Your personal favorite Founding Father

[Davy Crockett]

I am currently reading the David McCullough novel, 1776, and found this out. I found it surprising as well.

If you have not read his other book, The Patriot's History of the United States, I recommend that you do.

 

[low preference guy]

Luther Martin was pretty good. Some of his words opposing the ratification of the centralizing Constitution:

By the power to lay and collect imposts Congress may impose duties on any or every article of commerce imported into these states to what amount they please. By the power to lay excises, a power very odious in its nature, since it authorizes officers to examine into your private concerns, the Congress may impose duties on every article of use or consumption: On the food that we eat, on the liquors we drink, on the clothes that we wear, the glass which enlighten our houses, or the hearths necessary for our warmth and comfort. By the power to lay and collect taxes, they may proceed to direct taxation on every individual either by a capitation tax on their heads or an assessment on their property. By this part of the section, therefore, the government has a power to tax to what amount they choose and thus to sluice the people at every vein as long as they have a drop of blood left.

 

[RileyE104]

Thomas Paine

 

[ConsideringRonPaul]

If you have not read his other book, The Patriot's History of the United States, I recommend that you do.

I read his John Adams which is a truly great story of an oft maligned Patriot. Although I didn't select him as my choice, Adams deserves more credit than he gets (Too many ppl see the Alien and Sedition Acts and look no further). Anyways, Ive never heard of the Patriots History, Ill have to look into it as I love McCullough and the title of the book itself sounds appealing.

 

[Davy Crockett]

The next two threads that I would like to see is "Greatest Americans of the 19th century" and "Greatest Americans of the 20th century." If someone is to set up a poll, please do not forget Lysander Spooner, James Polk, and Thomas Edison for the 19th century.

 

[Sola_Fide]

What style Christian was Henry?

Presbyterian

 

[PauliticsPolitics]

PAINE FTW

 

[Mark37snj]

George Washington, when they asked him to serve, he did.

 

[Sola_Fide]

The next two threads that I would like to see is "Greatest Americans of the 19th century" and "Greatest Americans of the 20th century." If someone is to set up a poll, please do not forget Lysander Spooner, James Polk, and Thomas Edison for the 19th century.

James Knox Polk's mother was a descendant of John Knox, the Calvinistic Reformer of Scotland. Polk was a Presbyterian.

 

[PierzStyx]

Well, whenever you go on these rants about free will, I notice that you don't quote the Scripture. The Bible clearly teaches that men's wills are not free, they are fallen and bound to sin. Only God's will is free because only He is sovereign, and as Romans 9 clearly teaches, the Potter has power over the clay, and YOU O man cannot answer back to the Potter. He makes some pots for noble use and some for common use.

Have you read Romans 9 lately?


But it doesn't surprise me that you are so bound up with this error. Mormonism began as a reaction against Calvinism. Joseph Smith envisioned Satan as the one who wanted to "force" us to be saved, and it was Jesus who wanted to give us "free will". So Mormonism began as a reaction against a misunderstanding of the Bible and the doctrines of grace.



EDIT: also, you didn't interact in any way with the Martin Luther quotes I put on page 10 of this thread. What I was talking about initially was how theology relates to political liberty. I wasn't talking about eternal things yet.

And whenever you talk about Mormonism it doesn't surprise me how bound up in ignorance you are on that subject either. And you're right Jesus Christ is the Author of Liberty. Because of His Atonement we have the choice between good and evil, and the power to choose either. Satan wants to make us a slave to his will by sin. Yet we are still free to choose sin or not. You can believe in Jesus the Tyrant all you like. I believe in Christ the Liberator of the Captives.

And its remarkable that you find me in error for not quoting scripture since all you quote is Luther. And you're right I didn't interact with those quotes from Luther. He was wrong. He was neither prophet or apostle and his beliefs are nothing more than his own understanding. He was a great man, but he was wrong about free will. So why should I pay attention to them?

As for scripture, I could preach a sermon on it from scripture. But I find a few quotes from James, Revelation, and John sufficient for this case.

James 1:13-14 "Let no man say he is tempted of God, for God is tempted by no evil, neither tempteth he any man. But every man is tempted, when he is drawn away of his own lust, and enticed." The lesson is clear. Temptation comes not from God, but from a person's OWN lusts. Notice it specifically says God is the author of no temptation but that temptation comes from man alone. A theology absent form free will violates this. Because God is the only mover He is the only source of anything and everything. This makes Him the author of temptation. Yet James says those temptations come from each person NOT God. This can only eb so if man is a free agent able to have lusts and feelings of his own and able to choose ON HIS OWN to obey them or not.

James 2:17- "But wilt thou know, O vain man, that faith without works is dead?" and James 2:24- "Ye see then how that by works a man is justified, and not by faith only. and James 2:26- "For as the body without the spirit is dead, so faith without works is dead also." I feel so bad for Paul. Romans is so often warped that his words are twisted beyond their meaning. As James teaches us our works,OURS, are absolutely essential to our salvation. One cannot have faith without works. Calvinism ignores this. Man has no works in a theology absent of free will. All works, good and evil, belong to God. You cannot have faith or salvation in Calvinist thought because you can have no works. It is works that leads to faith and faith that leads to grace and grace that leads to salvation. Without individual liberty and free will works do not exist because the individual who does them is not an individual. He is a puppet. And a puppet is unable to do anything on its own. yet James clearly lays out that we are each able to do works on our own, both good and evil, and it is these works that lead us to faith and salvation.

Revelation 20:12-13, "And I saw the dead, small and great, stand before God; and the books were opened: and another book was opened, which is the book of life: and the dead were judged out of those things which were written in the books, according to their works. And the sea gave up the dead which were in it; and death and hell delivered up the dead which were in them: and they were judged every man according to their works." EVERY man is judged by HIS works. Not God's, not Satan's, but his own works. Yet individual works are impossible in a theology absent of free will because you have no works that are YOUR OWN. Yet the Bible clearly shows that each man has works that are entirely his own, not God's, and thus he has free will in order to have individual and personal works. And it is those works which one is judged by. The very fact that our actions are of such eternal consequence that we are judged by them implies that they are separate from God's actions because how can a just God condemn or reward someone for only doing what He forced them to do?

John 7:17- " If any man will do his will, he shall know of the doctrine, whether it be of God, or whether I speak of myself." Here Christ teaches that if any man wants to know if He is sent of God then that man should test His teachings by doing them. Then one can know if they are of God by the result of their actions and if they are blessed in His work or not. For this to even be true there has to be free will because if there is no free will you cannot choose to do His will or not (in fact it is arguable whether "you exist at all if there is no free will)and then to learn for yourself of its veracity. Free will is essential to this test. Without it this whole statement is useless because doing His will is impossible because all will, including yours, is His to begin with. In fact the whole idea that you don't know something is God's will means you have an individual will that can be confused that chi separate from God's omniscient will.

And I'll throw in one from the Book of Mormon as well. The ancient Prophet Lehi taught his son Nephi (pronounced "Knee-fi") in 2 Nephi 2: 26-27 "And the Messiah cometh in the fulness of time, that he may redeem the children of men from the fall. And because that they are redeemed from the fall they have become free forever, knowing good from evil; to act for themselves and not to be acted upon, save it be by the punishment of the law at the great and last day, according to the commandments which God hath given. Wherefore, men are free according to the flesh; and call things are given them which are expedient unto man. And they are free to choose liberty and eternal life, through the great Mediator of all men, or to choose captivity and death, according to the captivity and power of the devil; for he seeketh that all men might be miserable like unto himself." Here it is laid out clearly. Because of the Atonement of Jesus Christ we are able to choose between good and evil and not doomed to be shackled by sin. Using that choice we can either choose liberty and freedom through Christ or slavery to sin as Satan did. God does not force some to Heaven and force others to hell, but it is up to us to choose so we had better choose wisely.


And I know you meant the idea of politically liberty. The point is that Calvinism ISN'T the theology of liberty. And all you have to do is look at the actual life of John Calvin to see it. The man was a tyrant. When he gained influential power in Geneva his religious beliefs lead him to becoming a despot who executed any who disagreed with him. He had exiled, burned at the stake and beheaded any who opposed him. Even the Spanish Inquisition at its height allowed the accused "lawyers". Calvin didn't even pay heed to the formality. If he is the culmination of his beliefs, then it is obvious Calvinism isn't about liberty, or even believe in it. You can't have liberty without individuality because the idea of liberty states a belief that another person is a separate being with equal rights that you by your actions should never transgress. Calvinism denies free will to transgress another's rights, or even that rights exist at all since individual existence is required to have individual rights. If we are all slaves to God's will then none of us have true individuality and therefore cannot have liberty.

 

[ConsideringRonPaul]

Why did Polk become a Presbyterian if he was descended of Calvinistic Reformers? That would be like saying Joseph Smith's grandson became a Catholic or something like that.

 

[PierzStyx]

The next two threads that I would like to see is "Greatest Americans of the 19th century" and "Greatest Americans of the 20th century." If someone is to set up a poll, please do not forget Lysander Spooner, James Polk, and Thomas Edison for the 19th century.

Pfft. Edison was a thief. Nickola Tesla FTW!

 

[Davy Crockett]

It is amusing that Christians claim that America was founded by Christians and "Christian principles", when three of the first four Presidents of the United States, along with several Founding fathers, were deists.

I am not trying to start a fight with anyone, just pointing out the facts.

This is a partial list of people who have been categorized as deists, the belief in a God based on natural religion only, or belief in religious truths discovered by people through a process of reasoning, independent of any revelation through scripture or prophets. They have been selected for their influence on Deism, or for their fame in other areas.

George Washington (1732 – 1799), "Father of the Our Country", one of the Founding Fathers of the United States, and the 1st President of the United States

Thomas Jefferson, author of the United States Declaration of Independence, one of the Founding Fathers of the United States, and the 3rd President of the United States

James Madison (1751 – 1836), "Father of the United States Constitution", one of the Founding Fathers of the United States, and the 4th President of the United States

Thomas Paine (1737 – 1809), English pamphleteer, revolutionary, radical, inventor, and intellectual, and one of the Founding Fathers of the United States

Benjamin Franklin (1706 – 1790), American polymath, one of the Founding Fathers of the United States

Ethan Allen (1738 – 1789), early American revolutionary and guerrilla leader

Elihu Palmer (1764 – 1806), American author and advocate of deism

John Locke (1632 – 1704), influential English philosopher in the field of empiricism

Adam Smith (1723 – 1790), Scottish Philosopher and economist, considered the father of modern economics

One could also argue that the second U.S. President, John Adams, was also a deist. He said:

The question before the human race is, whether the God of nature shall govern the world by his own laws, or whether priests and kings shall rule it by fictitious miracles.

As I understand the Christian religion, it was, and is, a revelation. But how has it happened that millions of fables, tales, legends, have been blended with both Jewish and Christian revelation that have made them the most bloody religion that ever existed?

 

[ConsideringRonPaul]

The next two threads that I would like to see is "Greatest Americans of the 19th century" and "Greatest Americans of the 20th century." If someone is to set up a poll, please do not forget Lysander Spooner, James Polk, and Thomas Edison for the 19th century.

I think I will do that, please post names everyone for Americans from these two centuries. Although I don't know about the 20th century poll because I'd need to put Paul on there and everyone here would just vote for him.

 

[Sola_Fide]

Why did Polk become a Presbyterian if he was descended of Calvinistic Reformers? That would be like saying Joseph Smith's grandson became a Catholic or something like that.

Presbyterians are Calvinists.

Wait, let me be more precise: SOME Presbyterians are Calvinists. Many Presbyterians today are theological liberals who bear no resemblance to what Presbyterians used to be. But 200 years or so who, all Presbyterians were Calvinists in that they held to the Westminster Confession.

 

[Bonnieblue]

The founders meaning those who were active in American political life from the 1760s through the early 19th century. And by that post I assume you're more of an anti-federalist, articles of confederation guy.

That definition of the "founders" would be more historically correct, although marker besides "founders" would be better. I do not have one to suggest. Actually, I am a paladin of true federalism, which ironically, having been usurped by the unity/monarchy faction of Hamilton and company, has to be labeled anti-federalist. Yes, I do not buy the Hamiltonian lie that we needed a new constitution. The Articles would have sufficed.

 

[klamath]

PierzStyx;4029516]Pfft. Edison was a thief. Nickola Tesla FTW!

testla was a nutjob. Wacked his own nuts

 

[Davy Crockett]

James Knox Polk's mother was a descendant of John Knox, the Calvinistic Reformer of Scotland. Polk was a Presbyterian.

President Polk outlined what he was going to achieve in just one four year term and accomplished it. He was the President that best defined America's Manifest Destiny as a White homeland from the Atlantic to the Pacific. Without him, most of you would still be back in Europe.

Presidency (1845–1849)

When he took office on March 4, 1845, Polk, at 49, became the youngest man at the time to assume the presidency. According to a story told decades later by George Bancroft, Polk set four clearly defined goals for his administration:

Reestablish the Independent Treasury System.
Reduce tariffs.
Acquire some or all of Oregon Country.
Acquire California and New Mexico from Mexico.

And he also annexed Texas into the Union, giving us America what it looks like today.

 

[Bonnieblue]

It is amusing that Christians claim that America was founded by Christians and "Christian principles", when three of the first four Presidents of the United States, along with several Founding fathers, were deists.

I am not trying to start a fight with anyone, just pointing out the facts.

Almost all of that which you posted supra can be well debated and much of it refuted; however, I am not sure what it will bring the Ron Paul campaign. I would simply note that the men whom you mentioned were not America but only a small fraction thereof, and that Deism did not come to be ex nihilo, to the extent that your characterization of these men is at all accurate, but that it has a historically verifiable objective correlative with the Arian heresy of Christianity; thus, it has its root in Christianity.




One could also argue that the second U.S. President, John Adams, was also a deist. He said:

The question before the human race is, whether the God of nature shall govern the world by his own laws, or whether priests and kings shall rule it by fictitious miracles.

As I understand the Christian religion, it was, and is, a revelation. But how has it happened that millions of fables, tales, legends, have been blended with both Jewish and Christian revelation that have made them the most bloody religion that ever existed?

Almost all of that which you posted supra can be well debated and much of it refuted; however, I am not sure what it will bring the Ron Paul campaign. I would simply note that the men whom you mentioned were not America but only a small fraction thereof, and that Deism did not come to be ex nihilo, to the extent that your characterization of these men is at all accurate, but that it has a historically verifiable objective correlative with the Arian heresy of Christianity; thus, it has its root in Christianity.

 

[Sola_Fide]

It is amusing that Christians claim that America was founded by Christians and "Christian principles", when three of the first four Presidents of the United States, along with several Founding fathers, were deists.

I am not trying to start a fight with anyone, just pointing out the facts.

What is amusing to me are these utterly ridiculous posts where the same 4 or 5 historical figures that some people think were Deists are trotted out as evidence that this wasn't a nation of Christians.

It's just beneath the level of refutation. Any unbiased person can exclude those 4 or 5 people, look at the rest of the 95% percent of the population, and see that most colonial Americans were Calvinists of different denominations. There were very little Methodists, hardly any Catholics, and even fewer Jews, and even fewer unbelievers.

Also, the elites of a country are always more theologically liberal than the people.

But you aren't unbiased, so you are interested in revising history.

One could also argue that the second U.S. President, John Adams, was also a deist. He said:

The question before the human race is, whether the God of nature shall govern the world by his own laws, or whether priests and kings shall rule it by fictitious miracles.

This sounds like something I would say. Calvinists know that God's law is above the fictitious and evil laws of kings and priests.