Would you care to elaborate.?
MB
-
Welcome to Baptist Board, a friendly forum to discuss the Baptist Faith in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to all the features that our community has to offer.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon and God Bless!
How should Christians judge America?
- Thread starter Calminian
- Start date
MB
Your anger really makes me laugh. Keep it up. hehehehehehehehehehehe Oh I just can't stop hehehehehehehehe.
MB
1. Cutting regulation allowed business to expand.
2. Cutting the corporate taxes allowed corporations to bring their money back to the U.S., allowed U.S. corporations to better compete with foreign corporations, and stopped the flight of corporations overseas.
3. Reductions in immigration has caused actual growth in median wages for the first time in over 20 years.
No, they didn't.
You obviously know nothing about U.S. history. First there are several sets of settlers. Only a small portion of them were fleeing religious "persecution".
The vast majority of the land was purchased from the Indians who largely did not use the land. Manhattan was bought 8 times or so.
As time went on, wars were fought and the "Native Americans" ended up always siding with the losing side. As a result of the secular wars at that time, territory was seceded to the winner just like in Europe and GB to the present day.
Unlike the Europeans and GB, the Americans actually felt remorse about what happened and set up the reservation system which was unfortunately modeled on the socialist model. For a short period of time the "Native American" population was forced to integrate secularly - not religiously.
The reasons behind "taking" "Native American" land without payment has always been a secular one - not a religious one.
In addition, the "Native Americans" generally stole their land from other Indian groups as well. The Iroquois have as much claim over the Ohio Valley as Russia has over Poland. But one can go on and on about "Native Americans" attacking each other and "taking" each other's land.
Islam is quite different. But you'd have to be less ignorant of Islam to understand that.
At what time in our history did we become a Christian Nation? Was it before, after or during the large-scale displacement of the Native Americans?
Were there no Christians involved in this successful effort? I conclude from your post it was an entirely secular undertaking.
https://www.history.com/topics/native-american-history/trail-of-tears
At the beginning of the 1830s, nearly 125,000 Native Americans lived on millions of acres of land in Georgia, Tennessee, Alabama, North Carolina and Florida–land their ancestors had occupied and cultivated for generations. By the end of the decade, very few natives remained anywhere in the southeastern United States. Working on behalf of white settlers who wanted to grow cotton on the Indians’ land, the federal government forced them to leave their homelands and walk thousands of miles to a specially designated “Indian territory” across the Mississippi River. This difficult and sometimes deadly journey is known as the Trail of Tears.
Yes, people are sinners. Prior to that those natives butchered other natives to take their land. And prior to that, those natives did the same.
Since the Fall, men have been hurting other men. This does not mean you disobey governments, and oppose God's purpose for governments.
Yes, you can judge America by it's sinful past. It has much good in its past, and also much sin. Or, you can judge America on the things it has overcome, and the direction its taken and where it is now.
How would you like to be judged?
I have no choice in the matter of my judgement.
[Mat 12:36 KJV] 36 But I say unto you, That every idle word that men shall speak, they shall give account thereof in the day of judgment.
My thoughts, actions and Idle words condemn me before the Holy God of Heaven.
But, by HIs grace, I have been redeemed.
[1Pe 1:18-19 KJV] 18 Forasmuch as ye know that ye were not redeemed with corruptible things, [as] silver and gold, from your vain conversation [received] by tradition from your fathers; 19 But with the precious blood of Christ, as of a lamb without blemish and without spot:
I would that this discussion had not gotten personal. I'd still like to know when America became a Christian nation.
Me neither. But the premise of the OP was how should we judge America, and by extension, others. Today there is a rush to look into peoples pasts, 30, 40, 50 years ago, and condemn them for it. I would imagine, you'd probably be against this. Yet you judge early America by its past. I'm merely asking, would you want someone judging you like that.
Two points should be remembered when addressing the OP.
1) America was never a "Christian" nation. It certainly held ideals that were similar to the Judaeo/Christian thinking, but with the exception of a few, the founding fathers were at best deist inclined. The adoption of the Judaeo/Christian line of thinking was because such was considered the highest rational thinking and ideal that famous philosophers of the day considered, yet allowed for refraining from making God personal, but benign and uninvolved.
2) Scripturally, America is, as all without Christ, "condemned already." There is no need to judge for judgement has already been pronounced.
1) America was never a "Christian" nation. It certainly held ideals that were similar to the Judaeo/Christian thinking, but with the exception of a few, the founding fathers were at best deist inclined. The adoption of the Judaeo/Christian line of thinking was because such was considered the highest rational thinking and ideal that famous philosophers of the day considered, yet allowed for refraining from making God personal, but benign and uninvolved.
2) Scripturally, America is, as all without Christ, "condemned already." There is no need to judge for judgement has already been pronounced.
This is an opinion, based on your own definitions.
But for the record, can you please describe what would constitute a Christian nation? That way we have something to compare it to.
By whose decree? Yours? Who made you judge over any, let alone an entire nation?
The current trend of going back 30-50 years looking into peoples past can lead to wrong conclusions of what that person became over those decades.
In answer to your question, if their judgement of me ended in my being condemned, then no.
I answered the OP's question and I have challenged the clam that this was/is a Christian nation. In so doing, I have put forth many leading questions.
In light of God's commandments, America's past history condemns it. Its current history even more so.
God's first commandment said His people should have no other gods before them. America proclaims freedom of religion and worship any deity you wish - with few limits.
The U.S. was never a Christian Nation and religious freedom and the first amendment was not even a part of daily life within these United States. Thomas Jefferson was one of the most vocal proponents of religious freedom. Not that he liked many denominations. He considered Calvinists to be demon-worshippers. (And that was when Calvinism was predominant.) The thinking that the U.S. was a unified Christian nation has never been true. The great heretic Greg Boyd has even written a book about it.
However, the founders of the U.S. were wholly and completely different from anything one would ever find in the world at that time. And more important than that - they were humble before God. (Even though they disagreed on who or what God was.) They realized that they did not earn the U.S. or its independence. Almost all of them believed that God's divine providence allowed the U.S. to succeed but also believed that the base values of the U.S. - equality for the law, freedom of choice, etc. were values that God wanted to preserve as well.
Yes, you see them pop up - Just lie in the Old Testament. There was opposition to the Indian Removal Act and the Supreme Court even struck it down as unconstitutional. However, the Democrat involved decided to discard the Constitution as Obama did in his second term.
And, in truth, many in power make of mockery of Christianity despite trying to "support" it.
Says who? The people living in the southern lands were so few to begin with that when trying to find and "punish" the people, Jackson had great difficulty finding them.
Only 16,000 Cherokee were removed. For the extent of land, that is a tiny number. And the Cherokee were likely late migrants to the area - displacing other natives. They likely moved in around the time of or soon after the early East Coast colonies. Once again, as much claim to the land as Russia has on Poland.
Add to this that the natives hadn't even entered the Bronze age and were still a Stone age civilization.
Also note that the Cherokee chose the wrong side of wars and it was quite common at that time to take the land of the losers of war. In fact, it is still being done in Europe, Asia, Africa, and South America.
Yes, the Democrat - Jackson was very good at Indian removal. But even then, there were very few to begin with.
Informative, thanks. There has been pervasive bad thinking all throughout history, and no one would ever question this is true of the US. We have our sins and black eyes. We've had a democrat party that has done some seriously evil things throughout our history. I'm surprised leftists aren't trying to abolish it, knowing its history. But the US as a while has a great history of doing good for ourselves and the rest of the world, which is evidenced by the lengths people go to to get here. But for some, past sins can never be forgiven.
Wesley Briggman said: ↑
their ancestors had occupied and cultivated for generations.
MartyF, you pulled a partial quote out of the portion of the article in history.com I used in my post. The answer, according to their website, is the editors of the article.
I cannot justify the taking of the Indians land because their culture was not as advanced as others or because they were so few in number.
their ancestors had occupied and cultivated for generations.
MartyF, you pulled a partial quote out of the portion of the article in history.com I used in my post. The answer, according to their website, is the editors of the article.
I cannot justify the taking of the Indians land because their culture was not as advanced as others or because they were so few in number.