You see a pattern, I do.

 

Actually, when you are held down and have God shoved down your throat it does matter to a lot of people.

 

You mean spoken to your ears, right?

You know what I mean.

Who says the Pledge of Allegiance anymore? Only time I hear it is before NKY city council meetings on local cable TV. Do kids still say the pledge in school? When I was a kid, we said the Pledge of Allegiance when we returned to class from noon recess, then we turned around and faced the big cross on the wall and said the Pledge to the Cross.

 

Schools still recite it, at least as of last year.

You know what I mean.

 

I do, but the point I was going to make was that why is that term almost exclusively used when talking about religion. Crammed down my throat, or some variation, is most often used when discussing religion. Only other time it's really used much is when talking about running the football :lol2:

good for the judge.

One needs to go no further that that opening paragraphs of the official statement that led to the creation of our Constitutional Republic to see that belief in a Creator is fundamental and required to rationalize the creation and ongoing existence of a government of the people, by the people and for the people.

 

 

"When in the Course of human events, it becomes necessary for one people to dissolve the political bands which have connected them with another, and to assume among the powers of the earth, the separate and equal station to which the Laws of Nature and of Nature's God entitle them, a decent respect to the opinions of mankind requires that they should declare the causes which impel them to the separation.

 

We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness. ..."

 

So in the opening two sentences that officially declared the right to break away from the crown of England God is directly referenced in the first and the Creator is referenced in the second.

 

It the belief in something (someone) beyond the earthly world we occupy that provided legitimacy to terminating the rule of King George. Without that belief there would have been no logical rationalization for the Declaration of Independence. At a practical level God or a Creator is required to justify the legitimacy of our nation.

 

If anything it bothers me that it's become an issue to keep or exclude it as if we have somehow reached a magical place of decline. It was written by a minister and he didn't see he need to include it and it was added for 50 or more years. Kind of like "In God We Trust" was never an official motto until the same era as the pledge. The motivation was less than genuine IMO.

 

Pledges and the like never bother me except that the ones, like myself who are Christians forget we worship a God who wants true worship rather than recitation.

 

Amen...

You can stand or not. You can recite or not. I don't care. What I do care is that you remember because of those who stood and recited allowed you to choose to sit and not recite.

One needs to go no further that that opening paragraphs of the official statement that led to the creation of our Constitutional Republic to see that belief in a Creator is fundamental and required to rationalize the creation and ongoing existence of a government of the people, by the people and for the people.

 

 

"When in the Course of human events, it becomes necessary for one people to dissolve the political bands which have connected them with another, and to assume among the powers of the earth, the separate and equal station to which the Laws of Nature and of Nature's God entitle them, a decent respect to the opinions of mankind requires that they should declare the causes which impel them to the separation.

 

We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness. ..."

 

So in the opening two sentences that officially declared the right to break away from the crown of England God is directly referenced in the first and the Creator is referenced in the second.

 

It the belief in something (someone) beyond the earthly world we occupy that provided legitimacy to terminating the rule of King George. Without that belief there would have been no logical rationalization for the Declaration of Independence. At a practical level God or a Creator is required to justify the legitimacy of our nation.

 

And you and I both know that the reference to the "Laws of Nature and of Nature's God" is a veiled deistic reference. Deism is hardly Christianity as most of us know it today. Mainly because Deism didn't acknowledge Jesus as Deity and that is the foundation stone of Christianity.

 

Deism - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

And you and I both know that the reference to the "Laws of Nature and of Nature's God" is a veiled deistic reference. Deism is hardly Christianity as most of us know it today. Mainly because Deism didn't acknowledge Jesus as Deity and that is the foundation stone of Christianity.

 

Deism - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

 

Actually I was not familiar with the term Deism as a defined line of theology. Thanks for the link.

 

The main point is that to rationalize and justify the forming of the new nation and the breaking of the ties to England and King George referencing the Creator and God and Nature (capital N) were absolutely required. And hence the concept that God or Creator is a key aspect of the forming of the nation and in a way - a 'nation under God'.

 

I do not want to try to guess as to if the founders believed in Deism as the link explains or they favored its concept over Christianity. But as a practical matter to justify the declaration of breaking away from England they had to rely on a 'higher power' or else it would have had no legitimacy.

Actually I was not familiar with the term Deism as a defined line of theology. Thanks for the link.

 

The main point is that to rationalize and justify the forming of the new nation and the breaking of the ties to England and King George referencing the Creator and God and Nature (capital N) were absolutely required. And hence the concept that God or Creator is a key aspect of the forming of the nation and in a way - a 'nation under God'.

 

I do not want to try to guess as to if the founders believed in Deism as the link explains or they favored its concept over Christianity. But as a practical matter to justify the declaration of breaking away from England they had to rely on a 'higher power' or else it would have had no legitimacy.

 

I think you make a good argument for the appeal. My thought that has long troubled me is how so many (not you it seems) wish to make an immediate jump from this mention to the Current Evangelical perception of Creator God. To me there is a distinct difference between the Biblical God and the God referred to in Jefferson's writing and very likely within his mind based on his other writings. :thumb:

I think you make a good argument for the appeal. My thought that has long troubled me is how so many (not you it seems) wish to make an immediate jump from this mention to the Current Evangelical perception of Creator God. To me there is a distinct difference between the Biblical God and the God referred to in Jefferson's writing and very likely within his mind based on his other writings. :thumb:

 

Thomas Paine is also worth mentioning here. It's hard to overstate the influence of Common Sense in not only providing a strong (and radical at the time) argument against monarchy but rallying the colonists to revolution. He also wrote Age of Reason where he argues that all religions are false, but the existence of a god can be logically deduced, which is basically Deism in a nutshell.

I think you make a good argument for the appeal. My thought that has long troubled me is how so many (not you it seems) wish to make an immediate jump from this mention to the Current Evangelical perception of Creator God. To me there is a distinct difference between the Biblical God and the God referred to in Jefferson's writing and very likely within his mind based on his other writings. :thumb:

 

Jefferson had contradicting thoughts and writings on God. I don't think anyone can claim to 100% know exactly what he meant. What we do know is he believed in a higher power that granted certain rights to all man kind. To deny this thought of a higher power in the founding of our country denies history.

 

I've just always believed this country was founded on the freedom of religion I never felt in all my readings that the founding fathers didn't want religious beliefs to influence our leaders . This is a country meant not to persecute based on one's religious belief but this country has never been secular .

Jefferson had contradicting thoughts and writings on God. I don't think anyone can claim to 100% know exactly what he meant. What we do know is he believed in a higher power that granted certain rights to all man kind. To deny this thought of a higher power in the founding of our country denies history.

 

I've just always believed this country was founded on the freedom of religion I never felt in all my readings that the founding fathers didn't want religious beliefs to influence our leaders . This is a country meant not to persecute based on one's religious belief but this country has never been secular .

 

I don't deny that. But they believed in Reason and Liberty the most. As a Christian I find it hard to reconcile their "faith in a 'higher power'" as orthodox in any way imaginable. Not all were Deists. But many key writers and leaders were, especially Jefferson who edited the gospels to his liking.

, especially Jefferson who edited the gospels to his liking.

You mean like Oprah?