One Nation Under God

It doesn't really matter what's "good enough" for me. The question is what the facts support. As with anyone else, we cannot know his relationship with God; the documentary evidence suggests he did not consider himself a Christian. That's all.

I have made no harsh or rude judgement of Franklin and rather like the man. His contributions — in government, science, business and philantropy — are legion. His importance to the Revolution and the young Republic were vital; without the treaty of alliance with France, it is possible the Revolution might have had an entirely different outcome.

 

"Then in the 1980's people started going, "Oh, that's not true!"

Not true. Weems' embellishments of Washington's biography were well known in the 19th century."

"They use this to trash the life of the great men who we once used as leaders to our children, and they claim they do this for the sake of our children, but in doing so, they leave our children with the feeling that no one should be used as an example, that historians cannot be trusted, that school's lie to them, that great men are really just despots."

Again, this is untrue (at least for me.) All great leaders have warts. Look at Moses. Look at David. It does us no service to pretend that the Founders were demigods. They were men — accomplished, patriotic, learned — but men with foibles and worse. To pretend otherwise is to make "schools lie to them." And no one has mentioned that they were despots, so far was I recall.

"Then they wonder why children have no respect for anyone."

Then children shouldn't be lied to in the first place.

"I don't, and never will, rely on the Internet for important information. Anyone, absolutely anyone, can build a website, claim it is a quality source of information, and put up total garbage. There are no editors, no proof-readers, no research teams verifying 99% of it."

Good for you. There is a lot of disinformation out there and one must be very discerning — especially from sources that have an ax to grind. So where did your reference to the University of Houston study come from?

"It is a historical fact that Washington attended church all the time."

I do not recall having said anything about Washington, who seems to have been a typical Anglican and Freemason in his beliefs.

"As for me. I will stand firm on the belief that men who, after having had homes destroyed, relatives turn against them, relatives and friends murdered, entire armies hunting them down with murderous intent who could look to God, and thank Him for His guideance, and call the nation to prayer to Him each morning as better men of God that 99% of modern Americans who have everything handed to them easily, without risk or danger, or in many cases even earning it, who do NOT thank God, and who bend over backwards to try to make sure none of the rest of the nation does either."

I try not to judge the past by the present and don't know if they were "better men of God" than we have in the present. Perhaps they were. Perhaps some of them were and some weren't.

I am not sure what you mean by the last phrase. I can'at recall that I have urged people not to give thanks to God.

 

"And why trash men who cannot defend themselves, who gave you the right to worship God as you see fit?"

I don't see that I have trashed anybody. It seems that if someone disagrees with you, that person is "trashing" or "hateful" or "satanic."

"Re the Reference to the University of Houston Study - after finding it in the web, I took the liberty of checking it out. Its not that difficult. I happen to work less than 1/2 a block from one of the finest reference libraries in the country. All it takes is finding the source and then the rest is easy."

Then you can provide the citation. I think I have it, but I am not sure.

As to revising history: It is always under revision. Each generation interprets the past by its own lights. The Founders, for example, took a pretty good drubbing in the early 20th century. During the middle of the century, they were rehabilitated. And so it goes and will go forever.

(BTW: I enjoy being considered a young whipper-snapper even though it is far from the truth.)

 

Sky:

"You quoted Stalin in defending a position that Franklin was not a man who believed in God."

I did no such thing. I simply pointed out that the fact that one is trained to ministry does not determine later belief. That's all.

"I never accused you of being a Satanist, but I stand on the belief that preaching that God needs to stay out of Government is unbiblical, and that belief comes from Satan not God."

You said Satan is behind the debunking. Close enough for me. What does "stay out of government" mean? Do Christians bring their beliefs with them to government and arevtheir actions informed by their beliefs? Of course. Do I trust any politician who attempts to conflate his will with God's will? Of course I do.

As John Leland said: Heaven forbids the bands of marriage between church and state; their embraces, therefore, must be unlawful. Guard against those men who make a great noise about religion, in choosing representatives. It is electioneering intrigue. If they knew the nature and worth of religion, they would not debauch it to such shameful purposes. If pure religion is the criterion to denominate candidates, those who make a noise about it must be rejected; for their wrangle about it, proves that they are void of it. Let honesty, talents and quick despatch, characterise the men of your choice.

"I am somewhat stunned though. I've never met anyone under the age of 40 who was not a self-professing-agnostic or athiest, or who was under the age of 25, who claimed that the USA was not founded on Christian principles."

What Christian principles are you talking about? If you can tell me what they are, then perhaps I can agree with you.

I believe that God is sovereign and can raise up nations as He will for His purpose and that sometimes we mistake our purposes for His.

 

emeraldctyangel said:

"What difference does it make that some conject that Washington and Franklin were not Christian? We dont worship Franklin or Washington anyway. We are shaped by their purposeful lives and to great benefit, regardless of what anyone believes was their motivation for the things they accomplished."

I agree totally.

"To not have respect for that says to me that some of us have no idea of the gifts that we enjoy daily - that they willingly entertain the thought of having another way of life because they are certain that those new rules of worship and speech really wont apply to them. Nice notion that never really works out that way.

Do they realize the right to speak against another was clinched by the very men they speak against?"

I do not have disrespect for their accomplishments and, in fact, admire them. Men like Madison and Leland were men of principle, who loved liberty and feared that government would pollute religion.

"I have a feeling that all of this is pure trend speaking. When it becomes popular to disavow the ministry of Jesus Christ in a worldly voice, I guess they will be jumping on that bandwagon too."

No one here has disavowed the ministry of Jesus Christ.

"It appears to me that God has indeed blessed nations that accept Him and rendered asunder those that do not. Didnt google that, saw that with my own eyes, which is why nothing anyone says about the United States of America bothers me. The words of those ungrateful and disrespectful fall on my deaf ears as I just believe they do not know better. Theyll learn."

Again, no one has been ungrateful and disrepectful in this discussion.