[Old Tom]

Re: Salem 1692 God's will was done. Then what happened? Liberals!

It tells me that you are some kind of commie, godless, gay, history revisionist who likes to cherry pick facts in a pathetic attempt to make some kind of obscure, feeble point.

Shoo demon!

Here are some more cherry-picked facts. Thomas Jefferson literally cut up his Bible with scissors, excising all the miracles, including Our Lord's ressurrection. Thomas Paine, the first man to use the phrase "the United States of America" in print, was asked on his deathbed to accept the fact that Jesus Christ was the Son of God. He replied, "I refuse to accept any such thing." George Washington attended church regularly but never, ever took communion. When reproached by a deacon for this practice, Washington... never attended church again.

I challenge you to find one single solitary example of a Founding Father or a signatory to the Constitution of the United States of America who believed in both of the following bedrock principles of true Christianity: baptism of the believer and eternal security. Try as you might, you won't find him. But on the other hand, ask me to name Founders and signatories who believed that Jesus was not Divine and/ or that everyone goes to Heaven? I could pour out names by the hatful.

Look: I wish that our country were founded on Christian principles- I wish it with all my heart. But it just wasn't. It's universally acknowleged in our day that the First Amendment permits blasphemy. Would you seriously contend that there is a "right" to blaspheme? That's absurd- no one has a "right" to disobey God. As this ridiculous left-of-Marx administration implodes, we have a unique opportunity to remake this nation on the principles of true Christianity. But pretending that it's already something that it patently ain't is unhelpful, to say the least.

[Pastor Ezekiel]

Re: Salem 1692 God's will was done. Then what happened? Liberals!

I don't think that Karl Marx was even born back in those days, friend. You aren't making much sense.

It is obvious that America is God's favorite country.

God wants us to be richly rewarded for our faith.

2 Samuel 22:21
The LORD rewarded me according to my righteousness: according to the cleanness of my hands hath he recompensed me.

2 Chronicles 15:7
Be ye strong therefore, and let not your hands be weak: for your work shall be rewarded.

Psalm 31:23
O love the LORD, all ye his saints: for the LORD preserveth the faithful, and plentifully rewardeth the proud doer.

The United States is the single most powerful and wealthy nation in the world. Jesus has been guiding us from day one, pal. He got this land back from the injuns who pre-stole it from us in the first place.

[David Goldman]

Re: Salem 1692 God's will was done. Then what happened? Liberals!

I challenge you to find one single solitary example of a Founding Father or a signatory to the Constitution of the United States of America who believed in both of the following bedrock principles of true Christianity: baptism of the believer and eternal security.

I don't usually feed the trolls, but a statement like that is just begging for retribution. So let's ask these founding fathers, in their own words.
John Adams:

The general principles on which the fathers achieved independence were. . . . the general principles of Christianity. . . . I will avow that I then believed, and now believe, that those general principles of Christianity are as eternal and immutable as the existence and attributes of God; and that those principles of liberty are as unalterable as human nature.

Twenty times in the course of my late reading have I been on the point of breaking out, "This would be the best of all possible worlds, if there were no religion at all!!!" But in this exclamation I would have been as fanatical as Bryant or Cleverly. Without religion, this world would be something not fit to be mentioned in polite company, I mean hell.

Jesus is benevolence personified, an example for all men. . . . The Christian religion, in its primitive purity and simplicity, I have entertained for more than sixty years. It is the religion of reason, equity, and love; it is the religion of the head and the heart.

Samuel Adams

The right to freedom being the gift of the Almighty...The rights of the colonists as Christians...may be best understood by reading and carefully studying the institutions of The Great Law Giver and Head of the Christian Church, which are to be found clearly written and promulgated in the New Testament.

Principally, and first of all, I resign my soul to the Almighty Being who gave it, and my body I commit to the dust, relying on the merits of Jesus Christ for the pardon of my sins.

Alexander Hamilton

In my opinion, the present constitution is the standard to which we are to cling. Under its banner bona fide must we combat our political foes, rejecting all changes but through the channel itself provided for amendments. By these general views of the subject have my reflections been guided. I now offer you the outline of the plan they have suggested. Let an association be formed to be denominated "The Christian Constitutional Society," its object to be first: The support of the Christian religion. second: The support of the United States.

I have a tender reliance on the mercy of the Almighty, through the merits of the Lord Jesus Christ. I am a sinner. I look to Him for mercy; pray for me.

Patrick Henry

Amongst other strange things said of me, I hear it is said by the deists that I am one of the number; and indeed, that some good people think I am no Christian. This thought gives me much more pain than the appellation of Tory; because I think religion of infinitely higher importance than politics; and I find much cause to reproach myself that I have lived so long, and have given no decided and public proofs of my being a Christian. But, indeed, my dear child, this is a character which I prize far above all this world has, or can boast.

This is all the inheritance I give to my dear family. The religion of Christ will give them one which will make them rich indeed.

John Jay

I have long been of opinion that the evidence of the truth of Christianity requires only to be carefully examined to produce conviction in candid minds. . . .
While in France . . . I do not recollect to have had more than two conversations with atheists about their tenets. The first was this: I was at a large party, of which were several of that description. They spoke freely and contemptuously of religion. I took no part in the conversation. In the course of it, one of them asked me if I believed in Christ? I answered that I did, and that I thanked God that I did.

George Washington

Bless my family, kindred, friends and country, be our God & guide this day and for ever for his sake, who lay down in the Grave and arose again for us, Jesus Christ our Lord, Amen.

in and for the sacrifice of Jesus Christ offered upon the cross for me; for his sake, ease me of the burden of my sins, and give me grace that by the call of the Gospel I may rise from the slumber of sin into the newness of life.

Let me live according to those holy rules which thou hast this day prescribed in thy holy word; make me to know what is acceptable in thy holy word; make me to know what is acceptable in thy sight, and therein to delight, open the eyes of my understanding, and help me thoroughly to examine myself concerning my knowledge, faith and repentance, increase my faith, and direct me to the true object Jesus Christ the way, the truth and the life, bless O Lord, all the people of this land, from the highest to the lowest, particularly those whom thou has appointed to rule over us in church & state. continue thy goodness to me this night. These weak petitions I humbly implore thee to hear accept and ans. for the sake of thy Dear Son Jesus Christ our Lord, Amen.

You do well to wish to learn our arts and our ways of life and above all, the religion of Jesus Christ. These will make you a greater and happier people than you are. Congress will do everything they can to assist you in this wise intention.

I could go on and on, but as you see this is like shooting fish in a barrel. Were some people like Thomas Jefferson Deists rather than True Christians™? Yes, and so what? God can and does use any leader for his purpose, even the most hated atheists or anti-Christians. Clearly a significant number of the founding fathers were Christian, and a majority believed in God and in the principles of a Godly nation.

Your history revisionist trash is just Satan's latest attempt to hijack the USA for his own sick ends. She is the last bastion of Godliness in the world, and she won't go down without a fight.

[Isabella Abbey]

Re: Salem 1692 God's will was done. Then what happened? Liberals!

You describe these things as both as “patterns” and “unfortunate moments”, now I suggest they are one or the other, witchcraft fits perfectly your idea of patterns; patterns typical of the work of Satan.

You suggest that “occult craftwork” is something “that we can't see, prove or document” Yet I have given prime examples and you have given even more of witchcraft!

Do I really need to tell you that not being able to see, prove or document something, neither proves nor disproves its existence? Absence of evidence is not evidence of absence.

I agree, but existence of evidence is evidence of existence. And while Occam's Razor from a far-sighted, sweeping standpoint might offer support for the assertion that there is one cause (witchcraft) for all adverse phenomenon, a more cautious and itemized application of the same logical paradigm permits only one conclusion -- that things are caused by what seems to cause them. And that would be the things that we can see, document and prove.

Which would free up all sorts of time and energy squandered on punishing people, suspects, who didn't do anything wrong, wouldn't it?

[Isabella Abbey]

Re: Salem 1692 God's will was done. Then what happened? Liberals!

the injuns who pre-stole it from us in the first place.

( ...how does that work?....... )

[David Goldman]

Re: Salem 1692 God's will was done. Then what happened? Liberals!

( ...how does that work?....... )

Like the Israelites going into Canaan. God promised that land to them, but a bunch of idol worshipping giants had the audacity to move there anyway. Try to thwart God, and suffer the consequences.
Joshua 1

1Now after the death of Moses the servant of the LORD it came to pass, that the LORD spake unto Joshua the son of Nun, Moses' minister, saying,
2Moses my servant is dead; now therefore arise, go over this Jordan, thou, and all this people, unto the land which I do give to them, even to the children of Israel.
3Every place that the sole of your foot shall tread upon, that have I given unto you, as I said unto Moses.
4From the wilderness and this Lebanon even unto the great river, the river Euphrates, all the land of the Hittites, and unto the great sea toward the going down of the sun, shall be your coast.
5There shall not any man be able to stand before thee all the days of thy life: as I was with Moses, so I will be with thee: I will not fail thee, nor forsake thee.

[Old Tom]

Re: Salem 1692 God's will was done. Then what happened? Liberals!

That's an impressive list of quotes. I showed them to a Roman Catholic, a Mormon, a Jehovah's Witness, and a Unitarian Universalist- they all liked them too, and asked me to extend their gratitude. Would you now care to respond to, like, what I actually said?

I challenge you to find one single solitary example of a Founding Father or a signatory to the Constitution of the United States of America who believed in both of the following bedrock principles of true Christianity: baptism of the believer and eternal security.

I acknowledged that Jay, Hamilton, and Adams may have been Christians, albeit very immature ones. George Washington did espouse Christianity, but he "went out from us" and died a Deist. Patrick Henry wasn't a founder or a signatory- in fact, he was an outspoken opponent of the Constitution.

Let me be perfectly clear: yes, we are a Christian people and, God willing, we'll defend that identity. However, this is in spite of our secular founders' intentions. Article VI, Section 3 of the Constitution reads,

The Senators and Representatives before mentioned, and the Members of the several State Legislatures, and all executive and judicial Officers, both of the United States and of the several States, shall be bound by Oath or Affirmation, to support this Constitution; but no religious test shall ever be required as a qualification to any office or public trust under the United States.

This sentiment ought be alien to a Christian nation. If candidates for public office and the judiciary were first vetted by conservative true Christian pastors, would we be engaged in this manifestly absurd controversy over gay marriage? I think not...

[David Goldman]

Re: Salem 1692 God's will was done. Then what happened? Liberals!

Let me be perfectly clear: yes, we are a Christian people and, God willing, we'll defend that identity. However, this is in spite of our secular founders' intentions. Article VI, Section 3 of the Constitution reads,

The Senators and Representatives before mentioned, and the Members of the several State Legislatures, and all executive and judicial Officers, both of the United States and of the several States, shall be bound by Oath or Affirmation, to support this Constitution; but no religious test shall ever be required as a qualification to any office or public trust under the United States.

The intent of the founding fathers can be found in Amendment 2:

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof;

It wasn't to "protect government from religion", quite the opposite -- it was to protect religious freedom from government interference, and to prevent an official STATE religion like the Anglican Church. The intent of the founding fathers can also been seen with their copious references to God in the federalist papers and the Declaration of Independence.

We are a government of the people, by the people and for the people. yet when the people exercise their Godly and lawful rights to legislate a prohibition against gay marriage, history revisionists twist the original intent of freedom of religion into "freedom from religion" to promote all sorts of heinous "lifestyle choices" and block said legislation.

You guys dream of some sort of godless state and fantasize that the founding fathers felt the same. Too bad for you, that is not the case. They intended to establish a Godly state and to protect it from heathen and godless scum. And their intent succeeded for a long time, until it started getting chipped away bit by bit. And now you try to pull the coup de grâce, and claim that godlessness was the intent all along. Nice try, but you are not there yet. Try again after the rapture.

[Old Tom]

Re: Salem 1692 God's will was done. Then what happened? Liberals!

The intent of the founding fathers can be found in Amendment 2:

It wasn't to "protect government from religion", quite the opposite -- it was to protect religious freedom from government interference, and to prevent an official STATE religion like the Anglican Church.

It was both, obviously.

The intent of the founding fathers can also been seen with their copious references to God in the federalist papers and the Declaration of Independence.

A lot of God-talk (like the quotes you posted above) is all well and good, but by and large they didn't know the Lord. That would explain the Deism and the Universalism and the denying-Christ-on-your-deathbed stuff.

We are a government of the people, by the people and for the people.

What people? May I remind you who sits in the White House and occupies the Chair of the Speaker of the House of Representatives?

Yet when the people exercise their Godly and lawful rights to legislate a prohibition against gay marriage, history revisionists twist the original intent of freedom of religion into "freedom from religion" to promote all sorts of heinous "lifestyle choices" and block said legislation.

Thomas Jefferson was not a Christian. This is not revisionism. The Constitution forbids lawful authorities from preventing Mormons and Jehovah's Witnesses from proselytizing. This is not revisionism. The problem is not philosophical differences over the courts' role in the gay marriage debate. The problem is the fact that the matter is even open to discussion. However "Godly" you believe the Constitution to be, it's not Godly enough, obviously. Mr. Goldman: it's a political document. That's all. It isn't sacred. It's OK to critique it and even want it amended (or ripped out, root and branch).

You guys dream of some sort of godless state and fantasize that the founding fathers felt the same. Too bad for you, that is not the case.

Are you looking through some sort of dimensional rift and reading posts by Bizzarro Old Tom? None of the founders or signatories were atheists. Of course their political ideas were driven by their religious beliefs. It's just that their beliefs were wrong, you see, so their ideas were out of whack.

They intended to establish a Godly state and to protect it from heathen...

Sir: for the most part, they were heathens themselves...

and godless scum. And their intent succeeded for a long time, until it started getting chipped away bit by bit.

It's really a shame that I don't have time to do this justice, but I disagree. As I've said, we're a Christian people, although you wouldn't guess it from watching prime time television. American culture was quite shockingly Godless from the time of the Revolution until the 1820's. There was quite a dip which began in the 1890's and lasted a couple of decades. And of course, our current slump began about 45 years ago. Holiness comes and goes, here and there, in fits and starts. When it comes, it's always in spite of, never because of, our government.

And now you try to pull the coup de grâce, and claim that godlessness was the intent all along. Nice try, but you are not there yet. Try again after the rapture.

There's that Bizzarro Old Tom again. This one won't be here after the Rapture, thank God. I think I see your problem, though. Our culture is wildly subjectivist and you're letting it seep in. Iran is a "Godly" nation, except the God is false. Still, they don't have these discussions because their revolutionary constitution makes the state's role as protecter of religion clear. That's what I'd like, but comparing me with Islamist revolutionaries is a subjectivist false equivalency. Objectively speaking, we are right: Evangelical Christianity is the true revealed religion, and should be so treated at both the individual and state level. I strongly believe that, in this nation where anti-Darwinism polls at over 50% despite the leading way in which the questions are posed, I speak for a substantive majority.

The Constitution of the United States of America is an un-American document. It should be scrapped.

[David Goldman]

Re: Salem 1692 God's will was done. Then what happened? Liberals!

The Constitution of the United States of America is an un-American document. It should be scrapped.

Well on that we can agree. And there is a candidate that can do just that: Mike Huckabee:

"[Some of my opponents] do not want to change the Constitution, but I believe it's a lot easier to change the constitution than it would be to change the word of the living God, and that's what we need to do is to amend the Constitution so it's in God's standards rather than try to change God's standards,"

It is either that, or start from scratch with a constitutional convention. I'm game for either one.

[Old Tom]

Re: Salem 1692 God's will was done. Then what happened? Liberals!

A pre-emptive rebuttal: politics is the art of the possible. We're not going to get anything done without the Catholics, and we're not going to get the Catholics' support if we continually reprove them for their shockingly-blasphemous heresies. There are times and places where that's appropriate and helpful; the process I am about to propose is not one of them. Similarly, we may have strong disagreements on the perpetuation of the Gifts of the Spirit. We should air those disagreements vigorously... outside of the context of what follows.

I believe the solution is quite simple: we need to establish a body of Godly, faithful Christians (and heretics who can be counted on to vote like Godly, faithful Christians). Men and women like Pat Robertson, Mike Huckabee, and Sarah Palin spring to mind. As stated, barring a hitherto-unseen wave of conversions (may it please the Lord) Catholics such as Alan Keyes and Bobby Jindal would have to be included.

Then, a Constitutional Amendment would be crafted that essentially constituted this body as the fourth branch of government. Its duty would be to vet any candidate for public office and any judicial appointee above the county level. This would absolutely include current officeholders; I'd expect quite a few people to be shown the door within hours after this body begins its deliberations. This body would be wholly-independent, appointing its own successors.

There's a two-fold beauty here. First of all, the Supreme Court can't overrule an Amendment, which would amount to finding the Constitution unconstitutional. This removes a huge enemy of traditional American values from the field. Secondly, Constitutional amendments are the last anti-Federalist, pro-State process we have left. You need a simple majority in the legislatures of thirty-eight states. We can just ignore populous Liberal behemoths like New York and California and work to convince the Dakotas and the Iowas that this proposed body would be in their interest. This extends to the state level as well- for example, we need 135 Texas State Legislators. Don't worry about the three or four Darwinist Democrats from Austin.

It's very doable. Then, we'd be able to create a truly Christian nation within the confines of our very flawed Constitution. The law is a matter of interpretation and, as we are constantly reminded, the Constitution is a living document. Well, some laws, like the case law that affords First Amendment protection from blasphemy, is going the way of the Dred Scott decision...

[Once was lost]

Re: Salem 1692 God's will was done. Then what happened? Liberals!

Looking back at that great Era in Christian history in our new world (Salem) i can't help but sometimes feel a tad disappointed. Was justice truly served? Nineteen were hanged,one crushed to death by stones and a few died in prison but not one was burnt at the Stake! I keep asking myself,why was no one burnt alive? This has always bothered me.

Exodus 22:18 "Thou must not suffer a witch to live."

[eliot mayfield]

Re: Salem 1692 God's will was done. Then what happened? Liberals!

Looking back at that great Era in Christian history in our new world (Salem) i can't help but sometimes feel a tad disappointed. Was justice truly served? Nineteen were hanged,one crushed to death by stones and a few died in prison but not one was burnt at the Stake! I keep asking myself,why was no one burnt alive? This has always bothered me.

Exodus 22:18 "Thou must not suffer a witch to live."

I figure there just wasn't enough firewood. They were still building the town and furniture and stuff.

[Isabella Abbey]

Re: Salem 1692 God's will was done. Then what happened? Liberals!

Then, a Constitutional Amendment would be crafted

Hi, Tom. Who would be crafting this Amendment? To date, the electorate has been pretty skittish about putting a voting majority of religious extremists in the legislature.

Another option is to live and let live, and every congregation gets a church, and every flock can draft its own charter as creatively as it likes, as long as it doesn't violate secular laws. That protects all of us, Baptists, Bibliophiles and Babies and all, from the extremist ideals from OTHER flocks.

Isn't life splendid?

[David Goldman]

Re: Salem 1692 God's will was done. Then what happened? Liberals!

A pre-emptive rebuttal . . . (lawyer stuff snipped)

That is all way too complicated. What we need is something simple, like a little more frontier and community justice.

Another option is to live and let live, and every congregation gets a church, and every flock can draft . . . (hippie stuff snipped)

That's way too complicated (and unrealistic) as well. All you'd need is 2 or 3 witches to form their own community, and all of a sudden they are a local majority. That's no good. It is much simpler to just pluck them up and weed them out as the odd one appears.

Look, there is no good reason to be performing witchcraft, especially in today's technological era. Anyone caught practicing witchcraft is in reality guilty of gross stupidity. Getting them out of the gene pool makes sense, even to a secular humanist. Witch burning just seems to be a win-win kind of thing.