Religion and politics?
Moving this hot potato from IMHO to Great Debates.
JThunder, you might want to check out neutral sources to discover the real beliefs of the Founding Fathers–good scholarship is not partisan. If you bother to read for yourself instead of relying on incompetent fundie Web sites, you’d find that there was a variety of opinions on religion among the FFs. Certainly, they all believed in a Supreme Being, but you have to remember they were 18th-century lawyers, businessmen, and farmers who were heavily influecned by the English Enlightenment that placed a greater emphasis on utilitarian philosophy than strict inerrantist theology.For example, Jefferson was a Deist who acknowledged a Creator but saw Jesus as a moral teacher and not as the Son of God. Jefferson created his own New Testament by cutting up his Bible and pasting the pages in a notebook, omitting the references to Jesus’s divinity. (Cite). Franklin believed in a remote Supreme Perfection that did not require worship, although worship fulfilled man’s need to pay regard to his Creator. (Brands, H.W.; The First American; Doubleday, New York, NY, pp.94-95) Hamilton eschewed organized religion and disdained sectarian affiliation, but he said of Christianity that if her were sitting as a juror on its authenticity,he would abruptly give his verdict in its favor. (Chernow, Ron; Alexander Hamilton; Penguin, New York, NY, pp. 169-170).
No, you are obliged to go to the library (or your own bookshelf as I did) and find the appropriate cites. You don’t serve God by being a lazy writer.
Who was, obviously, a fisher of men.
Somehow this thread reminds me of one of the funnier religious jokes I’ve heard recently:
Sunday School teacher: Now, kiddies, who can tell me why we celebrate Easter?
Little Kid #1: Because we get candy and choklit!! 
Sunday School teacher: Well, that’s fun, of course, but that’s not the real reason.
Little Kid #2: Because it’s when the Easter Bunny comes?
Sunday School teacher: No, not exactly. Anybody else?
Little Kid #3: I know, I know!! It’s when Jesus came up out of His tomb…
Sunday School teacher: That’s right!
Little Kid #3: …and if He sees His shadow…
Damn! I have hit the big time now!
Some of the sources which I cited are partisan, and some were not. Heck, I pointed out that Witherspoon had a theological degree, and I cited a neutral source which verified that Benjamin Rush founded the Philadelphia Bible Society. I have not had time to re-dig up exhaustive sources for all the Founding Fathers, but these sources alone show that RealityChuck’s claim is a vast oversimplification.
Golly gee! Ya think? Perhaps you missed the point where I explicitly, explicitly, EXPLICITLY said,
Get that? I specifically said that they were a mixed bag. I specifically stated that they held a variety of opinions, and cited several who espoused non-Christians viewpoints.
So why are you castigating me in this regard? Why are you lambasting me for allegedly omitting something, when in reality, I took great pains to emphasize it? Why?
Please, tell me.
And I explicitly mentioned that Jefferson did not hold Christian views. So what’s your point? How in the world does your statement prove me wrong?
And I already cited sources to that effect. Not for all the Founding Fathers, but enough to show that your claim is vastly oversimplified.
Heck, if you want more proof, just check out the
Moreover, why are you taking me to task for pointing that several of the Founding Fathers held Christian beliefs, while giving RealityChuck a free pass? After all, he’s the one who said that the Founding Fathers did not believe in Jesus as a personal Savior. I’m merely pointing out that not all of them can be described that way.
Or is it simply that his claim – extreme as it may be – needs no corroboration? It’s interesting to note how you keep demanding cites from one side, but not from the other. Interesting indeed.
Now, here’s a thought. I have agreed with everything you said about Jefferson, and I do not dispute your claims about Hamilton. Heck, let’s throwin Ben Franklin, Ethan Allen, Henry Dearborne and Charles Lee – all of whom I went out of my way to mention earlier. Now, let’s see you refute my claims.
Let’s start off easy. Do you deny the secular source which I cited, attesting that Dr. Benjamin Rush, started the first Bible society and Sunday school society in America? Do you deny that Charles Pinckney and John Langdon founded the American Bible Society? Do you deny that James McHenry founded the Baltimore Bible Society? And so forth, and so on.
BTW, gobear, I find it ironic that you accused me of conducting poor research, considering that (a) you failed to notice that I explicitly addressed the objections which you raised regarding Jefferson et al, and (b) you failed to notice that I was not relying solely on “fundie Web sites” – indeed, that I explicitly pointed out some of the secular sources which I used, and some to which these sites referred. (Hint: Look up Annals of America, which I mentioned previously.)
Truly ironic.
-
What are we debating? Why was this moved here?
-
What, specifically, did the article say we’re supposed to be celebrating about Jesus?
-
Did it say that the 4th happened to fall on a Jesus-Day, or that it was the 4th BECASUE it was a Jesus-Day?
No argument there, but he is also not wrong in his statement that the FFs didn’t regard Jesus as a personal savior, because that wasn’t a widespread concept in the 18th century. Certainly the founders of evangelical Christianity flourished in that era, but their teachings didn’t receive mass acceptance until the next century.
I’ll give you credit for mentioning that, but your emphasis was on the FFs professing Christian beliefs, 3 paragraphs to 1.
Mostly because I really detest the fundies’ attempt to hijack the FFs and reinvent them as born-again Christians who designed America to be a Christians-only nation.
It doesn’t. You were right.
So far, all I’ve found on the Web states that Pinckney was First president of the Charleston Bible Society, but I have no doubt that you can back up your claims. Let’s posit that you are correct in every detail–what do we make of that in regard to the claim of July 4 being an explicitly Christian holiday? Do Christians have a greater claim to American than do Jews or atheists?
The reason why Christians would ignore Jesus on the Fourth of July should be obvious. The holiday celebrates the signing of the Declaration of Independence, which was basically amounted to a declaration of war with England. England was a Christian nation, and the people in the colonies were primarily Christian. Thus the Revolutionary War was basically a secular thing, with 2 groups of Christians fighting and killing each other. Isn’t Jesus the Prince of Peace, and the idea of Christians killing Christians against his teachings? The idea of considering Independence Day to be a religious holiday to me seems blasphemous.
The author also might want to brush up on history. Many of the founding fathers were Deists. Pretty much all believed there was a god, but many didn’t consider Jesus to be their personal savior.
My understanding, from a careful reading of the biblical text(s) leads me to conclude that God, Jesus, Holy Spirit, Abraham, Moses, Solomon, the Apostles, and first century Christians had no interest whatsoever in secular holidays of any kind as having religious signifigance. Their business was of a spiritual nature.
There are many writers/preachers who distort the scriptures and the Gospels for their own reasons, not for the real conversion of individuals to God’s Truth.
It said we are failing to recognize the most important person who “gave it all” so we could have our freedom. It then specifies that Jesus is that one person. It also says that while it is great to remember the others who died to make us free, we must remember Jesus at this time.
It actually doesn’t castigate people for celebrating the holiday, but tells us we must acknowledge Jesus as the most important person to sacrifice himself for us. It then advises us to remember all who died while we watch the fireworks.
It then advises people to hie themselves to the local Orthodox Presbyterian church.
It also cites John 8: 31-32
Is their fireworks show any good? 
At least on Christmas and Easter believers celebrate events which purport to involve supernatural intervention. Pointing out church membership or religious remarks by some of the FFs is hardly a substitute for accounts of miracles taking place during the founding of the US.
Do remember that this was only mentioned because someone made the unusual claim that the Founding Fathers did not believe in Jesus as a personal Savior. The point was not to defend the Christian nature of July 4th, but to demonstrate that the claim regarding the Founding Fathers’ beliefs was a vast oversimplification. If anything, the facts suggest that most of them did espouse traditional Christian beliefs.
The 4th of July and Christianity are mutually exclusive. Jesus said his kingdom was “not of this world”, so don’t try to drag him into a holiday that has nothing to do with him. To pretend that you are somehow being a good christian by honoring America is a fallacy, politics have hijacked your religion. America is not especially holy to the Lord, Isaiah said “all the nations of the world are as dust to him”.
If you are not a Christian, resist Jesus being part of the 4th of July; you are doing christians a favor even though they may not realize it.
If you are a Christian, resist the 4th of July being part of your religion.
When you mix the two, you’ll end up with some sick mutant of religion and politics that should be annhialiated.
Nonsense. Now I’m going to have to ask you for cites – and since you refused to accept any cites from Christian organizations, I will urge you not to reference any websites or publications from atheistic groups, humanistic organizations or any similar camps.
Remember what I said earlier – about how you gave the anti-Christian claim a free pass, while demanding secular cites for the statements I made? I now choose to hold you to a consistent standard.
In fact, one need only read about the lives of George Whitefield, John Wesley, Charles Wesley and many others to show that this was indeed a well-established teaching. Heck, one can barely read the Epistles of St. Paul without seeing this need for an individual relationship with Jesus being taught. So if someone has been telling you that this was not a well-established concept, then I truly have to question that person’s sources.
Which is irrelevant. The point is that I devoted a considerable amount of my posting – 25%, if we count by paragraphs – to emphasizsing the very same things which you claimed that I ignored.
Moreover, your objection was that I supposedly ignored the beliefs of Jefferson et al. I clearly did not. Yes, I did concentrate on the Founding Fathers who did espouse Christian beliefs, but only because that was the specific topic under debate. I did not need to mention Jefferson and company, but I chose to do so in anticipation of objections such as yours. Obviously, that wasn’t enough.
Hmm. Interesting. Now, what were you saying about “partisanship” again? And were you not the one who was urging scholarship, rather than the pursuit of an agenda?
Good. At least you admit that.
Again, I don’t think you read my postings very closely. I never said anything about July 4th as a Christian holiday. I said exactly nothing – diddly squat – about that matter. I was addressing the specific claim that the Founding Fathers did not believe in Jesus as a personal Savior. All the evidence shows that this is a severe misrepresentation of their views.
So if we look back on this thread, we see that I specifically addressed each of your claims, well in advance – all except for your new claim that Jesus-as-a-personal-savor “wasn’t a widespread concept in the 18th century.” Again, I’ll have to ask you for proof of that claim.
And I already answered your point in my previous post, which acknowledged the origin of evangelical Christianity in the 18th century.
Didn’t say you ignored it, and I gave you credit for mentioning it. Get over it already.
And I believe that we both acknowedged that there was no consensus among the FFs on religion. As for the “personal relationship,” I believe I already cited the Deist beliefs of several FFs in a remote Watchmaker, indicating that they, who you must admit were representative of the religious climate of their era, did not accept a personal savior. Certainly, devout 18th-century Christians believed in a God who oversaw their daily lives, but you just don’t find them espousing the “Jesus is my buddy” rhetoric passed off by evangelicals today.
So if we look back on this thread, we see that I specifically addressed each of your claims, well in advance – all except for your new claim that Jesus-as-a-personal-savor “wasn’t a widespread concept in the 18th century.” Again, I’ll have to ask you for proof of that claim.
[/QUOTE]
Didn’t George Washington walk across the Delaware River?
Nope. You asserted that it began in the 18th century, and that it did not receive widespread acceptance until the 19th. Wesley and company were vocal proponents of evangelicalism, but by no means would I credit them with its origin. (If anything, I would trace it back through the Reformation, and even further back to the New Testament era, but that’s grist for another mill.)
Additionally, even if we grant that evangelicalism was not widespread until the 19th century (a claim which I reject), it still does not mean that the Founding Fathers were ignorant of it. And even if we grant that claim, it still does not disprove the notion of a personal Savior.
First of all, you did take me to task for allegedly being ignorant of Jefferson’s views, and for omitting them as a result. You might not have used the word “ignored,” but that was what accused me of doing.
And second, you were trying to weasel your way out by saying that my “emphasis was on the FFs professing Christian beliefs, 3 paragraphs to 1.” My points were that (a) 25% is a very respectable percentage, and (b) it doesn’t matter what the percentage was, as I most certainly addressed that point long before you levelled your accusations.
No, it simply means that those particular Founding Fathers did not accept Jesus as a personal Savior. It does not mean that they were unfamiliar with the concept, and it most certainly does not mean that the other Founding Fathers were similarly ignorant.
Hint: If Jefferson rejects the need for a personal commitment to Christ, what does that say about the beliefs of Washington, Benjamin Rush, Charles Pinckey, the (ahem) Reverend Witherspoon and company? That’s right – nothing. Nada. Zip. Zilch. Diddly-squat. It doesn’t even prove that Jefferson himself was ignorant of the concept, so your logic is doomed from the very start.
No, but they did emphasize the need for personal devotion, personal prayer, personal reading of the Bible and personal commitment to following the teachings of Christ. Only the most tortured logic can be used to explain this as anything other than cultivating a personal relationship with the Messiah.
The fact that they didn’t use the word “buddy” is simply irrelevant.