• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Was the United States founded on Christian principles?

Was the United States founded on Christian principles?

  • Yes, it was.

    Votes: 18 41.9%

  • No, it wasn't.

    Votes: 25 58.1%
  • Total voters
    43
  • Poll closed .
Jerry said:
Pay no attention to the man behind the curtain :cool:
Click to expand...

I knew it all along. :2razz:

Well hold on...you asked for the definition of a 6th grade word and I provided it. If my definition didn't answer your question then perhaps you asked the wrong question? I've found that when people ask for definitions of basic words they are really trying to ask something else.
Click to expand...

I certainly know what the word means. What I am asking is how it is being used, contextually. I ask this in order to understand what the context of the question is.

The complexity you refer to escapes me as I've already answered this: The government is secular, the nation as a whole is Christian.

Principals exclusive to Christianity, such as accepting Jesus as your savior, the virgin birth, etc, are absent in the Constitution. This means the governing body is not Christian.

Principals exclusive to Christianity, such as accepting Jesus as your savior, the virgin birth, etc, were overt and dominant in the social institutions, every day behaviors, speech, history and traditions of the common man. This means the nation as a people were Christian.
Click to expand...

If what you say above, you are referring to when the country was founded, I would agree. However, this was not denoted or defined, as far as I could see, until after my post. I saw it and if this is what the OP is referring to, then the context of the question is now clarified. This is really all I was looking for.


Neither the DoI, Constitution, or any Federalist paper I can think of rely on any article of faith which is exclusive to any denomination. All of which, however, rely on the core principals of Christianity which each denomination in existence share with each other.

As no document is based on any denomination, I fail to understand why you believe the specific types of Christianity involved is relevant in any way.
Click to expand...

You explained the context of the OP that I was looking for, above. Thank you. Someone finally clarified things for me.
 
Arch Enemy said:
Mr. Jerry,
We are not debating whether or not the nation (if you can consider there to be a consenting transcendent nation within United States borders) is Christian, as the majority of her people are.

WE ARE debating whether or not the United States is Christian.
Click to expand...

Actually, Arch, I think Jerry made it clear that we are NOT debating whether the US is Christian, but whether at the time of it's founding, the tenets and principles that went into building the US, at that time, were tenets and principles based on and referencing Christian tenets and principles. And, to respond to this, I would say, for the most part, yes.
 
CaptainCourtesy said:
Actually, Arch, I think Jerry made it clear that we are NOT debating whether the US is Christian, but whether at the time of it's founding, the tenets and principles that went into building the US, at that time, were tenets and principles based on and referencing Christian tenets and principles. And, to respond to this, I would say, for the most part, yes.
Click to expand...

Please read my most recent post.
 
Jerry said:
From one authority Man is, from another authority Man is not.

You are comparing apples and oranges when you compare amendments and commandments.
Click to expand...


Thank you. Now you know why America wasn't founded on Christian principles. ;)
 
Sir Loin said:
There is nothing vague about the OP, the USA was either founded upon Christian or secular principals. Yes the OP does include room for “dancing” which you and IT both participated in, while ignoring every single post in the thread that did address the OP. Do you need me to hook you up with perma links to the post in the thread from me Jerry and others that did address it? The ones you and IT both managed to ignore?

I wonder, can you address the OP yourself Captain? Or are you and IT2002, instead content to sit back and merely cheery pick through the thread? While you ‘spot ignore’ the comments of those of us who have managed to address the OP and topic? I challenged IT to do the same and **poof** he vanished. Frankly I don’t care how many excuses you can make for ignoring the OP and topic to “question” those of us who could both grasp the question put forth by the OP and answer it.

I know when I challenged IT to stop trolling the thread he simply **poof** up and vacated the thread.

How lazy and easy is it for you to just pop in and pretend as if you don’t understand what is meant by the OP question? It is too vague for you you say? It is really very simple, if the USA was not founded upon Christian principals it must have been secular ones eh? Maybe you could muster up the effort to address the topic and thread, rather than trolling those of us who could do so?

Do you have a “take” on this topic Captain? Or is posing “questions” to those who have one, your idea of an opinion here? How much wiggle room do you need to build into your answer to the thread/topic before you bravely answer it? Or do you really need Jerry to answer some more questions for you before you can boldly brave the tepid waters of the thread? Are they warm enough for you yet Captain? Because despite the fact that your questions have been largely answered (even before Jerry replied) all you seem to be able to do is claim it is all to vague for you, you need to pose some more questions of those who have been able to address the topic, despite the so called vague nature of it? :confused:
Click to expand...

And...you are wrong. To me, the OP question was vague. It is not for you to tell me that it is not. Your understanding of the context of the question is different from mine. Your opinion on the vagueness of the OP, in the context of my perception is irrelevant. Too often I have seen vague OP's either be used as a way to direct a discussion in a slanted way, or to create misinterpretation because of the lack of clarity. I like to be aware of what I am responding to, before I respond. And the fact that there are several here that wanted clarification is more evidence that you are wrong. Jerry has sufficiently answered my questions and clarified things so I can respond appropriately. That's all I needed. I wonder what the agenda surrounding your attacks is.

It is not trolling to request clarification. It may be trolling, however, to attack those who request it.
 
Jerry said:
I don't follow, but then you didn't exactly make any attempt to show me your thinking, so I guess all is as intended :2wave:
Click to expand...

It's because our country was founded on a government made of men that answers to men, not a government that is beholden to a higher power. That is what democratic republic is.
 
Arch Enemy said:
Please read my most recent post.
Click to expand...

Gotcha. And I see the basic disagreement between yours and Jerry's positions. It is about labels. This was kind of the reason I saw the OP as vague. The context it creates. Are those principle singularly Christian, or have they been around longer than that, and are they humanistic? Probably a good idea for another thread.

However, I think it does matter what the founding fathers thought about the principles they used. And in their context, those principles were Christian. Therefore, based on what their perception was, I would agree that the US was founded on Christian principles. These principles may be humanistic to some, Buddhist to others, Hebrew to others, but in the context of who was using them to establish this country, they were Christian.
 
CaptainCourtesy said:
Gotcha. And I see the basic disagreement between yours and Jerry's positions. It is about labels. This was kind of the reason I saw the OP as vague. The context it creates. Are those principle singularly Christian, or have they been around longer than that, and are they humanistic? Probably a good idea for another thread.

However, I think it does matter what the founding fathers thought about the principles they used. And in their context, those principles were Christian. Therefore, based on what their perception was, I would agree that the US was founded on Christian principles. These principles may be humanistic to some, Buddhist to others, Hebrew to others, but in the context of who was using them to establish this country, they were Christian.
Click to expand...


So,
I guess we can all agree on that they were founded on a belief pre-text, possibly even religious.
 
Jerry said:
You and I can agree that murder is wrong, even if we each arrive at that shared opinion though completely different and mutually exclusive rationales.

It is the rational for the principal which makes the principal Christian. Another rational would make the same principal Buddhist, a 3rd rational would make the same principal atheist, etc.

Christianity, not Buddhism or secularism, is the chief agent of socialization which bound the founding fathers together in their reasoning and rational.
Click to expand...

Folks, this comment clarifies the problem here. We are not talking about different principles. The principles that we are discussing are somewhat universal. However, the question is, when the US was founded in what context were these principles used? The answer is Christianity. The principles themselves are not exclusively Christian, but the people who used them, when they did, derived them from Christianity.
 
Arch Enemy said:
So,
I guess we can all agree on that they were founded on a belief pre-text, possibly even religious.
Click to expand...

Almost. The were founded on a belief pre-text, one that transends many different belief systems. In this case, the system that was used to utilize those principles was Christianity.
 
independent_thinker2002 said:
It's because our country was founded on a government made of men that answers to men, not a government that is beholden to a higher power. That is what democratic republic is.
Click to expand...

IT, I think part of your confusion, and part of mine, initially, was whether or not the principles discussed where an adherence to God. I think it has been made clear that they are not. The principles we are discussing can come from a number of belief systems, some theist, some not. In this case, they came from a theist belief system, but were separated out from theism.
 
Last edited:
independent_thinker2002 said:
It's because our country was founded on a government made of men that answers to men, not a government that is beholden to a higher power. That is what democratic republic is.
Click to expand...

Our country was founded on a government which answers to men who in turn answer to God.

Since the principal 'you need no mediator between you and God' is inherently religious, the resulting mandate for a secular government is also religious.
 
Last edited:
CaptainCourtesy said:
IT, I think part of your confusion, and part of mine, initially, was whether or not the principles discussed where an adherence to God. I think it has been made clear that they are not. The principles we are discussing can come from a number of belief systems, some theist, some not. In this case, they came from a theist belief system, but were separated out from theism.
Click to expand...

I get what you are saying. But at the very core principle, democracy, I don't see how that is a Christian principle. Now if we are talking inherent rights, then yes, they pointed to those coming from God. That is a whole other debate though as it takes a govt. to enforce them. ;)
 
Jerry said:
Those men you speak of disagree with you, though.
Click to expand...

Didn't they have to? What happened to heretics back then and who would follow them?
 
CaptainCourtesy said:
Almost. The were founded on a belief pre-text, one that transends many different belief systems. In this case, the system that was used to utilize those principles was Christianity.
Click to expand...

hmmmm

It seems more likely that it was humanism, philanthropy, more then Christian. As it is geared for religious toleration--not the emphasis on the god of Abraham.
 
independent_thinker2002 said:
I get what you are saying. But at the very core principle, democracy, I don't see how that is a Christian principle. Now if we are talking inherent rights, then yes, they pointed to those coming from God. That is a whole other debate though as it takes a govt. to enforce them. ;)
Click to expand...

That's a good question. As this debate has progressed, I believe that we are discussing individual rights, though the religious freedom of some of those that came here from Europe can certainly be looked at as a democratic principle.

And as far as enforcement goes, you are correct. However, that is far less about principle, the concept around the OP, and more about management, as you said, an entirely different debate.
 
Arch Enemy said:
hmmmm

It seems more likely that it was humanism, philanthropy, more then Christian. As it is geared for religious toleration--not the emphasis on the god of Abraham.
Click to expand...

The qualities you mentioned are parts of several less dogmatic Christian sects. Quakerism is one that comes to mind. Remember, religious toleration is not only found in humanism. Many of the less extreme sects of the worlds religions are tolerant of other religions.
 
CaptainCourtesy said:
The qualities you mentioned are parts of several less dogmatic Christian sects. Quakerism is one that comes to mind. Remember, religious toleration is not only found in humanism. Many of the less extreme sects of the worlds religions are tolerant of other religions.
Click to expand...


But it wouldn't have been found in the mainline Christians of the founding fathers, would it?
Unless, as I suspect, they weren't as mainline Christians as one would assume. They were well-educated men who had a sense to cater to Humanity before they catered to their God. Or in some instances, cater to their god by catering to humanity?
 
Arch Enemy said:
But it wouldn't have been found in the mainline Christians of the founding fathers, would it?
Unless, as I suspect, they weren't as mainline Christians as one would assume. They were well-educated men who had a sense to cater to Humanity before they catered to their God. Or in some instances, cater to their god by catering to humanity?
Click to expand...

Even if this is accurate, what we believe, 200+ year later is no where near as important as what they used as the foundation for their principles. They used their Christian beliefs, and those morals.
 
Jerry said:
Our country was founded on a government which answers to men who in turn answer to God.

Since the principal 'you need no mediator between you and God' is inherently religious, the resulting mandate for a secular government is also religious.
Click to expand...

I see what you are saying. Religion is a personal issue. Though I tend to disagree that the lack of a need for a mediator automatically makes a secular govt. a prescription from religion.
 
CaptainCourtesy said:
Even if this is accurate, what we believe, 200+ year later is no where near as important as what they used as the foundation for their principles. They used their Christian beliefs, and those morals.
Click to expand...

Thats a good thought. A lovely hypothesis... that our founding fathers were that far ahead of their congregation when it comes to religious toleration. This thread is doing nothing more than celebrating our founding fathers-- and as a humanist-type it's fantastic.
 
Arch Enemy said:
Thats a good thought. A lovely hypothesis... that our founding fathers were that far ahead of their congregation when it comes to religious toleration. This thread is doing nothing more than celebrating our founding fathers-- and as a humanist-type it's fantastic.
Click to expand...

And to some extent, you're probably correct. One of the reasons that, in historical context, when founded, the US was such a forward-thinking anomaly.
 
Arch Enemy said:
Thats a good thought. A lovely hypothesis... that our founding fathers were that far ahead of their congregation when it comes to religious toleration. This thread is doing nothing more than celebrating our founding fathers-- and as a humanist-type it's fantastic.
Click to expand...


It was not that they were that far ahead as it was more to being experienced in the religious persecutions of Europe. They wanted to avoid this in the new government that they were forming. No religious entities making and breaking alliances or granting special privileges to elected officials, Appointing or impeaching an elected official etc. It is nothing more than another part of the checks and balances in our system that keeps any one person party or power from seizing complete control of our government.

Moe
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom