(or, Langston vs. The Apologist) Wanna help me combat an apologist? Come on, you know you wanna....it'll be fun...

I forget which discussion it was in on the Forum, but somehow I came into contact with this website:

www.faithfacts.org

It's an apologist website. I looked through it a bit, and, man, the stuff you'll find there is....well, I won't say it, but WOW. I’m over here just shaking my head; shaking it in pity or consternation or awe of disbelief, I know not which.

Anyways, I noticed a little something they had on their front page. It appears as follows:

Is or WAS America a Christian Nation?
June 22, 2009

What do Americans celebrate on the 4th of July?

President Obama says America is NOT a Christian nation. Was it ever? Are there biblical prinicples for America's laws? (Yes, they misspelled “principles”; but don’t tell them, though).

Supreme Court Justice David Josiah Brewer made the following statement in the 1892 Decision of Holy Trinity Church vs. U.S.: "These and many other matters which might be noticed, add a volume of unofficial declarations to the mass of organic utterances that this is a Christian nation." [emphasis added]

And listen to Rep. Randy Forbes from Virginia ask the question, "Did America ever consider itself a Judeo-Christian nation?



That's all it has. The whole "America is a Christian Nation" thing is one of three or four things that really pisses me off about the Christian religion; I say this to make the point that, in truth, there really aren't that many things about it that piss me off. Just a small handful.

So I wrote them a short e-mail and handed them Article XI:

A preliminary treaty between the United States and the Bey of Tripoli was signed at the close of the Washington administration in 1796. John Adams sent the document to the Senate during his administration and that Senate, containing many of the signers of the Declaration of Independence and the Constitution, ratified it. Adams signed it on June 10, 1797. Article XI of the Treaty states: "As the Government of the United States of America is not in any sense founded on the Christian religion; as it has in itself no character of enmity against the laws, religion, or tranquillity, of Musselmen [i.e., Muslims]; and as said States never have entered into any war or act of hostility against any Mehomitan [i.e., Mohammedan] nation; it is declared by the parties that no pretext arising from religious opinions shall ever produce an interruption of the harmony existing between the two countries." (brackets added)


I then explained that "though the vast majority of people in this nation *claim* to be Christians, this does not make us a ‘Christian nation‘”. It makes us a nation of mostly Christians.

Here’s the prompt and brief reply from Charles.

Hi, Joseph. Thanks for the feedback.

Here is an article by David Barton on this issue:
http://www.wallbuilders.com/LIBissuesArticles.asp?id=125

Of course, we are not a Christian nation in the sense that the Christian church runs the government. But our laws and institutions have a very large Christian influence and so in this sense we are indeed a Christian nation.

Blessings,
Charles


More like “Christian hegemony”. And if he has the right of things, then quite literally.

he·gem·o·ny [hə jémmənee, héjjə mnee] n
authority or control: control or dominating influence by one person or group over others, especially by one political group over society or one nation over others (formal)

Encarta ® World English Dictionary © & (P) 1998-2004 Microsoft Corporation. All rights reserved.


I am contemplating on how to respond to this. I am planning something devastating. I have a few options in mind. First I need to read the Barton article (I can’t open it for some reason; can anyone else send that to me?)

(1). IF you are right, then a “Christian Nation” must be willing to except the sins and ills of the U.S. Government and all the sins found through the nation’s history and heritage. After all, you cannot claim such illustrious influence and such a grand role while turning your head and eyes away from all the bad things, pretending that only the successes of your “laws and institutions” that have such a “very large Christian influence” belong to you while their failures are someone else’s, anyone else‘s but that of your “Christian Nation“. If you take the title to heart, you must accept these as yours as well. To shuck them off onto an imaginary demon or evil spirit force, or to blame them on “the ungodly, the unrighteous, the sinners, and secularism”, would be incongruent with your claim.

What have we?

a. Stealing of Native American lands, the murder and sequestering and infecting of a great, once- numerous people. Manifest Destiny, remember, Charles?

b. Raping what was once a bountiful land, filling it with pollution, marring the landscape with development. Essentially your “Christian nation” took what was god-given and spat on it. After all, if god had wanted you to have what you have today, he would have given it to you that way. But you found it as it was (in its original, god-given state), and now look at it.

c. Slave trade and trafficking of Africans. Now why would a “Christian Nation” let this go down on their watch? I also recall that people calling themselves Christians took a book, called the Bible, and used “information” they found therein to justify this most morally vile and inane practice.

d. The ridiculously high divorce rate. It is called a social ill and deplored by members of your “Christian Nation” on a regular basis. Come to think of it, if somewhere around 80 to 90% percent of people say they believe in god (or at least a higher power), and the divorce rate is somewhere around 50% (!) wouldn’t it mean that most of those who are getting these divorces are self-identified Christians?

e. If the Bible commands you to “turn the other cheek” (what’s the verse for that? I don’t have my Bible handy, or the time to look it up), then why did your “Christian Nation” participate in WWI, WW2, The Gulf War, the Korean Conflict, Vietnam, The Cold War (technically not a “real” war, but the hostility and all other brotherly war elements were present), and now our battles in Iraq/Afghanistan. Let me guess: there’s some other Bible verse than can be used to justify this participation. But, in that case, you’ve used another verse to cancel out the other. A contradiction in the Bible (or a means to make two such verses in god‘s book clash against one another)? Surely not.

There are others, but I’ll stop for now. Basically, criticize these arguments. Help me strengthen them, find where they are weak, and, also, add more examples to the list. I’m ready to take it to this guy.

Views: 102

Reply to This

Replies to This Discussion

This is a bit off what you've got going up top. But I have yet to come across an intellectually-sound comeback to the blog post below. It definitely constitutes atheist ammunition.

This one is the concise version: http://theatheistobserver.wordpress.com/2009/06/14/

And this one is an expansion of it (but more of a tedious read):

http://theatheistobserver.wordpress.com/2009/07/09/


The content does not "disprove" the existence of the Christian "God" but it sure shatters to smithereens what Christians conted is the moral make-up, the moral character, of their Jesus-God in a way few atheists (that I'm aware of) have directly attacked.

I'm rather proud of it.
Good job, I loved it. If Christians could just reason a little about their belief in an omniscient fictional god who has known since day one whether every unborn child up to the rapture will go to heben or hell, they would have to be a member of some other ridiculous religion or a non-believer. Obviously, that fictional chump satan is just a sub-contractor for evil. The Hebrew word for satan simply means adversary.
Thanks for the positive feedback.

And yes, you almost feel sorry for Lucifer, the Imaginary Satan. Heck, whose worse: an imaginary demon who was conceived and created to epitomize evil, or the imaginary creature who conceived and created evil in all its vulgar manifestations--including imaginary Satan--while feigning to be love, mercy, and goodness personified? Poor imaginary Lucifer was a perfect angel created in the place of ultimate perfection by a pefect trio of one God who had no choice but to fufill a role wherein forgiveness was pre-destined to be denied him--much like the character, Judas Iscariot. What happened? God can create a rock he can't lift but finds it impossible to forgive those he destined to carry out pre-planned evil as part of his Divine Plan?

What kind of imaginary, less than omnipotent, God is that! Oh that's right: His Holy and Perfect Almightiness IS composed of pure imagination, aren't the trio of One?

Gee, it must be extremely difficult to be three gods making up one God with unimaginable, omnipotent, power but can't figure out how to stop all the suffering in the world. Too bad they couldn't have Intelligently Designed themselves while being Oneself (before they had no "beginning") to forgive Adam and Eve for being deliberately duped by their True Godness and the character He created especially to dupe them, Satan, to say four simple words to the earthly pair: "Uh, I forgive you." Even imaginary deity, it seems, was not Intelligent enough to do that!

Too bad. Earthly man could and would have, if he could.

Ssssh. We better keep as quiet as we can about this lest Christian fundamentalists find that out and quit buying TV evangelist-blessed prayer cloths and Holy tap water. Ssssh. Don't want to ruin the religion business, er . . I mean religious "faith" in these economically difficult times.

Now do we.

RSS

Support Atheist Nexus

Donate Today

Donate

 

Help Nexus When You Buy From Amazon

Amazon

 

Latest Activity

Tom Sarbeck replied to Dr. Allan H. Clark's discussion Atheism and the Holocaust: Primo Levi and Os Guiness
11 minutes ago
Visvakarman Svetasvatara-Upanish replied to Visvakarman Svetasvatara-Upanish's discussion God Loves Uganda.
25 minutes ago
Visvakarman Svetasvatara-Upanish replied to Visvakarman Svetasvatara-Upanish's discussion Do you guys know what tomorrow is?
29 minutes ago
Grinning Cat replied to Ruth Anthony-Gardner's discussion Camo cats in the group Atheist Ailurophiles
32 minutes ago
Loren Miller commented on Warren Jappe's photo
1 hour ago
Patricia replied to Bertold Brautigan's discussion Pity Poor Rush, Whose Panties Are in a Wad Because There Might Be a Black James Bond
1 hour ago
Bertold Brautigan replied to Bertold Brautigan's discussion Pity Poor Rush, Whose Panties Are in a Wad Because There Might Be a Black James Bond
1 hour ago
Patricia replied to Bertold Brautigan's discussion Pity Poor Rush, Whose Panties Are in a Wad Because There Might Be a Black James Bond
1 hour ago
Patricia replied to Idaho Spud's discussion Safety of frozen food in the group Food!
1 hour ago
Bertold Brautigan posted a discussion
1 hour ago
Grinning Cat commented on Warren Jappe's photo
1 hour ago
sk8eycat replied to Idaho Spud's discussion Safety of frozen food in the group Food!
2 hours ago

© 2014   Atheist Nexus. All rights reserved. Admin: Richard Haynes.

Badges  |  Report an Issue  |  Terms of Service