The last few posts were good and well thought out (without me picking sides or playing favorites). That's the kind of stuff that I can learn from. I am certainly not trained as a historian and my knowlege is incomplete on these things, but now I know a bit more. I like it when posts go beyond 5th grade level intellect which can happen a lot on these boards. Certainly the founding fathers, like all of us, were influenced by their experiences and culture from many sources and individuals.
Originally posted by Symmetric Chaos
Here's a question I've never gotten a good answer to. Does anyone know why things like killing gays were put in the Bible in the first place?
Everyone despised the Jews so they made laws against what they saw as those people's customs and beliefs like sodomy, incest, wearing clothes with multiples colors, shaving beards, etc.
Originally posted by En Sabah Nur X
Even the stoning of children who deviate is still carried through, with psychological stones, verbal stones, etc... stones strong enough that some kids commit suicide or murder parents or friends out of the blue.The law is eternal.
LOL! Good one. We should not discipline our kids at all. I have a 2 yr old at home, and let me tell you it would not be pretty if she had no boundaries!
Originally posted by RocasAtoll
Everyone despised the Jews so they made laws against what they saw as those people's customs and beliefs like sodomy, incest, wearing clothes with multiples colors, shaving beards, etc.
The subject of homosexuality is addressed mostly in Leviticus of the Old Testament, which is a history of the Jewish people. Their exodus from Egypt, the 10 Commandments, the dispersal of the 12 tribes, etc, all concern Jewish people. The Jewish people themselves kept the laws outlined in Leviticus. Whether you believe God gave them these laws or they made them up themselves, no outside group made up laws to try to oppress them, at least not where this is concerned. I don't understand who you mean by "everyone," especially since the popular theory is that Moses himself wrote a large portion of the Old Testament, and he himself was Jewish.
Originally posted by willofthewisp
"It does me no injury for my neighbor to say there are twenty gods, or no God.--- Thomas Jefferson
"Let us with caution indulge the supposition, that morality can be maintained without religions."
--- George Washington
Plenty of quotes out there show Thomas Jefferson to have been an atheist and George Washington to be a Christian. Yet these two quotes are basically saying the same thing: that all forms of religion should be protected, but one should not be a bigger part of the government than another. That's what they were going for in the infancy of the United States.
However, it is a little presumptuous to say that Christianity had no influence in the construct of the Declaration of Independence. It was pretty much the only religion in colonial America at the time since Jewish people did not start emigrating in large numbers to America until about the 1800s, so many of the founding fathers were Christians. Those who were not seemed to be influenced at least by John 13:34 ("love each other as I have loved you"😉 in that they were okay with religious expression as long as the US did not become a church-state.
what theologians, especially those involved with the administration of Christian rule, had any such ideas prior to the 1700s?
Originally posted by Symmetric Chaos
Reductio ad absurdum.The founding fathers were Christians. In spite of their enlightenment era intents keeping that influence out of their design of the Constitution would be impossible. Admittedly they did a very good job, but assuming that simply because they were trying to work with Enlightenment concepts doesn't mean they somehow avoided letting their religion affect the design is silly.
The Christianity that existed post renissance/enlightment/age of reason
or am I to suppose (re: generalize) that all Christians have always been the same?
Which specific part of the constitution do you find to be more in line with pre-renissance Christian theocratic policies more so than enlightment era philosophy?
Originally posted by inimalist
what theologians, especially those involved with the administration of Christian rule, had any such ideas prior to the 1700s?
Well, Christ himself preached loving one's neighbors, including one's enemies. I would think that would fall under the lines of religious tolerance. Christ would never approve inflicting violence or persecution on someone as he was the one to coin the phrase, "turn the other cheek."
Galatians 3:28: 'There is neither Jew nor Greek, there is neither slave nor free, there is neither male nor female; for you are all one in Christ Jesus.' "
thats fine
what about the humans who, you know, actually ran countries based on christian teaching.
Technically, if Jesus is the only one, the Christianity of America is categorically different than the Christianity of Europe pre-renissance, which is my argument, which shows that the specific christianity of the time had little to do with the influence, and it is easier to explain this discrepency through memetic drift and a re-definition of christian faith based on enlightment ideas rather than christianity informing an opinion on the constitution.
Originally posted by Symmetric Chaos
Reductio ad absurdum.The founding fathers were Christians. In spite of their enlightenment era intents keeping that influence out of their design of the Constitution would be impossible.
Can you point out the supposed principles that are espoused by the constitution that can be construde as ONLY christian-inspired? Or perhaps where a portionn of the founding documents refers only to christianity? Or a portion of the document where any specific religion is addressed? Or any mention of religion in the document that doesn't specifically refer to the idea that religion must not influence government?
Given the answers to those questions, I find it highly likely that they were able to seperate their religion from their politics.
Originally posted by K-Dog
I'll tell ya, it's a heck of a lot easier to make my slaves do my work than me getting my lazy butt up and doing it myself! 💃And those danged women....I've got them lined up so if I stone one off, I'll get a fresh new one anyway. Oh, I thought everybody had it so good.
I don't see how my second paragraph was a contradition. I don't believe they were trying to keep their religious influence out of the constitutional ideas. What I said was that from what I know (maybe I'm wrong) they did not want a state-mandated church or denomination. They had seen English rules switch back and forth between Catholicism and various Protestant systems, often merely to justify their political agendas based on different doctrine. But as a whole they were Christian influenced. They weren't Muslim, Buddha, etc.
The statements that we are all created with inalienable rights by our creator of life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness is based on Christian principles. Now yes, maybe other religions could be said to say much of the same thing, but the founding fathers would have been influenced primarily by Christianity. Anyone who knows anything about the framework of the Constitution knows that the men prayed together everyday when they wrote this. They were Christian influenced, there were not Muslims or Hindus in 18th century New England (that I know of at least.)
A discussion like this is kinda hard to have cause I'm not sure if I am on the same wavelength as everybody else or not.
It was a contradiction because it implied they considered no religion and then went on to say they considered only christianity.
You see, that's the arrogance of your position. Just because there might not have been very many muslims or hindus or Jews, doesn't mean they didn't take those religions into account, doesn't mean they didn't know they existed. It is not true that they prayed together everyday.
"Endowed by their creator" is not a phrase aimed at a creator, it is a phrase aimed at the people. Their creator implies that descision is up to the person, not the government.
Originally posted by Devil King
It was a contradiction because it implied they considered no religion and then went on to say they considered only christianity.You see, that's the arrogance of your position. Just because there might not have been very many muslims or hindus or Jews, doesn't mean they didn't take those religions into account, doesn't mean they didn't know they existed. It is not true that they prayed together everyday.
"Endowed by their creator" is not a phrase aimed at a creator, it is a phrase aimed at the people. Their creator implies that descision is up to the person, not the government.
The American Constitution is a wonderful document for securing personal freedoms. I'm sure Christian teachings were involved in certain areas...but then I don't know that for certain, I don't even think it matters.
America is a secular nation and it should remain so.
Originally posted by K-Dog
The last few posts were good and well thought out (without me picking sides or playing favorites).
This is also a contradiction. You say the posts were well thought because they largly agree with the position you have been supporting since you entered the thread, and then you say "without picking a side"? I don't recall anyone inviting you to be the impartial judge of this thread and it's outcome. (not that one will be reached)
Originally posted by Grand_Moff_Gav
The American Constitution is a wonderful document for securing personal freedoms. I'm sure Christian teachings were involved in certain areas...but then I don't know that for certain, I don't even think it matters.America is a secular nation and it should remain so.
When ever a proposition came before the body there were several votes that had to be taken. First they had to vote to consider the proposition and finally they had to vote to pass or deny it. With, many times, there being a number of votes in between.
Much more often than not, when that proposition hinged soley on the consideration of christianity or any particular sect of that broader religion, this group of men didn't even pass a vote to consider the proposition. This means they voted not to even discuss it or consider it. And none of them were voted on to be added to the constitution.
Originally posted by willofthewisp
The subject of homosexuality is addressed mostly in Leviticus of the Old Testament, which is a history of the Jewish people. Their exodus from Egypt, the 10 Commandments, the dispersal of the 12 tribes, etc, all concern Jewish people. The Jewish people themselves kept the laws outlined in Leviticus. Whether you believe God gave them these laws or they made them up themselves, no outside group made up laws to try to oppress them, at least not where this is concerned. I don't understand who you mean by "everyone," especially since the popular theory is that Moses himself wrote a large portion of the Old Testament, and he himself was Jewish.
Incest was considered bad by the Jews because it was a wide practice in Egypt. Sexual promiscuity was discouraged because it was seen in other societies that despised the Jews. Etc. Who wrote it is of no consequence to what I said. My statement was The Jewish people model their beliefs against those around them, because they saw them as immoral people. And Also because of practicality in a lot of cases.