Was the United States founded on Christian principles?

Read the question, answer it, and give your reasons.

No, it was founded on the Constitution. The Founding Fathers of this country signed the Constitution, not the Bible.

It was founded on principles that were around way before the Bible.

Most of the founding fathers were not your typical Christians. There is no reference to "God". There is a reference to a "creator", however, that can mean anything.

Article 11 of the Treaty of Tripoli, ratified by a UNANIMOUS Senate vote on June 17th, 1797, and signed by President John Adams on June 10th, 1797.

Not to mention, the majority of colonists in America weren't Bible-thumpers, but rather those of the Enlightenment movement. Deists, not theists.

Degreez said:

Article 11 of the Treaty of Tripoli, ratified by a UNANIMOUS Senate vote on June 17th, 1797, and signed by President John Adams on June 10th, 1797.

Not to mention, the majority of colonists in America weren't Bible-thumpers, but rather those of the Enlightenment movement. Deists, not theists.

Click to expand...

Forgot about that one.

Good call.

Degreez said:

Article 11 of the Treaty of Tripoli, ratified by a UNANIMOUS Senate vote on June 17th, 1797, and signed by President John Adams on June 10th, 1797.

Not to mention, the majority of colonists in America weren't Bible-thumpers, but rather those of the Enlightenment movement. Deists, not theists.

Click to expand...

Article 11 was NOT in the Arabic version, which is authoritative.

However, there is the 1783 Treaty of Paris. A far MORE important document relating to the founding of the United States

In the name of the most holy and individed Trinity.

Click to expand...

The very first ten words of the treaty that established the independence of the colonies from England.

Arch Enemy said:

Forgot about that one.

Good call.

Click to expand...

Wrong. Not in the original text of the treaty. It was totally made up by the American negotiator who submitted the treaty to the Senate. Besides, that treaty was completely broken by the Bey of Tripoli just a few years later, and contradicts the first ten words of the 1783 Treaty of Paris.

ludahai said:

Wrong. Not in the original text of the treaty. It was totally made up by the American negotiator who submitted the treaty to the Senate. Besides, that treaty was completely broken by the Bey of Tripoli just a few years later, and contradicts the first ten words of the 1783 Treaty of Paris.

Click to expand...

proof?

Even so, you cannot deny the other comments against it being the foundation of America.

What are these principles that are exclusively Christian?

Yes of course America was founded upon Christian and not secular principals. The Pilgrims left England to establish a more strict and fundamental religion than that practiced by the Church of England. Which they viewed as corrupted by backsliding politicians focused on compromise rather vigorous religious standards. They sought to establish a more theocratic society and to that end they arrived in Holland in 1608 where they found complete freedom. Twelve years later they left Holland for Massachusetts because the Dutch honored too few religious restrictions!

All of the original colonies but Rhode Island aimed to establish religious communities that would be more rigorous and restrictive, not more open and accepting than the Church of England. Sabbath was strictly enforced as was mandated attendance at worship services and tax money was used to support seminaries such as Harvard and Yale, to benefit “Christian Commonwealths.” Of the original thirteen colonies, ten mentioned religious purpose in the founding documents. Virginia’s initial charter from King James called for the “propagation of Christian religion to such People as yet live in Darkness.” Delaware’s charter explicitly commands “further propagation of the Holy Gospel.” The Quakers in Pennsylvania and the Catholics in Maryland founded their colonies to provide denominational havens for their religions. The Dutch settlement of New Amsterdam's Calvinist dictates ruthlessly drove out Quakers and only reluctantly accepted a minuscule amount of Jewish settlers. Of the original thirteen colonies only Rhode Island made a consistent priority of religious tolerance and openness to dissenters.

Arch Enemy said:

proof?

Even so, you cannot deny the other comments against it being the foundation of America.

Click to expand...

Treaty of Paris Look at the first ten words.

Treaty of Tripoli

link

The eleventh article of the Barlow translation has no equivalent whatever in the Arabic. The Arabic text opposite that article is a letter from Hassan Pasha of Algiers to Yussuf Pasha of Tripoli. The letter gives notice of the treaty of peace concluded with the Americans and recommends its observation.

Click to expand...

another link

The translation of the Treaty of Tripoli by Barlow has been found faulty, and there is doubt whether Article 11 in the version of the treaty ratified by Congress corresponds to anything of the same purport in the Arabic version.[18]

In 1931 Hunter Miller completed a commission by the United States government to analyze United States's treaties and to explain how they function and what they mean in terms of the United States's legal position in relationship with the rest of the world.[19] According to Hunter Miller's notes, "the Barlow translation is at best a poor attempt at a paraphrase or summary of the sense of the Arabic" and "Article 11... does not exist at all."[15]

Click to expand...

another link

"The Barlow translation is at best a poor attempt at a paraphrase or summary of the sense of the Arabic . . . . Most extraordinary (and wholly unexplained) is the fact that Article 11 of the Barlow translation, with its famous phrase, ‘the government of the United States of America is not in any sense founded on the Christian Religion,’ does not exist at all [in the Arabic]. There is no Article 11 [in the Arabic]. The Arabic text which is between Articles 10 and 12 is in form a letter, crude and flamboyant and withal quite unimportant, from the Dey of Algiers to the Pasha of Tripoli. How that script came to be written and to be regarded, as in the Barlow translation, as Article 11 of the treaty as there written, is a mystery and seemingly must remain so. Nothing in the diplomatic correspondence of the time throws any light whatever on the point."

Click to expand...

Not quite as straightforward as you once thought, huh?

ludahai said:

Article 11 was NOT in the Arabic version, which is authoritative.

However, there is the 1783 Treaty of Paris. A far MORE important document relating to the founding of the United States



The very first ten words of the treaty that established the independence of the colonies from England.

Click to expand...

Yes, but the Barlow version (the translated one) was the text that was presented to Congress under the Presidency of George Washington, ratified by Congress, and signed by the new President John Adams.

That version was the one presented to both Barbary and the United States.

Degreez said:

Yes, but the Barlow version (the translated one) was the text that was presented to Congress under the Presidency of George Washington, ratified by Congress, and signed by the new President John Adams.

That version was the one presented to both Barbary and the United States.

Click to expand...

Doesn't matter. When there is a lingustic problem due to translation, the original language of the treaty (in this case Arabic) governs the treaty if there is no provision specifying which language is authoritative.

ludahai said:

Doesn't matter. When there is a lingustic problem due to translation, the original language of the treaty (in this case Arabic) governs the treaty if there is no provision specifying which language is authoritative.

Click to expand...

The treaty that was signed and read aloud to the entirety of Congress was the Arabic translation. Do you ratify and sign something that has terms or text you do not agree with? The entire Senate was unanimous on this ratifying it, one of only three times the Senate has been unanimous on anything.

And who is to say the Arabic version does not have Article XI in it?

Was the United States founded on Christian principles?

Click to expand...

The United States was formalized as a nation by the ratification of the Constitution and it makes no mention of "Christian principles"; therefore the answer is no.

Degreez said:

The treaty that was signed and read aloud to the entirety of Congress was the Arabic translation. Do you ratify and sign something that has terms or text you do not agree with? The entire Senate was unanimous on this ratifying it, one of only three times the Senate has been unanimous on anything.

And who is to say the Arabic version does not have Article XI in it?

Click to expand...

A lot of people say that there is no Article XI in the original Arabic.

When there is a treaty, the original version is what is being voted on, NOT the translation.

Think about this. Let's say there is a treaty betwen the US and France up for a vote. It was written in French, but translated into English and has a clause noting that French is the authoritative language of the treaty. The Senate will be reading the English version. What are they voting on, the English version or the French? The answer is the French because if there is an alleged violation of the treaty, it will be the French version of the treaty that will be used to determine the nature of the violation.

I doesn't matter who added, or when it was added. Congress voted on it with the Barlow interpretations, including the plausibly atheist wording of Article XI

ludahai said:

A lot of people say that there is no Article XI in the original Arabic.

When there is a treaty, the original version is what is being voted on, NOT the translation.

Think about this. Let's say there is a treaty betwen the US and France up for a vote. It was written in French, but translated into English and has a clause noting that French is the authoritative language of the treaty. The Senate will be reading the English version. What are they voting on, the English version or the French? The answer is the French because if there is an alleged violation of the treaty, it will be the French version of the treaty that will be used to determine the nature of the violation.

Click to expand...

A lot of people can say what they want. That doesn't rule out that there could be Article XI in the original Arabic version.

If the treaty specifically states a certain version of a treaty is the authoritative version of said treaty, then you are right.

But none of that occurred then. The English translation is what they read, heard, ratified, and signed. They did not know the contents of the Arabic version.

The Journal of the Executive Proceedings of the United States Senate clearly specifies that the treaty was read aloud on the floor of the Senate and that copies of the treaty were printed "for the use of the Senate." Nor is it plausible to argue that perhaps Senators voted for the treaty without being aware of the famous words. The treaty was quite short, requiring only two or three pages to reprint in most treaty books today--and printed, in its entirely, on but one page (sometimes the front page) of U.S. newspapers of the day. The lack of any recorded argument about the wording, as well as the unanimous vote and the and the wide reprinting of the words in the press of 1797, suggests that the idea that the government was not a Christian one was widely and easily accepted at the time.

Click to expand...

ludahai said:

Read the question, answer it, and give your reasons.

Click to expand...

Very much so. When the United States was founded I do not think that Christian principals were quite understood the way when understand them today and also they had to deal with much more hardships.

ruserious said:

Very much so. When the United States was founded I do not think that Christian principals were quite understood the way when understand them today and also they had to deal with much more hardships.

Click to expand...

Good try, but you are wrong.

independent_thinker2002 said:

What are these principles that are exclusively Christian?

Click to expand...

I can't think of any.

The USA was not founded on Christian principles. Most of the people of the USA were basically christians of one type or another, but the USA was created by the Constitution. If there was no Constitution, there would be no USA.

We would probably be a small bunch of Nation states created by the seperate13 colonies of the USA. With a long history of fighting each other. We are a nation founded on Laws and bonded by the Bill Of Rights. Now we can belong to any religion we choose and we can choose not to believe in God if we choose. This stuff was debated hotly at the Constitutional Convention.

Constitutional Topic: The Constitutional Convention - The U.S. Constitution Online - USConstitution.net

"the constitutional convention" - Google Search

During the colonial times each colony was a seperate government and not bonded to its neighbor. Great Britain tied the colonies together in a loose federation, under the leadership and the protection of the Crown.

Many colonies had forms of freedom of choice in religion, but not all. For instance, Virginia had a state sponsored religion, based on the Church Of England. There were many types of church organizations in the colonies, from Quackers to Catholics.

The freedom of Religion Clause gave us an end religious strife, and domination by one church. We can be a member of any church that we choose. Legally there is no one Correct church. We were spared much of the religious strife that happened in Europe during 17 and 18th centuries.

God Bless America, God Bless our wonderful Constitution and our country.
May the lord bless us and protect us.
These things I ask in the name of Jesus Christ. AMEN

This whole question begs the question:

What Are Christian Principles?

Giving Christianity the authorship of these principles (that some seem to be suggesting are from Christianity) is like giving the makers of Dr. Thunder (Dr. Thunder - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia) the authorship of Dr. Pepper.

It doesn't work like that. You cannot play with time in that manner.

dragonslayer said:

The USA was not founded on Christian principles. Most of the people of the USA were basically christians of one type or another, but the USA was created by the Constitution. If there was no Constitution, there would be no USA.

We would probably be a small bunch of Nation states created by the seperate13 colonies of the USA. With a long history of fighting each other. We are a nation founded on Laws and bonded by the Bill Of Rights. Now we can belong to any religion we choose and we can choose not to believe in God if we choose. This stuff was

Click to expand...

dragonslayer said:

debated hotly at the Constitutional Convention.

Constitutional Topic: The Constitutional Convention - The U.S. Constitution Online - USConstitution.net

"the constitutional convention" - Google Search

During the colonial times each colony was a seperate government and not bonded to its neighbor. Great Britain tied the colonies together in a loose federation, under the leadership and the protection of the Crown.

Many colonies had forms of freedom of choice in religion, but not all. For instance, Virginia had a state sponsored religion, based on the Church Of England. There were many types of church organizations in the colonies, from Quackers to Catholics.

The freedom of Religion Clause gave us an end religious strife, and domination by one church. We can be a member of any church that we choose. Legally there is no one Correct church. We were spared much of the religious strife that happened in Europe during 17 and 18th centuries.

God Bless America, God Bless our wonderful Constitution and our country.
May the lord bless us and protect us.
These things I ask in the name of Jesus Christ. AMEN

Click to expand...

Weeks before the Constitutional Convention convened in 1787 Congress adopted the Northwest Ordinance, which stated: “Religion, morality, and knowledge being necessary to good government and the happiness of mankind, schools and the means of education shall forever be encouraged.” These words were reenacted by the First Congress under the Constitution and made it clear that the Founders found the propagation of “religion” and “morality” to of such importance that they should the primary purpose of schooling in the United States. The Northwest Ordinance is considered part of America’s “Organic Law” and is second only to the Declaration of Independence in its importance as a legal document. It requires Christianity to be taught by the newly-admitted states in their schools. Language from the Ordinance is found in state constitutions for the next 100 years.
Northwest Ordinance - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Yet modern opinion would have us believe that ALL of this is a violation of the First Amendment! Also the founders and legislators that enacted all of this were unaware that they were getting so much so wrong.:roll:

Less than twenty four hours after Congress approved the First Amendment, they passed the following resolution: “Resolved, That a joint committee of both Houses be directed to wait upon the President of the United States to request that he would recommend to the people of the United States a day of public thanksgiving and prayer, to be observed by acknowledging with grateful hearts the many signal favors of Almighty God, especially by affording them an opportunity peaceably to establish a Constitution of government for their safety and happiness.” In the proclamation announcing the “day of thanksgiving and prayer” that Congress had requested, President Washington declared November 26 “to be devoted by the People of these States to the service of that great and glorious Being, who is the beneficent Author of all the good that was, that is, or that will be.”

I guess it never occurred to the First Congress that their call for public prayer would conflict with the amendment they had adopted twenty four hours earlier prohibiting “an establishment of religion.”:dohdoh!

And the constitution was NOT based upon Christian principals? Right.:wow: