What religion were our founding fathers worshipping?

[glockmail]

post 55 is your conjecture about what YOU think applies with nary the slighest scrap of evidence beyond your goofy opinion. here it is:

The 1806 Ttreaty is between the “President and Citizens of the United States of America, on the one part, and the Bashaw, Bey and Subjects of the Regency of Tripoli in Barbary on the other…”

This supersedes the 1796 Treaty “between the United States of America and the Bey and subjects of Tripoli of Barbary…”

It’s really not that difficult to understand.


post your evidence, dude. or go sit in the corner and think about why you've been given Das Boot.

The "evidence" is that the second treaty is between the same parties, and contains nearly identical language, with Article 11 removed in its entirety from the first.

 

[glockmail]

no, you really didn't. You posted some surgical cut and paste that you think indicates more than his own autobiographical words do. I mean, hell.. believe what you want. If some jewish zombie in the sky promises you heaven then feel free to believe it. BUT, the fact remains that a man who was a product of the age of ENLIGHTENMENT who says, in his own goddamn autobio, that he was a deist trumps your typical dogma junkie attempt at assimilating everything despite reality.


and, since i've spanked you with both Thomas Jefferson and Ben Franklin it's not necessary at all to use anyone else. Deny what you will... but Montecello and Ole Ben prove you wrong all day long.

Again, what Ben wrote while he was a Founder supersedes what he wrote as a boy, questioning his beliefs like most open-minded people do.

 

[Shogun]

The "evidence" is that the second treaty is between the same parties, and contains nearly identical language, with Article 11 removed in its entirety from the first.

again, you are simply wrong. there was no "second treaty" to sum up the range of treaties that are referred to as the TREATIES.

it;s cool, dude.. it's pretty obvious that you have nothing more to add.

 

[Shogun]

Again, what Ben wrote while he was a Founder supersedes what he wrote as a boy, questioning his beliefs like most open-minded people do.

thats your BELIEF. It's not based on anything beyond your opinion. Again, read the autobiography. He didn't start is "as a boy" and he sure as hell wasn't trying to give you secret hints by leaving his mention of deism in his draft.


again, open minded my ass. You are doing nothing more than what christians typically do when faced with facts: trying to polish the turd of your own lack of credible evidence.


PWNED.

 

[glockmail]

again, you are simply wrong. there was no "second treaty" to sum up the range of treaties that are referred to as the TREATIES.

it;s cool, dude.. it's pretty obvious that you have nothing more to add.

thats your BELIEF. It's not based on anything beyond your opinion. Again, read the autobiography. He didn't start is "as a boy" and he sure as hell wasn't trying to give you secret hints by leaving his mention of deism in his draft.


again, open minded my ass. You are doing nothing more than what christians typically do when faced with facts: trying to polish the turd of your own lack of credible evidence.


PWNED.

1. Again, the 1806 treaty superseded the earlier version, as previously stated.
2. Again, Franklin’s own words and actions during the period in question identify him as a Christian.

 

[Shogun]

1. Again, the 1806 treaty superseded the earlier version, as previously stated.
2. Again, Franklin’s own words and actions during the period in question identify him as a Christian.

1. you have no evidence of this outside of your bullshit assumptions

2. No, franklin's own words made him a deist. I'll post the exact quote, non-surgical, if you need to see it.

 

[glockmail]

When you have something new to say then I'll address it.

 

[Shogun]

HA!

thats rich coming from the dudes whose sole "proof" is making reference to an empty post 55!




you haven't "addressed" anything since having your ass handed to you back when we were still on Jefferson. But, again, by all means.. believe what you want. Considering your domga it sure doesn't take much. Just sprinkle some jesus on it and BAM! it's "christian".

 

[LOki]

The second treaty superseded the first and corrected the obvious known error.

There was no error in the first--it was not a draft for a later treaty--as unarguably demonstrated by being passed by the unanimous vote of the Senate, and signed into law by the President.

There were different conditions and issues surrounding the writiing, and (entirely separate) ratification of the second treaty--the second treaty was a different treaty, which is why it's called "The Second Treaty of Tripoli" rather than "The Amended Treaty of Tripoli".

By the way LOki, I'm curious as to the symbolism of your avatar. What is your interpretation of it?

I am unaware any symbolism attached to my avatar; you clearly perceive some--feel free to share.

 

[glockmail]

There was no error in the first--it was not a draft for a later treaty--as unarguably demonstrated by being passed by the unanimous vote of the Senate, and signed into law by the President.

There were different conditions and issues surrounding the writiing, and (entirely separate) ratification of the second treaty--the second treaty was a different treaty, which is why it's called "The Second Treaty of Tripoli" rather than "The Amended Treaty of Tripoli".

I am unaware any symbolism attached to my avatar; you clearly perceive some--feel free to share.

1. The first treaty was hastily assembled in order to end an expensive war that the fledgling US could not afford. When the aggressor didn’t abide by the terms, and in fact declared war, the US engaged the enemy on August 1, decimating her flagship and humiliating her captain. The conflict lasted four years until US Marines ventured a land attack, threatening Tripoli’s throne. The new treaty, negotiated under much more favorable conditions, completely eliminated the notorious Article 11.
2. I’m curious as to why you would claim that, having used the same image for several years now. Was it chosen at random?

 

[Shogun]

1. The first treaty was hastily assembled in order to end an expensive war that the fledgling US could not afford. When the aggressor didn’t abide by the terms, and in fact declared war, the US engaged the enemy on August 1, decimating her flagship and humiliating her captain. The conflict lasted four years until US Marines ventured a land attack, threatening Tripoli’s throne. The new treaty, negotiated under much more favorable conditions, completely eliminated the notorious Article 11.
2. I’m curious as to why you would claim that, having used the same image for several years now. Was it chosen at random?

cite your source.

 

[LOki]

1. The first treaty was hastily assembled in order to end an expensive war that the fledgling US could not afford.

I don't think this is entirely true--I don't think you do either.

When the aggressor didn’t abide by the terms, and in fact declared war, the US engaged the enemy on August 1, decimating her flagship and humiliating her captain. The conflict lasted four years until US Marines ventured a land attack, threatening Tripoli’s throne.

See what I mean? It seems you pretty clearly understand that "the fledgling US" could indeed afford the expensive war--that we actually did.

The new treaty,...

What? A new treaty, you say? A different treaty? Negotiating some different issues, under different conditions and circumstances, perhaps? Not the original treaty?

...negotiated under much more favorable conditions, completely eliminated the notorious Article 11.

New conditions you say...because it's a different treaty, rather than the same old treaty, addressing the same old issues, just "revised"?

Would you please be careful to note that there is still an Article 11 in The Second Treaty of Tripoli. It discusses a different issue, however. You might then focus your attention upon Article 14 of the Second Treaty of Tripoli, which more closely follows the vein of Article 11 of the First Treaty of Tripoli. You'll note, that rather than being actually "eliminated" (with some statement like, "Oh, by the way, you remember how we formerly said our nation was in no way founded on the Christian religion? Now we're saying the founding of our nation is completely steeped in the Christian religion. FYI."), the conditions of the founding of our nation were not mentioned, having already been properly explained in the First Treaty of Tripoli, and not at all changed by the new conditions the new treaty was negotiated under.

In any case, nothing in the Second Treaty of Tripoli in any way reverses the the claims made, in the First Treaty of Tripoli, by our government regarding the founding of our nation. NOTHING.

2. I’m curious as to why you would claim that,..

I might suggest that the reason I said that I am unaware of any symbolism attached to my avatar, is that I am in fact unaware of any symbolism attached to my avatar.

...having used the same image for several years now.

I suppose, for me, it still looks cool after all these years.

Was it chosen at random?

No.

 

[glockmail]

cite your source.

Post 87

 

[Inferno]

George Washington — Religion: Anglican/Episcopal
Country Information, a world portal on countries, politics and governments

Benjamin Franklin was raised as an Episcopalian but was a Deist as an adult.
The religion of Benjamin Franklin, founding father

John Adams — Religion: Unitarian
john adams religion - Google Search

Thomas Jefferson — Religion: Deist
Thomas Jefferson - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

 

[Shogun]

Post 87

HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!


typical. You've had your ass handed to you and you think

When you have something new to say then I'll address it.

impresses anyone?

Like I said.. TYPICAL dogma junkie in action.


NEXT!

 

[glockmail]

I don't think this is entirely true--I don't think you do either.

See what I mean? It seems you pretty clearly understand that "the fledgling US" could indeed afford the expensive war--that we actually did.

What? A new treaty, you say? A different treaty? Negotiating some different issues, under different conditions and circumstances, perhaps? Not the original treaty?

New conditions you say...because it's a different treaty, rather than the same old treaty, addressing the same old issues, just "revised"?

Would you please be careful to note that there is still an Article 11 in The Second Treaty of Tripoli. It discusses a different issue, however. You might then focus your attention upon Article 14 of the Second Treaty of Tripoli, which more closely follows the vein of Article 11 of the First Treaty of Tripoli. You'll note, that rather than being actually "eliminated" (with some statement like, "Oh, by the way, you remember how we formerly said our nation was in no way founded on the Christian religion? Now we're saying the founding of our nation is completely steeped in the Christian religion. FYI."), the conditions of the founding of our nation were not mentioned, having already been properly explained in the First Treaty of Tripoli, and not at all changed by the new conditions the new treaty was negotiated under.

In any case, nothing in the Second Treaty of Tripoli in any way reverses the the claims made, in the First Treaty of Tripoli, by our government regarding the founding of our nation. NOTHING.

I might suggest that the reason I said that I am unaware of any symbolism attached to my avatar, is that I am in fact unaware of any symbolism attached to my avatar.

I suppose, for me, it still looks cool after all these years.

No.

1. It is entirely true. Perhaps you misunderstood because I did not tell you the first treaty also included $56,000 “tribute” payments to the sultans, which was then considered reasonable, but the pasha of Tripoli demanded more along with a new treaty. This demand arrived on the new President Jefferson’s desk in March 1801, and Tripoli declared war shortly thereafter, and the US engaged them a few months later on August 1, 1801. The four or five years between the first military engagement and the second allowed the US to build up its Navy and become a potent fighting force.
2. Semantics aside, the Article 14 of which you refer simply recognizes religious differences between the two parties, then goes on to forbid prohibitions of free exercise thereof. The former Article 11 has been completely eliminated.
3. I would suggest that your avatar looks like a horse’s teeth with Day Glo ink smears above it. What does it look like to you?

 

[glockmail]

.......
Thomas Jefferson — Religion: Deist
....

Do these sound like quotes from a deist?

"I hold the precepts of Jesus as delivered by Himself, to be the most pure, benevolent and sublime which have ever been preached to man..."

"Can the liberties of a nation be thought secure when we have removed their only firm basis, a conviction in the minds of the people that these liberties are the gift of God? That they are not to be violated but with His wrath? I tremble for my country when I reflect that God is just; that His justice cannot sleep forever."

"The reason that Christianity is the best friend of Government is because Christianity is the only religion that changes the heart.”

"Of all systems of morality, ancient or modern, which have come under my observation, none appear to be so pure as that of Jesus."

Each one is from Thomas Jefferson.

 

[Shogun]

is it any wonder why dogma junkies often believe in snake oil?


Glock has ZERO evidence to offer and he knows he's been schooled in this thread.


like I said.. NEXT!

 

[Uknow_me72]

What religion were our founding fathers worshipping? When I say founding fathers, I mean founding fathers of the United States of America - George Washington, Thomas Jefferson, Benjamin Franklin, John Adams, etc.? I do not believe it was Christianity. The original Constitution does not mention any specific reference to Christianity being the official religion of the USA. Am I wrong?

The were worshipping humanism, most people say they Protestent Christians, and the Catholics went up to Canada and down to Mexico, thus the vatican which is Catholic but is a rewritten Christian surrounded the area. The area was surround by the religions so that they all may be under the same control group. Which is where the secret societies are from which is the Roman Catholic Church and all they do is send the missionaries out to control the people and their beliefs so that they may take over the world.

Religions are only control groups that are disguesed to be the word of God. The word of God has no label. It has no group.
All religions now are Humanistic and not Aetherial.

Beware...
You must climb out of the box, if you try to use rationalize in the box they have created for you, you will never get out off the box, no matter how many times that you think you have. You must climb up and out and ask those questions that really needs answers.

Jehovah or YHWH call him and ask him. You will get your awnser some way, just do not ignore it.

 

[LOki]

Do these sound like quotes from a deist?

1. "I hold the precepts of Jesus as delivered by Himself, to be the most pure, benevolent and sublime which have ever been preached to man..."

2. "Can the liberties of a nation be thought secure when we have removed their only firm basis, a conviction in the minds of the people that these liberties are the gift of God? That they are not to be violated but with His wrath? I tremble for my country when I reflect that God is just; that His justice cannot sleep forever."

3. "The reason that Christianity is the best friend of Government is because Christianity is the only religion that changes the heart.”

4. "Of all systems of morality, ancient or modern, which have come under my observation, none appear to be so pure as that of Jesus."

1. Yes. Consistent with a Deist perspective, Jefferson did not assert the divinty of Christ with this quote. You should look into the Jeffersonian Bible, Mr. Jefferson-was-no-Deist.
2. Yes. Consistent with a Deist perspective, Jefferson did not assert the divinty of Christ with this quote--although he does present his belief in God; also consistent with Deism.
3. Yes. Consistent with a Deist perspective, Jefferson did not assert the divinty of Christ with this quote. He certainly made a point regarding the frendliness of Chistianity to Government, but he did not declare any Christianity for himself.
4. Yes. Consistent with a Deist perspective, Jefferson did not assert the divinty of Christ with this quote. He validated Christ's system of morality, but not so much his divinity.

Each one is from Thomas Jefferson.

For the moment, I'll take your word for it--mostly because they are all consistent with a Deist's perspective.