Founding Fathers: Christians or Deists

[RSLudlum]

I just got this chain letter sent to me proclaiming (with unsourced quotes) that the majority of the founding fathers were Christians and that in itself deems that the placement of the 10 Commandments justifiable in Gov't buildings. At the end of the email it states:

"It is said that 86% of Americans believe in God.
Therefore, it is very hard to understand
why there is such a mess about having the Ten
Commandments on display or 'In God We Trust'
on our money and having God in the Pledge of
Allegiance. Why don't we just tell the other
14% to Sit Down and SHUT UP!!!"


What do you think about this? And is there still an ongoing debate about whether the majority of our 'notable' Founding Fathers were Christian's or Deist's?

 

[ryanmkeisling]

Anyone who studies history knows that at least some them were deists. These Christians will say anything to get what they want. I'd love to hear how they reconcile evolution theory with the bible. Or any number of other things that make the christian faith what it is or isn't. The founding fathers weren't the best men and did not have the best intentions. They did start something new and did have better ideas than were already in existence, but to think that freedom, liberty, etc. were the heart of what they were after is plane foolish.

 

[LibertiORDeth]

Anyone who studies history knows that at least some them were deists. These Christians will say anything to get what they want. I'd love to hear how they reconcile evolution theory with the bible. Or any number of other things that make the christian faith what it is or isn't. The founding fathers weren't the best men and did not have the best intentions. They did start something new and did have better ideas than were already in existence, but to think that freedom, liberty, etc. were the heart of what they were after is plane foolish.

Actually, a lot of Masons were founders of this country also, so not all of them were Christians, although the majority probably were. As long as nobody tries to force their beliefs on me, I won't try to force them on others, although the government is going too far by allowing Arab women to wear full head garments for drivers license, and teaching evolution in school.

 

[Dieseler]

I'm going through quite a learning curve on the true nature of the founders of our great nation.
The movers and shakers of which were indeed Masons.
This is a pretty good documentary, I have not finished watching but thought it fit the thread.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QcLDPoeI4ms

 

[Mini-Me]

Actually, a lot of Masons were founders of this country also, so not all of them were Christians, although the majority probably were. As long as nobody tries to force their beliefs on me, I won't try to force them on others, although the government is going too far by allowing Arab women to wear full head garments for drivers license, and teaching evolution in school.

Well...
Driver's licenses: This is a state issue (except when the damn feds get involved, e.g. Real ID). If state governments want to "let" people wear full head garments for their pictures, that's their prerogative. Mandating driver's licenses isn't exactly an absolutely essential function of government anyway. While driver's licenses have their uses, they also have their dangers. They're an example of giving away some freedom for security - are they an example of giving up essential freedom, though? That's up to the people of each state to decide.

Evolution in school: There's nothing inherently wrong with teaching evolution in school (and as a personal opinion, I think it's probably a good idea). What IS wrong is when the federal government dictates policy to state and local school boards. It should be up to them to decide what to teach, not the federal government.

 

[mtmedlin]

My reply would be that even if all of their argument was true (its not) we are a Republic and not a pure democracy. The wants of the majority do not outstrip the rights of the few. The government has an oligation to uphold equal and just law for ALL its citizens including the 14%. The 14 amendment is referred to as the "equal protection" clause. It is what keeps any one group from running its agenda over anybody else.

 

[ryanmkeisling]

Actually, a lot of Masons were founders of this country also, so not all of them were Christians, although the majority probably were. As long as nobody tries to force their beliefs on me, I won't try to force them on others, although the government is going too far by allowing Arab women to wear full head garments for drivers license, and teaching evolution in school.

And many of those masons are professed Christians although not true to their religion, but how many true christians are there>? And what is a true christian?

Evolution should be taught everywhere especially if we want to have truly educated scientists or truly educated people. Evolution is more than a belief at this point and is almost irrefutable as far as modern thought is concerned. The creation-evolution controversy is a crock promoted by people who want to believe fantasy or cannot admit their creation myths are wrong. Evolutionary concepts are also evident in many other sciences: computer, medicine, philosophy, psychology. Anyone who is in denial of evolution has their head in the sand or is just plain crazy. Sorry but we weren't created by God out of thin air 5,000 years ago and theistic evolution is not science but a way for religions to still exist or to try and reconcile themselves with the theory of evolution.

As for the head dress thing I have to agree as it kind of defeats the purpose of having identification but it is a states issue not a Federal issue although they would like it to be.

 

[Shiranu]

And many of those masons are professed Christians although not true to their religion, but how many true christians are there>? And what is a true christian?

Evolution should be taught everywhere especially if we want to have truly educated scientists or truly educated people. Evolution is more than a belief at this point and is almost irrefutable as far as modern thought is concerned. The creation-evolution controversy is a crock promoted by people who want to believe fantasy or cannot admit their creation myths are wrong. Evolutionary concepts are also evident in many other sciences: computer, medicine, philosophy, psychology. Anyone who is in denial of evolution has their head in the sand or is just plain crazy. Sorry but we weren't created by God out of thin air 5,000 years ago and theistic evolution is not science but a way for religions to still exist or to try and reconcile themselves with the theory of evolution.

As for the head dress thing I have to agree as it kind of defeats the purpose of having identification but it is a states issue not a Federal issue although they would like it to be.

quoted for brain eating truth...



wait...this isn't my zombie survival forums...
QFT.

 

[Macon GA]

This cracked me up...

Evolution should be taught everywhere especially if we want to have truly educated scientists or truly educated people. Evolution is more than a belief at this point and is almost irrefutable as far as modern thought is concerned. The creation-evolution controversy is a crock promoted by people who want to believe fantasy or cannot admit their creation myths are wrong. Evolutionary concepts are also evident in many other sciences: computer, medicine, philosophy, psychology. Anyone who is in denial of evolution has their head in the sand or is just plain crazy. Sorry but we weren't created by God out of thin air 5,000 years ago and theistic evolution is not science but a way for religions to still exist or to try and reconcile themselves with the theory of evolution.

Evolution is a theory. It has to be accepted by faith. Abiogenesis has not been demonstrated in a laboratory, nor has one creature's DNA being changed into the DNA of another creature. Because we can't reproduce this theory in a lab, and nobody has ever observed it (none of us were there), one must accept it by faith.

I think that one could be "truly educated" without accepting Evolution. All one must do is peruse historical figures for evidence of that. After all, I would consider Galileo and Isaac Newton to be fairly "scientifically minded."

 

[Macon GA]

Evolution=Science....NOT!

Piltdown Man: fake, human skull with a few key parts missing, jaw of an ape whose teeth had been filed down and stained

Java Man: Bones found over fifty feet apart in gravel. Who knows if bones came from the same individual. Regular human skulls also evidenced in gravel (which were conveniently forgotten for 30 years).

Nutcracker Man: Skull ape-like, but buried with evidence of human tools.... must be evidence of an apeman using tools? Or perhaps the human tools were used on the ape skulls, not by the apes. Ape meat may be too tough, so the ape brain is considered the real delicacy. 30 years later Leakey finds bones like modern man buried deeper. Hmmmmmmm...

We also have other mistakes made.... supposed ape-men's bones turning out to be other things like: alligator's upper leg bone, dolphin's rib, horse's toe.

Nebraska Man (including his whole family): based on a single TOOTH.... that is good science. Remember the Scopes Trial? An identical tooth was found later with its real skull attached to its real skeleton..... Pig's tooth.

Ramapithecus: first ape to walk upright????? This based on pieces of jaws and teeth. Soon after whole jaw is found and as it turns out Rama was just an ape after all.

How come Evolutionist's are so eager to use the tiniest bit of "evidence" to support their Scientific endeavors?

How about the tooth that wasn't there? Discover magazine's cover story on a jaw that had the canine teeth missing. The hole where they should have been was small, so the pointed teeth must have been small, which means they couldn't have been used as weapons, which means the animal must have had its hands free to hold weapons, which PROVES it walked upright....

Evolution is not science. It is a belief about the past. A belief made up by men and women who weren't there. Men and women who are not omniscient, and who have made some HUGE mistakes about the past already.

 

[ryanmkeisling]

Piltdown Man: fake, human skull with a few key parts missing, jaw of an ape whose teeth had been filed down and stained

Java Man: Bones found over fifty feet apart in gravel. Who knows if bones came from the same individual. Regular human skulls also evidenced in gravel (which were conveniently forgotten for 30 years).

Nutcracker Man: Skull ape-like, but buried with evidence of human tools.... must be evidence of an apeman using tools? Or perhaps the human tools were used on the ape skulls, not by the apes. Ape meat may be too tough, so the ape brain is considered the real delicacy. 30 years later Leakey finds bones like modern man buried deeper. Hmmmmmmm...

We also have other mistakes made.... supposed ape-men's bones turning out to be other things like: alligator's upper leg bone, dolphin's rib, horse's toe.

Nebraska Man (including his whole family): based on a single TOOTH.... that is good science. Remember the Scopes Trial? An identical tooth was found later with its real skull attached to its real skeleton..... Pig's tooth.

Ramapithecus: first ape to walk upright????? This based on pieces of jaws and teeth. Soon after whole jaw is found and as it turns out Rama was just an ape after all.

How come Evolutionist's are so eager to use the tiniest bit of "evidence" to support their Scientific endeavors?

How about the tooth that wasn't there? Discover magazine's cover story on a jaw that had the canine teeth missing. The hole where they should have been was small, so the pointed teeth must have been small, which means they couldn't have been used as weapons, which means the animal must have had its hands free to hold weapons, which PROVES it walked upright....

Evolution is not science. It is a belief about the past. A belief made up by men and women who weren't there. Men and women who are not omniscient, and who have made some HUGE mistakes about the past already.

I could care less about any of this bone or that bone and yes science often is not perfect. The fact that we may have evolved from apes is debatable, however evolution is undeniable and it is evident in everything we are and we do. It doesn't need to be recreated in a lab; biological evolution is the changes seen in the inherited traits of a population from one generation to the next. Evolution occurs when heritable differences become more common or rare in a population, either non-randomly through natural selection or randomly through genetic drift.

People used to think the earth was flat; we now know for a fact that it is round. People used to think the earth was created 5,000 years ago by an omnipresent "being," that even though he created everything and is omnipotent he could not help but create evil and can do nothing about its existence, and for some reason they still do despite overwhelming evidence to the contrary. When someone decides to vote for Ron Paul as opposed to Hilary Clinton they evolve. When a people move and settle in higher elevations over generations their lungs get bigger to compensate; they evolve. Now I will not say time and experience will not lead us to other discoveries but evolution is here to stay and its everywhere you look.

The FACT is that this powerful explanatory and predictive theory has become the central organizing principle of modern biology, providing a unifying explanation for the diversity of life on Earth which is far more powerful and evidenced than anything else out there, ever. Evolution influences every aspect of the form and behavior of organisms. Most prominent are the specific behavioral and physical adaptations that are the outcome of natural selection. These adaptations increase fitness by aiding activities such as finding food, avoiding predators or attracting mates. Organisms can also respond to selection by co-operating with each other, usually by aiding their relatives or engaging in mutually-beneficial symbiosis. Everything evolves, it is not a belief about the past by people who weren't there. It is a scientifically demonstrable theory that happens all the time.

 

[LibertiORDeth]

I'm going through quite a learning curve on the true nature of the founders of our great nation.
The movers and shakers of which were indeed Masons.
This is a pretty good documentary, I have not finished watching but thought it fit the thread.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QcLDPoeI4ms

Watched it, very good indeed.

 

[LibertiORDeth]

I could care less about any of this bone or that bone and yes science often is not perfect. The fact that we may have evolved from apes is debatable, however evolution is undeniable and it is evident in everything we are and we do. It doesn't need to be recreated in a lab; biological evolution is the changes seen in the inherited traits of a population from one generation to the next. Evolution occurs when heritable differences become more common or rare in a population, either non-randomly through natural selection or randomly through genetic drift.

People used to think the earth was flat; we now know for a fact that it is round. People used to think the earth was created 5,000 years ago by an omnipresent "being," that even though he created everything and is omnipotent he could not help but create evil and can do nothing about its existence, and for some reason they still do despite overwhelming evidence to the contrary. When someone decides to vote for Ron Paul as opposed to Hilary Clinton they evolve. When a people move and settle in higher elevations over generations their lungs get bigger to compensate; they evolve. Now I will not say time and experience will not lead us to other discoveries but evolution is here to stay and its everywhere you look.

The FACT is that this powerful explanatory and predictive theory has become the central organizing principle of modern biology, providing a unifying explanation for the diversity of life on Earth which is far more powerful and evidenced than anything else out there, ever. Evolution influences every aspect of the form and behavior of organisms. Most prominent are the specific behavioral and physical adaptations that are the outcome of natural selection. These adaptations increase fitness by aiding activities such as finding food, avoiding predators or attracting mates. Organisms can also respond to selection by co-operating with each other, usually by aiding their relatives or engaging in mutually-beneficial symbiosis. Everything evolves, it is not a belief about the past by people who weren't there. It is a scientifically demonstrable theory that happens all the time.

To some extent that is true. Animals will "evolve" to adapt to a new environment, such as changing colors; However, the "Theory of Evolution" is wrong, since people did not evolve from apes.

 

[Macon GA]

Microevolution and Macroevolution are two different things. Species do adapt to their environments, but one species does not develop into another species.

 

[LibertiORDeth]

Microevolution and Macroevolution are two different things. Species do adapt to their environments, but one species does not develop into another species.

Precisely.

 

[ryanmkeisling]

Microevolution and Macroevolution are two different things. Species do adapt to their environments, but one species does not develop into another species.

I do not dispute that there are two different levels of evolutionary thought, only that they are not separate. Speciation does occur on macro and micro levels and macroevolution is nothing more than an aggregate of the effects of microevolution. This is the modern scientific view called modern synthesis.

The creationist perspective you put forth, specifically that the term macroevolution is used as a perversion of its true scientific definition, exists as a denial with virtually nothing to back it up besides some crazy religious reasoning/ideas. This perspective has no scientific basis and is not advocated by any scientific representation that I am aware of. A theory is only an observation or explanation concerning a fact. The facts do not change and evolution is a fact; it has been demonstarted in a lab using fruit flies. For example current popular scientific thought dictates that humans definitely did evolve from "ape-like" ancestors, the only questions left are whose theories about how this happened are correct and this may still be yet to be discovered. There is a wealth of scientific certainty surrounding this and any refusal to accept it is simply not based in reality. Show me some facts and I would be willing to entertain them but I have been studying this for years and I am pretty familiar with all of the current literature. It is only a matter of time until one of these theories is proven and then it will be fact but there are no theories that dispute that humans did evolve from Ape-like animals; at least none that anyone in the scientific community takes seriously. Creationist theories are not accepted as they have no factual basis and no empirical proof while most of the accepted theories have a good deal of proof.

"Evolution is a theory. It is also a fact. And facts and theories are different things, not rungs in a hierarchy of increasing certainty. Facts are the world's data. Theories are structures of ideas that explain and interpret facts. Facts do not go away when scientists debate rival theories to explain them. Einstein's theory of gravitation replaced Newton's, but apples did not suspend themselves in mid-air, pending the outcome. And humans evolved from ape-like ancestors whether they did so by Darwin's proposed mechanism or by some other is yet to be discovered."

 

[MGreen]

Abiogenesis has not been demonstrated in a laboratory

Abiogenesis has nothing to do with evolution. Evolution explains why we have such diverse life on Earth, not how that life ultimately began.

nor has one creature's DNA being changed into the DNA of another creature.

Because that doesn't happen.

Because we can't reproduce this theory in a lab, and nobody has ever observed it (none of us were there)

Yes, we have observed it (speciation/evolution, that is... not abiogenesis ).

However, the "Theory of Evolution" is wrong, since people did not evolve from apes.

How can people still say this? Of course we didn't evolve from apes. We shared a common ancestor with modern day apes.

Accepting that evolutionary theory is a valid scientific theory doesn't mean you have to believe it to be true, people. (Real) Scientists know that evolution could be proven completely false tomorrow.

As for the founders, I don't know what kind of discussion there can be. We have writings that pretty much confirm their religious beliefs. Some were deists, some were Christians, and then you have people like Thomas Jefferson. Crazy, crazy man.

 

[Kade]

I just got this chain letter sent to me proclaiming (with unsourced quotes) that the majority of the founding fathers were Christians and that in itself deems that the placement of the 10 Commandments justifiable in Gov't buildings. At the end of the email it states:

"It is said that 86% of Americans believe in God.
Therefore, it is very hard to understand
why there is such a mess about having the Ten
Commandments on display or 'In God We Trust'
on our money and having God in the Pledge of
Allegiance. Why don't we just tell the other
14% to Sit Down and SHUT UP!!!"


What do you think about this? And is there still an ongoing debate about whether the majority of our 'notable' Founding Fathers were Christian's or Deist's?

Most of the most famous Founding Fathers were deist.

I consider all Deists, Non-Christians, Atheists, Agnostics, Unitarians, and other infidels, as the same mindset... All basically believe rule of man on Earth, not God.

Deists, Unitarians, Infidels and Non-Christians:

George Washington
Thomas Jefferson
Benjamin Franklin
James Madison
Thomas Paine
Ethan Allen
John Adams
George Mason
Robert Treat Paine
Cornelius Harnett



Personal writing between many of them show disgust, bordering on outright intolerance and infidelity towards Christianity, and in the case of Paine and Jefferson, outright atheism. Atheism at the time was a HUGE no-no, very secretive, and very unheard of... good thing times are changing, no?


It should be noted that most others were Presbyterian, Episcopalian, and Congregationalist, and a few splashes of Protestant, Catholic, and Quaker.

 

[RSLudlum]

Most of the most famous Founding Fathers were deist.

I consider all Deists, Non-Christians, Atheists, Agnostics, Unitarians, and other infidels, as the same mindset... All basically believe rule of man on Earth, not God.

Deists, Unitarians, Infidels and Non-Christians:

George Washington
Thomas Jefferson
Benjamin Franklin
James Madison
Thomas Paine
Ethan Allen
John Adams
George Mason
Robert Treat Paine
Cornelius Harnett



Personal writing between many of them show disgust, bordering on outright intolerance and infidelity towards Christianity, and in the case of Paine and Jefferson, outright atheism. Atheism at the time was a HUGE no-no, very secretive, and very unheard of... good thing times are changing, no?


It should be noted that most others were Presbyterian, Episcopalian, and Congregationalist, and a few splashes of Protestant, Catholic, and Quaker.

Kade, thanks for actually staying on topic with my OP. For some reason this thread got overrun with 'evo-creationist debaters".

 

[travisAlbert]

The founding fathers at the Constitutional Convention were overwhelmingly Deistic in nature. There was one Unitiarian, however, he would have likely held some unconventional beliefs about Christ. There was also one person there who would consider himself born again, however he has no recorded input.