Posted on 03/15/2017 3:29:14 PM PDT by Jim Robinson
Atheism and Marxism go hand in hand. Rarely is an atheist also a conservative. Atheists and Marxists seek to dethrone Christ to enthrone man. They do not believe mankind is endowed by his and her Creator with certain inalienable rights. To them, rights (or their warped version of them) come from government, not from God. That is why the left sees the Constitution as more of an obstacle to be overcome—for the good of the masses, of course—than as a blessing bestowed by Almighty providence.
If one spends even a short time reading the original documents and letters of the persons back then with an open mind, he would realize that the word religion back then could only be translated into today’s word Christianity. And the freedom of religion is really freedom of Christianity.
The Constitution only supports the freedom of practicing Christianity. And within that Christians would allow others to practice their beliefs but not the promotion of other beliefs. And that Judaism would be specially protected and respected.
“In Their Own Words” - Franklin, Jefferson, Adams, Washington...pick any Founding Father and by just quoting their own words you will astound most Americans. As a local minister, I lead Christian heritage outings in DC and typically use the “In Their Own Words” theme. That theme makes the acronym, I-TOW. As in, I tow you through the Capitol and I show you the overwhelming evidence of America’s Christian heritage by quoting the Founding Fathers in their own words. After hearing me share a good bit, a docent in the Capitol once told me, “I like your stories, but we’re not allowed to talk about God.” I replied, “It’s not me, I’m just quoting what the Founders said!” She said, “Well, we’re not allowed to do that.” How sad! The U.S. Capitol docents are ‘required’ to censor history. And that is symptomatic of many in our day. Mr. Jim Robinson, THANK YOU for initiating this thread. America has dodged a bullet, but we’ll need to fight our way back to the right path. Press on!
P.S. There are MANY outstanding resources out there, if anyone would like to see some of my various quote compilations that I use in DC, let me know.
An objection that ACLU types raise is that the phrase "Year of our Lord" was not included in the draft of the Constitution that was approved by the Convention.
Strict separationists argue that "The Year of our Lord" was ritualistic, not religious. being the standard way of dating important documents in the 1700s; its use was ritualistic, not religious. But which "proves too much," for it evidences that they were not strict separationists, who would not tolerate such a statement, much less call for prayer or publicly do so.
As Wolfstar stated in the aforementioned thread:
The main body of the Constitution concluded with this statement:
"done in Convention by the Unanimous Consent of the States present the Seventeenth Day of September in the Year of our Lord one thousand seven hundred and Eighty seven and of the Independence of the United States of America the Twelfth In witness whereof We have hereunto subscribed our Names,"
Granted, it is not part of the regulatory language, but it is the operative paragraph which confirms that those who signed witnessed the drafting and passage of the Constitution. Also granted that "year of our Lord" was a common formulation on legal documents in the founders' time. Nevertheless, if they wanted to ban all religiously based references, they could have eliminated the phrase.
<
Moreover, while the delegates apparently did not vote for the phrase "in the year of our Lord" as they did for Franklin's locution fostering acceptance by the states, and it is possible that the delegates signed the Constitution before the attestation at issue, which was engrossed by non-delegate Jacob Shallus [which is in large script in the original, similar to that which titles the Articles] on the final day of the Convention, for presentation as a legal document (Michael I. Meyerson, Endowed by Our Creator: The Birth of Religious Freedom in America), it was apparently in copies which were sent to states such as Delaware for ratification:
We the Deputies of the People of the Delaware State, in Convention met, having taken into our serious consideration the Federal Constitution proposed and agreed upon by the Deputies of the United States in a General Convention held at the City of Philadelphia on the seventeenth day of September in the year of our Lord one thousand seven hundred and eighty seven,.. - http://blog.constitutioncenter.org/2014/12/december-7-1787-one-down-and-eight-to-go/
Also, as one researcher found,
ALL of the colonial State constitutions of America at the time the federal Constitution was ratified in 1787 were explicitly Christian in nature and most of them had established denominations as State churches (an “establishment of religion” to use the First Amendment’s language), yet NONE of the State constitutions ended with the dating designation “in the year of our Lord.”
Yet here, in the closing, they DEPARTED from established tradition of dating by bare date, month, and year to specifically include the acknowledgement “the year of OUR LORD.” None of the State constitutions used these words. http://thecreationclub.com/in-the-year-of-our-lord-creation-evolution-and-the-u-s-constitution/#
And in a document signed by Thomas Jefferson on September 24, 1807 giving permission for a ship called the Herschel to proceed on its journey to the port of London, is the phrase “in the year of our Lord Christ..” https://wallbuilders.com/thomas-jefferson-document/
The Heritage Foundation adds:
Dating documents to "the Year of our Lord" had become more unusual; the Declaration of Independence, for instance, simply states "In Congress, July 4, 1776." Dating important documents in American political history to the Declaration of Independence was at that point relatively frequent. The dual reference can be found in only two other national documents: the Articles of Confederation and the Northwest Ordinance (considered, along with the Declaration, to be the "organic documents" of the nation).
The language here is neither insignificant nor unintentional: these dates serve to place the document in the context of the religious traditions of Western civilization and, at the same time, to link it to the regime principles proclaimed in the Declaration of Independence, the Constitution having been written in the twelfth year after July 1776. The usage stands in contrast to both the contemporary British tradition, in which documents were dated to the reign of the sitting monarch (see the Magna Carta of 1215 and the Petition of Right of 1628), and the French decision in 1793 to reject the Gregorian calendar altogether and begin measuring time starting with the French Revolution. http://www.heritage.org/constitution/#!/articles/7/essays/137/attestation-clause
I’d sure enjoy it and believe it is much needed on a grand site such as this . . . perhaps it can serve to pull the direction of some back to the goal of its founder.
I fear that we have many good folk here that have simply missed godly teaching and have been the unwilling sponges of ungodly professors.
They did this because they KNEW that the Christian faith was the only true religion.
Ya think??!!??
But when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same Object evinces a design to reduce them under absolute Despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such Government, and to provide new Guards for their future security.
Likewise.
https://www.wdl.org/en/item/2708/view/1/4/
The preamble to the Constitution contains a reference to "their Creator" found in the Declaration of Independence.
We the People of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defence, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America.
Christian principles shaped America’s founding as evidenced by the Declaration of Independence. The Constitution accepts that the people may hold spiritual beliefs whilst the government cannot. To that end, the Constitution prohibits government from legislating religion while not directly acknowledging the existence of “their Creator”.
This seems to be about the only thread you have authored that garnered less than 100 replies. It would seem that the “God of our fathers” and “Christianity” is not so popular with our modern conservative movement as we might have hoped.
The silence is indeed enlightening.
Nary a bump . . . nary a word of support.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.