Originally posted by JesusIsAliveWell, the wording is very specific. It says Christian Faith, not religious liberty. So I am technical when the situation calls for it as it does in this case. The whole "Christian superiority" term is your take or interpretation. No one thinks or claims that Christians are superior to anyone--I certainly don't. Again, that is your deduction. The document states that those who left England came to North America to advance the Christian Faith. These are the facts. You can argue this, re-word it, and even dispute this, but the fact still remains that those early settlers appear to have been Christians, based on their own words. Perhaps this may not sit well with you seeing that you are an adherent of Mormonism. I don't know what else to tell you. If the settlers had said that their objective was to advance Mormonism, Buddhism, or Islam then I would have quoted that, but they didn't say that. Don't take their declaration personally. As long as you have faith in Jesus Christ, confess Him as your Lord, repent of your sins, and believe that God has raised Jesus from the dead, you will be saved.
My comment is in reference to all documents dealing with the founding of the U.S.
Were they hypocrites? If not, and I do believe they were not hypocrites, then the nation was founded on religious liberty and freedom, not on advancing Christianity. Citizens of the U.S. should take their documents personally. If they promote Christianity and not religious liberty, such documents, if considered valid today, should be abolished or amended to protect religious liberty.
Originally posted by JesusIsAlive
Man, Jessica Alba is beautiful!
This is the ONLY FACT present in your argument droolio
Ne ways, according to the Old Testament, you must now take a fork, impale your eye, and gauge it out of its socket. You claimed to have been taken already, and you are visually lusting over the sight of another woman...
❌ shame..shame.
"He commits adultery with his eye"
Originally posted by Lord Urizen
To recognize the physical beauty of someone else ,when you are already taken seems like "commit adultery in his eye" to me. ✅
Originally posted by JesusIsAlive
You have totally missed the point. I did not say anything about JFK's belief in God. Here is what I said originally:That was all I wanted you to get out of this. I was not even talking about whether JFK believed in God or not, but simply that he admitted that our basic rights come from God. That's it, nothing more or less. This whole subject escalated from this simple fact to folks talking about JFK being Catholic, whether or not JFK believed in God, etc. But all I intended to convey was exactly what I wrote: JFK admits that our rights come from God.
First of all - Nobody questioned whether JFK believed in God. We all accept the fact.
Second - It is still you that misses the point I was talking about two separate things:
1st - That religious terminology in a document isn't necessarily indicative of religious belief.
2nd - That it doesn't really matter that JFK believes they came from God. You believe they come from God, I don't. Technically it doesn't mean anything. All you have shown is that some people believe in God. So what?
Thirdly - That didn't actually have anything to do with the opening post where you tried to imply significance in the fact "In the Year of our lord" is mentioned. Hence my reference to "act of God" which you have still failed to give a yes or no answer to.
And as to the Mayflower compact:
First - Once again there has never been ever any debate that religion drove many of the early people to the shores of America
Second - However the Mayflower Compact is not about the foundation of a nation. If I am not mistaken it is merely a governing document of a single colony relishing being free of English orders.
Thirdly - That is not actually anything to do with the declaration of Independence nor the foundation of the United States as a free nation.
Fourth - 41 out of 102? That isn't even a majority.
Fifth - Merely speaks of the useful governing power of religion. Look at the fate of many other colonies at the time. Unify through faith and things are easier to manage.
In reality claiming it is indicitive if like claiming the local by laws of my home town are somehow binding on the nation as a whole.
Originally posted by JesusIsAliveWell, the wording is very specific. It says Christian Faith, not religious liberty. So I am technical when the situation calls for it as it does in this case. The whole "Christian superiority" term is your take or interpretation. No one thinks or claims that Christians are superior to anyone--I certainly don't. Again, that is your deduction. The document states that those who left England came to North America to advance the Christian Faith. These are the facts. You can argue this, re-word it, and even dispute this, but the fact still remains that those early settlers appear to have been Christians, based on their own words. Perhaps this may not sit well with you seeing that you are an adherent of Mormonism. I don't know what else to tell you. If the settlers had said that their objective was to advance Mormonism, Buddhism, or Islam then I would have quoted that, but they didn't say that. Don't take their declaration personally. As long as you have faith in Jesus Christ, confess Him as your Lord, repent of your sins, and believe that God has raised Jesus from the dead, you will be saved.
That's just retarded. As soon as the mayflower compact becaosme the governing document of the United States of America, I'll conceed the point. However, it is not.
all this "confess him" and repent and eternal damnation crap is getting old.
Originally posted by Imperial_Samura
First of all - Nobody questioned whether JFK believed in God. We all accept the fact.Second - It is still you that misses the point I was talking about two separate things:
1st - That religious terminology in a document isn't necessarily indicative of religious belief.
2nd - That it doesn't really matter that JFK believes they came from God. You believe they come from God, I don't. Technically it doesn't mean anything. All you have shown is that some people believe in God. So what?
Thirdly - That didn't actually have anything to do with the opening post where you tried to imply significance in the fact "In the Year of our lord" is mentioned. Hence my reference to "act of God" which you have still failed to give a yes or no answer to.
And as to the Mayflower compact:
First - Once again there has never been ever any debate that religion drove many of the early people to the shores of America
Second - However the Mayflower Compact is not about the foundation of a nation. If I am not mistaken it is merely a governing document of a single colony relishing being free of English orders.
Thirdly - That is not actually anything to do with the declaration of Independence nor the foundation of the United States as a free nation.
Fourth - 41 out of 102? That isn't even a majority.
Fifth - Merely speaks of the useful governing power of religion. Look at the fate of many other colonies at the time. Unify through faith and things are easier to manage.
In reality claiming it is indicitive if like claiming the local by laws of my home town are somehow binding on the nation as a whole.
1st - That religious terminology in a document isn't necessarily indicative of religious belief.
I beg to differ (except, perhaps in a contractual setting). If JFK got up and announced that God had a physical body, or that Jesus is "a" god instead of God, or that our rights come from Buddha or Allah, I would believe that he meant exactly what he said.
2nd - That it doesn't really matter that JFK believes they came from God. You believe they come from God, I don't. Technically it doesn't mean anything. All you have shown is that some people believe in God. So what?
How do you know what I believe? I am talking about what JFK stated (I am not the subject here JFK is. Is this another diversion?) I haven't shown anything about their belief. What I intended to convey is that they mentioned Creator or God in their documents and/or speeches. Whether they believed in God or not is immaterial.
Thirdly - That didn't actually have anything to do with the opening post where you tried to imply significance in the fact "In the Year of our lord" is mentioned. Hence my reference to "act of God" which you have still failed to give a yes or no answer to.
What it did was it reinforced my statement that Jesus Christ (i.e. God) was mentioned in the U.S. Constitution. The U.S. Constitution represents formal U.S. documents. The Declaration of Independence, Mayflower Compact, and JFK's Inaugural Address are just more complementary instruments that serve to buttress the thread topic.
And as to the Mayflower compact:
First - Once again there has never been ever any debate that religion drove many of the early people to the shores of America
Good.
Second - However the Mayflower Compact is not about the foundation of a nation. If I am not mistaken it is merely a governing document of a single colony relishing being free of English orders.
Here is a quote by John Quincy Adams:
The compact was referred to by John Quincy Adams as the foundation of the Constitution of the United States, but he was speaking figuratively, not literally.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mayflower_compact
So John Quincy Adam's referred to the Mayflower Compact as the foundation of the Constitution of the United States. I believe that it was a seminal document because it appears to have laid the premise for the U.S. Constitution. It definitely preceded the U.S. Constitution so certainly the essence of the Compact was it's begetter as it were in sum and substance. Here is another quote:
This compact established the first basis in the new world for written laws.
http://www.historyplace.com/unitedstates/revolution/mayflower.htm
Thirdly - That is not actually anything to do with the declaration of Independence nor the foundation of the United States as a free nation.
As I have aforestated, the Declaration of Independence is a complentary instrument to buttress the fact that God (i.e. Jesus Christ) is indeed mentioned in U.S. documents, even seminal documents.
Fourth - 41 out of 102? That isn't even a majority.
I don't know whether you know this or not but Jesus Christ revealed that there are more people going to Hell than to Heaven. Here is a Scripture to support this statement:
Matthew 7:13-14
Enter by the narrow gate; for wide is the gate and broad is the way that leads to destruction, and there are many who go in by it. Because narrow is the gate and difficult is the way which leads to life, and there are few who find it.
So Christians are a minority in this world relative to those who do not trust Jesus Christ for salvation from sin. This is nothing new and this is certainly no surprise.
Fifth - Merely speaks of the useful governing power of religion. Look at the fate of many other colonies at the time. Unify through faith and things are easier to manage.
Oh, so you admit that faith is a unifier and that it makes things easier to manage. There is some truth to this statement.
Originally posted by JesusIsAliveThis is most definitely not a reflection of what America was founded on. This is what Rhode Island and Massachusetts were founded on. And you know what Rhode Island and Massachusetts and the majority of New England is? The most liberal part of the Union.
[B]The Mayflower Compact"In the name of God, Amen. We, whose names are underwritten, the Loyal Subjects of our dread Sovereign Lord, King James, by the Grace of God, of England, France and Ireland, King, Defender of the Faith, e&. Having undertaken for the Glory of God, and Advancement of the Christian Faith, and the Honour of our King and Country, a voyage to plant the first colony in the northern parts of Virginia; do by these presents, solemnly and mutually in the Presence of God and one of another, covenant and combine ourselves together into a civil Body Politick, for our better Ordering and Preservation, and Furtherance of the Ends aforesaid; And by Virtue hereof to enact, constitute, and frame, such just and equal Laws, Ordinances, Acts, Constitutions and Offices, from time to time, as shall be thought most meet and convenient for the General good of the Colony; unto which we promise all due submission and obedience. In Witness whereof we have hereunto subscribed our names at Cape Cod the eleventh of November, in the Reign of our Sovereign Lord, King James of England, France and Ireland, the eighteenth, and of Scotland the fifty-fourth. Anno Domini, 1620."
There followed the signatures of 41 of the 102 passengers, 37 of whom were Separatists fleeing religious persecution in Europe. This compact established the first basis in the new world for written laws. Half of the colony failed to survive the first winter, but the remainder lived on and prospered.
http://www.historyplace.com/unitedstates/revolution/mayflower.htm
We were once a Christian nation folks. God is everywhere present in all of our founding and seminal documents upon which this country's government and society is based. [/B]
Originally posted by Ushgarak
...But if you want a literal refutation of your idea that I always come in against you because I am biased against you- what about the Tactitus thing, hmm?....
Uh, Ushgarak...the Tacitus post of yours was not written in support of what I said, It seems to be in support of what Nellinator or Imperial Samura said. There post is just above yours respectively. I don't even have a post on that page in reference to Tacitus. So in reality your post was not in support of what I had written.
Originally posted by Ushgarak
To be fair, Tacitus does directly state that the Christian's founder was put to death by Pilate, and Tacitus was not the sort of historian who would mention that just because it is something they said; he would have throught that factual.
But it WAS countering the suggestion being made that Tacitus was not a good source for showing that Jesus existed; if I was always posting against your beliefs no matter what, I wouldn't have said anything.
You simply have a persecution complex, and you think it is because of what you are, but in fact it is simply because you are so often absurd.
Fact of the matter is, you have entirely failed to convince anyone about your point, which is partly because you have been so ridiculously obscuire about what your point is and why you are making it.
But to be absolutely certain, JIA, the morals of the US in the modern day are entirely divorced from religion, and this is true in most Western countries.
Originally posted by JesusIsAlive
1st - That religious terminology in a document isn't necessarily indicative of religious belief.I beg to differ (except, perhaps in a contractual setting). If JFK got up and announced that God had a physical body, or that Jesus is "a" god instead of God, or that our rights come from Buddha or Allah, I would believe that he meant exactly what he said.
2nd - That it doesn't really matter that JFK believes they came from God. You believe they come from God, I don't. Technically it doesn't mean anything. All you have shown is that some people believe in God. So what?
How do you know what I believe? I am talking about what JFK stated (I am not the subject here JFK is. Is this another diversion?) I haven't shown anything about their belief. What I intended to convey is that they mentioned Creator or God in their documents and/or speeches. Whether they believed in God or not is immaterial.
Thirdly - That didn't actually have anything to do with the opening post where you tried to imply significance in the fact "In the Year of our lord" is mentioned. Hence my reference to "act of God" which you have still failed to give a yes or no answer to.
What it did was it reinforced my statement that Jesus Christ (i.e. God) was mentioned in the U.S. Constitution. The U.S. Constitution represents formal U.S. documents. The Declaration of Independence, Mayflower Compact, and JFK's Inaugural Address are just more complementary instruments that serve to buttress the thread topic.
And as to the Mayflower compact:
First - Once again there has never been ever any debate that religion drove many of the early people to the shores of America
Good.
Second - However the Mayflower Compact is not about the foundation of a nation. If I am not mistaken it is merely a governing document of a single colony relishing being free of English orders.
Here is a quote by John Quincy Adams:
The compact was referred to by John Quincy Adams as the foundation of the Constitution of the United States, but he was speaking figuratively, not literally.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mayflower_compact
So John Quincy Adam's referred to the Mayflower Compact as the foundation of the Constitution of the United States. I believe that it was a seminal document because it appears to have laid the premise for the U.S. Constitution. It definitely preceded the U.S. Constitution so certainly the essence of the Compact was it's begetter as it were in sum and substance. Here is another quote:
This compact established the first basis in the new world for written laws.
http://www.historyplace.com/unitedstates/revolution/mayflower.htm
Thirdly - That is not actually anything to do with the declaration of Independence nor the foundation of the United States as a free nation.
As I have aforestated, the Declaration of Independence is a complentary instrument to buttress the fact that God (i.e. Jesus Christ) is indeed mentioned in U.S. documents, even seminal documents.
Fourth - 41 out of 102? That isn't even a majority.
I don't know whether you know this or not but Jesus Christ revealed that there are more people going to Hell than to Heaven. Here is a Scripture to support this statement:
Matthew 7:13-14
Enter by the narrow gate; for wide is the gate and broad is the way that leads to destruction, and there are many who go in by it. Because narrow is the gate and difficult is the way which leads to life, and there are few who find it.So Christians are a minority in this world relative to those who do not trust Jesus Christ for salvation from sin. This is nothing new and this is certainly no surprise.
Fifth - Merely speaks of the useful governing power of religion. Look at the fate of many other colonies at the time. Unify through faith and things are easier to manage.
Oh, so you admit that faith is a unifier and that it makes things easier to manage. There is some truth to this statement.
No response Samura?
Originally posted by JesusIsAlive
1st - That religious terminology in a document isn't necessarily indicative of religious belief.I beg to differ (except, perhaps in a contractual setting). If JFK got up and announced that God had a physical body, or that Jesus is "a" god instead of God, or that our rights come from Buddha or Allah, I would believe that he meant exactly what he said.
2nd - That it doesn't really matter that JFK believes they came from God. You believe they come from God, I don't. Technically it doesn't mean anything. All you have shown is that some people believe in God. So what?
How do you know what I believe? I am talking about what JFK stated (I am not the subject here JFK is. Is this another diversion?) I haven't shown anything about their belief. What I intended to convey is that they mentioned Creator or God in their documents and/or speeches. Whether they believed in God or not is immaterial.
Thirdly - That didn't actually have anything to do with the opening post where you tried to imply significance in the fact "In the Year of our lord" is mentioned. Hence my reference to "act of God" which you have still failed to give a yes or no answer to.
What it did was it reinforced my statement that Jesus Christ (i.e. God) was mentioned in the U.S. Constitution. The U.S. Constitution represents formal U.S. documents. The Declaration of Independence, Mayflower Compact, and JFK's Inaugural Address are just more complementary instruments that serve to buttress the thread topic.
And as to the Mayflower compact:
First - Once again there has never been ever any debate that religion drove many of the early people to the shores of America
Good.
Second - However the Mayflower Compact is not about the foundation of a nation. If I am not mistaken it is merely a governing document of a single colony relishing being free of English orders.
Here is a quote by John Quincy Adams:
The compact was referred to by John Quincy Adams as the foundation of the Constitution of the United States, but he was speaking figuratively, not literally.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mayflower_compact
So John Quincy Adam's referred to the Mayflower Compact as the foundation of the Constitution of the United States. I believe that it was a seminal document because it appears to have laid the premise for the U.S. Constitution. It definitely preceded the U.S. Constitution so certainly the essence of the Compact was it's begetter as it were in sum and substance. Here is another quote:
This compact established the first basis in the new world for written laws.
http://www.historyplace.com/unitedstates/revolution/mayflower.htm
Thirdly - That is not actually anything to do with the declaration of Independence nor the foundation of the United States as a free nation.
As I have aforestated, the Declaration of Independence is a complentary instrument to buttress the fact that God (i.e. Jesus Christ) is indeed mentioned in U.S. documents, even seminal documents.
Fourth - 41 out of 102? That isn't even a majority.
I don't know whether you know this or not but Jesus Christ revealed that there are more people going to Hell than to Heaven. Here is a Scripture to support this statement:
Matthew 7:13-14
Enter by the narrow gate; for wide is the gate and broad is the way that leads to destruction, and there are many who go in by it. Because narrow is the gate and difficult is the way which leads to life, and there are few who find it.So Christians are a minority in this world relative to those who do not trust Jesus Christ for salvation from sin. This is nothing new and this is certainly no surprise.
Fifth - Merely speaks of the useful governing power of religion. Look at the fate of many other colonies at the time. Unify through faith and things are easier to manage.
Oh, so you admit that faith is a unifier and that it makes things easier to manage. There is some truth to this statement.
No comment Imperial?
Originally posted by JesusIsAlive
I beg to differ (except, perhaps in a contractual setting). If JFK got up and announced that God had a physical body, or that Jesus is "a" god instead of God, or that our rights come from Buddha or Allah, I would believe that he meant exactly what he said.
*Gapes dumbly at computer screen*
You realise that the president or prime minister just speaking isn't a legal document? JFK could have gotten up there and sworn allegiance to Stalin, claimed the moon was cheese and stated he had no toes - and it wouldn't have actually meant anything.
You still seem to be horribly stuck on this fact - I was not talking about documents and JFK at the same time. Try and understand that. JFK believes in God, as is his right. He believes God does and did stuff. Fine. He gets up and says it - because he believes it. I AM NOT SAYING THAT HE IS NOT MEANING WHAT HE SAYS. WHEN HE SAYS GOD HE MEANS IT. STOP! STOP! STOP IMPLYING THAT I AM SOMEHOW TYING IN LEGAL DOCUMENTS WITH JFK SPEACH - BECAUSE I AM NOT!
That doesn't make it a document. That doesn't mean the use of "In the Year of our lord" means a God damned thing." Try and understand the two different parts of the argument and see they are not one. Really, it is beyond a joke.
How do you know what I believe? I am talking about what JFK stated (I am not the subject here JFK is. Is this another diversion?) I haven't shown anything about their belief. What I intended to convey is that they mentioned Creator or God in their documents and/or speeches. Whether they believed in God or not is immaterial.
Because you have said as much before?
And once again - a presidents speech is not a legal document. It doesn't matter if they say they believe in God during it or not. Why is that so hard for you to understand? Unless under oath or declaring an actual document - and even then that is still a degree away from being binding. It really does not mean anything that JFK said something in reference to God other then that he believes in God. AND NO BODY IS ARGUING THAT!
What it did was it reinforced my statement that Jesus Christ (i.e. God) was mentioned in the U.S. Constitution. The U.S. Constitution represents formal U.S. documents. The Declaration of Independence, Mayflower Compact, and JFK's Inaugural Address are just more complementary instruments that serve to buttress the thread topic.
Still no answer, and I begin to think you are incapable of giving one, or even understanding what has been said.
Here is a quote by John Quincy Adams:The compact was referred to by John Quincy Adams as the foundation of the Constitution of the United States, but he was speaking figuratively, not literally.
You do know the difference between figurative and literal don't you? And once again - who died and made John Quincy Adam's the authority on the world? Just like the fact JFK believes in God doesn't actually make it so.
As I have aforestated, the Declaration of Independence is a complentary instrument to buttress the fact that God (i.e. Jesus Christ) is indeed mentioned in U.S. documents, even seminal documents.
Once again - no one has said he wasn't mentioned - but you fail to understand that mention does not automatically indicate acceptance, nor belief, nor the implication God is the highest thing. People have torn apart the claim that "In the Year of our lord" means something other then what it does. I have pointed out that in many cases "Creator" is not implicitly indicating the Christian God since it is used in many other contexts over the years in other nations to simply imply "things higher then man" - nothing divine need be read into it.
And so a bunch of religious refugees on board a ship decide to mention God in there colony rules... shocking. The fact not the majority of people on board the ship even signed it is irrelevant as "more people go to hell then heaven" - the fact it was for a single colony when the US was original many colonies is also irrelevant. The fact it wasn't binding on the whole land is also irrelevant. And so on. Seriously it is beyond a joke.
I don't know whether you know this or not but Jesus Christ revealed that there are more people going to Hell than to Heaven. Here is a Scripture to support this statement:So Christians are a minority in this world relative to those who do not trust Jesus Christ for salvation from sin. This is nothing new and this is certainly no surprise.
I knew it was coming. Once again you have the Bible to justify something that can not be justified.
Oh, so you admit that faith is a unifier and that it makes things easier to manage. There is some truth to this statement.
Oh yes - man invents religion to add power to the rulers orders, it legitimises the state. Nothing remotely divine about that. I am pleased you see the "some truth" in this.