Atheism died in the 20th century

[Lon]

I feel like this is something we've gone over again and again.


No, it was not. Too many of the founders were non-Christian pantheists for your statement to hold water

Here's a definitive list :

John Adams: mostly christian
Benjamin Franklin: mostly deist
Alexander Hamilton: probably deist
John Jay: christian
Thomas Jefferson: deist / atheist
James Madison: deist
George Washington: anyone's guess

Stuart

Except it isn't definitive.

Prayers of George Washington and Thomas Jefferson

On November 11, 1779, Virginia Governor Thomas Jefferson signed a Proclamation of Prayer, which stated: “Congress...hath thought proper...to recommend to the several States...a day of publick and solemn Thanksgiving to Almighty God, for his mercies, and of Prayer, for the continuance of his favour...That He would go forth with our hosts and crown our arms with victory; that He would grant to His church, the plentiful effusions of Divine Grace, and pour out His Holy Spirit on all Ministers of the Gospel; that He would bless and prosper the means of education, and spread the light of Christian knowledge through the remotest corners of the earth...” On April 6, 1780, at Morristown
www.ndpaustin.org%2Fdocuments%2F2013presidentprayer.pdf

For atheism to be viable, it would have to at the very least be intelligently informed and honest, and that just to get our ear. lain:

Don't miss Nikolai's excellent post page 4 at the bottom of page, btw.

 

[nikolai_42]

Here's a definitive list :

John Adams: mostly christian
Benjamin Franklin: mostly deist
Alexander Hamilton: probably deist
John Jay: christian
Thomas Jefferson: deist / atheist
James Madison: deist
George Washington: anyone's guess

Stuart

Franklin's deism - if it existed - didn't really persist. One of his more popular quotes makes this abundantly clear :

And have we forgotten that powerful Friend? Or do we imagine that we no longer need His assistance? I have lived, sir, a long time and the longer I live the more convincing proofs I see of this truth: that God governs in the affairs of men. And if a sparrow cannot fall to the ground without his notice, is it probable that an empire can rise without His aid? We have been assured, sir, in the sacred writings that 'except the Lord build the house, they labor in vain that build it.' I firmly believe this and I also believe that without His concurring aid, we shall succeed in this political building no better than the builders of Babel.

Franklin as quoted by James Madison in Notes on Debates in the Federal Convention of 1787 (Athens: Ohio University Press, 1966, 1985), p. 209.

Jefferson was no atheist and he changed views several times in his life.

Washington was an interesting man and had strong Anglican leanings in him. That, mixed with his retiring personality makes him seem odd by today's standards. But it also makes him one of those whose character would have been judged by action more than word. Many testimonies exist to his character and strongly indicate a man of deep Christian conviction.

 

[gcthomas]

The whole idea that a modern country is tied eternally to the beliefs of it's founders is nonsense.

My nation was founded by the Anglo-Saxons who believed in Wodun and Thunor, and elves, dragons and nicor. Should we have stuck with that when the Germanic Christians arrived on their boats, and told them to go back where they came from because our country was founded on paganism and faeries?

 

[shopkinslpskids]

I feel like this is something we've gone over again and again.


No, it was not. Too many of the founders were non-Christian pantheists for your statement to hold water

Atheism did not even exist, yet, on an official level. They were all Christians. Even Benjamin Franklin.



From various sources:

. America’s Colonial Origins

Few doubt that Puritans were serious Christians attempting to create, in the words of Massachusetts Governor John Winthrop,*“a shining city upon a hill” (a reference to Matthew 5:14). Puritans separated church and state, but they clearly thought the two institutions should work in tandem to support, protect, and promote true Christianity.

Other colonies, however, are often described as being significantly different from those in New England. Historian John Fea, for instance, contends that “the real appeal of Jamestown was economic opportunity and the very real possibility of striking it rich.”[9]*It is certainly the case that colonists were attracted to the New World by economic opportunity (in New England as well as in the South), and yet even in the southern colonies the protection and promotion of Christianity was more important than many authors assume. For instance, Virginia’s 1610 legal code begins:

Whereas his Majesty, like himself a most zealous prince, has in his own realms a principal care of true religion and reverence to God and has always strictly commanded his generals and governors, with all his forces wheresoever, to let their ways be, like his ends, for the glory of God….

The first three articles of this text go on to state that the colonists have embarked on a “sacred cause,” to mandate regular church attendance, and to proclaim that anyone who speaks impiously against the Trinity or who blasphemes God’s name will be put to death.[10]

Early colonial laws and constitutions such as the Mayflower Compact, the Fundamental Orders of Connecticut, and Massachusetts Body of Liberties*are filled with such language—and in some cases, they incorporate biblical texts wholesale. Perhaps more surprisingly, tolerant, Quaker Pennsylvania was more similar to Puritan New England than many realize. The*Charter of Liberties and Frame of Government of the Province of Pennsylvania(1681) begins by making it clear that God has ordained government, and it even quotes Romans 13 to this effect. Article 38 of the document lists “offenses against God” that may be punished by the magistrate, including:

swearing, cursing, lying, profane talking, drunkenness, drinking of healths, obscene words, incest, sodomy…stage-plays, cards, dice, May-games, gamesters, masques, revels, bull-baiting, ****-fighting, bear-baiting, and the like, which excite the people to rudeness, cruelty, looseness, and irreligion….[11]

An extensive survey of early colonial constitutions and laws reveals many similar provisions. As well, at least nine of the 13 colonies had established churches, and all required officeholders to be Christians—or, in some cases, Protestants. Quaker Pennsylvania, for instance, expected officeholders to be “such as possess faith in Jesus Christ.”[12]

If one is to understand the story of the United States of America, it is important to have a proper appreciation for its Christian colonial roots. By almost any measure, colonists of European descent who settled in the New World were serious Christians whose constitutions, laws, and practices reflected the influence of Christianity. Although some authors refer to this “planting” as a “founding,” such a designation is rare among scholars. Instead, most scholars consider America to have been founded in the late 18th century around one of, or some combination of, two major events: the War for Independence and the creation of America’s constitutional order.


The first President: WASHINGTON

1st U.S. President

"While we are zealously performing the duties of good citizens and soldiers, we certainly ought not to be inattentive to the higher duties of religion. To the distinguished character of Patriot, it should be our highest glory to add the more distinguished character of Christian."
--The Writings of Washington, pp. 342-343.






Sent from my SM-N920V using Tapatalk

 

[shopkinslpskids]

America is not a theocratic republic but is rather a nation whose legal foundation rests on a Christian heritage. Where dissent was publicly squashed in former days, the American experiment takes the stance that the Truth will win the day if it - and its opponents - are given free accord. A sort of Elijah on Mt. Carmel that gives more than fair opportunity for all to do their best against God's revelation. To take it that step further and chase down the prophets of Ba'al and destroy them because they are wrong - that is God's province. Liberty is not an end in itself, but is what provides the stage for the conflict. If we try to end it prematurely, we are not doing anyone service - most especially ourselves. To give in to fear rather than present the gospel and let it stand without excuse or apology should be the heritage of this nation. Not the law of it. The very fact that a theist can be wrong yet still trump an atheist should be an example that we can be victorious over the delusion of Islam. But it won't be military victory (though there is a place for that).

The increasing Islamic hegemony is merely an exclamation point on the scripture :

By mercy and truth iniquity is purged: and by the fear of the Lord men depart from evil.
When a man's ways please the Lord, he maketh even his enemies to be at peace with him.
Proverbs 16:6-7

We will not overcome Islamic deception by war, but by truth and mercy. And as we do and as we submit to the Lord, HE will fight our battles for us. Not that we won't have a military, but recognizing our success comes from Him means we need fear no one. Banning Muslim activity and worship only counters the liberty promised by the founding fathers and removes the primary weapon believers have in defeating the lies of the enemy.

I tend to side with the Crusaders as they're the reason the majority of us are Christians and not Muslims, today.

Sent from my SM-N920V using Tapatalk

 

[shopkinslpskids]

The whole idea that a modern country is tied eternally to the beliefs of it's founders is nonsense.

My nation was founded by the Anglo-Saxons who believed in Wodun and Thunor, and elves, dragons and nicor. Should we have stuck with that when the Germanic Christians arrived on their boats, and told then top go back where they came from because our country was founded on paganism and faeries?

Christianity civilized the pagans. This has spanned across cultures. They go from being barbarian cannibals to putting on clothes and building cities with decency laws.

Sent from my SM-N920V using Tapatalk

 

[gcthomas]

Christianity civilized the pagans. This has spanned across cultures. They go from being barbarian cannibals to putting on clothes and building cities with decency laws.

Sent from my SM-N920V using Tapatalk

Every invader and empire builder through the centuries had said the same thing.

Yet the Anglo-Saxons had culture before Christians arrived. They were not cannibals, they certainly wore clothes. They had laws and wars. They had organised sports. They sung songs in the mead halls and they created art. The women practised needlepoint and the men wrote poetry. Have you never read Beowulf? Don't you realise that you call the days of the week after their gods?

No, the Christians didn't civilise them, and they brought their own incivilities, immoralities and wars. Different, but not better. But until you study some history how can you judge the present?

 

[nikolai_42]

I tend to side with the Crusaders as they're the reason the majority of us are Christians and not Muslims, today.

Sent from my SM-N920V using Tapatalk

Don't confuse historical happenstance with doing the right thing (even if the result seemed good). God uses who He will and what He will do do what He will do but it doesn't invalidate scriptural directives. If you go down that path then the question becomes "Why didn't the crusaders keep going until they just wiped out the Muslims?". After all, it was largely a religious war against idolaters (ironically, Muslim wars against Christians tended to be driven by perceived idolatry on the Christian side as well). If it was the way to go, why not take the example of Saul not totally wiping out the Amalekites? That displeased God. I would also hasten to add that when the disciples tried to do something similar and Jesus was quick to correct them in their seeking for judgment (Luke 9:54-55). You know not what spirit you are of. And they were going to do precisely what a prophet of God had done previously. Be careful of historical sanction.

 

[Jonahdog]

Christianity civilized the pagans. This has spanned across cultures. They go from being barbarian cannibals to putting on clothes and building cities with decency laws.

Sent from my SM-N920V using Tapatalk

Ask the native south Americans. They wore clothes and had magnificent cities. The Spanish, on behalf of king and cross destroyed the cultures and the cities.

 

[Jonahdog]

Every invader and empire builder through the centuries had said the same thing.

Yet the Anglo-Saxons had culture before Christians arrived. They were not cannibals, they certainly wore clothes. They had laws and wars. They had organised sports. They sung songs in the mead halls and they created art. The women practised needlepoint and the men wrote poetry. Have you never read Beowulf? Don't you realise that you call the days of the week after their gods?

No, the Christians didn't civilise them, and they brought their own incivilities, immoralities and wars. Different, but not better. But until you study some history how can you judge the present?

Because it is easier to parrot your right wing religious teachers.

 

[Stuu]

Except it isn't definitive.

Well no. Of course it isn't.

Some bemoan the lack of any atheist presidents, but of course there have been many atheist presidents putting on a facade for the Guns 'n' Religion folks...

Stuart

 

[Stuu]

Jefferson was no atheist and he changed views several times in his life.

The Enlightenment gave them deism, which was a kind of atheism. It was very difficult to be an intellectually satisfied atheist those few hundred years ago. While no religion has ever explained anything, that was all the folks had, and I guess they couldn't have gone against that because they couldn't explain the diversity of life on earth or the existence of the solar system and so forth.

Nowdays it is possible to be an intellectually satisfied atheist because of Darwin, and then the cosmology of the 20th Century and through to today. I suspect Jefferson still wouldn't be able to call himself 'atheist' if he were running for POTUS today, but that would likely be his personal view.

Washington was an interesting man and had strong Anglican leanings in him. That, mixed with his retiring personality makes him seem odd by today's standards. But it also makes him one of those whose character would have been judged by action more than word. Many testimonies exist to his character and strongly indicate a man of deep Christian conviction.

Yes, I'd say that would be a fair guess!

Stuart

 

[Evil.Eye.<(I)>]

Don't confuse historical happenstance with doing the right thing (even if the result seemed good). God uses who He will and what He will do do what He will do but it doesn't invalidate scriptural directives. If you go down that path then the question becomes "Why didn't the crusaders keep going until they just wiped out the Muslims?". After all, it was largely a religious war against idolaters (ironically, Muslim wars against Christians tended to be driven by perceived idolatry on the Christian side as well). If it was the way to go, why not take the example of Saul not totally wiping out the Amalekites? That displeased God. I would also hasten to add that when the disciples tried to do something similar and Jesus was quick to correct them in their seeking for judgment (Luke 9:54-55). You know not what spirit you are of. And they were going to do precisely what a prophet of God had done previously. Be careful of historical sanction.

So here it is... NOT ALL of the Crusades were BAD... I'm siding with [MENTION=20238]shopkinslpskids[/MENTION] on this one. Make no mistake... the global force of Islam is destined to bring this house down... but God didn't see it to be the time yet, that more could enter into HIS REST...

Romans 11:25 (AMP) I do not want you, believers, to be unaware of this mystery [God’s previously hidden plan]—so that you will not be wise in your own opinion—that a partial hardening has [temporarily] happened to Israel [to last] until the full number of the Gentiles has come in;​

Shops is correct.

You need to search scripture for "The crescent ornaments around their camel's necks"... It's there.

Judges 8:21 Zebah and Zalmunna said, "Get up and kill us yourself, for a man is judged by his strength." So Gideon got up, killed Zebah and Zalmunna, and took the crescent ornaments that were on the necks of their camels.

Psalm 83 Do not keep silent, O God!
Do not hold Your peace,
And do not be still, O God!
2 For behold, Your enemies make a tumult;
And those who hate You have lifted up their head.
3 They have taken crafty counsel against Your people,
And consulted together against Your sheltered ones.
4 They have said, “Come, and let us cut them off from being a nation,
That the name of Israel may be remembered no more.”
5 For they have consulted together with one consent;
They form a confederacy against You:
6 The tents of Edom and the Ishmaelites;
Moab and the Hagrites;
7 Gebal, Ammon, and Amalek;
Philistia with the inhabitants of Tyre;
8 Assyria also has joined with them;
They have helped the children of Lot. Selah
9 Deal with them as with Midian,
As with Sisera,
As with Jabin at the Brook Kishon,
10 Who perished at En Dor,
Who became as refuse on the earth.
11 Make their nobles like Oreb and like Zeeb,
Yes, all their princes like Zebah and Zalmunna,
12 Who said, “Let us take for ourselves
The pastures of God for a possession.”
13 O my God, make them like the whirling dust,
Like the chaff before the wind!
14 As the fire burns the woods,
And as the flame sets the mountains on fire,
15 So pursue them with Your tempest,
And frighten them with Your storm.
16 Fill their faces with shame,
That they may seek Your name, O Lord.
17 Let them be confounded and dismayed forever;
Yes, let them be put to shame and perish,
18 That they may know that You, whose name alone is the Lord,
Are the Most High over all the earth.

The Psalm 83 Geography...

5 For they have consulted together with one consent;
They form a confederacy against You:
6 The tents of Edom and the Ishmaelites;
Moab and the Hagrites;
7 Gebal, Ammon, and Amalek;
Philistia with the inhabitants of Tyre;
8 Assyria also has joined with them;
They have helped the children of Lot. Selah

You can't shake the perfection of scripture.

 

[Lon]

Well no. Of course it isn't.

Some bemoan the lack of any atheist presidents, but of course there have been many atheist presidents putting on a facade for the Guns 'n' Religion folks.

Stuart

Tainted and as I said prior, blind. I'll never be to talk to/with you over that which is obtuse to you, by preference. We don't get to make it up as we go. Knock yourself out on the fruitless try though.

 

[Lon]

The Enlightenment gave them deism, which was a kind of atheism. It was very difficult to be an intellectually satisfied atheist those few hundred years ago. While no religion has ever explained anything, that was all the folks had, and I guess they couldn't have gone against that because they couldn't explain the diversity of life on earth or the existence of the solar system and so forth.

Nowdays it is possible to be an intellectually satisfied atheist because of Darwin, and then the cosmology of the 20th Century and through to today. I suspect Jefferson still wouldn't be able to call himself 'atheist' if he were running for POTUS today, but that would likely be his personal view.


Yes, I'd say that would be a fair guess!

Stuart

All slanted take and meaningless fiction for opinion. When you deal in reality, and become a U.S. citizen, perhaps an actual conversation could happen. lain:

 

[nikolai_42]

So here it is... NOT ALL of the Crusades were BAD... I'm siding with [MENTION=20238]shopkinslpskids[/MENTION] on this one. Make no mistake... the global force of Islam is destined to bring this house down... but God didn't see it to be the time yet, that more could enter into HIS REST...

Romans 11:25 (AMP) I do not want you, believers, to be unaware of this mystery [God’s previously hidden plan]—so that you will not be wise in your own opinion—that a partial hardening has [temporarily] happened to Israel [to last] until the full number of the Gentiles has come in;​

Shops is correct.

You need to search scripture for "The crescent ornaments around their camel's necks"... It's there.

Judges 8:21 Zebah and Zalmunna said, "Get up and kill us yourself, for a man is judged by his strength." So Gideon got up, killed Zebah and Zalmunna, and took the crescent ornaments that were on the necks of their camels.

Psalm 83 Do not keep silent, O God!
Do not hold Your peace,
And do not be still, O God!
2 For behold, Your enemies make a tumult;
And those who hate You have lifted up their head.
3 They have taken crafty counsel against Your people,
And consulted together against Your sheltered ones.
4 They have said, “Come, and let us cut them off from being a nation,
That the name of Israel may be remembered no more.”
5 For they have consulted together with one consent;
They form a confederacy against You:
6 The tents of Edom and the Ishmaelites;
Moab and the Hagrites;
7 Gebal, Ammon, and Amalek;
Philistia with the inhabitants of Tyre;
8 Assyria also has joined with them;
They have helped the children of Lot. Selah
9 Deal with them as with Midian,
As with Sisera,
As with Jabin at the Brook Kishon,
10 Who perished at En Dor,
Who became as refuse on the earth.
11 Make their nobles like Oreb and like Zeeb,
Yes, all their princes like Zebah and Zalmunna,
12 Who said, “Let us take for ourselves
The pastures of God for a possession.”
13 O my God, make them like the whirling dust,
Like the chaff before the wind!
14 As the fire burns the woods,
And as the flame sets the mountains on fire,
15 So pursue them with Your tempest,
And frighten them with Your storm.
16 Fill their faces with shame,
That they may seek Your name, O Lord.
17 Let them be confounded and dismayed forever;
Yes, let them be put to shame and perish,
18 That they may know that You, whose name alone is the Lord,
Are the Most High over all the earth.

You can't shake the perfection of scripture.

Maybe I'm missing yours, but I think you missed my point (or at least part of it).

 

[Evil.Eye.<(I)>]

Maybe I'm missing yours, but I think you missed my point (or at least part of it).

Shops made a point and you quoted it, then went on to attempt to disprove his point. I just dropped scripture that binds to Islam and explains why his statement about Christianity being prevalent and Islam only now beginning to gain global momentum... thanks to the crusades... was correct.

I wasn't jumping in on any other aspect of your post... but scripture is very clear about the consistent use of the "Crescent" ornament by a force that is present all throughout scripture.

edit to come...

Acts 19 (Riot at Ephesus) 21Now after these events Paul resolved in the Spirit to pass through Macedonia and Achaia and go to Jerusalem, saying, “After I have been there, I must also see Rome.” 22And having sent into Macedonia two of his helpers, Timothy and Erastus, he himself stayed in Asia for a while.

23About that time there arose no little disturbance concerning the Way. 24For a man named Demetrius, a silversmith, who made silver shrines of Artemis, brought no little business to the craftsmen. 25These he gathered together, with the workmen in similar trades, and said, “Men, you know that from this business we have our wealth. 26And you see and hear that not only in Ephesus but in almost all of Asia this Paul has persuaded and turned away a great many people, saying that gods made with hands are not gods. 27And there is danger not only that this trade of ours may come into disrepute but also that the temple of the great goddess Artemis may be counted as nothing, and that she may even be deposed from her magnificence, she whom all Asia and the world worship.”

28When they heard this they were enraged and were crying out, “Great is Artemis of the Ephesians!”​

Do you know who "Artemis" was?

She is associated with the "Goddess of the Moon"... if you follow the Acts Narrative... you can easily see that many demons were connected to her worship. The Apostles were extremely busy casting demons out in the chapter that I quoted.

Moon... Moon worship... Surely you see my point?

Revelation 12:1 A great sign appeared in heaven: a woman clothed with the sun, with the moon under her feet and a crown of twelve stars on her head.

If you were a Dispensationalist... you would understand that the woman is National Israel... funny that she has the "moon" "under her feet". That's seen all throughout scripture as a sign of power over something. Kind of like when Jesus put the serpent under His "heal".

Just a quick fact... the Crusaders initially got angry when the Holy Land... AKA Israel (Palestine at the time) was overrun by ... Drum Roll... Islamic Turks.

This was the "First Crusade" and brought Jerusalem out of Islamic control around 1099 A.D.

 

[Zeke]

In this sense, we went to war with Japan and Germany and the nature of that fight freed what was left of the Jews and others in those camps.

Have you heard of the St. Louis ocean liner? In 1939 over a thousand people, largely Jews, fled Germany on her. Most of the passengers had applied for US visas and planned to wait on them in Cuba then proceed to the states. Despite being aware of both the state of affairs for the Jew in Europe the White House ignored their pleas. The St. Louis was close enough to see the lights of Miami.

He might as well have taken a pistol and killed a few hundred of them personally.

If you want to defend him on the point, be my guest.


What guys? :AMR: It's the right wing conservatives who hate him, if for other reasons more often than not. I'm an unaffiliated moderate. But the truth is the truth. Roosevelt snubbed a thousand souls he could have saved with a wave of his hand. If not for the intervention of Great Britain and an effort by some European Jewish groups who knows how many of them would have survived the war?

And Roosevelt snubbed Jesse Owens after his historic Olympic run.

Well we agree on something almost wish I hadn't read it.

 

[Stuu]

All slanted take and meaningless fiction for opinion. When you deal in reality, and become a U.S. citizen, perhaps an actual conversation could happen. lain:

A slanted and fact-free response. Given that a show of piety is essential for anyone wanting the votes of the masses, I would have thought Americans might be the last people to ask about that deception.

I don't think you have claimed this exactly, but is it really important to you that there has 'never been an atheist president'?

Part of the problem is the loaded term 'atheist'. I identify with the word myself because it describes the way I live my life, but as I mentioned earlier I don't like it because it defines me in terms of others' crazy ideas. I am more than just a lack of crazy ideas (and I have other unrelated ideas that are definitely crazy). You can put many public figures who have no belief in a deity in that same category, Einstein probably being the most famous. Even Richard Dawkins resists the term somewhat, putting himself at 6 on his scale of 1-7.

Meantime, that lack of intellectual satisfaction at not having explanations for our existence makes it difficult to analyse non-belief too far into the past. How did all this stuff come to be here? A deist god is the placeholder 'explanation' until you have Big Bang cosmology and evolution by natural selection. We know that all the stuff in the universe is borrowed from the expansion of space-time, and that the living things fittest to survival and reproduction tend to pass on their ever-mutating genes, but that was all unavailable to the desperately curious before the last part of the 19th Century. So almost everyone was at least a deist.

Here is some speculation on the closeted atheist presidents, but they could have done themselves a favour by calling them the 'nones', in which category you would include most intellectually curious deists from the past, but not all.

Their list of definite (based on their analysis of blasphemous quotes) non-believers: Jefferson, Lincoln, Grant, and Taft.

Their suspects for closeted status, based on less compelling evidence: Harrison, Tyler, Hayes, Arthur, Kennedy, Nixon, Hoover, Reagan, Clinton, and Obama.

Stuart

 

[Evil.Eye.<(I)>]

Deism is an autonomous form of "Theism", but it roots into agnosticism and identifies that God allows "Free Will".

If God doesn't allow free will, then God is the orchestrater of all chaos... which is a pretty slanderous thing to say about our Lord, God J.C..

However... Deism ain't "Atheism". If you ask what book those Agnostics and founders that are being discussed... embraced as their revelation of God... it would be the old King Jim.

Yup... They were "Christ" based, but knew a "Country" couldn't thrive on Theocracy... since the "Theos" of the matter isn't presently here in Physical form to take His "throne".