I have mixed feelings about the concept of the United States being a Christian nation.
A lot of the founders and early settlers were a mixture of believers and others who acknowledged the importance of Judeo-Christian ethics and morality and some who just gave lip service to that concept.
Can we say we are a Christian nation when we are built upon genocide and ethnic cleansing?
I'm probably the only person here who wanted to jump up and "boo" at the end of the movies where you heard the bugle sounding a charge and the cavalry came over the hill.
I'm probably the only one here that is glad that General Custer received a gift of an arrow shirt (old Indian joke from an old Indian) in June 1876 near the Little Bighorn River.
__________________
Sam also known as Jim Ellis
Apostolic in doctrine
Pentecostal in experience
Charismatic in practice
Non-denominational in affiliation
Inter-denominational in fellowship
Kind of sappy... sorry. And I object to the notion that the United States Constitution is "inspired of God." It's good, but not "inspired by God." In fact, it sort of goes out of the way to make no such claims for itself.
Benjamin Franklin should have the "Christian minister" between him and Jesus. In his thousands of letters that we have have preserved, Franklin never once even mentions Jesus Christ in passing. The two apparently had never met.
George Washington: the "Father of Our Country" was a deist and a philosophically committed Mason. He is famously said to have knelt in prayer at Valley Forge. The only problem is that the individuals that are said to have "witnessed" this either have denied it or are completely silent about it. No serious American historian has been able to attribute any religious faith to Washington other than his transcendental deism and his several secular announcements proclaiming a day or a time of "Thanksgiving to our Maker" - the impersonal deist god.
While I agree with most of what you said in the post I chopped up I take issue with two points. One minor the other not so much.
Franklin did in fact reference Jesus Christ, though perhaps not in the light most would like...
As to Jesus of Nazareth, my opinion of whom you particularly desire,
I think his system of morals and his religion, as he left them to us, the best the world ever saw or is likely to see; but I apprehend it has received various corrupting changes,
and I have, with most of the present dissenters in England, some doubts as to his divinity;
though it is a question I do not dogmatize upon, having never studied it, and think it needless to busy myself with it now, when I expect soon an opportunity of knowing the truth with less trouble.
I see no harm, however, in its being believed, if that belief has the good consequences, as probably it has, of making his doctrines more respected and more observed;
especially as I do not perceive that the Supreme takes it amiss, by distinguishing the unbelievers in his government of the world with any peculiar marks of his displeasure.
As to Washington I am curious as to why the view you presented would be attributed to a man who wrote...
...I beseech thee, my sins, remove them from thy presence, as far as the east is from the west, and accept of me for the merits of thy son Jesus Christ, that when I come into thy temple, and compass thine altar, my prayers may come before thee as incense; and as thou wouldst hear me calling upon thee in my prayers, so give me grace to hear thee calling on me in thy word, that it may be wisdom, righteousness, reconciliation and peace to the saving of the soul in the day of the Lord Jesus.
While I agree with most of what you said in the post I chopped up I take issue with two points. One minor the other not so much.
Franklin did in fact reference Jesus Christ, though perhaps not in the light most would like...
As to Jesus of Nazareth, my opinion of whom you particularly desire,
I think his system of morals and his religion, as he left them to us, the best the world ever saw or is likely to see; but I apprehend it has received various corrupting changes,
and I have, with most of the present dissenters in England, some doubts as to his divinity;
though it is a question I do not dogmatize upon, having never studied it, and think it needless to busy myself with it now, when I expect soon an opportunity of knowing the truth with less trouble.
I see no harm, however, in its being believed, if that belief has the good consequences, as probably it has, of making his doctrines more respected and more observed;
especially as I do not perceive that the Supreme takes it amiss, by distinguishing the unbelievers in his government of the world with any peculiar marks of his displeasure.
As to Washington I am curious as to why the view you presented would be attributed to a man who wrote...
...I beseech thee, my sins, remove them from thy presence, as far as the east is from the west, and accept of me for the merits of thy son Jesus Christ, that when I come into thy temple, and compass thine altar, my prayers may come before thee as incense; and as thou wouldst hear me calling upon thee in my prayers, so give me grace to hear thee calling on me in thy word, that it may be wisdom, righteousness, reconciliation and peace to the saving of the soul in the day of the Lord Jesus.
Good questions: First of all, the alleged "prayer journal" for General Washington is spurious. He did not write those words. They were composed, fabricated out of whole cloth (I believe) in or around 1919 or 1920. This is when the "prayer at Valley Forge" mythos was promulgated.
Concerning my remarks about George Washington... In the remarks that we know are authentic and actually came from the hand of the Father of Our Country, we do not find him addressing God in direct and personal terms as he is purported to have done in the "Prayer Journal" that was published in 1919. Consider his Inaugural Address:
“…[I]t would be peculiarly improper to omit in this first official Act, my fervent supplications to that Almighty Being who rules over the Universe, who presides in the Councils of Nations, and whose providential aids can supply every human defect, that his benediction may consecrate to the liberties and happiness of the People of the United States, a Government instituted by themselves for these essential purposes: and may enable every instrument employed in its administration to execute with success, the functions allotted to his charge.”
Washington's First Inaugural Address is one of the most important documents related to the founding of our nation. It's up there with the Constitution, Declaration of Independence and the Federalist Papers.
Look at how Washington addresses God - this reveals a great deal of his own theology. God is not "Our Father which art in heaven..." Instead, God is "that Almighty Being..."
For whatever reason, Washington throws in a reference to the divine council of the gods (Councils of Nations), but despite their alleged abilities to influence the course of human national affairs, Washington attributes all of the hard work at nation building to "The People of the United States." And notice; "The People of the United States" are given an equal billing with that impersonal deistic God, "the Almighty Being."
Frank Grizzard, a senior editor of the George Washington Papers collection at the University of Virginia has had to almost devote his career to debunking the George Washington Prayer Journal myth. There is no "Prayer Journal" as your source cited in any of the collections of Washington's letters.
Tim LaHaye - he of "left Behind" wealth, claims to have hired handwriting experts who "authenticated" the hand written "Prayer Journal." However, the FBI was called in to examine the document and they pronounced it a forgery. It was first "discovered" in 1891 and then took on legs of its own after its 1919 publication.
With regard to Benjamin Franklin, there are many myths related to his "Christian faith" as well.
These men were deists. They believed in the so-called "Watchmaker" God. An "Almighty Being" Who created the universe but Who is so transcendent and remote that He doesn't really interact in our affairs in any real personal way. That's why, when it came time to win their freedom and to create a new nation, "The People of the United States" were called upon to act, to fight and to forge a new nation.
George Washington in a speech to the United Baptist Churches in Virginia in May, 1789, Washington said that every man "ought to be protected in worshipping the Deity according to the dictates of his own conscience."
After Washington's death, Dr. Abercrombie, a friend of his, replied to a Dr. Wilson, who had interrogated him about Washington's religion replied, "Sir, Washington was a Deist."
__________________
Last edited by John Atkinson; 11-23-2009 at 05:52 PM.
Then of coarse the Treaty of Tripoli Article 11 1797
Art. 11.As the Government of the United States of America is not, in any sense, founded on the Christian religion; as it has in itself no character of enmity against the laws, religion, or tranquillity, of Mussulmen; and, as the said States never entered into any war, or act of hostility against any Mahometan nation, it is declared by the parties, that no pretext arising from religious opinions, shall ever produce an interruption of the harmony existing between the two countries.
Then of coarse the Treaty of Tripoli Article 11 1797
Art. 11.As the Government of the United States of America is not, in any sense, founded on the Christian religion; as it has in itself no character of enmity against the laws, religion, or tranquillity, of Mussulmen; and, as the said States never entered into any war, or act of hostility against any Mahometan nation, it is declared by the parties, that no pretext arising from religious opinions, shall ever produce an interruption of the harmony existing between the two countries.
Linear Mode
