are many topics about which most conservative Christians agree,​
The Rev. Joseph Darby, first vice president for the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People in Charleston, disagreed with claims that the country was intended to be explicitly Christian.​

Darby, who also pastors Nichols Chapel AME in Charleston, didn’t mince words in describing Christian nationalists and white evangelical denominations with exclusionary views on immigration and multiculturalism.​

“It’s called Christian hypocrisy,” Darby said.​

Darby added that the country should not be in favor of one particular religion. Rather, he said politicians and voters should “love God and love others as we would be loved.”​

“If the laws reflect that, we’d be one nation under all,” he said. “If you have something that’s exclusively Christian, you’re walking a very slippery, nationalist slope. Everyone in America is not Christian.”​
Is Darby in your mind one of those “fucked up secular elite” ?​
 

22lcidw

Gold Member
Joined
Dec 25, 2018
Messages
15,177
Reaction score
4,552
Points
275
Trump has shown some amazing things about religion in America and particularly Evangelicals when it comes to political power. You would think Trump Christ-like. But I fail to remember Christ being in favor of caging children or breaking up families. Did I miss that? Two pieces below help, it isn't about being religious, is it? What then of religion? Has it lost its holiness, its goodness.

'How the evangelical movement became Trump's "bitch" — and yes, I know what that word signifies'

'As an evangelical myself, I can see how far the movement has sunk — even to betraying its own ideal of masculinity'



"His most notable advice for interacting with half the human population is "grab 'em by the pussy". Who could have predicted such an alliance?"

Climate too. Why not pray away hurricanes floods and fires, poverty too while they are at it. Interesting how the mixture of politics and religion accomplishes so little good.

'Faith and politics mix to drive evangelical Christians’ climate change denial'


'Climate science denial may stem more from politics than religion'

'Social scientist Dan Kahan rejects the idea of an automatic link between religiosity and any anti-science bias. He argues that religiosity only incidentally tracks science denial because some scientific findings have become “culturally antagonistic” to some identity groups.'


"No one can serve two masters. Either he will hate the one and love the other, or he will be devoted to the one and despise the other. You cannot serve both God and Money." Matthew 6:24
The problem is that Evangelicals became the Progs bitch a long time ago. His election was the result of you. Look at all the fun today now. All of the gains and many of the people are miserable. Let us see if a Catholic Religious woman is put up for the Supreme Court if you do not try to destroy her in hearings.
 

Correll

Diamond Member
Joined
Mar 16, 2015
Messages
70,136
Reaction score
13,994
Points
2,220
Imo, yes. It is a Christian Nation
This is not an opinion poll.

Putting your biased “opinion” aside give me your Constitutionally correct answer to the question whether America was founded as a Christian Nation.

I understand that it is your opinion that the Protestant Christian majority of adherents living in 1790s America makes it necessary and official that all Americans now must recognize that the supreme religion of the American Nation was and still is Christianity. Therefore it is Constitutionally correct to proclaim to all the world that America was founded as a Protestant Christian Nation.

Is that correct?

If so please tell us where and when the Constitution was amended to change Protestant Christian Nation to Christian Nation in order to now include Catholicism in the official name of the Nation.

Tell you what, you suck at understanding other people. If you have a question about my opinion, don't even try to guess what it might be, because your barriers to communication are very strong, and your mind has very weak empathy skills.


MY opinion is that the vast Christian Majority of the nation living in the late 1800s AND the fact that the vast majority of the FOunding Fathers were Christian and the fact that the founding principles of this nation were so obvious heavily drawn upon Christian ideas and beliefs,

mean that this nation was founded as a Christian nation with the intent that it would always be a Christian Nation, and that that was a good thing.


I further believe that the goal of liberals, in having such discussions, is not to protect religious minorities but to drive Christianity and Christians and Christian ideas from the public square to make it easier for liberals to advance their far left agenda.
 

Correll

Diamond Member
Joined
Mar 16, 2015
Messages
70,136
Reaction score
13,994
Points
2,220
It would be so refreshing to have an honest discussion for once with an advocate for abortion.
.
It would be so refreshing to have an honest discussion for once with an advocate for abortion.
.
- and your purpose for the "discussion" you have not already imposed by your incendiary statements.
To state the obvious; that it is wrong to abort a human life.
To state the obvious; that it is wrong to abort a human life.
but murdering everything else in Garden Earth is ok -
.
View attachment 391463
.
you've not explained how having a vasectomy or using a condom is not the same as an abortion ... fill us in.

That is moronic. Completely moronic.
.
That is moronic. Completely moronic.
but murdering everything else in Garden Earth is ok - you've not explained how having a vasectomy or using a condom is not the same as an abortion ... fill us in.
.
don't be a coward, give it a whirll -
.
View attachment 391758
.
have you your letter from the priest, their permission for your vasectomy ... bing fixed it for himself no different than an abortion.

A sperm is not a human life you fucking moron. A fertilized egg, is. THe sperm by itself, will not grow up and one day have a family of it's own.

The fertilized egg, will. Because it is a human life. A brand new human life, with a lot of growing in front of him or her, but a human never the less.
.

What part of that, is too hard for you to understand?
.
preventative intervention is the same no matter when it occurs - and is the choice made by the individual involved - bing chose abortion for himself while denying the same to others the same as you and your self centric, qualifying motivations intervening against the lives of others you have no legitimacy being involved with.
.
The sperm is not.
you are a joke by using a condom you are preventing a birth. the very purpose of a vasectomy is the prevention of life - your doing nothing more than screaming fire in a packed theatre.

Except it obvious does matter whether the intervention occurs, before the parts come together it is parts that could become something greater if the right chain of events happens,


and later on, it is a human being.
.
Except it obvious does matter whether the intervention occurs, before the parts come together it is parts that could become something greater if the right chain of events happens,
and later on, it is a human being.
.
the line you yourself have drawn is not conciliatory, the intervention is the same result no matter when it occurs - you are nothing more than a disingenuous sociopathic zealot.

at least build and sale your chastity belt you alone have the key for, they will be forever in your debt.

THe line is not one I have drawn, the line is the difference between a human life and not a human life.


YOur denial of this, is you just stonewalling like a troll.
.
THe line is not one I have drawn, the line is the difference between a human life and not a human life.


YOur denial of this, is you just stonewalling like a troll.
.
no, its your making a false issue from the same result - from beginning to end.

you must have no intervention, intercourse but only for the sole purpose you deem as animalistic reproduction whether or not pregnancy is the result for your objection to be valid.

and they will need your approval to make the attempt being certain by your presence no mistakes or loss of fluids occurs.

No, I mustn't. Your words have no weight to them. They are structured as though it is a conclusion with a supporting argument.

But, your claims are empty assertions, with no actual reasons or logic to give them weight.
.
No, I mustn't. Your words have no weight to them. They are structured as though it is a conclusion with a supporting argument.

But, your claims are empty assertions, with no actual reasons or logic to give them weight.
.
you mustn't what - bear witness to their intercourse to preserve whatever may spill from their bedside.

You said I must. I said, NOT.

You went weird, because you cannot support your conclusion. Yet you will hold to it, for reasons you can not, or will not share.
.
You went weird, because you cannot support your conclusion. Yet you will hold to it, for reasons you can not, or will not share.
.
preventative intervention is the same no matter when it occurs - and is the choice made by the individual involved -
the line you yourself have drawn is not conciliatory, the intervention is the same result no matter when it occurs -
no, its your making a false issue from the same result - from beginning to end.
.
my position has been made perfectly clear - your end run is nothing more than sociopathic zealotry.

Yes, your position is clear. It just refuses to recognize that a fertilized egg is different than a sperm cell.

ie, you are delusional.
 

Correll

Diamond Member
Joined
Mar 16, 2015
Messages
70,136
Reaction score
13,994
Points
2,220
1. Some Christians wanted some official recognition. You don't get to pretend it was the group as a whole, when it was not.
I never said all wanted official recognition of Christianity in the Constitution. The ones that did - lost.

You are the one pretending that colonial Christians were united in desire to pressure the framers Into creating a Christian Nation. Yet you admit that Christians back then were not of one mind at all. Perhaps most involved Christians in Philadelphia were united with the non-Christian secularists from the start In keeping Christianity out of Constitution. It comes to mind that the Virginia Baptist’s were opposed to forming a Christian nationalist Governnent.

That presents the flaw in your Christian Nation creationism because you can only point to the Protestant Christian majority to justify your fake Christian Nation reality. So if the Protestant Christian majority did not want to form a Christian Nation at the founding who are you to tell us and them 200 years later that they did?

When you reference a group, without qualifiers as wanting to do something you are claiming that the majority of the group and/or the leadership support that goal.



When I said that "the Founding Fathers" founded the nation as a Christian Nation, my obvious intent was that the majority of the Founding Fathers did that with that intent.


When you stated that "Christians" wanted to have official recognition of Christianity in the Constitution, you were stating that "Christians" as a group, were behind that move.


Which does not seem to be the case.
 

Correll

Diamond Member
Joined
Mar 16, 2015
Messages
70,136
Reaction score
13,994
Points
2,220
2. Other Christians wanted to avoid anything that looked like a step towards an Established State Church.
Then why run around telling everybody that America was founded as a Christian Nation when it wasn’t?

Why don’t you respect what the 1790’s Christians wanted to avoid? When you say America was founded as a Christian Nation it sounds exactly like the founders took all the steps they needed to establish a state/nations church and religion.

1. I don't. You asked, I answered. I find it hard to believe that that is too complex for you to understand.

2. I don't want a National Established Church. NEXT!

3. Your confusion and inability to tell the difference in the words, "Christian Nation" and "Established State Church" is a strategy designed with the sole intent of justifying your anti-Christian bigotry. You are fooling no one.
 

Correll

Diamond Member
Joined
Mar 16, 2015
Messages
70,136
Reaction score
13,994
Points
2,220
I entertained the idea of reparations for slavery, it WAS within the real of probability. They lost me, slavery ended 155 years ago. Rioting and destroying stuff, um no fuck racism. Its happening NOW. Racism is a lie. Riots are very real...
If we are going to consider reparations it should be for existing blacks to pay us for allowing them to stay in the US and make this their home. We pay many monthly for food, rent and medical treatments when needed. If they were still living in a tribe in Africa, what would their life be? Would they own a car, computer, a wardrobe and be considered "poor?" Doubt it.
White people get money for food, rent and medical treatment. What are those reparations for?
White people aren't asking for reparations.
1.Arguendo is a Latin legal term meaning for the sake of argument.
Arguendo - Wikipedia

Before the knee jerk aspersions learned in government school kick in (see what I did there?), let’s try this as an intellectual exercise: examples of evil as the motivation, as the fuel for many events and doctrines, abound. Consider the case of the Las Vegas shooter by whose actions 868 people were injured, and 60 killed, with no benefit to the shooter….and, as of this date, no motive. Call it evil.

Now, take the further step of personification of evil, as Satan, or as Obama’s mentor, Saul Alinsky posited, Lucifer….just as God can be viewed as the personification of good.



2. Now, bigger picture: Richard Wurmbrand begins his book “Marx and Satan,” [*Wurmbrand, Marx and Satan, https://legiochristi.com/static/lit/Marx_and_Satan.pdf] this way: “Marxism today governs over one third of mankind. If it could be shown that the originators and perpetrators of this movement were indeed behind-closed doors devil-worshipers, consciously exploiting Satanic powers, would not such a startling realization require action?”
I’d say a careful consideration of such a widespread power of evil a worthy endeavor, rather than dismissing it out of hand.




3. “Paul Kengor is a professor of political science at Grove City College in Grove City, Pennsylvania. He has just published "The Devil and Karl Marx,"
The Devil and Karl Marx

4. The book has come out during an important time in our history since so many Americans, particularly our youth, have fallen for the seductive siren song of socialism taught to them by the academic elite.

5. "The Black Book of Communism," edited by Stephane Courtois, details the Marxist-Leninist death toll in the 20th century. Here is the breakdown: USSR, 20 million deaths; China, 65 million; Vietnam, 1 million; North Korea and Cambodia, 2 million each; Eastern Europe, 1 million; and about 3.5 million in Latin America, Africa and Afghanistan. These figures understate those detailed by Professor R.J. Rummel in "Death by Government." He finds that from 1917 until its collapse, the Soviet Union murdered or caused the death of 61 million people, mostly its own citizens. From 1949 to 1976, Communist China's Mao Zedong regime was responsible for the death of as many as 78 million of its own citizens.” The Devil and Karl Marx



6. Evil “ There are certain words that have passed out of the realm of public debate. One of them is the word “evil.” Its disuse is certainly not because the world is any less dangerous, or because people have finally gotten the better of their base nature, or because Satan has been neutered. When was the last time you heard anyone use the word in common conversation? When was the last time it was uttered by one of your political leaders?”
What does the Bible say about recognizing evil?

The doctrines that result in million upon millions of dead human being are evil.



Evil always takes advantage of ignorance (Proverbs 7:6–27)

If the Bible isn’t your source of knowledge, Santayana put it this way:

Those who cannot learn from history are doomed to repeat it.
Acts 4
32 All the believers were one in heart and mind. No one claimed that any of their possessions was their own, but they shared everything they had. 33 With great power the apostles continued to testify to the resurrection of the Lord Jesus. And God’s grace was so powerfully at work in them all 34 that there were no needy persons among them. For from time to time those who owned land or houses sold them, brought the money from the sales 35 and put it at the apostles’ feet, and it was distributed to anyone who had need.


Which has what to do with the OP? A sign of your indoctrination?

The Bible has naught to do with and certainly doesn't endorse, socialism.
Not hardly.

An accurate understanding of the Bible requires the distinction between 'redistribution' and 'generosity.'

"Some people conclude from these verses that the Bible supports government-enforced wealth redistribution. But what these verses really show is that the Bible advocates generosity.

These are two very different concepts.
Generosity springs from free will....not force, coercion, or threats.


The motivation to give and share originates in compassion, as 1 John 3:17 indicates—but there is choice involved.

With socialism, it is the opposite.
Redistribution of wealth is always by force of government. The government simply uses its overwhelming power to take what it thinks is “fair” from the “givers.” Is God a Socialist?

Generosity is based on choice....on free will....the cornerstone of Judeo-Christian tradition.
Not so with any of these six: Socialism, Liberalism, Communism, et al



And this is the face of government coercion.....


Under the Bolsheviks, the dynasty with which Franklin Roosevelt felt comradeship, slaughter was so omnipresent that corpse-disposal actually became a problem.

There was resistance to the Lefts mandate of collectivism, especially in the Ukraine.
September 11, 1932, Stalin wrote to his assistant, 'We must take steps so we do not lose the Ukraine.' So, 1932-1933, all food supplies in the Ukraine were confiscated.


Those who tried to leave were shot, those who remained, starved to death. Men, women, children. They died tortuously slowly.
NKVD squads collected the dead. They received 200 grams of bread for every dead body they delivered; often they didn't wait until the victim was dead.


'Lazar Kaganovich (together with Vyacheslav Molotov) participated with the All-Ukrainian Party Conference of 1930 and were given the task of implementation of thecollectivization policy that caused a catastrophic 1932–33 famine known as theHolodomor. He also personally oversaw grain confiscations during the same time periods.

'Similar policies also inflicted enormous suffering on the Soviet Central Asian republic ofKazakhstan, the Kuban region, Crimea, the lower Volga region, and other parts of the Soviet Union. As an emissary of the Central Committee of the Communist Party, Kaganovich traveled to Ukraine, the central regions of the USSR, the NorthernCaucasus, and Siberia demanding the acceleration of collectivization and repressions against theKulaks, who were generally blamed for the slow progress of collectivization.'
Lazar Kaganovich - Wikipedia the free encyclopedia
That religious freedom was enshrined in the Constitution, does not mean that the nation was not a Christian nation.
Since no one had to be a Christian to be an American citizen under the new Constitution m, there is no way it truthfully can be said that America was founded as a Christian nation.

Sure it can. The nation was massively majority Christian, with Christians dominating every aspect of public life and with Churches happy to engage in politics and Christian ideas and culture enshrined in law and culture.

That it also respected the religious freedom of every citizen, including religious minorities, does not conflict with that.
So where exactly did Jesus command His followers to seize earthly political power and set up Christian nations, where they can then lord over and dominate others?
Your pretense that it is the Christians who are the would be tyrants in our society today, is not fooling anyone. Try again lefty.
 

Correll

Diamond Member
Joined
Mar 16, 2015
Messages
70,136
Reaction score
13,994
Points
2,220
.... yes. It is a Christian Nation, with a fucked up secular elite that is increasingly out of touch with their people.
pretty sure you are just a religious bigot in touch with white evangelical Christian nationalists and out of touch with the multicultural pluralistic Christians who reject white Christian nationalism.

Here we have a white Reverend and a black Preacher. One (Baird) a white Christian Nationalist, The other a black preacher (Darby) who rejects the religious right’s Christian Nation propaganda.


More than 80 percent of evangelicals voted for Trump in 2016. The poll found that 80 percent of Republican (or Republican leaning) Southerners approve of Trump, while only 4 percent of Democrats do.​
The Rev. Dr. Kevin Baird, a conservative who pastors Charleston Legacy Church in West Ashley, said he thought there would have been less agreement among Southerners on whether the nation was founded as a Christian country.​
“Make America Christian Again: Christian Nationalism and Voting for Donald Trump in the 2016 Presidential Election,” by Andrew L. Whitehead, Samuel L. Perry and Joseph O. Baker, asserts that many evangelicals voted for Trump to preserve the United States’ perceived Christian heritage, even though they thought Trump behaved immorally.​
Baird, who said America was founded on Christian precepts, added that there are many topics about which most conservative Christians agree,​
The Rev. Joseph Darby, first vice president for the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People in Charleston, disagreed with claims that the country was intended to be explicitly Christian.​

Darby, who also pastors Nichols Chapel AME in Charleston, didn’t mince words in describing Christian nationalists and white evangelical denominations with exclusionary views on immigration and multiculturalism.​

“It’s called Christian hypocrisy,” Darby said.​

Darby added that the country should not be in favor of one particular religion. Rather, he said politicians and voters should “love God and love others as we would be loved.”​

“If the laws reflect that, we’d be one nation under all,” he said. “If you have something that’s exclusively Christian, you’re walking a very slippery, nationalist slope. Everyone in America is not Christian.”​
Is Darby in your mind one of those “fucked up secular elite” ?​


I don't know his socio-economic status to say if he is one of the elite, or just one of their dupes.
 

NotfooledbyW

Gold Member
Joined
Jul 9, 2014
Messages
10,847
Reaction score
1,313
Points
245
I don't know his socio-economic status to say if he is one of the elite, or just one of their dupes.
Why would Christian Reverend Darby be a dupe for recognizing the FACT that America was not founded as a Christian and is not a Christian Nation today?

is he duped by the truth?

This goes to show that you are very deceptive when you cite Christian majority status as you sole reason for declaring America to be a Christian Nation. Your argument is absurd considering that most Christians in America reject you and your Christian Nation hogwash.
 

ding

Confront reality
Joined
Oct 25, 2016
Messages
75,465
Reaction score
5,688
Points
1,855
Location
Houston
It would be so refreshing to have an honest discussion for once with an advocate for abortion.
.
It would be so refreshing to have an honest discussion for once with an advocate for abortion.
.
- and your purpose for the "discussion" you have not already imposed by your incendiary statements.
To state the obvious; that it is wrong to abort a human life.
To state the obvious; that it is wrong to abort a human life.
but murdering everything else in Garden Earth is ok -
.
View attachment 391463
.
you've not explained how having a vasectomy or using a condom is not the same as an abortion ... fill us in.

That is moronic. Completely moronic.
.
That is moronic. Completely moronic.
but murdering everything else in Garden Earth is ok - you've not explained how having a vasectomy or using a condom is not the same as an abortion ... fill us in.
.
don't be a coward, give it a whirll -
.
View attachment 391758
.
have you your letter from the priest, their permission for your vasectomy ... bing fixed it for himself no different than an abortion.

A sperm is not a human life you fucking moron. A fertilized egg, is. THe sperm by itself, will not grow up and one day have a family of it's own.

The fertilized egg, will. Because it is a human life. A brand new human life, with a lot of growing in front of him or her, but a human never the less.
.

What part of that, is too hard for you to understand?
.
preventative intervention is the same no matter when it occurs - and is the choice made by the individual involved - bing chose abortion for himself while denying the same to others the same as you and your self centric, qualifying motivations intervening against the lives of others you have no legitimacy being involved with.
.
The sperm is not.
you are a joke by using a condom you are preventing a birth. the very purpose of a vasectomy is the prevention of life - your doing nothing more than screaming fire in a packed theatre.

Except it obvious does matter whether the intervention occurs, before the parts come together it is parts that could become something greater if the right chain of events happens,


and later on, it is a human being.
.
Except it obvious does matter whether the intervention occurs, before the parts come together it is parts that could become something greater if the right chain of events happens,
and later on, it is a human being.
.
the line you yourself have drawn is not conciliatory, the intervention is the same result no matter when it occurs - you are nothing more than a disingenuous sociopathic zealot.

at least build and sale your chastity belt you alone have the key for, they will be forever in your debt.

THe line is not one I have drawn, the line is the difference between a human life and not a human life.


YOur denial of this, is you just stonewalling like a troll.
.
THe line is not one I have drawn, the line is the difference between a human life and not a human life.


YOur denial of this, is you just stonewalling like a troll.
.
no, its your making a false issue from the same result - from beginning to end.

you must have no intervention, intercourse but only for the sole purpose you deem as animalistic reproduction whether or not pregnancy is the result for your objection to be valid.

and they will need your approval to make the attempt being certain by your presence no mistakes or loss of fluids occurs.

No, I mustn't. Your words have no weight to them. They are structured as though it is a conclusion with a supporting argument.

But, your claims are empty assertions, with no actual reasons or logic to give them weight.
.
No, I mustn't. Your words have no weight to them. They are structured as though it is a conclusion with a supporting argument.

But, your claims are empty assertions, with no actual reasons or logic to give them weight.
.
you mustn't what - bear witness to their intercourse to preserve whatever may spill from their bedside.

You said I must. I said, NOT.

You went weird, because you cannot support your conclusion. Yet you will hold to it, for reasons you can not, or will not share.
.
You went weird, because you cannot support your conclusion. Yet you will hold to it, for reasons you can not, or will not share.
.
preventative intervention is the same no matter when it occurs - and is the choice made by the individual involved -
the line you yourself have drawn is not conciliatory, the intervention is the same result no matter when it occurs -
no, its your making a false issue from the same result - from beginning to end.
.
my position has been made perfectly clear - your end run is nothing more than sociopathic zealotry.

Yes, your position is clear. It just refuses to recognize that a fertilized egg is different than a sperm cell.

ie, you are delusional.
He's a subversive. He's knows he's making a bullshit argument. But it's the stupidest argument one could make.
 

ding

Confront reality
Joined
Oct 25, 2016
Messages
75,465
Reaction score
5,688
Points
1,855
Location
Houston
I don't know his socio-economic status to say if he is one of the elite, or just one of their dupes.
Why would Christian Reverend Darby be a dupe for recognizing the FACT that America was not founded as a Christian and is not a Christian Nation today?

is he duped by the truth?

This goes to show that you are very deceptive when you cite Christian majority status as you sole reason for declaring America to be a Christian Nation. Your argument is absurd considering that most Christians in America reject you and your Christian Nation hogwash.
You are like a dog with a bone on this Christian nation thingee.
 

Correll

Diamond Member
Joined
Mar 16, 2015
Messages
70,136
Reaction score
13,994
Points
2,220
I don't know his socio-economic status to say if he is one of the elite, or just one of their dupes.
Why would Christian Reverend Darby be a dupe for recognizing the FACT that America was not founded as a Christian and is not a Christian Nation today?

is he duped by the truth?

This goes to show that you are very deceptive when you cite Christian majority status as you sole reason for declaring America to be a Christian Nation. Your argument is absurd considering that most Christians in America reject you and your Christian Nation hogwash.

Because the secular elite he is carrying water for, is using him to support their anti-Christian bigotry.

It actually does not hurt my position, even if the majority of Christians disagree with me. THeir opinion does not negate historical facts, such as the massive majority that Christians had at the time of the Founding and for the most of our history.
 

Correll

Diamond Member
Joined
Mar 16, 2015
Messages
70,136
Reaction score
13,994
Points
2,220
I don't know his socio-economic status to say if he is one of the elite, or just one of their dupes.
Why would Christian Reverend Darby be a dupe for recognizing the FACT that America was not founded as a Christian and is not a Christian Nation today?

is he duped by the truth?

This goes to show that you are very deceptive when you cite Christian majority status as you sole reason for declaring America to be a Christian Nation. Your argument is absurd considering that most Christians in America reject you and your Christian Nation hogwash.
You are like a dog with a bone on this Christian nation thingee.

Yeah, he brings it up and then askes me why I am so set on it.


LOL!!!
 

PoliticalChic

Diamond Member
Joined
Oct 6, 2008
Messages
101,249
Reaction score
35,712
Points
2,260
Location
Brooklyn, NY
I don't know his socio-economic status to say if he is one of the elite, or just one of their dupes.
Why would Christian Reverend Darby be a dupe for recognizing the FACT that America was not founded as a Christian and is not a Christian Nation today?

is he duped by the truth?

This goes to show that you are very deceptive when you cite Christian majority status as you sole reason for declaring America to be a Christian Nation. Your argument is absurd considering that most Christians in America reject you and your Christian Nation hogwash.




Did you not know that there is a clear reference to Jesus Christ in the US Constitution?
 

ding

Confront reality
Joined
Oct 25, 2016
Messages
75,465
Reaction score
5,688
Points
1,855
Location
Houston
I don't know his socio-economic status to say if he is one of the elite, or just one of their dupes.
Why would Christian Reverend Darby be a dupe for recognizing the FACT that America was not founded as a Christian and is not a Christian Nation today?

is he duped by the truth?

This goes to show that you are very deceptive when you cite Christian majority status as you sole reason for declaring America to be a Christian Nation. Your argument is absurd considering that most Christians in America reject you and your Christian Nation hogwash.
You are like a dog with a bone on this Christian nation thingee.

Yeah, he brings it up and then askes me why I am so set on it.


LOL!!!
He's playing a word game. But it won't change the fact that America was founded by a people who were overwhelmingly Christian. Whose values and principles were based on Christian values and principles. He's trying to downplay America's Christian heritage.
 

NotfooledbyW

Gold Member
Joined
Jul 9, 2014
Messages
10,847
Reaction score
1,313
Points
245
Because the secular elite he is carrying water for, is using him to support their anti-Christian bigotry.
Do you know as a matter of fact that Darby a Black Christian Preacher obtained his conclusion that America was not founded as a Christian Nation from a cabal of evil fuched up secular elites? if you don’t have any evidence of that you are lying to have maintain your argument.

America was not founded as a Christian Nation. That is a facts based conclusion reached by millions of Americans of all religions and non-religions including millions of Christians like Reverend Darby.

Your mindless dismissal of millions of right thinking Americans including Christians that cannot agree with you tells me that you are some kind white Christian supremacist elite.
 

NotfooledbyW

Gold Member
Joined
Jul 9, 2014
Messages
10,847
Reaction score
1,313
Points
245
He's trying to downplay America's Christian heritage.

You are a liar. I have never downplayed America’s Christian heritage. Colonial America was predominate Christian at the time of the founding but it was not founded Constitutionally on one single word about Christianity, Jesus, or the Bible. There are many Christian Nations in the world as expressed in their Constitutions. America is not one of them and never was. Just a fact that is not detrimental to America’s Christian heritage. In fact I have posted excerpts that the secular nature of our Federal government is what many think helped CHRISTIANITY to flourish under total freedom of and freedom from religion.
 

ding

Confront reality
Joined
Oct 25, 2016
Messages
75,465
Reaction score
5,688
Points
1,855
Location
Houston
He's trying to downplay America's Christian heritage.

You are a liar. I have never downplayed America’s Christian heritage. Colonial America was predominate Christian at the time of the founding but it was not founded Constitutionally on one single word about Christianity, Jesus, or the Bible. There are many Christian Nations in the world as expressed in their Constitutions. America is not one of them and never was. Just a fact that is not detrimental to America’s Christian heritage. In fact I have posted excerpts that the secular nature of our Federal government is what many think helped CHRISTIANITY to flourish under total freedom of and freedom from religion.
By virtue of you taking exception with the phrase "Christian nation," I think you have. America can be a Christian nation without being a theocracy which is what you are really arguing against.
 

abu afak

ALLAH SNACKBAR!
Joined
Mar 3, 2006
Messages
3,352
Reaction score
864
Points
315
Notice everyone EXCPEPT 'ding' is capable of posting more than one sentence, and can use sources to back their claims.
ding is just a Lying-for-Jesus multi-posting TROLL with NO real contribution... ever.



`
 

New Topics

Most reactions - Past 7 days

Forum List

Top