America WAS Originally a Christian Nation

It couldn't be more relevant to the topic. America runs on the constitution and it's bureaucracy. I cannot think of anything more relevant. You are just making up excuses to dodge my questions.

Are you saying that I have to have previous knowledge of a subject, so that I can be qualified to ask questions about the subject? Are you serious?

I shouldn't have to remind you, that you don't know how much I know about Christianity. So lets stop assuming ok?

 

It couldn't be more relevant to the topic. America runs on the constitution and it's bureaucracy. I cannot think of anything more relevant. You are just making up excuses to dodge my questions.

Are you saying that I have to have previous knowledge of a subject, so that I can be qualified to ask questions about the subject? Are you serious?

I shouldn't have to remind you, that you don't know how much I know about Christianity. So lets stop assuming ok?

I don't know if there are different types of gravity, but I do know that there are different types of Christianity!

 

maybe America was Originally a Peyote nation... not sure the Indians ever heard of Jesus

unless you believe the Mormons that is....

 

I have a low tolerance for nonsense, in case you're interested.

Alas, I can definitely feature that.

What I said is in perfectly good English and requires no rephrasing, thanks anyway.

Regardless of how much minutiae you may have scarfed up about Christianity, you have no understanding of its essence.

 

If you need to be told how to be moral, you lack empathy, not religion.

 

Are you ever going to answer the questions? Or are you going to continue to assume things about me and attack me personally, in order to dodge the question again?

The only thing that is obvious in this conversation is you trying everything you possibly can to avoid answering legitimate questions. I will respond, when you ask a legitimate question that is on topic, or you answer one of mine. Seem fair?

 

They didn't wan religious matters intertwined with political matters, or more to the point the power of religion mixed with the power of government.

And the Constitution specifically prohibts a religious test because one does not have to believe in supernatural beings in order to be a moral person.

Yet atheist are just as moral as those who profess religious faith.

And what morals are indicative of and unique to Christians?

 

I've given them such answers as they merit.

I can hardly continue to do what I wasn't doing in the first place.

That is no concern of mine.

 

^ Ignored, for being a troll. Have fun in your bubble!

 

Yes, we could have slaves and deny women inheritance and the vote.

 

I would say that if we were a Christian nation it was out of such predominance, but religion in general was extremely important. It's why the First Amendment starts with the guarantee with the practice and exercise of religion.

You also see the following excerpt from the Northwest Ordinance of 1787:

Religion, morality, and knowledge, being necessary to good government and the happiness of mankind, schools and the means of education shall forever be encouraged.​

So you're saying Washington wasn't a Christian?

Here is some clarification:

This conspiracy theory is my absolute favorite of the three. Conspiracy theorists allege that it was Masons who designed the street layout of Washington DC and in that design created intricate designs to create certain symbols. What are these symbols they say? According to the theorist there are Satanic symbols placed in the street design which proves we Masons are really followers of Satan. I always get a good chuckle out of this when someone approaches me with this one.

Here are the facts. George Washington appointed Pierre Charles L'Enfant to design Washington DC, which was established in 1790 when an act of Congress authorized a federal district along the Potomac River and conveniently situated between the northern and southern states.

Thomas Jefferson had created a sketch of the city comprised of a square grid street system. L'Enfant took these designs further and applied radials upon them. From each of these radials stemmed streets that would shoot diagonally across the city intersecting the grid system. L'Enfant placed Congress on a high point with a commanding view of the Potomac, instead of reserving the grandest spot for the leader's palace as was customary in Europe, to display the American attitude of reserving the high point of the city for the Legislature whose duty it is to represent the People and the States. These wide boulevards stemming from the radials allowed for easy transportation across town and offered views of important buildings and common squares from great distances.

Eventually L'Enfant's head strong behavior earned him the ire of Washington, who fired him after one year of employment. According to the Encyclopedia Americana:

L'Enfant forged ahead regardless of his orders, the budget, or landowners with prior claims.​

When he left the US, he took his designs with him. The duty of remaking the plans fell upon Andrew Ellicot and Benjamin Banneker (a freed black man). Banneker was able to recreate the plans in their entirety from memory.

Of all the men who dealt with the designs, of this future Seat of Government, was George Washington. Some have stated that L'Enfant was a Mason, but according to Brent Morris in his book, The Complete Idiot’s Guide to Freemasonry, stated:

Eager Freemasons with more enthusiasm than facts have claimed L’Enfant as a brother. It is unfortunate for them that there are no documents, either primary or secondary, showing L’Enfant was a Mason.​

To counter this, Pierre F. de Ravel d’Esclapon, of New York, wrote an article called "The Masonic Career of Major Pierre Charles L’Enfant" who states there exist minutes of Holland Lodge in NY that show L'Enfant getting proposed and initiated, but makes no more further statements as to whether he made it to become a Master Mason. I find his article intriguing, but the evidence is circumstantial and muddies the water. Even if he had been initiated, if he had not progressed any further he would not have been considered a full member nor entitled to the rights of membership. Regardless of his affiliation, he was fired and the designs remade from Banneker are what we see today.

The conspiracy theorist states that there exists an inverted pentagram (as seen in the picture above), but if you notice I have one line that is blue. I made that line blue because Rhode Island Ave NW doesn't go all the way through to K St NW. Rhode Island Ave NW stops when it runs into Connecticut Ave NW. The pentagram is not complete.

Some also state that you can find the Square and Compasses (one of the most prominent Masonic symbols out there), but I'd like to point out that when you place a radial street system upon a grid system, you'll find the Square and Compasses. With an intricate crisscross of streets, you're bound to find various images. In fact, as you can see in the picture above, you can spell "JESUS" in the streets of Washington DC, but you don't hear anyone condemning it as some deviant scheme of the Christian faith.

I personally find this theory to be illogical and unfounded, but even faced with the facts some people will hold tight to their theories.

http://www.travelingtemplar.com/2012/12/freemasonry-founding-of-united-states.html

 

Those who still believe in establishment need to read Madison's Memorial and Remonstrance which was written a full TWO years before the Constitution was enacted.

 

I don't have a full rundown on his beliefs, but even if he is regarded as a Christian, it is apparent that he was strongly influenced by deism and freemasonry.

Your info is interesting and insightful. However, not all presentations that hawk the masonic influence in the design of Washington DC rely on conspiracy theories and satanic symbols.

Other sources have also found the layout to be based on consistent multiples of the megalithic yard.

 

These are the same righteous men who:

1. Supported an unjustified rebellion against their home nation, England?

AND

2. Used the same Christian faith to support slavery, going so far as to legitimize it IN the Constitution?

Seems to me if it was a case of Atheists we might have avoided the Revolution and slavery would have ended as British subject in her colonies far sooner.

 

That's cool. So the founders wanted a place in which Hinduism and Islam could be practiced in complete safety and freedom?

 

No, you WERE a cesspool, but you've been maturing out of those awful habits since the 1960's. There is far more respect for human life today, and there is more respect for the idea of equality (essential to respecting humans full stop). You've abolished slavery, chauvinism, racism, legal rape-within-marriage, oppression of alternate sexuality, the juvenile judging of others based purely on appearances, unbridled environmental destruction, etc etc.

Unless of course your idea of respect is neatly combed hair, tidy children, and the repression of the beautiful things which make us human.

 

Jupiter may only have one type of gravity, but the Jupiteans might imagine 1000 different types. One of which might be "there is only one true Gravitarian, all the rest are just Jupitean interpretations"

I'm not sure how you managed to reach the conclusion that lack of 'rudimentary understanding' of Christianity is what causes the atheist to ask "which type?", when it's as plain as the nose on your face that there are virtually limitless interpretations and 'types'. Your idea that a true Christian is beyond partisan carry on is just one more version, as per my Jupiter analogy above - but apparently your own lack of understanding has prevented you realising that.

 

Well he being a Freemason wouldn't prevent him from being a Christian.

I would like to see these other presentations.

DC was influenced by a great deal.

Unjustified? That's hardly accurate.

Where does the Constitution mention slavery? Plus, many Founders did in fact not like slavery and opposed it.

So you think we should have submitted like good lil' peasants? LOL What a fool.

 

They've been run on TV, probably the history channel.

 

Ah. I don't have cable but I'll root around to.see what there is.

 

Specifically which principles would you like to ENFORCE upon the masses? Because you cant really "go back" You can only move forward. Most people in this day and age wouldnt accept the types of restraints placed upon them by law that people 200 years ago would have.

So, how. specifically, would you want to enforce christian principles on people who dont want them?