Let’s Talk Religion

[janey851]

I do not think of my relationship with Christ as my Savior is a religion.  It is a personal belief that there is a higher being that is with me and will guide me.

[swansonjohnsonjr]

the only way to God is through Christ

not through the church

not through other saints

its only through Christ

everything else is details

if you dont know Christ you are destined to a life apart from God

all religions DO NOT worship the same God

Jesus said that He is the only way to God

was Jesus a liar?

not at all

[mlbevins]

I was raised in a Freewill Baptist church but I lean more towards Southern Baptist.  I do believe in God and Jesus Christ is our savor.  Pray every night, but need to attend church a little more. 

[liljp617]

the only way to God is through Christ

not through the church

not through other saints

its only through Christ

everything else is details

if you dont know Christ you are destined to a life apart from God

all religions DO NOT worship the same God

Jesus said that He is the only way to God

was Jesus a liar?

not at all

And your authority for making these statements is....?

[davidf938]

I don't follow any organized form of religion. They were all ceeated by people. I am most familiar with Christianity so I will use it as an example. If you believe that light on a bright day comes from the sun, read Genesis chapter 1. Light was created on the first day and the sun, moon, and stars on the fourth day. Any reasonable person knows this is not possible. Light does come from the sun. If a glass of deadly poison were placed in front of you, would you drink it? According to Mark16:18 it would not hurt you. As for the portraits of Christ most of us have seen, given the time and place Christ is supposed to have lived, he was not a caucassion. These are just a few of the many things wrong with Christanity. Please don't tell me to read Bible verses for "proof". Considering the above "facts " from it how can any of it be believed?

[Bridget_Elaine]

Ooohh... so someone wants to start the religion debate!!  LOL... only kidding.  I do believe in God and the Holy Trinity, The Father the son and Holy Ghost.  I was raised independent fundamental baptist, but I do believe they are one of the most hypocritical religions out there.  I felt very... looked down on... in many churches.  Now I am more southern baptist but still believe more on the ind. fund. side of the things.  I don't think my beliefs are superior to others, although, I will argue back my beliefs if I don't agree.  It's just how I feel and I will find everything I can to back up what I say.  I do believe you have a freedom to believe what you want to believe, therefore I won't push my religion on you and would expect you to do the same!!!  In saying that.... God Bless America!!!  In God We Trust!!!!

[liljp617]

In God We Trust!!!!

Out of sheer curiosity, do you believe the statement above being the US's official national motto is pushing a belief on countless numbers of US citizens who want no part in it (not only in terms of people who do not associate with any religion, but also in terms of people who practice something besides Christianity or Judaism)?

With freedom of religion comes freedom from religion, be it freedom from all religion or freedom from a specific religion.  Is that statement being our motto not an unfair, biased promotion of one religion over all others?  Is there any logical reason we have gone against a very specific (and important) detail laid out in our nation's foundation?

[lightstar240]

In God We Trust!!!!

Out of sheer curiosity, do you believe the statement above being the US's official national motto is pushing a belief on countless numbers of US citizens who want no part in it (not only in terms of people who do not associate with any religion, but also in terms of people who practice something besides Christianity or Judaism)?

With freedom of religion comes freedom from religion, be it freedom from all religion or freedom from a specific religion.  Is that statement being our motto not an unfair, biased promotion of one religion over all others?  Is there any logical reason we have gone against a very specific (and important) detail laid out in our nation's foundation?

No, and no. The founding fathers of America, DID trust in God. But if this is truly a country that has "freedom of/from religion", then there is nothing wrong with that.

[liljp617]

In God We Trust!!!!

Out of sheer curiosity, do you believe the statement above being the US's official national motto is pushing a belief on countless numbers of US citizens who want no part in it (not only in terms of people who do not associate with any religion, but also in terms of people who practice something besides Christianity or Judaism)?

With freedom of religion comes freedom from religion, be it freedom from all religion or freedom from a specific religion.  Is that statement being our motto not an unfair, biased promotion of one religion over all others?  Is there any logical reason we have gone against a very specific (and important) detail laid out in our nation's foundation?

No, and no. The founding fathers of America, DID trust in God. But if this is truly a country that has "freedom of/from religion", then there is nothing wrong with that.

I think it's worth keeping in mind that the current national slogan was put in place in 1956 as a sort of propaganda-esque tool to separate the "glorious west" from the "evil Soviet Union."  It was not put in place by the Founding Fathers as a token of their "trust" in the Christian God.  I'm sure you know this, just making note of it in case others who read the posts don't.

Let's keep the details clear here as well:  Very few, if any, of the Founding Fathers "trusted God" being involved with the government they were presently laying out.  Many of them (including a number of the significant names in our US history books) were adamantly opposed to having any religion what so ever interconnected with the government.  This includes Founders who openly proclaimed their Christian faith.  Others were opposed to having religion or any creator involved in the founding in any way (Thomas Paine for instance).  Many were deists, some were atheists, some were theists.  But importantly, the overwhelming majority of them were, regardless of personal theology, secularists.

I don't think there's any debate surrounding the idea that the consensus among the Founders was one of keeping the federal and state governments from promoting a specific religion over all others, or promoting any religion as the national/state religion.

The legislature of New Hampshire proposed:

Congress shall make no laws touching religion, or to infringe the rights of conscience.

Virginia felt similar:

That religion, or the duty which we owe to our Creator, and the manner of discharging it, can be directed only by reason and conviction, not by force or violence, and therefore all men have an equal, natural and unalienable right to the exercise of religion according to the dictates of conscience, and that no particular sect or society ought to be favored or established by law in preference to others.

Thomas Jefferson, who we should remember was a self-proclaimed avid follower of Christ's teachings (although I don't think he would be considered much of a Christian in today's world):

Believing with you that religion is a matter which lies solely between man and his god, [the people, in the 1st Amendment,] declared that their legislature should make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof, thus building a wall of separation between church and state.

But back to the overall question:  Is the national motto, put in place in 1956, the federal government's promotion of a specific religion, or in any way a step toward setting the appearance of a national religion?  Does it infringe upon a specific principle the nation was clearly founded on, that is, the federal/state government is prohibited from passing any legislation that promotes a specific religion?

Legislation, prepared by the national government, stating "In God We Trust" IS a promotion of Christianity.  It was meant to be a promotion of Christianity, and understandably given the historical context.  By placing ourselves on the side of this "moral, infallible God" and Christianity, the US created a light/dark setting surrounding the Cold War.  The Russians were "evil, godless, immoral Communists" and we were the "saviors of the world" with our God-given democracy.

We are not a "nation under God," we are not a "Christian nation," we are not a nation that was intended to have its national government promoting any specific religion.  We are a nation that recognizes theocratic-esque governments are not good governments.  We are a nation that recognizes the wall between church and state is a crucial wall to our success.  We are a nation founded by, first and foremost, secularists who recognized that they did not want to be the repeat of the country they seceded from.

I think that takes care of your second sentence.  If this is truly a nation of freedom of/from religion, then the federal government's promotion of a specific religion IS a problem.  A significant one.

[Stealth3si]

As for the portraits of Christ most of us have seen, given the time and place Christ is supposed to have lived, he was not a caucassion.

All artists use artistic license.

Considering the above "facts " from it how can any of it be believed?

By taking the biblical doctrines of Creation or Incarnation seriously.

[Stealth3si]

God Bless America!!!  In God We Trust!!!!

Out of sheer curiosity, what do you, as a Christian, actually mean when you say this?

[Stealth3si]

In God We Trust!!!!

Out of sheer curiosity, do you believe the statement above being the US's official national motto is pushing a belief on countless numbers of US citizens who want no part in it (not only in terms of people who do not associate with any religion, but also in terms of people who practice something besides Christianity or Judaism)?

With freedom of religion comes freedom from religion, be it freedom from all religion or freedom from a specific religion.  Is that statement being our motto not an unfair, biased promotion of one religion over all others?  Is there any logical reason we have gone against a very specific (and important) detail laid out in our nation's foundation?

In terms of meta narratives, America is intrinsically much more Enlightenment than Christian...so I don't think there is any logical reason for this "oxymoron" but historically, there is.

[Stealth3si]

No, and no. The founding fathers of America, DID trust in God. But if this is truly a country that has "freedom of/from religion", then there is nothing wrong with that.

But if I may offer my personal rant in a tangeant of the problem you pointed out, the simple fact is that this is America, so if we (Christians) want to "win it back" then it must be as Americans, not as Christians.

But who is saying America is God's Kingdom on Earth, it is "our" holy nation and trying to "Christianize" America?

Nobody. It's just non-Christians. And of course we think that non-Christians must not be American, because America is God's Kingdom, right?

Wrong because we worship the great pagan god America we believe in the American story that it has always understood itself as God's Kingdom on Earth, and so we think we should "win back America."

Can America be conquered by God's Kingdom? Sure, I imagine that that is possible. But why are so we busy trying to take control of America by America's means when we should be taking part in God's redemption of the world in the Church by God's means?

The "Christian" and American right movement in the Culture War (pushing their agenda to restore America to its "Christian roots") doesn't exactly make us look good to the world, of course, but as non-Christian Americans, I think.

When you commit the Church to being identified with an American history, it had better be right. (Say, for instance, "We inherited God's land" Of course, that's also basic theology.) The problem is that in this case the "Christian" and American agenda has no such hope.

What is the result? First of all, the Church looks very stupid. We're trying to play the world's game and we're just doing a worse job at it. If you want to be openly mocked, for good reason, have the arrogance to push the 'right movement.' Second, and more importantly, Christians are revealed for the arrogant bigots that we are. We don't like the fact that somebody else is "winning" the American ratrace, so we've got to fight back. And if the misled souls can do anything, they can smell a flimsy power play like this one. They know we're just trying to enlist the American government to aid us in our quest for power over our enemies. This may make people within the Church feel good about themselves, but it certainly won't tell the world that we are a people of the peace of Christ who are out for the good of the world.

What this tells the world is that we define ourselves against "the other," and "the other" is them. We don't define ourselves by the Christ who is our Head. We don't define ourselves as the ones called out to serve the world. We define ourselves as the ones who are battling "The Democrats" "The Secularists" or "The Atheists" or whatever. But our battle is with the principalities and powers, not merely the Democrats or Secularists. Battles with the Democrats or Atheists are for people trying to participate in the American story, not a Christian one.

So, mock away, atheists, and feel free to express your fear of Christians. We're crazy.

[eSineM]

http://www.zeitgeistmovie.com/

1st part
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_dmPchuXIXQ

http://www.zeitgeistmovie.com/sources.htm

[Stealth3si]

http://www.zeitgeistmovie.com/

1st part
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_dmPchuXIXQ

http://www.zeitgeistmovie.com/sources.htm

http://www.preventingtruthdecay.org/zeitgeistpartone.shtml

I was shocked by how poor the scholarship is - besides many outright lies in it, the narrator/creator shows little to no grasp of the concept of shifting incarnations of divinity that the Egyptian religion had. I can go into further detail if anyone requires, but do yourself a favor and ignore “new age beliefs” from “Zeitgeist” - or use its blatant falsehoods to kindle an interest in Egyptian mythology.