The Coming Evangelical Collapse


Just_A_Guy
 Share

Recommended Posts

I think a collapse of a church that teaches the doctrines of Christ (even if not the fullness of such) and encourages people to live good principled lives, if such a collapse results in fewer people of faith is not something to cheer about.

I do prefer honest non-religious folk to "christian" hypocrites.

Truly, If you act upon the light and knowledge that you do have wither it be Islam (non radical), Buddhism, Dieist or what have you its a lot better than having more light and knowledge and not acting upon it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 58
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

I see the same pundits most vociferously arguing for the 'separation of church and state'-

I’m not sure which pundits you’re referring to, but the Founding Fathers deliberately fought to keep the concept of a separation between church and state in the Constitution by excluding God and/or Christianity.

Most Americans don’t realize how bitter and angry the ratification process was. Many state representatives, and much of the citizenry as well, were furious at the lack of a reference to God and/or Christianity, especially when they read Article 6 that called for no religious test. They believed the lack of a test would open up government positions, including the presidency, to people of any non-Christian religious, or none at all. In the 18th century, this was appalling.

Yet the founders refused to budge on this issue, and the secular Constitution was ratified.

Unfortunately, the result of their battle, a purposely secular government, has been consumed by the ultra-conservative Christian right that unambiguously insists our is a Christian nation, founded on Christian principles by the devoutly Christian founding fathers, and that our government should return to its Christian roots. This hugely popular revision of the nation’s history has taken hold and is so entrenched, the truth cannot get through.

The separation of church and state was largely established to prevent an organized religion from overtaking the government (as the Catholic and Anglican churches had done in the Old World),

This is true, but only part of the story.

The omission of God in the Constitution was not an indicator that they disdained Christianity; rather, it was a display of confidence in Christianity. The Constitution was intended to let religion function on its own without government interference, ensuring all religions would be equally protected.

However, the FF also feared the day when a public official would grant a religion special influence, as they knew any politically partisan use of religion would turn politics into pandering.

Our founding fathers were very prescient.

but that never meant separating the morals and values perpetuated by organized religion (especially Christianity) from the government.

If you are referring specifically to morals and values irrespective of Christianity this is true. If you’re referring to morals and values only obtained in Christianity, this is not true. Either way, it does not mean the founding fathers did not intend the Constitution to guarantee the separation of the church from the state. They did.

The founders were not Christians. That does not mean they did not take Christianity serious, because they did. In fact, they encouraged the populous to attend church as they believed Christian principles would benefit the fledgling country. But they did not share these beliefs, and it’s revisionist history to claim they did.

For example, Jefferson was a great admirer of Christ, but he did not believe in his divinity. In fact, you can spin Jefferson any way you want, but you cannot turn him to a Protestant evangelical who believed that Christianity was the only basis for moral systems, that only Bible-based ethics taught people the difference between right and wrong, and showed them how to be good citizens.

Jefferson was more conversed in, and influenced by, the classical moral philosophers of Greek and Rome who predated the Christian era. When he wrote the Declaration of Independence, he invoked the “the Laws of Nature and Nature’s God,” a phrase that avoided particular Christian references but is consistent with deism.

The founders admired the principles of Christianity and the Bible; however, they held little sway compared to the influence of John Locke, a 17th century English philosopher who believed the government had no business telling a man what religion he must join, or not join.

It is impossible to understate Locke’s influence on the founding fathers, but it is obvious when you look at the Constitution next to Locke’s writings. The founders rejected the ideal of a Christian country, because they saw the state’s secular institution as uninterested in men’s souls.

This is pure Locke, who had written: “the state is not interested with matters of belief “because no injury is thereby done to anyone, no prejudice to another man’s gods.“

This post is already so long probably no one is reading it, so I won’t take any more space up to continue discussing Locke. But it is simply wrong to assume the founders were greatly influenced by Christianity to the exclusion of all else. Christianity was a distant second compared to Locke’s philosophies. His influence was the most pronounced of all of the Age of Enlighten philosophers, and is directly responsible for the founders belief that the church and the state must remain separate.

. . . the secularization of society, and the abandonment of the values of our forefathers

No secularist that I know, including those who are Christian, wants society to become secular. What we want is a the government to be secular, just as the Founding Fathers meant it to be. Unfortunately, most Americans do not understand the distinction.

Elphaba

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I’m not sure which pundits you’re referring to, but the Founding Fathers deliberately fought to keep the concept of a separation between church and state in the Constitution by excluding God and/or Christianity.

...

Unfortunately, the result of their battle, a purposely secular government, has been consumed by the ultra-conservative Christian right that unambiguously insists our is a Christian nation, founded on Christian principles by the devoutly Christian founding fathers, and that our government should return to its Christian roots. This hugely popular revision of the nation’s history has taken hold and is so entrenched, the truth cannot get through.

Well, I may be a victim of this intellectual movement then, as I only recently graduated high school and I haven't bothered to study this subject much more since then. To the credit of my history teachers, when discussing the creation of the Constitution and the Founding Fathers, we studied Locke extensively.

Part of the reason I maintain the Constitution was founded on Christian principles is the belief that the Founding Fathers were inspired of God, as was the Constitution. The fact is that both the Constitution and Christian principles derive their intellectual foundation from the eternal principles of God's kingdom- wherever the Founding Fathers actually learned those principles from (for instance Locke, who was influenced by the political and artistic movement of the Enlightenment- something else we believe was influenced by God). In the end, the Constitution is fit only for a society that upholds the morals it was founded upon: today, we find most of those morals embraced in the Judeo-Christian heritage with many of the same morals reflected in other religious philosophies (freedom of choice, innate rights of man, etc.). I keep in mind the foundation of the liberation of our country: the Declaration of Independence, which explicitly references 'Nature's God' and the 'Creator'. Not the Christian God per se, but it recognizes that the rights of man are imputed to him by virtue of God's power. In the most real sense- the sense of following a person's inner conscience and the Light of Christ- the Founding Fathers were, by and large, demonstrably Christian.

This is true, but only part of the story...

However, the FF also feared the day when a public official would grant a religion special influence, as they knew any politically partisan use of religion would turn politics into pandering.

Our founding fathers were very prescient.

I didn't know all that, thank you.

If you are referring specifically to morals and values irrespective of Christianity this is true. If you’re referring to morals and values only obtained in Christianity, this is not true. Either way, it does not mean the founding fathers did not intend the Constitution to guarantee the separation of the church from the state. They did.

I'm still confused as to how the conjoining of morals and state somehow equates to the conjoining of church and state- the first is a set of beliefs, the second is an organization. If the Founding Fathers had implicit trust in Christianity, as you said, then wouldn't they want to see its influence continue in public thought? In fact, if even Jefferson who you have pointed to as denying Christ's divinity, recognized that the good principles of citizenship were taught in the Bible, wouldn't the collective group of the Founding Fathers want to see the influence of the Bible continue in society and not be abandoned? My main problem is the movement towards forced secularism- men who wish to make minor observances to their God in the public arena are forbidden to do so. Why is it that it's acceptable to let a prayer be offered in behalf of a new president, yet the basic morals that underlie the acceptance and practice of prayer are rejected as inferior in political arenas?

The founders were not Christians. That does not mean they did not take Christianity serious, because they did. In fact, they encouraged the populous to attend church as they believed Christian principles would benefit the fledgling country. But they did not share these beliefs, and it’s revisionist history to claim they did.

I've decided to PM you some questions to continue the conversation. I appreciate your time- again- explaining this to me.

No secularist that I know, including those who are Christian, wants society to become secular. What we want is a the government to be secular, just as the Founding Fathers meant it to be. Unfortunately, most Americans do not understand the distinction.

Funny... Most of the secularists I have talked too about this have flat-out stated that they want to see the institution of religion utterly abolished. I again fail to grasp how the perpetuation of Christian principles in government, as long as the basic human rights espoused in the Constitution and Bill of Rights are not trespassed, is somehow the mixing of church and state. I fear it's a belief that religion is entirely a philosophical construct of man. I guess I'm one of those Americans who "do[es] not understand the distinction." Edited by Maxel
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Fear mongering.

-a-train

If you're talking about the OP... I don't know. I agree there's some sort of serious change to the religious life of our country coming. I don't know how, when, or why, but I fear it's coming and that it will be a significant factor in the secularization and descent into wickedness of society. I'm one of those people who doesn't think it's bad to discuss possible future events, even though there's nothing we can do about them.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well Obama said himself that the problem of this world is the religion of the people, and one of the phases of socialism/communism given by marx is to destroy the religion of the people, and as Obama has also stated himself that he wants a World Order, and this is the one of the ways to bring this about - this is no suprise!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well Obama said himself that the problem of this world is the religion of the people, and one of the phases of socialism/communism given by marx is to destroy the religion of the people, and as Obama has also stated himself that he wants a World Order, and this is the one of the ways to bring this about - this is no suprise!

Citation required

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well Obama said himself that the problem of this world is the religion of the people, and one of the phases of socialism/communism given by marx is to destroy the religion of the people, and as Obama has also stated himself that he wants a World Order, and this is the one of the ways to bring this about - this is no suprise!

Yes. Could you provide a corroboration to your statements from an independent outlet?

Otherwise, I suspect this is just what you've been told by people and it is, in fact, not true.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You can't be serious.

This is nothing more than a sordid propganda hit piece created by ultra radicals. It's meant to appeal to your visceral hatred for Obama by literally portraying as a demon.

Unfortunately, some people here will love it, and that is more frightening than Obama will ever be.

By the way, the video violates the rule about swearing.

Elphaba

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You can't be serious.

This is nothing more than a sordid propganda hit piece created by ultra radicals. It's meant to appeal to your visceral hatred for Obama by literally portraying as a demon.

Unfortunately, some people here will love it, and that is more frightening than Obama will ever be.

By the way, the video violates the rule about swearing.

Elphaba

I couldn't give a hoot about what you think about the video, I personally don't give one about it either. But he said it, that was my point. And he has said it on other occasions! That proves he said it and it is TRUE!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You can't be serious.

This is nothing more than a sordid propganda hit piece created by ultra radicals. It's meant to appeal to your visceral hatred for Obama by literally portraying as a demon.

Unfortunately, some people here will love it, and that is more frightening than Obama will ever be.

Elphaba

I guess when the beast does completely arise even the elect will be deceived!!!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This may interest you, but again you're either uninformed or you are not open and teachable and you will think I am crazy....to be honest I am not doing this to prove a point, I am doing this because I want to know both sides and have knowledge, and it may well be true or not! But one thing is that I choose not to believe anything one way or the other.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You can't be serious.

This is nothing more than a sordid propganda hit piece created by ultra radicals. It's meant to appeal to your visceral hatred for Obama by literally portraying as a demon.

Unfortunately, some people here will love it, and that is more frightening than Obama will ever be.

By the way, the video violates the rule about swearing.

Elphaba

Propaganda??? Maybe, maybe not! Ha ha. I hope you are right, but don't be so sure as it could be considered propaganda in making you believe this propaganda!!

I didn't hear any swearing and I hope the moderators understand if this is correct I try to uphold the rules and think this is important to know. If this is the case I am happy to let that link be removed.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Unfortunately, most Americans do not understand the distinction.

Elphaba

Perhaps we should make "In Allah We Trust" out motto. I think the term 'God' is general. It can apply to Allah, or Jesus, or Nature's God, or whatever understanding one has of the Creator.

What is annoying is that so many seem to clamor for their own religious freedom while at the same time looking to limit the religious freedom of others.

Frankly, I thought Mitt's speech on religious freedom was meaningless, pointless, and bland. Religious freedom allows each individual to believe as they see fit and to act accordingly. This is not a secular notion. It is not a religious teaching. It is a natural human right. It is a God-given right.

Atheists are regular folks just like Muslims and Catholics. Nothing in the admonition of God we have received should cause us to feel otherwise. They are our brothers and sisters just the same and they have the same rights as we. Our goverment's role is to protect the freedom of conscience of each individual. Regardless of every attempt otherwise, the last 200 years have continued to see that freedom expand in the world.

-a-train

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Perhaps we should make "In Allah We Trust" out motto.

Wouldn't that be? نحن نؤمن بالل* or what ever the roman character equivalent would be. I mean if you are gonna just translate a phrase you might as well go all out. :D

* This is an internet translation, so may or may not be correct.

P.S. I always found it amusing the thought that Missionaries sent to any Arabic speaking countries would come home and bare their testimonies in their mission language would possibly use the word Allah when doing so and how some people would react to the usage of that word... I am however easily amused.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You've already responded three times to my one post. Can I take it you're done? If not, would you please tell me how many more posts you have to go?

Propaganda??? Maybe, maybe not! Ha ha. I hope you are right, but don't be so sure as it could be considered propaganda in making you believe this propaganda!!

Or, it could be exactly what I said it was. A hit piece that manipulates the emotions of the Obama haters, with no actual impartial or useful information.

Anything that makes the person literally look like a demon is propaganda. I despise Bush, but if I saw his face in this video instead of Obama's, I'd still know it has nothing to do with reality.

I didn't hear any swearing and I hope the moderators understand if this is correct I try to uphold the rules and think this is important to know. If this is the case I am happy to let that link be removed.

The swearing is at 28 seconds, and no, I don't think you heard it. I don't think you'd purposely link something with swearing in it.

Elphaba

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Perhaps we should make "In Allah We Trust" out motto. I think the term 'God' is general. It can apply to Allah, or Jesus, or Nature's God, or whatever understanding one has of the Creator.

What is annoying is that so many seem to clamor for their own religious freedom while at the same time looking to limit the religious freedom of others.

Frankly, I thought Mitt's speech on religious freedom was meaningless, pointless, and bland. Religious freedom allows each individual to believe as they see fit and to act accordingly. This is not a secular notion. It is not a religious teaching. It is a natural human right. It is a God-given right.

Atheists are regular folks just like Muslims and Catholics. Nothing in the admonition of God we have received should cause us to feel otherwise. They are our brothers and sisters just the same and they have the same rights as we. Our goverment's role is to protect the freedom of conscience of each individual. Regardless of every attempt otherwise, the last 200 years have continued to see that freedom expand in the world.

-a-train

What you don't think it was a mock session?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You've already responded three times to my one post. Can I take it you're done? If not, would you please tell me how many more posts you have to go?

The swearing is at 28 seconds, and no, I don't think you heard it. I don't think you'd purposely link something with swearing in it.

Elphaba

Yes dear I have LOL

Sorry about the swearing thing do you want it removed?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
 Share