From: johnsd2@vccsouth07.its.rpi.edu.its1 (Daniel Norman Johnson)
Subject: Re: The Founding of a Great Nation ...
Reply-To: johnsd2@vccsouth07.its.rpi.edu.its1
Organization: Sun Microsystems, Inc.
Date: Tue, 26 Jan 1993 02:35:07 GMT

In article Fov@boi.hp.com, jburrill@boi.hp.com (Jim Burrill) writes:
>In article <C19qH2.5ny@boi.hp.com>, I wrote:
>      
>>       The United States was founded by Christians, as a Christian Nation
>
>> I submit to you, based on these quotes, and the history of the Pilgrims, that
>> the United States indeed was founded as a Christian Nation. I know many popular
>> beliefs and authorities give the picture of many of our forefathers either 
>> suscribing to the atheist or deist philosophies. As a reference, one could use
>> the book by John Eidsmoe, "CHRISTIANITY AND THE CONSTITUTION"  which presents
>> these beliefs as unfounded and unwarranted. I submit to you by this then, 
>> that something has changed the course of this nation to be something other
>> than what the founding fathers' had in mind. This is something to ponder at 
>> election time. Do we as a nation, desire to return to the blessing that we
>> experienced before the time that we chose to ignore Christian Principles?
>
>Kent responds:
>
>|Sigh, there's a *difference* between something founded by Christians,
>|and founding a Christian nation. I hope the writer would understand this
>|difference, and it does not hurt to read the constitution, bill of rights
>|and similar papers to figure out how many times the word "Christian"
>|and "Christianity" is mentioned in these papers. 
>
>|Kent
>
>Allow me to respond by lifting a section from another posting which recently
>appeared on the subject:
>

Go for it.

>Myth # 3:  The silence of the Constitution regarding Christianity.
>
>      It is assumed that the United States was never Christian in its basic
>ideals and values because the Constitution does not specifically mention
>Christianity.

This is not exactly what is assumed. Its assumed the Government is not
supposed to mandate religious precepts because this is explicitly
forbiden to it in the first amendment.

> The myth is shattered when one realizes that it was never the
>purpose of the Constitution to give religious content to the nation.

We agree competely. Goverment (as the Constitution describes it) should
not meddle in religion.

> Rather,
>the Constitution was an instrument whereby already existing religious values
>of the nation could be protected and perpetuated.

Oh, I doubt it. Got any evidence?

If this the reason it is a truely poor document. I never specifies
which morals it is to protect! Nor does it give government the power
to protect morals at all! It's very odd. Perhaps the states were
supposed to do it?

> The Constitution is not
>devoid of Christian references, however.

No?

> It is interesting to note that the
>Constitution acknowledges Sunday as a day of rest: "If any bill shall not be
>returned by the President within ten days (Sundays excepted) after it shall
>have been presented to him, the same shall be a law. . ." (Article I, section
>7).

No need to assign religious significants to this- its just a weekly break
from the toil. (or it CAN be a religious day if you wish to use it so.
The president has freedom of religious too)

In modern times, this would have been written "ten business days" or
something like that. :/

> Moreover, there is a direct reference to the Lord Jesus Christ in the
>Constitution:

No there isn't.

> "DONE in convention by the unanimous consent of the States
>present, the seventeenth of September, in the year of our Lord one thousand
>seven hundred and eighty seven and of the independence of the United States of
>America the twelfth. In witness whereof we have hereunto subscribed our
>Names."

"DONE"? :) Is that it?

Or do you mean "Lord"?

They said 'The Year of our Lord" because that's the time expression that was
popular at the time. They could have said "Ab Urbe Condita", but nobody
would have understood it.

It says nothing about Christ. Only Christians consider him to be
anyones Lord. Jews consider their GOD the Lord, and so do Muslims. (which
sounds rather more tennable to me.)

>
>From: REXLEX@linac.fnal.gov
>
>This is lifted from a paper posted to soc.religion.christian newsgroup on the
>subject. If anyone is interested, drop me an E-mail and I will forward it.

I'm not surprised it was posted there.

---
			- Dan Johnson
And God said "Jeeze, this is dull"... and it *WAS* dull. Genesis 0:0

These opinions have had all identifiying marks removed, and are untraceable.
You'll never know whose they are.
Xref: sparky talk.religion.misc:27325 alt.pagan:15744