Has the US ever been a Christian nation.

[Bunyon]

"Not completely Biblically Based. As I pointed out earlier, there are things with the Constitution that go in direct opposition to the Bible."-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

What was in dircect opposistion? I can't think of anything.

 

[Joseph_Botwinick]

How about slavery and the Constitution's endorsement of it? Or, perhaps, you might consider the hypocrisy of stating that all men are created equal while treating blacks as 3rd class citizens?

Joseph Botwinick

 

[Bunyon]

Well I agree with the hypocrisy, but all nations had routinely practices slavery then, so I see what was acheieved here and what the original vison was and am proud of the English speaking nations. I am not sure where you say the constitution endorsed it. Where is that?

 

[Joseph_Botwinick]

Section 1, Article 9:

The Migration or Importation of such Persons as any of the States now existing shall think proper to admit, shall not be prohibited by the Congress prior to the Year one thousand eight hundred and eight, but a Tax or duty may be imposed on such Importation, not exceeding ten dollars for each Person.

Section 1, Article 9 of the United States Constitution

I believe the key word here is importation. It seems that human slaves were imported from other countries sort of like we would import any commodity today. And the Constitution said that was ok.

Joseph Botwinick

 

[Joseph_Botwinick]

Originally posted by Bunyon:
Well I agree with the hypocrisy, but all nations had routinely practices slavery then, so I see what was acheieved here and what the original vison was and am proud of the English speaking nations. I am not sure where you say the constitution endorsed it. Where is that?

My argument is not that it was not better than what we had before. My argument is that it cannot be said to be wholly Biblical. That, IMO, would be an insult to the Bible if we tried to say that it was.

Joseph Botwinick

 

[Bunyon]

Well indirectly. Just because the constitution reconized the commerce that was going on in some states and that it included slaves does not mean it endoresed slavery. And notice, it sets aside a time when congress will be able to force the states to stop slavery. So the founders had to compromise on the slave issue to create a union, but they left open a date to be free to deal with it in the future. It says "now existing", so they even left open the oportunity to prevent new states from doing it. And they taxed it, which is not promoting it but makin it costly. Respectfully Joseph, I think you just proved my point about the vision in the constitution.

 

[Joseph_Botwinick]

1. It does more than recognize that it is going on. Go back and read it again. It says:

shall not be prohibited by the Congress prior to the Year one thousand eight hundred and eight, but a Tax or duty may be imposed on such Importation, not exceeding ten dollars for each Person.

2. The fact that they compromised on this issue shows hypocrisy and a non-Biblical attitude. I don't think God would have compromised. He would have either said "All men are created equal" or "some men are 3rd class citizens to be bought, sold, and taxed like a commodity on the open market".

3. The fact that they were taxed is an insult. And it certainly did not discourage slavery.

4. To call the Constitution Biblical would be an insult to the Bible.

Joseph Botwinick

 

[Bunyon]

I really appreciated talking with you tonight, Joseph. I appreciate your mind, you got a sharp one. Good night pal.

 

[Joseph_Botwinick]

Yes...it is getting very late. I appreciate talking with you as well. I look forward to further discussions with you in the future. Good Night.

Joseph Botwinick

 

[Gold Dragon]

Originally posted by Bunyon:
You said that already, didn't you, Gold Dragon?

Yep. I see many other ideas repeated from the other thread here as well, so I didn't think that would be a problem.

Originally posted by Bunyon:
My response was that the idea of a Christian Nation is not necessarly pinned to whether or not we have a theocracy, which we don't. No one would want that. We have or had a Biblically informed and Biblically based democracy. ?

My point is that having a "Biblically based government" whether it is a democracy, monarchy, totalitarian dictatorship, theocracy, whatever is exactly what the founders didn't want and they made the first amendment in the constitution to prevent that from happening.

 

[gb93433]

Originally posted by Gold Dragon:
My point is that having a "Biblically based government" whether it is a democracy, monarchy, totalitarian dictatorship, theocracy, whatever is exactly what the founders didn't want and they made the first amendment in the constitution to prevent that from happening.

Several of the founders were not Christians. Some were deists. Jefferson was a liberal. He did not believe in the miracles. A Bible with the miracles gone is named after him.

 

[Gold Dragon]

Originally posted by gb93433:
A Bible with the miracles gone is named after him.

The aim of the Jefferson bible compiled by Jefferson was to extract the moral precepts of Jesus found in the gospels. But yes, Jefferson's clear Deism would have lead to a distrust of the supernatural.

 

[Bunyon]

"Yep. I see many other ideas repeated from the other thread here as well, so I didn't think that would be a problem."

No Problem. Glad to hear from you.

"My point is that having a "Biblically based government" whether it is a democracy, monarchy, totalitarian dictatorship, theocracy, whatever is exactly what the founders didn't want and they made the first amendment in the constitution to prevent that from happening. "
-----------------------------------------------

If you are saying we don't have a theocracy, everyone agrees with you I am sure.

 

[Gold Dragon]

Originally posted by Bunyon:
"My point is that having a "Biblically based government" whether it is a democracy, monarchy, totalitarian dictatorship, theocracy, whatever is exactly what the founders didn't want and they made the first amendment in the constitution to prevent that from happening. "
-----------------------------------------------

If you are saying we don't have a theocracy, everyone agrees with you I am sure.

I am also saying that the US founders would never have wanted a "biblically based democracy" which is why they created the first amendment.

 

[Bunyon]

"I am also saying that the US founders would never have wanted a "biblically based democracy" which is why they created the first amendment"----------------------------------------------------

I am not sure what you mean by Biblically based. If you man we would have to stone adulteres' or something, or course not. But when you read the founders papers, the mayflower compact, the state charters, etc. You realize this is a Biblically based constitution. Unless you think the Constitution was a sudden repudiation of all of this. Remember Franklin said, that "our gov was wholly inadequate for any but a Christian people" Or somehting to that effect.

 

[LadyEagle]

The fact that they compromised on this issue shows hypocrisy and a non-Biblical attitude. I don't think God would have compromised. He would have either said "All men are created equal" or "some men are 3rd class citizens to be bought, sold, and taxed like a commodity on the open market".

Slavery is in the Bible in both the Old & New Testaments. The Bible doesn't say anything about it being wrong to own slaves.

Paul even goes so far as to say he is a "slave of Jesus Christ."

At any rate, today, the average American is a slave to the tax system.

 

[KenH]

Originally posted by Joseph_Botwinick:
How about slavery and the Constitution's endorsement of it?

How is slavery in opposition to the Bible, Joseph?

True, freedom is much better. And I am opposed to slavery, but not because is it banned in the Bible.

Why did God not command masters to release their slaves in the New Testament?

 

[Joseph_Botwinick]

Originally posted by LadyEagle:
</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />The fact that they compromised on this issue shows hypocrisy and a non-Biblical attitude. I don't think God would have compromised. He would have either said "All men are created equal" or "some men are 3rd class citizens to be bought, sold, and taxed like a commodity on the open market".

Slavery is in the Bible in both the Old & New Testaments. The Bible doesn't say anything about it being wrong to own slaves.

Paul even goes so far as to say he is a "slave of Jesus Christ."

At any rate, today, the average American is a slave to the tax system. </font>[/QUOTE]If slavery is Biblical, then the idea that all men are created equal is not. Either way you want to go with this argument, the principles on which this nation were founded are hypocritical and unBiblical.

Joseph Botwinick

 

[LadyEagle]

You left out women, Joseph.

And I disagree with your position.

 

[Joseph_Botwinick]

Indeed I did leave them out. Allow me to add them: Women also. I don't care if you disagree with my position. Lately, that is actually something I would consider a positive thing.

The facts remain: Either all people are created equal or it is ok to buy and sell some people like you would cattle. Either way, the principles on which this nation is founded are hypocritical and not althogether Biblical.

Joseph Botwinick