-6 votes

America is and Always has been a Christian Nation! (Video)

"America's Best Christian" Betty Bowers offers proof that we are indeed actually a christian nation and always have been



Trending on the Web

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.

And it begins...

the pro-"christian" faith mongers that now make up the DP are obviously out in force tonight. so sad that "faith" is more powerful than facts on a site that wants to "fix the world"!

most of you people are such a joke!!

Wow!

There's that spirit of unity and friendship you were telling me was in your heart! Great stuff.

never said that, once again youre putting words in my mouth

and quit bumping the thread if you dont like it! this is a thread aimed towards non-religious people.

im sure there are some pro-christian/bigoted threads posted to the front page that you'd feel comfortable on!

Show me

Show me them. Maybe I could explain to these hypothetical people why they shouldn't be bigoted and that it's our duty as Christians to extend the love of Christ to people. But please don't resort to calling someone a bigot who's defending himself from your prejudice. All I've done is defend against the falsehood of this video you posted, which slants the facts that you claim to so love.

As for putting words in your mouth that is ridiculous. You were defending that this video was all in good fun and was not an attack on any of the Christians. I was just playing on that with a little hyperbole. I'm allowed to have fun too. Sorry to accuse you of having a spirit of good will, shame on me!

Hoka Hey!

Crazy Horse and Custer: The Parallel Lives of Two American Warriors

http://www.amazon.com/dp/0385479662/?tag=googhydr-20&hvadid=...

http://www.youtube.com/user/HomelandNation

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wakan_Tanka

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dreamkeeper


http://youtu.be/gtbjeRDRHj0

"I, __________, do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic."

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oath_of_enlistment

There is no duration defined in the Oath

Lila

Lila waste yelo!

Crazy Horse and Custer - Dr. Stephen Ambrose

http://www.amazon.com/Crazy-Horse-Custer-Parallel-American/d...

On the sparkling morning of June 25, 1876, 611 men of the United States 7th Cavalry rode toward the banks of the Little Bighorn in the Montana Territory, where 3,000 Native Americans stood waiting for battle. The lives of two great warriors would soon be forever linked throughout history: Crazy Horse, leader of the Oglala Sioux, and General George Armstrong Custer.

"I, __________, do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic."

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oath_of_enlistment

There is no duration defined in the Oath

I forgive you

Reconstituter,

As this nation has been moved away from our common Christian faith, it has become the den of Satan. How you cannot see this is beyond me.

I cannot blame you, for you know not what you do.

One day you will see the error in your ways.

No true scotsman, look it up, stop using it.

The U.S. is more Christian now than it was at its inception.

I did not watch the video but I get the jist

I can prove all of you wrong once and for all, this nation was not exclusively setup as a Christian nation but it was intended to be guided by Christian principles.

This is what makes me laugh about everyone here who hates on Christians but then lives their lifestyle.

The whole phrase "under God" was added by George Washington himself, and usually most people tell me he was the one who was anti-Christian.

I welcome any debate, I have studied this and am knowledable now, so lets go. Seek the truth, prove it was not founded on Christian principles as a Christian nation.

Go.

This country was founded as a

This country was founded as a reaction to its populace's geographic ancestry and the prevailing political theory, and perhaps more importantly, Enlightenment thinking, particularly the political theories of Hobbes, Locke and Rousseau.
While many of its founders were religious, many were merely spiritual (deist), and some were essentially anti-theist. It was a mixed bag - just like it was a mixed bag for almost every other position.

More than it ever was a Christian nation, or founded on Christian principles, this nation was founded on liberty principles, and this is known and studied the world over. The U.S. was founded on the notion that political power should be restrained, and this was unlike any other nation at the time - that's what set it apart. Can you say the same for its religious bent? Think about it: Was the U.S distinct among other nations for its embrace of religion, or was it distinct for its rejection of divine authority and its exploration and embrace of individualism and freedom from tyranny? If you can free yourself of the confirmation bias it's obvious. Was the nation founded on political theory or on religion? Again, very obvious. Religious people just grasp at straws for seemingly no reason - you can be a proud Christian without insisting that the nation is premised on your faith. Quit being so insecure that you need such assurances.

I have no insecurities because I do not fear

"Religious people just grasp at the straws for seemingly no reason"

Your absolutely right, however just because you do not see it, understand it, or accept it, does not give it a lack of reason.

I walk with the principles laid out by this nation, and walk with the principles laid out by God, they are one in the same, but you misunderstand what these principles are.

America was not the First Nation to attempt this, there have been many republics as well as a successful anarchal society, everyone thinks this whole concept of freedom from government is new, and if any of you had actuall read the Bible, you would know its the oldest form of government in recorded history.

There was no "enlightenment" with our founding populous, they were just well versed in righteousness, how can we now, the immoral, hold a candle to the moral upstanding of our forefathers and expect to return to it?

Do not speak to me of enlightenment, the past 150 years has been nothing but the destruction of knowledge. We are mere children to them, and the Bible dictates our destruction unless we grow up.

"America was not the First

"America was not the First Nation to attempt this, there have been many republics as well as a successful anarchal society, everyone thinks this whole concept of freedom from government is new, and if any of you had actuall read the Bible, you would know its the oldest form of government in recorded history."

The oldest form of government is anarchy. The second oldest is despotism/monarchy, and monarchy is the oldest 'recorded' form of government. (The nature of anarchy is that you don't need to record it occurring, you just have to have a leaderless people and voila)
The most prevalent government form throughout history is monarchy.
The first Republic was Rome. Rome is not nearly the oldest civilization... not by about 6000+ years. That aside, you missed the point entirely.
The government that was created in the U.S. was unlike any other government that then existed in the world. It did not differ however, in the degree to which its population was religious - it differed in that the government created was completely secular. It also differed in that liberty, rather than power, was the actual focus of the government.

"There was no "enlightenment" with our founding populous, they were just well versed in righteousness, how can we now, the immoral, hold a candle to the moral upstanding of our forefathers and expect to return to it?"

I wasn't just speaking of 'an enlightenment.'
I was speaking of *the* Enlightenment. You know what that is, don't you? During the Enlightenment many new political theories were developed, and without these influences our country would not be structured as it is now. Many of our founders were Enlightenment scholars, and very appreciative of specific philosophic contributions, namely those of Hobbes, Locke and Rousseau, as I said before. These people influenced the nature of American government more than the Bible ever did, I'm sorry to say.

You do realize that these righteously versed you prop up were, many of them, criminals, slave holders, slaves and all manner of profiteers? What's so moral about that? I mean are you just thinking, "Well we have pornography now and more drug use, therefor we're less moral"? Are you just pretending the only people who colonized were Puritans (who also burned/pressed/hung/drowned "witches" because they were superstitious idiots)?

The founders mostly morally justified slave ownership, and treated their wives as chattel. If only it were the good old days though, am I right?

"Do not speak to me of enlightenment, the past 150 years has been nothing but the destruction of knowledge. We are mere children to them, and the Bible dictates our destruction unless we grow up."

Again, the Enlightenment, not just some old enlightenment.
The past 150 years are not at all relevant to the discussion of the origin of the country's government. That's after-the-fact.

You need to go study history bro

"The oldest form of government is anarchy."

That's funny, ask any historian or scholar and they will tell you the oldest form of government was tribal, and Im sorry bro, but that's not anarchy, the concept of anarchy was born out of discontented "civilized" society.

There is no record of a leaderless people, because it never existed before ancient Israel. (There are notes to concepts that predate this, but I have not seen a documented society, if one is found, please correct me.)

"The first Republic was Rome"

The first republic was in Vaisali, India, somewhere between 700BC - 300BC, Rome and Greece held republics much later, they were not the first.

"The founders mostly morally justified slave ownership, and treated their wives as chattel."

I disagree with slavery, but people seriously need to learn the difference between submission and slavery. Submission is willing, slavery is not, and a wife should submit to her husband. The women's rights movements was a serious detriment to how women are treated today. They wanted to be equal? they got it, now they get to go and die for us in war, stand on a bus, open their own doors and not be treated like the princesses and queens they are.

You want to know what the Bible says about the destruction of a nation, as I mentioned before? First the women rule the house, and the man will laze about, then the children rule the women and eventually society, then the nation is doomed.

The people in Washington, are the result of being raised a bunch of spoiled selfish brats. Look around America today, how many kids get away with doing what they want? How many kids choose the vacation their family takes? Where they eat dinner? How many kids are told "no!"?

There was no "The Enlightenment" everything the founders did, including politically, had been done in the past, this is what I am talking about, read your Bible dude, if not for faith, then for History, you can't base your arguments on only one half of the information.

I do every day, bro.

"That's funny, ask any historian or scholar and they will tell you the oldest form of government was tribal, and Im sorry bro, but that's not anarchy, the concept of anarchy was born out of discontented "civilized" society."

1) Anarchy has multiple meanings. You're clearly insisting that anarchy only means, 'State collapse anarchy.' That's a farce.
One of the definitions of anarchy simply denotes a leaderless society, or one without centralized coercive leadership.
Tribalism can properly be described as that form of anarchy - it's also a stretch to consider tribalism a form of government - it's more like a social, cultural construct. Tribalism often does not impose rules for interaction, only suggestions of best practices within the group, and sometimes none at all. They are typically leaderless, or very loosely 'run' without many (or any) strict rules of conduct. A leaderless society is an anarchic society.

2) Saying, "Ask any historian," is silly and meaningless. First of all, the history we're referencing is derived from the field of anthropology, and anyone who studies anthropology beyond the community college level realizes that there is contention on many issues, including the nature of the first societies. The same is true of history though, much is not absolute.

This is all beside the point though, as I was only refuting your statement that 'Republic' was the oldest form of government. It clearly isn't. You even disagree with your own statement now and say it's tribalism.

"There is no record of a leaderless people, because it never existed before ancient Israel. (There are notes to concepts that predate this, but I have not seen a documented society, if one is found, please correct me.)"

The Natufians of Jericho were leaderless for a long time before ancient Israel existed. This was either the first or second recorded society depending on which expert you want to believe. You could also describe them as tribal hunter gatherers, but I wouldn't say that they had any 'tribal form of government,' just that their culture was tribal in nature.

"The first republic was in Vaisali, India, somewhere between 700BC - 300BC, Rome and Greece held republics much later, they were not the first."

Sure, I'll accept that. Separated by about a hundred years from Rome.

"I disagree with slavery, but people seriously need to learn the difference between submission and slavery. Submission is willing, slavery is not, and a wife should submit to her husband. The women's rights movements was a serious detriment to how women are treated today. They wanted to be equal? they got it, now they get to go and die for us in war, stand on a bus, open their own doors and not be treated like the princesses and queens they are."

All a matter of perspective, but I don't think you can fairly say that all women who were viewed as chattel willingly accepted and submitted (even if you believe they should have) - those who did not were essentially slaves because they did not have recourse to change their station. If submission so readily came, why was there ever a need for a women's rights movement? Some of them clearly felt put out by being considered property... especially being legally considered property and having no rights of one's own (no vote, no property ownership, no inherent parental rights, etc.) I wouldn't like it, no matter how much someone might insist that I should submit, or that it's good for me (even if he had his religion to back it up.)

"You want to know what the Bible says about the destruction of a nation, as I mentioned before? First the women rule the house, and the man will laze about, then the children rule the women and eventually society, then the nation is doomed."

The people in Washington, are the result of being raised a bunch of spoiled selfish brats. Look around America today, how many kids get away with doing what they want? How many kids choose the vacation their family takes? Where they eat dinner? How many kids are told "no!"?"

Personally I view children as human beings and individuals, just like adults. They deserve rights just the same, and they deserve to express their preferences. I don't see anything wrong with a child having input into where he vacations, or wanting to eat dinner somewhere. At the same time, I don't see a problem telling them no when it's necessary.

What you're basically saying though is that people, when not lorded over, become 'spoiled selfish brats,' but there are many shades of grey between the two layers of your black and white world. You can raise a child and both respect them and not spoil them.

"There was no "The Enlightenment" everything the founders did, including politically, had been done in the past, this is what I am talking about, read your Bible dude, if not for faith, then for History, you can't base your arguments on only one half of the information.""

There certainly was an Enlightenment.
When studying history I look to primary sources or critiques of primary sources.
Your statement is funny though. You don't accept that the Enlightenment occurred, but insist that I should read the Bible for historic reference so I don't exclude valid data.

sorry but the ONLY way to get the "jist" was to actually watch

its kinda like a congressperson voting on something without reading the bill...you know cause they got the "jist" of it already...hahaha

i got the "jist"

by reading the comments and learning that the movie was not worth my time, btw, i would only need to read the bill if im going to vote yes or no on it, i could always abstain.

Logic wins again.

But you didn't abstain.

You're here voting with your words, so it still applies.

Logic? Confirmation bias? I guess they're the same to most people.

I did abstain

I do not recall me commenting on the video, only against the comments of others

we were not founded as a Christian nation.

Christian principles yes, Christian nation no.
there is a reason, and a good one why the word "god" was avoided in favor of the word "creator"
people of the Abrahamic faiths like to fight with each other.
the only way to avoid this and promote peace, tolerance and understanding is to be based on natural law. this is a Deistic term.

there is really very little difference between the deists and the Christians. that is where you are confused.

peace.

Peace, tolerance, and understanding

is what put us in this mess today. If you can't see that your a fool.

If everyone is peaceful, who will fight for justice?

If there is tolerance, who will oppose corruption?

there is no understanding with evil, Christians are watch-guards of the righteous.

This nation was founded on the principles of Christianity, Peace, tolerance and understanding, is nowhere to be found in those principles.

We are to be good stewards, which brings peace, but we are also shepherds that protect the innocent against wolves, to the point we tear an ear or a piece of a leg out of the wolves mouth, we continue to fight.

I don't think you have a clear understanding of Christianity, and no, the founders were not deists. This concept that the founders were deists, was created in the 1990's to break you away from their greatness.

the word "God" IS in many of their writings, and if you actually study their letters, most of them start with a prayer....to who? oh right, God

My bad.... what on earth was I thinking?

"This nation was founded on the principles of Christianity, Peace, tolerance and understanding, is nowhere to be found in those principles."

is this a correct view of Christianity?

(just the song, ignore the video)

Uh

Ignore the video?
That's impossible.

The word

The word God is used in the Declaration as well though. Your first sentence I 100 percent agree with.

I'm sending this to everyone

I'm sending this to everyone I know. PS- watch ancient aliens.

"It does not take a majority to prevail, but an irate tireless few keen on setting the brushfire of freedom in the minds of men." - Samuel Adams

cool thanks, she has some funny videos

and, ancient aliens like on the history channel?

Thats because America belongs

Thats because America belongs to ZUES!!!

America is a Greek nation

Atop the foundation of Greek values.

You know why I like Ron Paul?

He keeps his religion to himself unless specifically asked.

I really

I really admire him in that regard as well! I wish this thread had never started. But once it did, I felt I had to say something. Mostly just because it was obviously started to insult what we know is a huge number of Christians who take part in this forum. Just wanted to point out that it sucks when people start threads like this that they know will divide us and start fights.