What's new
US Message Board 🦅 Political Discussion Forum

Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!

Were Most Of America's Founding Fathers - Christians

Status
Not open for further replies.

NotfooledbyW

Gold Member
Joined
Jul 9, 2014
Messages
19,239
Reaction score
3,522
Points
245
Why does Thomas Jefferson, state, "So much for your quotation of Calvin's `mon dieu! jusqu'a quand' in which, when addressed to the God of Jesus, and our God, I join you cordially, and await his time and will with more readiness than reluctance."

Perhaps you should read the entire letter:

From Thomas Jefferson to John Adams, 11 April 1823​

Monticello April 11. 23.
Dear Sir
The wishes expressed, in your last favor, that I may continue in life and health until I become a Calvinist, at least in his exclamation of ‘mon Dieu! jusque à quand’! would make me immortal. I can never join Calvin in addressing his god. he was indeed an Atheist, which I can never be; or rather his religion was Dæmonism. if ever man worshipped a false god, he did. the being described in his 5. points is not the God whom you and I acknolege and adore, the Creator and benevolent governor of the world; but a dæmon of malignant spirit. it would be more pardonable to believe in no god at all, than to blaspheme him by the atrocious attributes of Calvin. indeed I think that every Christian sect gives a great handle to Atheism by their general dogma that, without a revelation, there would not be sufficient proof of the being of a god. now one sixth of mankind only are supposed to be Christians: the other five sixths then, who do not believe in the Jewish and Christian revelation, are without a knolege of the existence of a god! this gives compleatly a gain de cause to the disciples of Ocellus, Timaeus, Spinosa, Diderot and D’Holbach. the argument which they rest on as triumphant and unanswerable is that, in every hypothesis of Cosmogony you must admit an eternal pre-existence of something; and according to the rule of sound philosophy, you are never to employ two principles to solve a difficulty when one will suffice. they say then that it is more simple to believe at once in the eternal pre-existence of the world, as it is now going on, and may for ever go on by the principle of reproduction which we see and witness, than to believe in the eternal pre-existence of an ulterior cause, or Creator of the world, a being whom we see not, and know not, of whose form substance and mode or place of existence, or of action no sense informs us, no power of the mind enables us to delineate or comprehend. on the contrary I hold (without appeal to revelation) that when we take a view of the Universe, in it’s parts general or particular, it is impossible for the human mind not to percieve and feel a conviction of design, consummate skill, and indefinite power in every atom of it’s composition. the movements of the heavenly bodies, so exactly held in their course by the balance of centrifugal and centripetal forces, the structure of our earth itself, with it’s distribution of lands, waters and atmosphere, animal and vegetable bodies, examined in all their minutest particles, insects mere atoms of life, yet as perfectly organised as man or mammoth, the mineral substances, their generation and uses, it is impossible, I say, for the human mind not to believe that there is , in all this, design, cause and effect, up to an ultimate cause, a fabricator of all things from matter and motion, their preserver and regulator while permitted to exist in their present forms, and their regenerator into new and other forms. we see, too, evident proofs of the necessity of a superintending power to maintain the Universe in it’s course and order. stars, well known, have disappeared, new ones have come into view, comets, in their incalculable courses, may run foul of suns and planets and require renovation under other laws; certain races of animals are become extinct; and were there no restoring power, all existences might extinguish successively, one by one, until all should be reduced to a shapeless chaos. so irresistible are these evidences of an intelligent and powerful Agent that, of the infinite numbers of men who have existed thro’ all time, they have believed, in the proportion of a million at least to Unit, in the hypothesis of an eternal pre-existence of a creator, rather than in that of a self-existent Universe. surely this unanimous sentiment renders this more probable than that of the few in the other hypothesis some early Christians indeed have believed in the coeternal pre-existance of both the Creator and the world, without changing their relation of cause & effect. that this was the opinion of StThomas, we are informed by Cardinal Toleto, in these words ‘Deus ab æterno fuit jam omnipotens, sicut cum produxit mundum. ab æterno potuit producere mundum.—si sol ab æterno esset, lumen an æterno esset; et si pes, similiter vestigium. at lumen et vestigium effectus sunt efficientis solis et pedis; potuit ergo cum causâ æterna effectus coæterna esse. cujus sententiæ est S. Thomas Theologorum primus.’ Cardinal Toleta.
Of the nature of this being we know nothing. Jesus tells us that ‘God is a Spirit.’ 4. John 24. but without defining what a spirit is ‘πνευμα ὁ θεος.’ down to the 3d century we know that it was still deemed material; but of a lighter subtler matter than then our gross bodies. so says Origen. ‘Deus igitur, cui anima similis est, juxta Originem, reapte corporalis est; sed graviorum tantum ratione corporum incorporeus.’ these are the words of Huet in his commentary on Origen. Origen himself says ‘appellatio ασοματον apud nostros scriptores est inusitata et incognita.’ so also Tertullian ‘quis autem negabit Deum esse corpus, etsi deus spiritus? spiritus etiam corporis sui generis, in suâ effigie.’ Tertullian. these two fathers were of the 3d century. Calvin’s character of this supreme being seems chiefly copied from that of the Jews. but the reformation of these blasphemous attributes, and substitution of those more worthy, pure and sublime, seems to have been the chief object of Jesus in his discources to the Jews: and his doctrine of the Cosmogony of the world is very clearly laid down in the 3 first verses of the 1st chapter of John, in these words, ‘εν αρχη ην ὁ λογος, και ὁ λογος ην προς τον θεον και θεος ην ὁ λογος. οὑτος ην εν αρχη προς τον θεον. παντα δε αυτου εγενετο, και χωρις αυτου εγενετο ουδε ἑν ὁ γεγονεν.’ which truly translated means ‘in the beginning God existed, and reason [or mind] was with God, and that mind was God. this was in the beginning with God. all things were created by it, and without it was made not one thing which was made.’ yet this text, so plainly declaring the doctrine of Jesus that the world was created by the supreme, intelligent being, has been perverted by modern Christians to build up a second person of their tritheism by a mistranslation of the word λογος. one of it’s legitimate meanings indeed is ‘a word.’ but, in that sense, it makes an unmeaning jargon: while the other meaning ‘reason,’ equally legitimate, explains rationally the eternal preexistence of God, and his creation of the world. knowing how incomprehensible it was that ‘a word,’ the mere action or articulation of the voice and organs of speech could create a world, they undertake to make of this articulation a second preexisting being, and ascribe to him, and not to God, the creation of the universe. the Atheist here plumes himself on the uselessness of such a God, and the simpler hypothesis of a self-existent universe. the truth is that the greatest enemies to the doctrines of Jesus are those calling themselves the expositors of them, who have perverted them for the structure of a system of fancy absolutely incomprehensible, and without any foundation in his genuine words. and the day will come when the mystical generation of Jesus, by the supreme being as his father in the womb of a virgin will be classed with the fable of the generation of Minerva in the brain of Jupiter. but we may hope that the dawn of reason and freedom of thought in these United States will do away all this artificial scaffolding, and restore to us the primitive and genuine doctrines of this the most venerated reformer of human errors.
So much for your quotation of Calvin’s ‘mon dieu! jusqu’a quand’ in which, when addressed to the God of Jesus, and our God, I join you cordially, and await his time and will with more readiness than reluctance. may we meet there again, in Congress, with our antient Colleagues, and recieve with them the seal of approbation ‘Well done, good and faithful servants.’
Th: Jefferson
 

NotfooledbyW

Gold Member
Joined
Jul 9, 2014
Messages
19,239
Reaction score
3,522
Points
245
Let me include the part of the latter quote, that your cherry picking, missed.
NFBW: Let me include the part just before the latter quote that your cherry picking missed:

The truth is that the greatest enemies to the doctrines of Jesus are those calling themselves the expositors of them, who have perverted them for the structure of a system of fancy absolutely incomprehensible, and without any foundation in his genuine words. And the day will come when the mystical generation of Jesus, by the supreme being as his father in the womb of a virgin will be classed with the fable of the generation of Minerva in the brain of Jupiter. But we may hope that the dawn of reason and freedom of thought in these United States will do away with all this artificial scaffolding, and restore to us the primitive and genuine doctrines of this the most venerated reformer of human errors.​
So elektra do you believe in and/or support the artificial scaffolding of the militant white half of American Catholicism and white Trump Republican evangelical Protestant nationalism that Jefferson and Adams hoped would die out but hasn’t yet.? END2210010232
 

WinterBorn

Diamond Member
Joined
Nov 18, 2011
Messages
49,482
Reaction score
17,118
Points
2,260
Location
Atlanta
Does that mean that nations founded by Jews aren't Jewish States (Israel) or nations founded by Muslims aren't Muslim States (Syria, Iran, etc.)?

That depends on whether the nation is founded as a theocracy or not.

The US was clearly not founded as a theocracy. The founding fathers, some good Christians, added an amendment that forbade making the US a "Christian nation".
 

elektra

Gold Member
Joined
Dec 1, 2013
Messages
13,997
Reaction score
4,332
Points
325
Location
Temecula California
NFBW: Let me include the part just before the latter quote that your cherry picking missed:

The truth is that the greatest enemies to the doctrines of Jesus are those calling themselves the expositors of them, who have perverted them for the structure of a system of fancy absolutely incomprehensible, and without any foundation in his genuine words. And the day will come when the mystical generation of Jesus, by the supreme being as his father in the womb of a virgin will be classed with the fable of the generation of Minerva in the brain of Jupiter. But we may hope that the dawn of reason and freedom of thought in these United States will do away with all this artificial scaffolding, and restore to us the primitive and genuine doctrines of this the most venerated reformer of human errors.​
So elektra do you believe in and/or support the artificial scaffolding of the militant white half of American Catholicism and white Trump Republican evangelical Protestant nationalism that Jefferson and Adams hoped would die out but hasn’t yet.? END2210010232
False premise, nice try
 

elektra

Gold Member
Joined
Dec 1, 2013
Messages
13,997
Reaction score
4,332
Points
325
Location
Temecula California
NFBW: Let me include the part just before the latter quote that your cherry picking missed:

The truth is that the greatest enemies to the doctrines of Jesus are those calling themselves the expositors of them, who have perverted them for the structure of a system of fancy absolutely incomprehensible, and without any foundation in his genuine words. And the day will come when the mystical generation of Jesus, by the supreme being as his father in the womb of a virgin will be classed with the fable of the generation of Minerva in the brain of Jupiter. But we may hope that the dawn of reason and freedom of thought in these United States will do away with all this artificial scaffolding, and restore to us the primitive and genuine doctrines of this the most venerated reformer of human errors.​
So elektra do you believe in and/or support the artificial scaffolding of the militant white half of American Catholicism and white Trump Republican evangelical Protestant nationalism that Jefferson and Adams hoped would die out but hasn’t yet.? END2210010232
This post is from 2014?

You are a bit slow to the table

Very slow, I included the entire lettet that was being discussed. It was not cherry picked as you claim
 
Last edited:

elektra

Gold Member
Joined
Dec 1, 2013
Messages
13,997
Reaction score
4,332
Points
325
Location
Temecula California
Perhaps you should read the entire letter:

From Thomas Jefferson to John Adams, 11 April 1823​

Monticello April 11. 23.
Dear Sir
The wishes expressed, in your last favor, that I may continue in life and health until I become a Calvinist, at least in his exclamation of ‘mon Dieu! jusque à quand’! would make me immortal. I can never join Calvin in addressing his god. he was indeed an Atheist, which I can never be; or rather his religion was Dæmonism. if ever man worshipped a false god, he did. the being described in his 5. points is not the God whom you and I acknolege and adore, the Creator and benevolent governor of the world; but a dæmon of malignant spirit. it would be more pardonable to believe in no god at all, than to blaspheme him by the atrocious attributes of Calvin. indeed I think that every Christian sect gives a great handle to Atheism by their general dogma that, without a revelation, there would not be sufficient proof of the being of a god. now one sixth of mankind only are supposed to be Christians: the other five sixths then, who do not believe in the Jewish and Christian revelation, are without a knolege of the existence of a god! this gives compleatly a gain de cause to the disciples of Ocellus, Timaeus, Spinosa, Diderot and D’Holbach. the argument which they rest on as triumphant and unanswerable is that, in every hypothesis of Cosmogony you must admit an eternal pre-existence of something; and according to the rule of sound philosophy, you are never to employ two principles to solve a difficulty when one will suffice. they say then that it is more simple to believe at once in the eternal pre-existence of the world, as it is now going on, and may for ever go on by the principle of reproduction which we see and witness, than to believe in the eternal pre-existence of an ulterior cause, or Creator of the world, a being whom we see not, and know not, of whose form substance and mode or place of existence, or of action no sense informs us, no power of the mind enables us to delineate or comprehend. on the contrary I hold (without appeal to revelation) that when we take a view of the Universe, in it’s parts general or particular, it is impossible for the human mind not to percieve and feel a conviction of design, consummate skill, and indefinite power in every atom of it’s composition. the movements of the heavenly bodies, so exactly held in their course by the balance of centrifugal and centripetal forces, the structure of our earth itself, with it’s distribution of lands, waters and atmosphere, animal and vegetable bodies, examined in all their minutest particles, insects mere atoms of life, yet as perfectly organised as man or mammoth, the mineral substances, their generation and uses, it is impossible, I say, for the human mind not to believe that there is , in all this, design, cause and effect, up to an ultimate cause, a fabricator of all things from matter and motion, their preserver and regulator while permitted to exist in their present forms, and their regenerator into new and other forms. we see, too, evident proofs of the necessity of a superintending power to maintain the Universe in it’s course and order. stars, well known, have disappeared, new ones have come into view, comets, in their incalculable courses, may run foul of suns and planets and require renovation under other laws; certain races of animals are become extinct; and were there no restoring power, all existences might extinguish successively, one by one, until all should be reduced to a shapeless chaos. so irresistible are these evidences of an intelligent and powerful Agent that, of the infinite numbers of men who have existed thro’ all time, they have believed, in the proportion of a million at least to Unit, in the hypothesis of an eternal pre-existence of a creator, rather than in that of a self-existent Universe. surely this unanimous sentiment renders this more probable than that of the few in the other hypothesis some early Christians indeed have believed in the coeternal pre-existance of both the Creator and the world, without changing their relation of cause & effect. that this was the opinion of StThomas, we are informed by Cardinal Toleto, in these words ‘Deus ab æterno fuit jam omnipotens, sicut cum produxit mundum. ab æterno potuit producere mundum.—si sol ab æterno esset, lumen an æterno esset; et si pes, similiter vestigium. at lumen et vestigium effectus sunt efficientis solis et pedis; potuit ergo cum causâ æterna effectus coæterna esse. cujus sententiæ est S. Thomas Theologorum primus.’ Cardinal Toleta.
Of the nature of this being we know nothing. Jesus tells us that ‘God is a Spirit.’ 4. John 24. but without defining what a spirit is ‘πνευμα ὁ θεος.’ down to the 3d century we know that it was still deemed material; but of a lighter subtler matter than then our gross bodies. so says Origen. ‘Deus igitur, cui anima similis est, juxta Originem, reapte corporalis est; sed graviorum tantum ratione corporum incorporeus.’ these are the words of Huet in his commentary on Origen. Origen himself says ‘appellatio ασοματον apud nostros scriptores est inusitata et incognita.’ so also Tertullian ‘quis autem negabit Deum esse corpus, etsi deus spiritus? spiritus etiam corporis sui generis, in suâ effigie.’ Tertullian. these two fathers were of the 3d century. Calvin’s character of this supreme being seems chiefly copied from that of the Jews. but the reformation of these blasphemous attributes, and substitution of those more worthy, pure and sublime, seems to have been the chief object of Jesus in his discources to the Jews: and his doctrine of the Cosmogony of the world is very clearly laid down in the 3 first verses of the 1st chapter of John, in these words, ‘εν αρχη ην ὁ λογος, και ὁ λογος ην προς τον θεον και θεος ην ὁ λογος. οὑτος ην εν αρχη προς τον θεον. παντα δε αυτου εγενετο, και χωρις αυτου εγενετο ουδε ἑν ὁ γεγονεν.’ which truly translated means ‘in the beginning God existed, and reason [or mind] was with God, and that mind was God. this was in the beginning with God. all things were created by it, and without it was made not one thing which was made.’ yet this text, so plainly declaring the doctrine of Jesus that the world was created by the supreme, intelligent being, has been perverted by modern Christians to build up a second person of their tritheism by a mistranslation of the word λογος. one of it’s legitimate meanings indeed is ‘a word.’ but, in that sense, it makes an unmeaning jargon: while the other meaning ‘reason,’ equally legitimate, explains rationally the eternal preexistence of God, and his creation of the world. knowing how incomprehensible it was that ‘a word,’ the mere action or articulation of the voice and organs of speech could create a world, they undertake to make of this articulation a second preexisting being, and ascribe to him, and not to God, the creation of the universe. the Atheist here plumes himself on the uselessness of such a God, and the simpler hypothesis of a self-existent universe. the truth is that the greatest enemies to the doctrines of Jesus are those calling themselves the expositors of them, who have perverted them for the structure of a system of fancy absolutely incomprehensible, and without any foundation in his genuine words. and the day will come when the mystical generation of Jesus, by the supreme being as his father in the womb of a virgin will be classed with the fable of the generation of Minerva in the brain of Jupiter. but we may hope that the dawn of reason and freedom of thought in these United States will do away all this artificial scaffolding, and restore to us the primitive and genuine doctrines of this the most venerated reformer of human errors.
So much for your quotation of Calvin’s ‘mon dieu! jusqu’a quand’ in which, when addressed to the God of Jesus, and our God, I join you cordially, and await his time and will with more readiness than reluctance. may we meet there again, in Congress, with our antient Colleagues, and recieve with them the seal of approbation ‘Well done, good and faithful servants.’
Th: Jefferson
The entire letter was included in my post, maybe you should figure out what the hell is going on
 

Clyde 154

Gold Member
Joined
May 30, 2021
Messages
1,373
Reaction score
417
Points
208
There is no argument concerning the founding of this nation and its very first legal document drafted by Congress that represented the people of the US.....as to a belief in GOD.

Simply read the declaration that granted US independence from England and to "whom" the continental congress made their Appeal in granting indepedence. The declaration of independence appeals to "natural law" and to the law of the one that created natural law. The Supreme Judge of the World. This langauge follows the declaration, "........all men are created equal and endowed by thier CREATOR with certain unalienable rights (non transferable by man's court), among these.....life and liberty, and the capacity to pursue individual happiness (in other words.......freedom to believe as one wishes whether he believes in atheism, agnostism, or formal religion)..........thus the Bill of Rights were the 1st amendments made to the US Constiution in defining FREEDOM of belief......not freedom from belief....the bill of rights defines certain freedoms the central government cannot legislate away (void of due process)..........free speech, freedom from non-waranted seraches ....etc.,

A belief is an individual reality and unique to every human being.......and the government has neither lot nor part in the matter (in a free society).....until said belief crosses the threshold of denying another of the same rights. Then and only then can Due Process be invoked. When someone's personal rights have been violated by another....whether they are the rights of property, the rights of freedom and liberty, or the rights of free speech......no one is allowed to take these rights away void of due process in showing crimes against humanity.

This is why I am so against "abortion on demand"...........what crime against humanity can any unborn child be charged with.......might alone found guilty of in our system of due processes...i.e, Natural Human Rights as defined by the Supreme Judge of the World? Can personal privacy (as the court first ruled in Roe v. Wade) be considered in realtion to any inhumane crime? Can this unborn infant be charged with invading the privacy of its parents since it had no part in the creation process? There is nothing on God's green earth more innocent than an infant that depends upon its mother to live.
 
Last edited:

rightwinger

Award Winning USMB Paid Messageboard Poster
Joined
Aug 4, 2009
Messages
254,018
Reaction score
74,133
Points
2,190
Our nation was founded by Christian’s

Christians who made sure we are not a Christian nation
 

dblack

Diamond Member
Joined
May 21, 2011
Messages
47,059
Reaction score
9,816
Points
2,030
Our nation was founded by Christian’s

Christians who made sure we are not a Christian nation
Christians who knew, first hand, just how dangerous it is to mix government and religion.
 

Clyde 154

Gold Member
Joined
May 30, 2021
Messages
1,373
Reaction score
417
Points
208
Christians who knew, first hand, just how dangerous it is to mix government and religion.
A nation that had safeguards in place to stop a Central Government from invoking only ONE REIGIOUS FAITH as was the case when the founders of this nation fled from Europe that was under the thumbnail of the RCC and its mandate of having only 1 state relgion. The founders were not attempting to separate faith and government.......as witnessed by even the swearing in oaths, In God we Trust on currency, a Chaplin corp to meet the needs of its military membership........funding the printing of King James Bibles........... the 1st amendment was created to allow ALL FAITHS be accepted........or NO FAITH, or luke warm faith......etc., the 1st simply denies Congress from restricting relgious exercise of any fashion.........and denies the central government from ESTABLISHING one national religion as was the circumstance in Europe that created the protestant movement to the new world. Our founders had been taught a lesson from history itself. Religion is an "individual right" of self expression and can't be denied by any agent of government........regardless of what belief one holds, or does not hold......ITS NOT THE BUSINESS OF THE CENTRAL GOVERNMENT.
 
Last edited:

NotfooledbyW

Gold Member
Joined
Jul 9, 2014
Messages
19,239
Reaction score
3,522
Points
245
Very slow, I included the entire lettet that was being discussed. It was not cherry picked as you claim
Yes it was. Were you promoting the absurd idea that Jefferson, late in life wrote to Adams that he was waiting for the second coming of Jesus and gaining eternal life in Calvin’s eternal heaven?
 

elektra

Gold Member
Joined
Dec 1, 2013
Messages
13,997
Reaction score
4,332
Points
325
Location
Temecula California
Yes it was. Were you promoting the absurd idea that Jefferson, late in life wrote to Adams that he was waiting for the second coming of Jesus and gaining eternal life in Calvin’s eternal heaven?
This pist is 6 years old?

I dont remember it, i will have to read what i wrote and who i was responding to, to pit it in context.

What is your beef? Are you arguing our founding was not based on christian principles?
 

NotfooledbyW

Gold Member
Joined
Jul 9, 2014
Messages
19,239
Reaction score
3,522
Points
245
There is no argument concerning the founding of this nation and its very first legal document drafted by Congress that represented the people of the US.....as to a belief in GOD
NFBW: I present no argument that the very first legal document drafted by Congress that represented the people of the US... who to a man and to a woman of every class, believed in God. So can you clarify the relevance of why your leadoff point matters.

The very first legal document drafted by Congress that represented the people of the US... has no ties to the base of the Republican Party which consists of white nationalist Protestants and Catholics that have unified around the Catholic concept that life and personhood begin at conception.

Our first five Presidents were nowhere near holding belief in God remotely close to the religious white Christian Republican voter base. A voter base that is the only reason that the Republican Party can wield political power that money cannot buy. “VOTES” 2210021234
 
Last edited:

NotfooledbyW

Gold Member
Joined
Jul 9, 2014
Messages
19,239
Reaction score
3,522
Points
245
What is your beef? Are you arguing our founding was not based on christian principles?
NFBW: No beef, just curious. But yes. It is not?

The letter you posted should not be used to convert Jefferson to some sort of Trump appointed Catholic Supreme Court Christian. END2210021239
 

surada

Diamond Member
Joined
Jan 3, 2021
Messages
51,967
Reaction score
22,710
Points
2,488
I came across a couple of Youtube clips not long ago that were truly enlightening (for me at least). Like most products of the Public School (fool?) System I was kept in the dark concerning the USA's Christian roots. If we (young, impressionable students) were told anything we were told that Jefferson and Franklin were deists but not Christians.

I've come to find out that the two least Christian founders were still sympathetic to and allied with the many devout Christians who helped create the great nation of the United States of America and signed her important, founding documents.

Anyway, please watch these very short videos and let everyone know what you think.

[ame=[MEDIA=youtube]YwvkcXBNm3Q[/MEDIA] Huckabee David Barton Founders of the Constitution 080109.flv - YouTube[/ame]
[ame=[MEDIA=youtube]jzGdHZDXxKI[/MEDIA]. Capitol Tour with David Barton.flv - YouTube[/ame]

The various Christian sects couldn't get along... Like Quakers, Anabaptists , Hugenots, Puritans, Dutch reformed.
 

kjw47

Silver Member
Joined
Oct 22, 2013
Messages
3,575
Reaction score
276
Points
95
Location
upstate NY
I came across a couple of Youtube clips not long ago that were truly enlightening (for me at least). Like most products of the Public School (fool?) System I was kept in the dark concerning the USA's Christian roots. If we (young, impressionable students) were told anything we were told that Jefferson and Franklin were deists but not Christians.

I've come to find out that the two least Christian founders were still sympathetic to and allied with the many devout Christians who helped create the great nation of the United States of America and signed her important, founding documents.

Anyway, please watch these very short videos and let everyone know what you think.

[ame=[MEDIA=youtube]YwvkcXBNm3Q[/MEDIA] Huckabee David Barton Founders of the Constitution 080109.flv - YouTube[/ame]
[ame=[MEDIA=youtube]jzGdHZDXxKI[/MEDIA]. Capitol Tour with David Barton.flv - YouTube[/ame]

They were far removed from God and his son. Freedom to sin does not make a nation great, God does not agree with Freedom of religion, he has 1 religion, the rest are satans. This world lives in darkness.
 

WinterBorn

Diamond Member
Joined
Nov 18, 2011
Messages
49,482
Reaction score
17,118
Points
2,260
Location
Atlanta
They were far removed from God and his son. Freedom to sin does not make a nation great, God does not agree with Freedom of religion, he has 1 religion, the rest are satans. This world lives in darkness.

This shows why not having a state religion is important. There are a lot of religions. For the believer to say there is only one true religion is fine. For the gov't to take that stance is not fine.
 

elektra

Gold Member
Joined
Dec 1, 2013
Messages
13,997
Reaction score
4,332
Points
325
Location
Temecula California
NFBW: No beef, just curious. But yes. It is not?

The letter you posted should not be used to convert Jefferson to some sort of Trump appointed Catholic Supreme Court Christian. END2210021239
The letter I posted was posted before Trump became president or was running for president. Certainly when I posted I was all for Cruz and Trump did not come to mind at all. You are really confused and trying to squeeze an elephant into a mail box.

And as you know, the USA was founded by people who believed in God for people who worshiped God.

Trump? Talk about playing in left field, no offense but you really came out of nowhere and your comments have no relation to the post that I can see.

2014, before Trump. Everything is not about Trump.
 

elektra

Gold Member
Joined
Dec 1, 2013
Messages
13,997
Reaction score
4,332
Points
325
Location
Temecula California
Yes it was. Were you promoting the absurd idea that Jefferson, late in life wrote to Adams that he was waiting for the second coming of Jesus and gaining eternal life in Calvin’s eternal heaven?
Quote my comment, the comment you wish to discuss is 8 years old.
 

NotfooledbyW

Gold Member
Joined
Jul 9, 2014
Messages
19,239
Reaction score
3,522
Points
245
Quote my comment, the comment you wish to discuss is 8 years old.

NFBW: Here is the quote you pulled from the very end of the powerfully anti/Christian letter.

ELEKTRA140501-#129 “Why does Thomas Jefferson, state, "So much for your quotation of Calvin's `mon dieu! jusqu'a quand' in which, when addressed to the God of Jesus, and our God, I join you cordially, and await his time and will with more readiness than reluctance."​

Are you asking If Jefferson is a typical sin and salvation Christian like our beloved Trump Christians of today because it appears in the paragraph above that Jefferson is telling Adams that he is waiting for Jesus and will be more ready than reluctant? END22101423
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

💲 Amazon Deals 💲

Forum List

Top