Is the U.S. A Christian Nation?

On Monday, Barack Obama’s U.S. apology tour, stopped in Turkey where he caused quite a stir.  In a press conference, in a shaky attempt to be all things to all people, he said this:  “Although we have a very large Christian population, we do not consider ourselves a Christian nation or a Jewish nation or a Muslim nation. We consider ourselves a nation of citizens who are bound by ideals and a set of values.”

Obama is wrong!  A new Newsweek poll (http://www.newsweek.com/id/192915) shows that 62 percent of our citizens still consider the U.S. to be a “Christian nation.”   Therefore, Obama clearly had no right to say this on our behalf.

The U.S. is not a theocracy.  However, it was founded by Christian men of great faith.   Furthermore, the “ideals” that bind us together and the laws under which we live are not based on thin air.  They are based on Judeo-Christian principles.

James Madison, the primary author of our constitution, said this:  “We have staked the future of all our political institutions upon the capacity of mankind for self-government; upon the capacity of each and all of us to govern ourselves, to control ourselves, to sustain ourselves according to the Ten Commandments of God.”

According to the American Religious Identification Survey,
(http://www.americanreligionsurvey-aris.org/reports/ARIS_Report_2008.pdf )
76 percent of us self-identify as Christians, 1.2 percent self-identify with the Jewish religion, while Muslims represent only 0.6 percent.

The moral and ethical teachings of the Bible are part of our Judeo-Christian heritage.  One doesn’t have to be a Jew or Christian to appreciate a government bound by laws based on those principles.  Many of the principles in the Bible, particularly the first five books, are accepted by Muslims as well.   Therefore, Obama need not feel as though he has to apologize for us!

However, the fact that this discussion has come up during the week we Christians celebrate Easter is fortuitous and useful for self-examination.

The one thing that separates Christians from all other religions is Jesus Christ.  There are those who deny that Jesus ever existed but there was far more written about him than any other person in ancient history.

In addition to the 27 different documents in the New Testament, there are many non-Christian sources as well.

The Old Testament prophets foretold that Jesus was coming for one specific reason — the redemption of our sins.  However, by the time of his birth, the Jews had watered-down what the Bible says about “original sin” and man’s need for personal salvation to the point that the Jews began looking for a deliverer in a warrior/king like David.

The Muslin Qur’an describes the virgin birth of Jesus but calls Him a prophet, equal to Abraham and others and ranks Jesus far below Muhammed.

Many Jews also accept Jesus as a “good teacher.”  In order to do this, the Muslim and Jew must ignore what prophets like Isaiah (chapter 53) said about Jesus’ birth, life and death.  They also must ignore what Jesus said about himself.  “Anyone who has seen me, has seen the Father.”  (John 14:9)   “I and the Father are one.”  (John 10:30) “I am the way, the truth and the life. No one comes to the Father except through me.” (John 14:6)

The Qur’an contradicts the historical evidence of the crucifixion and claims that Christ never really died on the cross simply because Muhammed made that assertion.

However, Easter is not simply about the crucifixion.  It is about the most dramatic event in human history – the resurrection!  For those who seek the truth, it is one of the most well-attested events in the ancient world.

Following the resurrection, over the next 40 days, Christ made many appearances.  The Apostle Paul wrote of one such occasion where there were more than 500 witnesses, most of whom were still alive.  Did anyone come forward to refute it?  No, not one!

However, the best evidence of Christ resurrection today is changed lives.

If you will examine the evidence, you will discover the truth for yourself.   You can believe on Jesus with confidence.

Each of us is born with a God-shaped vacuum.   We can deny it exists but we know it’s there.  We can busy ourselves to the point of exhaustion but, the reality is, it can be filled with none other that the living Christ.  If you are willing to confess your sin and surrender your will to Christ, He will come in and dwell with you.  That vacuum deep inside finally will disappear.    Then –  and only then – will you begin to live a life of true fulfillment.

Don’t miss this opportunity to have a joyous Easter!

————————————————————————————————–
If you would like to compare Christianity to the other major religions I highly recommend this
little book. It’s easy to use and will be a valuable resource.
http://rcm.amazon.com/e/cm?t=janechastainc-20&o=1&p=8&l=as1&asins=0830718982&fc1=000000&IS2=1&lt1=_blank&m=amazon&lc1=0000FF&bc1=000000&bg1=FFFFFF&f=ifr&nou=1

If you want proof that Jesus is Lord and on the authenticity of the Bible, I highly recommend this little book. http://rcm.amazon.com/e/cm?t=janechastainc-20&o=1&p=8&l=as1&asins=084230021X&fc1=000000&IS2=1&lt1=_blank&m=amazon&lc1=0000FF&bc1=000000&bg1=FFFFFF&f=ifr&nou=1

If you want to dig even deeper, I recommend this book but, for a quick start, begin with the one above. Then move into this one.
http://rcm.amazon.com/e/cm?t=janechastainc-20&o=1&p=8&l=as1&asins=0785242198&fc1=000000&IS2=1&lt1=_blank&m=amazon&lc1=0000FF&bc1=000000&bg1=FFFFFF&f=ifr&nou=1

36 thoughts on “Is the U.S. A Christian Nation?

  1. America is a nation in which the majority just happens to be Christian. But what about the rights of Jews,Muslims,Hindus,Buddhists,atheists,agnostics and others?
    Are they supposed to be second class citizens? None of the founding fathers was an evangelical Christian of the kind who are always calling America a Christian nation. Many were deists,and all were absolutely opposed to any one religion gaining poweer and turning this new nation into a theocracy. Their comments about God and religion have been taken out of context by the religious right of today and used as a pretext to advocate giving their fundamentalist faith all the power in America, and those founding fathers are turning in their graves.
    In fact, Jefferson had to deal with accusations that he was an atheist.
    I’m not opposed to Christianity per se, and have absolutely no wish to interfere the their beliefs or worship,but I,and many other like-minded Americans,not necessarily atheists, are absolutely imposed to the whole agenda of the religious right.

    Like

  2. Our founding fathers established our constitution in such a way as to prohibit two evils that were seen as ditrimental to the liberty sought by them.

    The first evil was big government and the second evil big government run as a theocracy. World history has proven that both are obsticles to liberty.

    America is not a nation run by a Christian Theocracy, but we have always have elected leaders who represent us with Christian principals.

    Like

  3. Jane, here’s the text of my email you asked me to post. Thanks – Curt Reinhardt

    “Hi Jane –

    Read the U.S. Supreme Court “Trinity” decision and you’ll be amazed. Most don’t know about it. The last half of the ruling states the justification for saying in the second to last paragraph America is a Christian Nation. Thanks for your column.

    Here it is – http://supreme.justia.com/us/143/457/case.html

    Take care – Curt Reinhardt
    Editor and publisher of “Tobacco Corn and Caviar”

    Like

  4. It is a tragedy that the testimony so plainly, yet eloquently put forth in this article along with the pointed invitation is absolutely missiong from the majority of pulpits in churches all over America.

    It is my preayer that every believer would make a copy of this article and send it to every minister of the “social” gospel. I am fortunate that I attend a church were the true gospel is unapologetically preached every service.

    God Bless you, and thank you for your testimony and invitation to the lost of our nation.

    Like

  5. I agree with you that Obama had no right to say that we are not a Christian nation, I was appalled. If we are not the beacon of Christianity in the world then there is none. There is no other nation that has given
    as much to the world in spreading the gospel as we have. I am ashamed that we have a president that ignores our history or is ignorant of it. Thanks for your article. Jesus is Lord. Have a wonderful Easter.

    Like

  6. I felt insulted that the President spoke for me and the fine Americans that I know who believe in God. The President brandishes his brush of authority like a magic wand and expects us to fall down in awe.
    I came to America when there was a Consitution that said ” Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion or prohibit the free exercise thereof.” HUM!! What has happened that America? The great leaders and founders of this country set up our constitution to stop the nonsense that is going on today; Could it be that ten simple
    laws or commandments makes the few anti Christian/Jews uncomfortable.
    Yes, it might be easier to bury our heads in the sand and ignore the fact that America and its principles are being tossed out for the easy lets do what feels good, and make the world like us for our weakness. It is easier to run with the pack than stand for what is right what was America.!!
    We all have the right to believe or not believe in God or gods, but let us not ignore the original principles on which Ameica was founded.

    Like

  7. Jane,

    Barack Obama is a very confused individual when it comes to spiritual matters. It is scary that his spiritual mentor for many years was Jeremiah Wright I believe that, at heart, Obama is still a Muslim. He also has said before that he doesn’t really believe that Hell exists. Well, if he continues upon his current spiritual journey, and he probably will, he will definitely find out some day to his great chagrin and sorrow that Hell really does exist!

    Clay Byrom

    Like

  8. No, James Madison did not say what you claim he said. Even David Barton, who was the one who first popularized the quote, has admitted that the quote has never been found anywhere in his writings or speeches. Please stop repeating this falsehood.

    Like

  9. Why did you write that column about teen pregnancy rates in Europe? It’s total b/s!With journalists like you in America it’s no wonder teen pregnancy rates are through the roof!You are playing on the ignorance of people so start acting responsibly with the power you hold……..

    Like

  10. Jane,

    Thank you for speaking out without apology for those of us who are Christian and backing up your article with facts. All who have examined the facts to prove that Jesus is not who He says He is have come away being converted to Christianity. To me the fact that our calendar is “Before Christ” and “After Christ” speaks volumes.

    May our Lord and Saviour continue to bless you and Roger as you continue in serving Him. We so desperately need voices speaking out for truth.

    Like

  11. To Ed (and others who strain at these gnats)

    Thank you for calling my attention to this important article by historian David Barton.

    The Madison quote to which you refer can be “documented to a source that is acceptable in a scholarly work or a university text.” However, due to the vicious attacks Barton has received on his book “Myth of Separation” he is calling everyone — Christian and atheist alike — to a higher standard — “a standard of documentation that would exceed the academic standard and instead would conform to the superior legal standard (i.e., relying solely on primary or original sources, using best evidence, rather than relying on the writings of attorneys, professors, or historians).” Good point!

    David Wrote a second book, “Original Intent,” using only quotations that met the higher standard. To quote Wallbuilders: “Both works arrive at exactly the same historical conclusion, but (critics say that) the history is ‘made up’ in the one but not the other? To date, none of David’s antagonists have ever been able to point out a single example in Original Intent in which he ‘made up a quote.’ They cannot do so. For that matter, they could not do so in The Myth of Separation either. Rather, they just continue to claim he “admits that he makes up his quotes.”

    Again, I think you for calling our attention to this excellent article. I encourage all my readers to follow the link and read it in its entirety. Then, buy your own copy of “Original Intent” and refer to it as often as time and the situation permits.

    Like

  12. Where even to start? The idea of David Barton holding anyone up to higher standards is pretty funny. I don’t think anyone has accused him of actually fabricating quotes, which you seem to suggest they have, but instead of really, really bad scholarship and just taking any quote that supports his thesis as a valid one, just because he wants it to be true. Not only do Madison scholars absolutely unanimously say that there is no provenance for that 10 commandments quote, but they all state that it is utterly unlike anything he ever did say or write. It’s about as believable as a Rudy Guiliani quote praising Osama bin Laden would be.

    And to believe we were founded as an explicitly Christian nation, you have to overlook the text of the Constitution, which nowhere mentions God, Jesus, or the Bible. The founders were pretty smart guys. Don’t you think if they had wanted to found an explicitly Christian nation, they would have said so? Or at least mentioned the topic in the main governing document of the nation?

    The Declaration of Independence does mention God, sort of, but the full phrase is “Laws of Nature and of Nature’s God,” hardly a ringing endorsement of Yahweh. Not to mention that the Declaration also describes just political power as deriving from the “consent of the governed.” I’m pretty sure that’s a completely un-Biblical concept. If there is any governmental type recognized by the Bible other than a theocratic monarchy, I am unaware of it. Certainly there’s not a hint of representative democracy anywhere in it (although slavery is given a free pass).

    The founding fathers had diverse religious beliefs, but several of the most important intellectual architects of the Republic were not Christians, at least not of the type that David Barton would recognize as Christian. Paine, Jefferson and Madison were all accused of being atheists. This is also inaccurate, at least according to modern terminology, but it is easy to find AUTHENTICATED quotes from all of them denigrating Christianity, and Jefferson famously prepared a version of the New Testament with all the miracle stories and other supernatural references omitted. That’s not to say that some, probably many, of the founders weren’t orthodox (whatever that means) Christians, but even many of the traditionally religious favored a secular government, and those who did want a more explicitly religious government made their case, and lost the debate.

    It’s instructive to remember that the 18th century equivalent of the religious right opposed the ratification of the Constitution precisely because of its godless, wholly secular, nature. This, unlike David Barton’s screeds, is easy to document.

    Like

  13. Barton’s claim that his usage of the quote would meet an “academic” standard of documentation for use in a “scholarly work” but not a “legal” standard is false to the point of being laughable. He did not get the Madison quote from a book by a historian or a professor, he got it from a 1939 independently published book by a Bible tract society (a book that has never been located, I might add; it’s likely that he actually borrowed that footnote from a later source that cited that book). It has never been found in any original Madison document or any report of any Madison speech. The earliest existence of that quote that can actually be found is from the late 1950s. No respectable historian would have passed on such a quote without verifying it, but Barton is, in fact, not a historian at all. His only academic training is an undergrad degree in Christian education from Oral Roberts.

    I don’t know why it’s so difficult to just admit that the quote does not exist. I don’t blame you for it anyway. You read it in Barton’s book and assumed it was accurate. I’ve done the same thing myself, found out I was wrong. I admitted it and tried to make sure it didn’t happen again. That’s what an intellectually honest person does.

    You’re hardly the only person who has passed on a fake or out of context quotation from the founders. It happens on both sides, in fact. I’ve tried hard to get people on my side of the issue to stop using the John Adams “quote” about this being “the best of all possible worlds if there was no religion in it” (he did say that, but the very next sentence says that he actually believes the opposite) and the fake Jefferson quote about not finding “one redeeming feature” in Christianity. Those on both sides have been know to pass on such fake quotations and it is incumbent upon all of us to make sure that we’re not repeating falsehoods.

    Like

  14. Ed,

    You are quick to make assumptions. I did not take that quote from David Barton’s book. (You brought him up, remember?) It has been around for years and has been mentioned in many scholarly works.

    However, for the record, I respect Barton and appreciate his work. He may not have a pedigree from an Ivy League school that you would appreciate but his work speaks for itself.

    Thanks to Barton and Wallbuilders, we now have the original sources for many old quotes that had been printed and reprinted without this kind of documentation.

    Now, about his book “Original Intent”?

    Like

  15. Jane-

    Can you name one “scholarly work” that includes that fake Madison quote? No, Barton does not count; he is not a scholar by any reasonable definition. I agree that his work speaks for itself. And his work is incredibly shoddy and intellectually dishonest.

    Like

  16. Ms. Chastain,

    You avoid Ed’s central points with rhetorical dodges. The problem is not such much that David Barton does not “have a pedigree from an Ivy League school”; the issue is that Barton has been repeatedly exposed as a propagandist focused on achieving a political end that is contrary to good histiography.

    The fact that Mr. Barton has been repeatedly exposed as a fraud, with Mr. Brayton’s example of Barton using a false quote from Madison being one among many, and that you continue to claim respect for Barton’s work argues you also have an agenda that is is also in conflict with sound historiography.

    In fact Chris Rodda, who shares Barton’s lack of pedigree, references an abundance of primary sources in her book, “Liars for Jesus” that provides overwhelming empirical evidence of Barton’s fraudulent activity, from grossly misrepresenting the framers’ positions, to actually changing direct quotations from the framers to change the meaning of the framers’ words. Rodda does not merely footnote her sources in her book, she actually provides online links to her footnotes of the primary sources archived at legitimate institutions. Sources that show a huge difference between what Barton claims these sources state and what they actually state.

    Like

  17. Jane Chastain, you provided a quote which you claim came from Madison, but this quote has been disputed since there is apparently no evidence it was ever uttered by him. So all you need to do to answer Mr. Brayton is to provide an original attribution to Madison that can be verified – or failing to do that admit that you cannot confirm the quote really is from Madison at all, and add a correction to your article.

    That other people besides Barton have repeated it is irrelevant. The only relevant fact is whether Madison said it, and if so, in what context. Also, Mr. Brayton’s point (in part) wasn’t that Barton does not have a history background from an Ivy League school, it’s that he has no such background at all. Indeed, I agree that his work speaks for itself, although I imagine it’s saying something different to me than it is to you. And it’s rather ironic that you praise Barton for finding original sources, when it’s the lack of those very original sources which is at issue here. In other words, we don’t care about other “many old quotes” right now, we care about THIS old quote.

    Like

  18. If this quote appears in “many scholarly works” can you identify one or two of those works, as well as their source for the quote? When did Madison say that? To whom? How was it recorded for posterity and by whom? Did it appear in personal memoirs? Correspondence to a friend or family member? Published in a newspaper or leaflet? Was it part of a public speech? If you are confident in its historicity, I assume you can provide some accounting of its provenance.

    Like

  19. Wow, way to miss the point lady. Why not just admit that YOU supported your thesis in this post with a fake quote?

    Like

  20. Perhaps you could provide an original source documenting this Madison quote? If you cannot, then please just admit it is not verified. To persist in evading what should be a simple documentation or a simple correction only further impinges your credibility.

    Like

  21. It’s a real shame you don’t have the intellectual honesty to admit the Madison quote is a fake. No reputable person would continue to use it after being shown the evidence Ed has given you.

    Like

  22. Jane,

    You are dancing around the issue; it doesn’t matter WHERE you got the quote from, the bottom line is that it’s bogus. It’s not found in ANY of Madison’s official writings. We don’t have the obligation to prove a negative (which can’t be done). YOU have to prove it exists in Madison’s original writings, which it does not.

    Like

  23. “It has been around for years and has been mentioned in many scholarly works.”

    Yes, and the “Protocols of the Elders of Zion” has been around for years, and has been quoted ad infinitum. Does that make it true? Jane, you should do a bit more research. This great nation of ours is not, has never been, and (if those of us with intelligence have anything to do about it) never will be a “Christian nation”.

    Like

  24. Perhaps Mr. Brayton’s comments are too much for you – let me sum them up.

    1. You used a quote that you claimed came from Madison to support your argument. That was the only quote you included from any source other than President Obama (with whom you disagreed) and the Bible.

    2. That quote was first popularized by David Barton. While it has since been quoted and re-quoted, it was Barton who first brought it to prominence. It has been well documented as being false, a determination that even Mr. Barton has confirmed.

    3. Your use of a faked quote undermines your entire argument, especially since that quote was your primary supporting data, and the only portion from the founders of our nation.

    Now, you could choose to honestly acknowledge your error and find other support for your point – or you could choose to dodge the issue and talk about other unspecified quotes for which Barton may have better documentation, and which may or may not have anything to do with the point you tried to make. It seems that you have, unfortunately, chosen the latter.

    Like

  25. Obama had the total right to say that. America is a nation of diversity and variety and not just Christian. The constitution was made for exactly that purpose and it is not a copy of the ten commandments, no it is a standard for living together with common sense. James Madison never that and Barton was not a historian at all and therefore not really a considerable source.

    Like

  26. Heinrich,

    Obama has the right to say that he doesn’t consider our country to be a Christian nation. He doesn’t have the right to say “We don’t consider ourselves to be a Christian nation” when the polls show otherwise.

    Also, to be clear, I have never said or implied that this nation is a theocracy — far from it. Many of our founders were fleeing religious persecution and they went to great lengths to make sure we had freedom of religion — not freedom from religion. We are a nation, founded predominately by Christians who based our government on Judeo-Christian principles. That is a fact! Also, the overwhelming majority of our citizens still recognize the divinity of Jesus Christ.

    As for the Madison quote I used in this piece, I thanked Ed for calling my attention to this excellent article by David Barton, whom I greatly admire, and I urged all of my readers to review it in its entirety. I agree with David Barton that Christians should be careful not to use a quote without an original source document because we should hold to the higher legal standard, not simply the academic standard. Therefore, I will cease to use it until it can be traced directly to Madison.

    It does not, however, mean that the Madison quote is bogus, only that it has not been traced to him directly, which leaves open the possibility that it may be located with more digging. (Wallbuilders has, in fact, located the original source documents for many quotes that previously were unconfirmed). In fact, a major primary document by Madison surfaced as late as 1946. As to this quote Barton writes “they are consistent with Madison’s thoughts on religion and government. They are consistent because the key idea being communicated is self-government, not religious laws or establishments. Our future rests upon the ability of all to govern themselves according to a Biblical standard. Madison could have easily offered the thought.

    “Concerning a republican form of government, he spoke in the Federalist #39 of “that honorable determination which animates every votary of freedom, to rest all our political experiments on the capacity of mankind for self-government.” (emphasis added) Here we see an interesting similarity to the quote’s wording, which may have led to a paraphrase that was erroneously attributed to Madison.

    “Speaking against direct religious taxation in his Memorial and Remonstrance, Madison wrote:
    ‘While we assert for ourselves a freedom to embrace, to profess, and to observe, the Religion which we believe to be of divine origin, we cannot deny an equal freedom to them whose minds have not yielded to the evidence which has convinced us. ‘

    “The religion of divine origin was obviously Christianity, of which Madison said he was convinced. Therefore, it would be appropriate for Madison to refer to the Ten Commandments as a foundation for self-government. Granted, he fought to abolish religious establishments much of his life, but that is not the issue. The issue is whether Madison could have made such a statement. He could have; the questionable quote is not out of character. ”

    The fact that so many of you, however, think that it was Barton who popularized that quote shows how little you know or perhaps all you can do is parrot what someone else has said.

    Also, it points out how important Barton’s research has become. I will hold to the Barton standard in all future columns and I challenge all of you to do the same. Nevertheless, I want to get back to my central point: What is your problems with his book “Original Intent,” which uses the words of our founders to reach the same conclusion that I reached in this column?

    Like

  27. The Qur’an contradicts the historical evidence of the crucifixion…

    Not to defend the historical accuracy of the Qur’an, but could you please link to “historical evidence” of the crucifixion.

    Therefore, it would be appropriate for Madison to refer to the Ten Commandments as a foundation for self-government.

    This seems to be obvious nonsense. Familiar as Madison was with the Bible (as were all the Founding Fathers, certainly much more so than the vast majority of Christians in this “Christian nation”), why would he endorse a government that commanded the worship of one, particular God, and which forbids, by law, doing any work on the Sabbath? (And of course, according to the source for these commandments, the punishment for being a Hindu or cleaning out the barn on a Sunday, is death.) Both of these are fundamentally un-American concepts.

    (Not to mention the commandments require us to honor our mothers and fathers, which is a good idea, generally. But if your parents beat you every day and you curse them for it, the punishment is that old Bronze Age standard, death.)

    Like

  28. Quotes are often used too often to support a position to which they are unrelated. The simple facts are that several American founding principles like the freedom of religion contradicts biblical principles like “no other gods before me”. The founders made no reference to god, a creator, or any other entity when writing our constitution. The treaty of tripoli ratified in 1797 in part states in no uncertain terms, “As the Government of the United States of America is not, in any sense, founded on the Christian religion; ” and out of 339 votes to that point was only the 3rd unanimous vote in the Senate. I think this wording would have been objected to by at least one senator if it was not consistent with their understanding of the foundation of our young nation at that time.

    Like

  29. Barack Obama was incorrect on both points.
    This is a Christian based nation, it is not however a Christian government as the government can not make any law respecting the establishment of a state religion.
    His comment “we are a nation of citizens” implies a connotation to his religious doctrine, that of G Hegel. Mr. Obama is practices the Hegelian doctrine, through his faith in black theology of liberation, which is James Cone’s theology that he based on Hegelian doctrine.
    This is the same governmental/religious doctrine used as the foundation for Communism, Socialism, Progressivism, Humanism, etc. Its historical base is it Greek philosophy. Paul warned all Christians in Colossians 2:8, that this doctrine would spoil you. The word spoil is actually the Greek word sulagogeo and based on Greek word sulao, These mean to strip you as a winning army strips the defeated of all its possessions. This is what following doctrine based on philosophy will do to unsuspecting Christians. I will force you to face all situations based solely on the logic and reason of men. Faith in God is completely ignored, as a matter of fact most Hegelians view God as being manifest in men, therefore the human is God. This is the same belief that Alexander the Great possessed (he assumed himself to be a god). This is the same doctrine that has spoiled Barack Obama, he is not a Christian, he is a Hegelian. The Progressives in congress “Progressive Caucus” are all of this religious belief, and they are writing US laws respecting the establishment of their religion, Hegelian doctrine. This is what is occurring. Christians better wake up and take the fight to congress or we will be ruled by the Hegelian doctrine, which will outlaw Christianity as well as other religious beliefs. According to our 1st amendment the government shall make no law respecting the establishment of a religion. Our forefathers knew we would come to this door step one day, and they provided us protection by this one amendment. We need to take those to task who are establishing law respecting there religion.

    Like

  30. Robert Berger’s comment was on-point, and most relevant to this article. However, I can see why you dodged the bullets in that comment. It never ceases to amaze me, how many times uneducated people, try to claim this country was founded by Christians, on Christian principles.

    Fortunately the truth that this country was actually founded by Freemasons, has come to light recently. Freemasonry promotes the ancient cult of Sun worship, and the Freemasons who founded this country were anything but Christians. The Treaty of Tripoli is also very clear on this issue, and for very good reason.

    For a United States president to claim this country a Christian nation, is not only a clear violation of the establishment clause, it’s also very dangerous to foreign policy. Obama, a constitutional law professor, certainly knows better than to touch that issue. The conservative right, unable to find any viable fault with Obama’s policies, would jump at the chance to toss him to the wolves on that issue, even if it might alienate their Evangelical voters.

    Once again Obama speaks the truth, and conservatives cry foul. Is it any wonder Americans tossed them out on their cans?

    Like

  31. Now about those claims you make of Jesus Christ, and the Holy Bible.

    “There are those who deny that Jesus ever existed but there was far more written about him than any other person in ancient history. In addition to the 27 different documents in the New Testament, there are many non-Christian sources as well”

    Let me be quite clear in stating the fact that there is not one shred of evidence that Jesus Christ ever walked the earth, much less that he said or did any of those things claimed on his behalf in the bible.

    There’s also absolutely no proof, outside of the bible, that Moses, or the vast majority of biblical characters ever lived. In fact those things that archeological evidence has revealed in favor of the bible are very few and completely irrelevant to any divine scripture and/or miracles.

    On the other hand, the evidence that the Israelites borrowed extensively from the ancient Egyptian’s religious text, and temples, is overwhelming. The arc of the covenant is unmistakenly an Egyptian artifact, as are all of the furnishings the bible mentions as part of Solomon’s temple.

    However, there is absolutely no proof that there ever was a such a temple in Jerusalem, and a very large body of evidence points directly to Avaris, Egypt as the location for the Israelite’s temple. Unlike what the bible says, that temple was built to honor Seth, the God of chaos.

    We know that the Canaanites or “Shepherd Kings”, as the Egyptians refered to them, ruled Upper Egypt from Memphis, with a summer residence in Avaris for about 100 years, from roughly 1600 BC to 1500 BC. They were expelled by “Ahmoses”, an Egyptian king, in the 16th year of his reign.

    According to Manetho, the story of the Exodus takes place, when the priest “Osarseph” (the biblical Joseph) with a following amongst “diseased” people were exiled to the land of Canaan, and organised a rebellion in alliance with the Canaanite population, and invaded Egypt, driving Amenhotep and his son Ramses, into exile.

    Osarseph and his leper followers are said to have instituted a 13-year reign of religious oppression before Amenhotep and Ramesses/Sethos eventually returned to oust the usurpers, expel them from the nation, and restore the old Egyptian religion.

    This is said to be remembered, and distorted as the expulsion of lepers by Moses. At any rate, the evidence found in Egypt is not in favor of the bible’s version of events. Quite simply the Jews were not slaves in Egypt, they were expelled as foriegn rulers or “occupiers”, and they took their religious doctrine, and Gods from Egypt’s great temples.

    As for Jesus Christ, and Christianity, this masterpiece was a complete fabrication from the trinity of Horus, Isis, and Osiris. So don’t tell us that there is evidence, that what the Old and New Testament say is true. Nothing could be further from the truth. From what I’ve read here so far Jane, you just make this stuff up as you go. Problem for you, is that some of us here rely on actual research.

    Like

  32. Usually I do not learn post on blogs, but I would like to say that this write-up very pressured me to check out and do so! Your writing taste has been amazed me. Thanks, quite great article.

    Like

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s