Our founding fathers were not Christian

[Amanda]

Like I stated before about cyberstalking, Allie. You remind me of a groupie. Amanda as well.

Jamie

It's a message board, get used to it.

 

[Amanda]

no, she's not. But still, it's fun to play.

fun for whom? i myself dont have that luxury of time. i prefer content to mull over rather than incipience. gnats are merely an annoyance, as are mosquitoes. the bane of mankind (or woman kind)

Then why are you fucking around on the interwebz?

You'd ignore me if you could, but we both know that's impossible.

 

[Intense]

There were 95 Senators and Representatives in the First Federal Congress. If one combines the total number of signatures on the Declaration, the Articles of Confederation and the Constitution with the non-signing Constitutional Convention delegates, and then adds to that sum the number of congressmen in the First Federal Congress, one obtains a total of 238 "slots" or "positions" in these groups which one can classify as "Founding Fathers" of the United States. Because 40 individuals had multiple roles (they signed multiple documents and/or also served in the First Federal Congress), there are 204 unique individuals in this group of "Founding Fathers." These are the people who did one or more of the following:

- signed the Declaration of Independence
- signed the Articles of Confederation
- attended the Constitutional Convention of 1787
- signed the Constitution of the United States of America
- served as Senators in the First Federal Congress (1789-1791)
- served as U.S. Representatives in the First Federal Congress

The religious affiliations of these individuals are summarized below. Obviously this is a very restrictive set of names, and does not include everyone who could be considered an "American Founding Father." But most of the major figures that people generally think of in this context are included using these criteria, including George Washington, Thomas Jefferson, Samuel Adams, Benjamin Franklin, John Adams, John Hancock, James Madison, Alexander Hamilton and more.


Religious Affiliation
of U.S. Founding Fathers # of
Founding
Fathers % of
Founding
Fathers
Episcopalian/Anglican 88 or 54.7%
Presbyterian 30 or 18.6%
Congregationalist 27 or 16.8%
Quaker 7 or 4.3%
Dutch Reformed/German Reformed 6 or 3.7%
Lutheran 5 or 3.1%
Catholic 3 or 1.9%
Huguenot 3 or 1.9%
Unitarian 3 or 1.9%
Methodist 2 or 1.2%
Calvinist 1 or 0.6%
TOTAL 204

NOTES: The table above counts people and not "roles," meaning that individuals have not been counted multiple times if they appear on more than one of the lists above. Roger Sherman, for example, signed all three foundational documents and he was a Representative in the First Federal Congress, but he has been counted only once.

In the table above, some people have been counted more than once because they changed religious affiliation from one denomination to another. Thus, the individual amounts added together total more than 100%. This method is used because it results in accurate numbers for each individual religious affiliation. For example, a total of 7 Quakers are shown in the table above. There were indeed 7 Quakers who were in this group. (However, not all of these were life-long Quakers.) For the most part, very few Founding Fathers switched denomination during their lifetime (less than 8%), so double-counting has occurred only rarely in this table. Quakers, in fact, are more likely to have switched denominations than members of any other religious denomination. Along with taking up arms and supporting military action against the British, a large proportion of Quaker Founding Father officially renounced or were expelled from the ardently pacifistic denomination they had been raised in and joined another denomination (usually Episcopalianism).

Religion of the Founding Fathers of America

 

[Smartt33]

Actually, there is no illusion. America was indeed founded on a solid foundation of Christian principles, and high moral values. The thing is, the two can actually work together. Non-Christians can have high morals, and still not base them on Christian principles. We have to give credit to all the founders, not just the Christians.

Because of the very reasons for which these people were here, religion was certainly an important and maybe even the most important motivator. For some there was the desire to have other faiths other than Catholicism. For some it was because they knew that government run religion is a failure, totally. For some, the Christian faith was far more than was represented by the Catholic faith in the time, and these protestant believers wanted to be free from such theocracy.

I would say that America, as a whole, still has those groups. While following a religious faith may not be important to many people now, the thing that has mostly changed is the moral values.

We can find quotes in favor of both sides of this issue from the very same people, and we can make it seem like they are of one mind in the matter, however, that is allowing one's self to be deceived.

The truth is that America has lost favor with God, and it is Christians who have to shoulder much of the responsibility for that. Christians have not been strong, and willing to stand where needed, in love, in faith, in service, in loyalty to their God, and in battle against immorality. Now, the battle that Christians were supposed to fight has come to their doorstep. It is no longer just out there, it is very personal.

So, we may not be a Christian nation, now, but our foundation was created in Christian principles, and high morals of most. the people.

There is a lot in your post I agree with.

What I take umbrage with ( not referring to you ) is the revisionist history that has taken hold in the Republic, in regards to our founding. I also take umbrage with many of my fellow Americans, who are religious authoritarians, and want to use the long arm of the government to do their bidding against their fellow Americans. And this authoritarian position is done in the name of getting back to the Christian roots.

I have no problem with people of faith, whatever it may be. I am a believer myself. At the same time, I don't believe in trying to twist the Constitution into saying something it doesn't say under the auspices of religion.

That is true as we take one fork in the road. There are Christian people who believe they can "use" the government to promote Christianity. I have to say that I don't think that is the task of our government.

With that said, there are as many or more who want to take the "anti-Christian" fork in the road to promote anything that can be done against what Christians believe. They can do this and make it look like it is secular, where Christians cannot camoflage their drive.

Then there are people who really don't care one way or another as long as they get elected, or get what tney want. That is done in the name od "rights." Is any one way right? no.

When a Christian is in office, or a Non-Christian, they usually make an attempt to see what the people want, but in the final talley, they vote their own convictions or desires.

As a Christian, my post is "citizen of the United States." As a citizen, I am one of "We the people." I am the government, and as much a part of the progress in this country as anyone else. So is everyone else. Also, as a Christian/citizen, I am responsible to serve God, and God only. I must do that in my family life, community life, and as an American. I shall. We must all serve from the heart, In my opinion.

 

[Dreamy]

Hence the difference between philosophy and debate. Lay philosophy consists of unsupported ramblings and wishful thinking.

Debate consists of argument backed up by fact. And a deft touch.

I have written lengthy prose before like Jamie, and had the same thing told to me as you said to Jamie about length. Why is it people will spend hours on a message board reading thread after thread and post after post, but complain about a post being long?

Because most people are multi-tasking while on a message board aka at work. lol

I think it makes much more sense to provide a link for those who want to read more in depth but to take what one reads,summarize and present an argument or premise for discussion or debate.

Ok that said I like the topic Jamie.

My question would be. "Does it matter" what the founders were since Freedom of Religion" is one of our rights?

 

[JohnStOnge]

I would be willing to bet that if you reasonably defined "founding fathers," you would find that the overwhelming majority of that group were Christians. It'd be interesting, for instance, to trace the history of everyone who signed the Declaration of Independence (Index of Signers by State).

The author of the piece posted to start this thread offered, as far as I can tell, very little substantiation of his or her assertions. The quotes that follow do not do it.

 

[Amanda]

I would be willing to bet that if you reasonably defined "founding fathers," you would find that the overwhelming majority of that group were Christians. It'd be interesting, for instance, to trace the history of everyone who signed the Declaration of Independence (Index of Signers by State).

The author of the piece posted to start this thread offered, as far as I can tell, very little substantiation of his or her assertions. The quotes that follow do not do it.

Considering some of the other threads started by this person I'd say we're lucky we got any sources at all.

 

[JohnStOnge]

By the way, regardless of how the language came about: Without a "Creator" bestowing unalienable rights, there is no basis for unalienable rights. There really isn't.

 

[Intense]

By the way, regardless of how the language came about: Without a "Creator" bestowing unalienable rights, there is no basis for unalienable rights. There really isn't.

Feel free to relinquish yours any time at all.That will be the last decision you have any right to make. I guess Life, Liberty, and the Pursuit of Happiness is too much responsibility for some.

 

[anna]

We are not a christian nation!!! Says the anti- christ muslim hussein!!! Let the muslim speak for himself and for his country!!! Jakarta indonesia!!! Not our country!!! We are americans!!! B hussein is not!!!

 

[BasicGreatGuy]

Actually, there is no illusion. America was indeed founded on a solid foundation of Christian principles, and high moral values. The thing is, the two can actually work together. Non-Christians can have high morals, and still not base them on Christian principles. We have to give credit to all the founders, not just the Christians.

Because of the very reasons for which these people were here, religion was certainly an important and maybe even the most important motivator. For some there was the desire to have other faiths other than Catholicism. For some it was because they knew that government run religion is a failure, totally. For some, the Christian faith was far more than was represented by the Catholic faith in the time, and these protestant believers wanted to be free from such theocracy.

I would say that America, as a whole, still has those groups. While following a religious faith may not be important to many people now, the thing that has mostly changed is the moral values.

We can find quotes in favor of both sides of this issue from the very same people, and we can make it seem like they are of one mind in the matter, however, that is allowing one's self to be deceived.

The truth is that America has lost favor with God, and it is Christians who have to shoulder much of the responsibility for that. Christians have not been strong, and willing to stand where needed, in love, in faith, in service, in loyalty to their God, and in battle against immorality. Now, the battle that Christians were supposed to fight has come to their doorstep. It is no longer just out there, it is very personal.

So, we may not be a Christian nation, now, but our foundation was created in Christian principles, and high morals of most. the people.

There is a lot in your post I agree with.

What I take umbrage with ( not referring to you ) is the revisionist history that has taken hold in the Republic, in regards to our founding. I also take umbrage with many of my fellow Americans, who are religious authoritarians, and want to use the long arm of the government to do their bidding against their fellow Americans. And this authoritarian position is done in the name of getting back to the Christian roots.

I have no problem with people of faith, whatever it may be. I am a believer myself. At the same time, I don't believe in trying to twist the Constitution into saying something it doesn't say under the auspices of religion.

That is true as we take one fork in the road. There are Christian people who believe they can "use" the government to promote Christianity. I have to say that I don't think that is the task of our government.

With that said, there are as many or more who want to take the "anti-Christian" fork in the road to promote anything that can be done against what Christians believe. They can do this and make it look like it is secular, where Christians cannot camoflage their drive.

Then there are people who really don't care one way or another as long as they get elected, or get what tney want. That is done in the name od "rights." Is any one way right? no.

When a Christian is in office, or a Non-Christian, they usually make an attempt to see what the people want, but in the final talley, they vote their own convictions or desires.

As a Christian, my post is "citizen of the United States." As a citizen, I am one of "We the people." I am the government, and as much a part of the progress in this country as anyone else. So is everyone else. Also, as a Christian/citizen, I am responsible to serve God, and God only. I must do that in my family life, community life, and as an American. I shall. We must all serve from the heart, In my opinion.

I wasn't speaking to "promoting" Christianity in my previous post. I was speaking of those who try and use the long arm of the government to force their personal religious ( read: moral stance) on others, even though the actions of person B do not infringe upon the constitutional rights of person A.

I have no problem with people expressing their faith. Be proud of who you are and what you believe. Once you cross the line and start trying to control my life via the government, because you may not like what I or others do at times as adults, and we have a big problem. I will fight against that authoritarian mindset with every fiber of my being.

There are a lot of things I do not participate in, for various and sundry reasons. At the same time, I don't believe in telling Suzie Q. Public she can't do thus and thus, because it "bothers" on whatever personal level. It is to that mindset I say, "Get over it. Live your life and let others do the same. I have a mom and a dad. I don't need or want the government to be such to me. And in my opinion, a lot of nanny state has come about, because many religious people want to thrust their religious convictions on others. And when you confront these people with the Constitution, all they can do is spin and rationalize.

*Note "You" was used in a plural sense and was not used or intended to be received as a personal insult to you Smart.

 

[vincubus]

I would be willing to bet that if you reasonably defined "founding fathers," you would find that the overwhelming majority of that group were Christians. It'd be interesting, for instance, to trace the history of everyone who signed the Declaration of Independence (Index of Signers by State).

The author of the piece posted to start this thread offered, as far as I can tell, very little substantiation of his or her assertions. The quotes that follow do not do it.

jethro tull rules.

christian appearance and being a christian aren't the same thing. most ppl had one book in their house-the bible. in the face of this superstition, it would not do for an atheist to tout their atheism, but pander to the ignorant masses in order to establish a system (heavily corrupted today) that was the desire of many of the revolutionaries who wanted power.

having attended church for over 25 years, i can certainly believe that many who claimed to be christian in fact were not. but then, only your god is capable of judging if someone is truly a christian or not, but concerning the founders, i am highly skeptical.

you will need to excuse amanda. she is jealous because jamie threatens to take away attention from her. jamie does it by using her intellect, while amanda can only deploy vapid repartie that falls flat and a flirtatious manner. she will hump anyones leg to get her ears scratched.

btw, the case could be made using kantian dignity to support unalienable rights and so removing some "creator" from the equation

 

[The Illusion]

I would be willing to bet that if you reasonably defined "founding fathers," you would find that the overwhelming majority of that group were Christians. It'd be interesting, for instance, to trace the history of everyone who signed the Declaration of Independence (Index of Signers by State).

The author of the piece posted to start this thread offered, as far as I can tell, very little substantiation of his or her assertions. The quotes that follow do not do it.

Do you need me to go through and underline all the sources or will you just admit right now that you didnt read the whole thing?

Jamie

 

[AllieBaba]

The founding fathers were primarily Christian and created the nation using Christian principles.

That's a fact. You can lie about it all you like, but the truth stands.

And the statement that Illusion's intellect is superior to Amanda's is laughable.

 

[Amanda]

The founding fathers were primarily Christian and created the nation using Christian principles.

That's a fact. You can lie about it all you like, but the truth stands.

And the statement that Illusion's intellect is superior to Amanda's is laughable.

Aw Alli, that's sweet.

I don't pretend to be smart, I'm just a country girl that calls it like I see it.

 

[vincubus]

The founding fathers were primarily Christian and created the nation using Christian principles.

That's a fact. You can lie about it all you like, but the truth stands.

And the statement that Illusion's intellect is superior to Amanda's is laughable.

you have claimed that jamie wouldnt know an intellectual if one sat on her face or visa versa. i then asked yoiu to post as an example of what you feel an intellectual would post as. and the following is what you post:

"The founding fathers were primarily Christian and created the nation using Christian principles.

That's a fact. You can lie about it all you like, but the truth stands."

and the lack of citations for your "facts" is conspicuously absent, and yet there is a great deal of yelling about jamie not citing a clearly well thought out and intelligent post. and no, dont try to say that you are doing what the romans do. that wont wash.

if the above i quoted from you is an example of what you claim is intellectualism or intellectual, then you are simply yapping at jamies heels like an attack hamster. your cage misses you. neither you nor your girlfriend (refer to the projected inferred face sitting) amanda have posted anything of intellectual inspiration or content. y'alls jealousy of jamie is blatant, garish and mediocre.

oh btw, you get the last word. smile. yes consider it a gift.

 

[JBeukema]

Look, there are two possibilities:
-They were not Christian

-They were Christian... making their creation of a secular government devoid of Christianity all the more poignant and arguing even more strongly for keeping Jefferson's wall of separation intact.

 

[JBeukema]

since the first 'Christian' I saw listed was Adams

Positive Atheism's Big List of John Adams Quotations

 

[JBeukema]

I would be willing to bet that if you reasonably defined "founding fathers," you would find that the overwhelming majority of that group were Christians..

Deists, actually.

 

[The Illusion]

The founding fathers were primarily Christian and created the nation using Christian principles.

That's a fact. You can lie about it all you like, but the truth stands.

And the statement that Illusion's intellect is superior to Amanda's is laughable.

Aw Alli, that's sweet.

I don't pretend to be smart, I'm just a country girl that calls it like I see it.

Id appreciate it if you either stayed on topic in my topics or stayed off them. If you cannot stay on topic, then post something with content. Id appreciate it. Thanks.

Jamie