Here are some more...I like particularly John Wesley's logic.
It is impossible to rightly govern the world without God and the Bible.” George Washington
“I am sorry for men who do not read the Bible every day. I wonder why they deprive themselves of the strength and pleasure.” Woodrow Wilson
“Hold fast to the Bible as the sheet anchor of your liberties, write its precepts on your hearts and practice them in your lives.” Ulysses S. Grant
“The Bible is a book in comparison with which all others are of minor importance, and which in all my perplexities and distresses has never failed to give me light and strength.” Robert E. Lee
“If we will not be governed by God, then we will be ruled by tyrants.” William Penn
“The more profoundly we study this wonderful book [the Bible], and the more closely we observe its divine precepts, the better citizens we will become and the higher will be our destiny as a nation.” William McKinley
“Education is useless without the Bible.” Daniel Webster
“A thorough understanding of the Bible is better than a college education.” Theodore Roosevelt
“That Book (the Bible) is the rock on which our Republic rests.” Andrew Jackson
“It is necessary for the welfare of the nation that men's lives be based on the principles of the Bible. No man, educated or uneducated, can afford to be ignorant of the Bible.” Theodore Roosevelt
“If there is anything in my thoughts or style to commend, the credit is due to my parents for instilling in me an early love of the Scriptures. If we abide by the principles taught in the Bible, our country will go on prospering and to prosper; but if we and our posterity neglect its instructions and authority, no man can tell how sudden a catastrophe may overwhelm us and bury all our glory in profound obscurity.” Daniel Webster
“I have a fundamental belief in the Bible as the Word of God, written by men who were inspired. I study the Bible daily.” Sir Isaac Newton
“Those who sacrifice essential liberty for temporary safety are not deserving of either liberty or safety.” Ben Franklin
“Our constitution was made only for a moral and religious people...so great is my veneration of the Bible that the earlier my children begin to read, the more confident will be my hope that they will prove useful citizens in their country and respectful members of society.” John Adams
“It is impossible to mentally or socially enslave a Bible reading people. The principles of the Bible are the groundwork of human freedom.” Horace Greeley
“Believe me, sir, never a night goes by, be I ever so tired, but I read the Word of God before I go to bed.” Douglas MacArthur
Scriptures.” Sir Ambrose Flemming
“To the influence of this Book we are indebted for the progress made in civilization, and to this we must look as our guide in the future.” Ulysses S. Grant
“England has two books; the Bible and Shakespeare. England made Shakespeare, but the Bible made England.” Victor Hugo
“No lawyer can afford to be ignorant of the Bible.” Rufus Choate
“It has been my custom for many years to read the Bible in its entirety once a year“ John Quincy Adams
“Of the many influences that have shaped the United States into a distinctive nation and people, none may be said to be more fundamental and enduring than the Bible.” Ronald Reagan
“I believe that the Bible is to be understood and received in the plain and obvious meaning of its passages; for I cannot persuade myself that a book intended for the instruction and conversion of the whole world should cover its true meaning in any such mystery and doubt that none but critics and philosophers can discover it.” Daniel Webster
“This book had to be written by one of three people: good men, bad men or God. It couldn’t have been written by good men because they said it was inspired by the revelation of God. Good men don’t lie and deceive. It couldn’t have been written by bad men because bad men would not write something that would condemn themselves. It leaves only one conclusion. It was given by divine inspiration of God.” John Wesley
“People say that the Bible is a boring book…but they don’t say that about Shakespeare, because the people who teach Shakespeare are zealous for Shakespeare.” Malcolm Muggeridge
“Almost every man who has by his lifework added to the sum of human achievement . . . has based his life-work largely upon the teachings of the Bible.” Theodore Roosevelt
“All Scripture is God-breathed and He doesn’t waste His breath.” Jim McCotter
“Tell your prince that this book is the secret of England's success.” Queen Elizabeth
“The fundamental basis of this nation's law was given to Moses on the Mount. The fundamental basis of our Bill of Rights comes from the teaching we get from Exodus and St. Matthew, from Isaiah and St. Paul. I don't think we emphasize that enough these days. If we don't have the proper fundamental moral background, we will finally end up with a totalitarian government which does not believe in the right for anybody except the state.” Harry S. Truman
“There is no other book so various as the Bible, nor one so full of concentrated wisdom. Whether it be of law, business, morals, etc.... He who seeks for guidance ... may look inside its covers and find illumination.”
Herbert Hoover
“A single line in the Bible has consoled me more than all the books I ever read besides.” Immanuel Kant
“I have known ninety-five of the world's great men in my time, and of these eighty-seven were followers of the Bible.” W. E. Gladstone
There is only one of the statements in Belle's post that I really agree with--the one that says people are leaving church and finding God. But I have a feeling it doesn't mean the same to me as it did to him!
I find it interesting that both Robert E. Lee and Ulysses S. Grant both laud the Bible for it's accuracy and wisdom and yet these two were both principal players in the worst bloodletting slaughter in American History.
Here's another well known, yet erroneous quote thats bandied about by those who think that this country was founded on the Bible:
It cannot be emphasized too strongly or too often that this great nation was founded not by religionists, but by Christians; not on religions, but on the gospel of Jesus Christ!
The fundamental basis of this nation's law was given to Moses on the Mount. The fundamental basis of our Bill of Rights comes from the teaching we get from Exodus and St. Matthew, from Isaiah and St. Paul.
The fundamental basis for Moses Law is "I am the Lord Thy God". That _alone_ disqualifies the Constitution, particularly when you consider the 1st Amendment (ie., "Congress shall make no law regarding the establishment of religion, nor shall prohibit the free exercise thereof".), from being based on the Law of Moses. Same principle applies to the bill of rights as not being based upon "teaching we get from Exodus and St. Matthew, from Isaiah and St. Paul".
If anything, the entire document of the Constitution is based upon the ideals and principles of the Enlightenment period, much of which had conflict with the Bible, the church, and religion in many respects. Do an indepth study of that period to see what I mean.
Snopes has an agenda and everything they put out is NOT accurate.
The quotes, in and of themselves, are the opinions of the individual speaking them, and had little to do with the founding of the nation. I think if you found an HONEST source, you'd find the Patrick Henry quote to be accurate, but looking further, you'd find that Patrick Henry was not only a devout Christian, but a devout anti federalist and opposed the constitutional convention.
Washington believed very strongly in a supreme being, but never, as far as I know, endorsed Christianity.
Belief in a supreme being is central to Washingtons activities in other endeavours apart from his political or military life, yet it would entwinw through everything he was and everything he did.
Harry Truman was also engaged in the "extra curricular" activities that Washington was engaged in as are a few on this very forum.
I have to admit, however, that that Truman quote is new to me, but as I recall, the nations founding had been pretty much accomplished by the time Truman came along, so such a quote would have nothing to do with the principles upon which the nation was founded.
Belief in a supreme being is central to the founding of our nation in that natural rights MUST come from a higher source than the state. Thus, the Bill of Rights is, in theory, inviolate. This is why the socialist left seeks to destroy God in the public forum. Without God, there are no unalienable rights, and without unalianable rights, there can be no individual liberty leaving the people open to socialist economic and social mechanisms.
Unfortunately for the fundie zealots, there is no provision to impose their views on others.
Unfortunately for the secular socialist atheist ACLU zealots, there is no prvision for separating men from God.
I think if you found an HONEST source, you'd find the Patrick Henry quote to be accurate, but looking further, you'd find that Patrick Henry was not only a devout Christian, but a devout anti federalist and opposed the constitutional convention.
Umm, okay, find the honest source that says the Patrick Henry quote is accurate. You note that Snopes has "an agenda" (a laughable assertion clearly coming from someone who doesn't read Snopes). Yet you fail to note that Snopes didn't even make that statement, they are quoting another source, historian David Barton.
About the Author
David Barton is founder and president of WallBuilders, a national pro-family organization which distributes historical, legal, and statistical information, and helps citizens become active in their local schools and communities. He was appointed by the Texas State Board of Education and the California Academic Standards Commission to review their History/Social Studies standards.
David is the recipient of several national and international awards, including the Daughters of the American Revolution Medal of Honor; the George Washington Honor Medal; two Angel Awards for excellence in media and educational medium, many Who's Who, and numerous other awards.
He is the author of numerous books on historical, legal, and educational issues. David is a national conference speaker and a frequent consultant to state and federal legislators.
I know, Amazon.com's "about the author" has an agenda, as does David Barton. Unfortunately for your point, David Barton's agenda would lead him to verify the Patrick Henry misquotation, not to dismiss it. That he dismissed it is telling. That you accept it in the absence of evidence while slandering the source is equally telling.
I guess I've been pondering whether the Bible really is the end all and be all source of all answers. It seems to be fallible and therefore NOT the God breathed word. I also consider that there most likely were political agendas involved with the writing of some of the books as well as the decision on what should be included in the Bible.
Considering the Presidents in Lifted's post - many of them were Diests and also seem to have felt the same way.
Historical and modern Deism is defined by the view that reason, rather than revelation or tradition, should be the basis of belief in God. Deists reject organized/revealed religion and promote reason as the essential element in making moral decisions (but still rationally conclude tolerance of such religions).
This information came from Wikipedia. Not sure about the integrity or lack of agenda there either, but I believe I have read and heard most of this information in other places as well:
Washington – Diest
W Wilson – Presbyterian
Grant – No Religious Affiliation
McKinley –Methodist
T Roosevelt – Dutch Reformed Church
A jackson – Presbyterian
J Adams – Unitarian/Diest
JQ Adams - Unitarian/Diest
Reagan – Disciple of Christ
Freedom of belief: Individual members are free to follow their consciences; they are expected to extend that freedom to others. Members are encouraged to seek guidance from scripture, study, and prayer, but to develop their own opinions about most issues.
Herbert Hoover – Quaker
Early Friends believed that Christ, not the Bible, was the Word of God; for example, according to Robert Barclay the scriptures "are only a declaration of the fountain, and not the fountain itself, therefore they are not to be esteemed the principal ground of all Truth and knowledge, nor yet the adequate primary rule of faith and manners" (Apology prop. 3).
In nearly all cases however, modern Friends believe in the necessity of being continually guided by the inward light. Divine revelation is therefore not restricted to the Bible, but rather continues even today; this doctrine is known as continuing revelation.
"I have always strenuously supported the right of every man to his own opinion, however different that opinion might be to mine. He who denies to another this right, makes a slave of himself to his present opinion, because he precludes himself the right of changing it."
I find it interesting that both Robert E. Lee and Ulysses S. Grant both laud the Bible for it's accuracy and wisdom and yet these two were both principal players in the worst bloodletting slaughter in American History.
Obviously, it worked out real well for them...
I wouldn't knock Grant and Lee, unless you want to knock everyone else who believes the Bible and is not a pacifist. And, maybe you would...I don't know. Either way, here is a quote from another principal player in the same bloodletting you refer to, upon being presented with a Bible...
"In regard to this Great Book, I have but to say, it is the best gift God has given to man. All the good the Savior gave to the world was communicated through this book."
No doubt that Lee and Grant were dedicated, honorable men. But they were on opposing sides of a stuggle, both convinced that they were instruments in the hand of The Almighty (as was Lincoln) and very much set on the destruction of one another. And in the process managed to help kill off several hundred thousand of their fellow citizens.
Maybe it's just me, but I find that to be somewhat ironic, given that the Bible is so often regarded as some sort of roadmap to God's love and contains the words of The Prince of Peace himself. One could hope that whatever guidance they derived from "the Good Book" is not as widely accepted today...
Oh, and yes, Snopes does have an "agenda"! How dare they put that sort of stuff on the internet when I've grown so comfortable with my urban myths!
Paine wrote a great deal and a century later his writings were used as the definative for Deists.
However Many of the founding Fathers lived before Paine, and really did not agree with him much.
To hold up one roman catholic individual as the definative for the entire religion spanning over a 1000 years would also be poor.
I agree that diests generally were strongly against organised religion. They were generally very much against Papal rule. They were also Biblical fundys by todays' standards.
... Considering the Presidents in Lifted's post - many of them were Diests and also seem to have felt the same way.
Historical and modern Deism is defined by the view that reason, rather than revelation or tradition, should be the basis of belief in God. Deists reject organized/revealed religion and promote reason as the essential element in making moral decisions (but still rationally conclude tolerance of such religions).
Reason as coming from focused study of the Bible, rather than a single man's revelations, or the teachings of organized religion (understood to be Papal or Anglican).
...
Washington – Diest ...
J Adams – Unitarian/Diest ...
JQ Adams - Unitarian/Diest ...
This is mis-leading. Unitarians back then was like saying Monotheists, those who beleive in a single diety. Jews were and are Unitarians. TWI is Unitarian. It was not for another hundred years that the Unitarians joined with the Universalists. to say Diest and Unitarian is almost saying the same thing.
The writings of Washington, the prayers of Our Worshipful Past Master geo. Washington, reveal him to be as much a unitarian as diest. He strongly beleived in a single diety, the Creator of the heavens and Earth.
Being famous and/or a historical figure of the past does not, IMO, make the people quoted in my post the authorities on life any more or less than the people quoted in Belle's original post. However, if the purpose of the post was to illustrate what a group of "successful" people believed about God and/or the Bible, I felt some balance would be a good idea.
Promoting these people as the authorities on life and/or Biblical authority, or lack thereof, then pointing out their shortcomings, or anything we don't liek about them, certainly would be an effecient way to discredit anything they say. For example, just speaking for myself, I don't think I would want to guide my life according to the gospel of Stephen King. You apparently would not model your life after Grant and Lee.
However, George, I am not so sure that a quote from, or a story about someone who uses the Bible and Christianity as the basis for his/her pacifism...opposition to war or killing...would bring you any closer to believing that God, Christianity, or the Bible has authority any more than Grant and Lee and the others.
However, if the purpose of the post was to illustrate what a group of "successful" people believed about God and/or the Bible, I felt some balance would be a good idea.
Ya know, Lifted. You foot-U-ME-D the purpose of my post was when I clearly stated it before I even posted the quotes:
I found these while I was pondering and looking around for something and thought they were funny and some true and others thought-provoking....
Then I further clarified my reason for posting the quotes after seeing how you had derailed what I had HOPED the discussion would have been about;
I guess I've been pondering whether the Bible really is the end all and be all source of all answers. It seems to be fallible and therefore NOT the God breathed word. I also consider that there most likely were political agendas involved with the writing of some of the books as well as the decision on what should be included in the Bible.
I NEVER, NEVER, NEVER said that I BELIEVED all of them. NOR did I EVER mention anything about WHO said those things. I DON’T give a rip about who said them. I was more concerned about WHAT was said. It is only proper to give credit to the speaker, that is why their names are included. He11, I don’t even know who half the people are!
Perhaps I should have posted this in the doctrinal section to have gotten the discussion I was hoping for, but so few people wander down there AND I do not want a discussion using “Chapter & Verse” – frankly – it does not help me when I the “pondering” is about the integrity of the Bible to begin with.
I thought about posting in the “About the Way” section, but it wasn’t TWI – Related in any way – except maybe that TWI could be partially responsible for my musings ….. AND the fact that you so aptly illustrated the holier-than-thou-I-don’t-give-a-S H I T-about your-NEEDS/QUESTIONS/CONCERNS-I’m-just-going-to-throw-MY-agenda-down-your-throat attitude we learned in TWI.
We got pretty darn good at reading between the lines and picking up on the double meanings of every thing that was said. Maybe you were one of the people who was really good at talking like that and so project that communication style onto everything you read. I wasn’t and I’m still not. I prefer to plainly and clearly communicate with no double entendres or “ya know what I mean” (wink, wink) messages behind what I say. Maybe you just had a knee-jerk reaction to the quotes, in which case I would have preferred some comments about the contents of the quotes themselves and not merely some rebuttal quotes.
However, George, I am not so sure that a quote from, or a story about someone who uses the Bible and Christianity as the basis for his/her pacifism...opposition to war or killing...would bring you any closer to believing that God, Christianity, or the Bible has authority any more than Grant and Lee and the others.
Then put me in George’s camp, because I’m pretty upset about the direction this thread has taken (primarily thanks to your initial post, Lifted) and if that’s the “Christian” way - to just spew quotes back to someone who has what I consider to be valid concerns….and so wonderfully established by those who merely congratulated and thanked you for your “so there!” response…..then I’ll hang with the curmudgeon’s like George any day. At least he’s up for some dialog.
Galen, thank you for clarifying that for me about the diests. I suppose I should read up some more on them. ;)
Given that there are a lot of quotes, I expected that some people would comment on the one(s) that resonated or struck a chord with them…Here is an example of what I would have liked to have happened:
One man's theology is another man's belly laugh.
Robert A. Heinlein
That’s a funny way to put it, but it’s so true. Remember how we were real good at laughing at the Catholic religion. I know more Catholic “jokes” than I could have imagined thanks to TWI.
I was raised Southern Baptist and I remember hearing jokes about us thinking we were the only ones in Heaven – which I don’t ever remember being taught, but apparently it seems we did think that way and it was funny to everyone else.
Funny how we can justify laughing at others because of what they believe…it’s even funnier when we come around to seeing the validity in some of the things they believe. We can really learn from each other when we quit laughing at and attacking one another’s beliefs.
Things that we took so seriously in TWI are funny to me now..... Happy Ho Ho, "Bless & Treat", "Blessed Eggs", Resurrection Sunday (instead of Easter)....
If we are going to teach creation science as an alternative to evolution, then we should also teach the stork theory as an alternative to biological reproduction.
Judith Hayes
That’s just funny. I don’t care she is or what her “agenda” is, it’s a funny statement….unless you’re so defensive you can’t see the humor in it and laugh at yourself every once in a while.
The biblical account of Noah's Ark and the Flood is perhaps the most implausible story for fundamentalists to defend. Where, for example, while loading his ark, did Noah find penguins and polar bears in Palestine?
Judith Hayes
So how DID Noah get penguins, polar bears, kangaroos and Tasmanian devils into the ark? Interesting question, no?
We are punished by our sins, not for them.
Elbert Hubbard
I think Elbert is onto something there. Some people call it karma….I think that’s what they mean by karma anyway… I mean, aren’t the consequences of our decisions what bites us in the a$$ so many times? We’re our own worst enemy at times. (Please note I did not say ALL THE TIME in either sentence.)
BTW: I only know one Elbert and he was quite a trip! I have no idea who this Elbert is, though. It’s an odd name; I wonder where it comes from.
There seems to be a terrible misunderstanding on the part of a great many people to the effect that when you cease to believe you may cease to behave.
Louis Kronenberger
Believe what? Most religions consider others who don’t believe exactly as they do are flawed, but because they AT LEAST believe in God, they are partially okay, but God forbid someone be atheist, agnostic or – gasp – wiccan! How does not believing in God or believing the Bible is the “inerrant God breathed word” make someone an animal?
This is my simple religion. There is no need for temples; no need for complicated philosophy. Our own brain, our own heart is our temple; the philosophy is kindness.
Dalai Lama
This seems to be where I have arrived in my thinking. I see no profit in dissecting scriptures; spending hours upon hours memorizing or reading scriptures; throwing around “chapter & verse” for every situation; concentrating on so much minutia that life becomes serious, burdensome and dictated by “what does the word say?”. It seems as though an all loving God would make it pretty easy to understand and know what His will is and how we should live. Jesus seems to have summed it up nicely into just two commandments….so why do we have to make it so much more complicated by arguing about whether someone should be baptized to be saved….and should that baptism be by “fire” or by “water” – theoretically or literally…..what exactly ordination is…whether we should tithe and/or how much we should give and where we should give it...etc…
There. That’s just a paltry amount of thoughts and things that came to mind when I read those quotes. THOSE are the kinds of things I preferred to discuss. They don’t require rebuttal quotes that aren’t really relevant when one considers the contents of the quotes, some additional comments, observations and discussions about the original quotes would be nice, but not if the comments are going to be along the same vein of thought as the first response to them.
Recommended Posts
Lifted Up
Here are some more...I like particularly John Wesley's logic.
It is impossible to rightly govern the world without God and the Bible.” George Washington
“I am sorry for men who do not read the Bible every day. I wonder why they deprive themselves of the strength and pleasure.” Woodrow Wilson
“Hold fast to the Bible as the sheet anchor of your liberties, write its precepts on your hearts and practice them in your lives.” Ulysses S. Grant
“The Bible is a book in comparison with which all others are of minor importance, and which in all my perplexities and distresses has never failed to give me light and strength.” Robert E. Lee
“If we will not be governed by God, then we will be ruled by tyrants.” William Penn
“The more profoundly we study this wonderful book [the Bible], and the more closely we observe its divine precepts, the better citizens we will become and the higher will be our destiny as a nation.” William McKinley
“Education is useless without the Bible.” Daniel Webster
“A thorough understanding of the Bible is better than a college education.” Theodore Roosevelt
“That Book (the Bible) is the rock on which our Republic rests.” Andrew Jackson
“It is necessary for the welfare of the nation that men's lives be based on the principles of the Bible. No man, educated or uneducated, can afford to be ignorant of the Bible.” Theodore Roosevelt
“If there is anything in my thoughts or style to commend, the credit is due to my parents for instilling in me an early love of the Scriptures. If we abide by the principles taught in the Bible, our country will go on prospering and to prosper; but if we and our posterity neglect its instructions and authority, no man can tell how sudden a catastrophe may overwhelm us and bury all our glory in profound obscurity.” Daniel Webster
“I have a fundamental belief in the Bible as the Word of God, written by men who were inspired. I study the Bible daily.” Sir Isaac Newton
“Those who sacrifice essential liberty for temporary safety are not deserving of either liberty or safety.” Ben Franklin
“Our constitution was made only for a moral and religious people...so great is my veneration of the Bible that the earlier my children begin to read, the more confident will be my hope that they will prove useful citizens in their country and respectful members of society.” John Adams
“It is impossible to mentally or socially enslave a Bible reading people. The principles of the Bible are the groundwork of human freedom.” Horace Greeley
“Believe me, sir, never a night goes by, be I ever so tired, but I read the Word of God before I go to bed.” Douglas MacArthur
Scriptures.” Sir Ambrose Flemming
“To the influence of this Book we are indebted for the progress made in civilization, and to this we must look as our guide in the future.” Ulysses S. Grant
“England has two books; the Bible and Shakespeare. England made Shakespeare, but the Bible made England.” Victor Hugo
“No lawyer can afford to be ignorant of the Bible.” Rufus Choate
“It has been my custom for many years to read the Bible in its entirety once a year“ John Quincy Adams
“Of the many influences that have shaped the United States into a distinctive nation and people, none may be said to be more fundamental and enduring than the Bible.” Ronald Reagan
“I believe that the Bible is to be understood and received in the plain and obvious meaning of its passages; for I cannot persuade myself that a book intended for the instruction and conversion of the whole world should cover its true meaning in any such mystery and doubt that none but critics and philosophers can discover it.” Daniel Webster
“This book had to be written by one of three people: good men, bad men or God. It couldn’t have been written by good men because they said it was inspired by the revelation of God. Good men don’t lie and deceive. It couldn’t have been written by bad men because bad men would not write something that would condemn themselves. It leaves only one conclusion. It was given by divine inspiration of God.” John Wesley
“People say that the Bible is a boring book…but they don’t say that about Shakespeare, because the people who teach Shakespeare are zealous for Shakespeare.” Malcolm Muggeridge
“Almost every man who has by his lifework added to the sum of human achievement . . . has based his life-work largely upon the teachings of the Bible.” Theodore Roosevelt
“All Scripture is God-breathed and He doesn’t waste His breath.” Jim McCotter
“Tell your prince that this book is the secret of England's success.” Queen Elizabeth
“The fundamental basis of this nation's law was given to Moses on the Mount. The fundamental basis of our Bill of Rights comes from the teaching we get from Exodus and St. Matthew, from Isaiah and St. Paul. I don't think we emphasize that enough these days. If we don't have the proper fundamental moral background, we will finally end up with a totalitarian government which does not believe in the right for anybody except the state.” Harry S. Truman
“There is no other book so various as the Bible, nor one so full of concentrated wisdom. Whether it be of law, business, morals, etc.... He who seeks for guidance ... may look inside its covers and find illumination.”
Herbert Hoover
“A single line in the Bible has consoled me more than all the books I ever read besides.” Immanuel Kant
“I have known ninety-five of the world's great men in my time, and of these eighty-seven were followers of the Bible.” W. E. Gladstone
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Zshot
Lifted Up,
Very nice :)
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Sushi
Christianity is the greatest religion ever invented. Too bad no one's ever practiced it.
Gandhi
Edited by SushiLink to comment
Share on other sites
likeaneagle
lifted up..I applaud their thinking.
Thanks
Edited by likeaeagleLink to comment
Share on other sites
coolchef1248 @adelphia.net
that was very nice thank you
no wonder i believe in the bible
i always thought i was and am a great thinker!
or is that stinker?
but seriously that was nice thanks for shareing
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Psalm 71 one
Thank you, Lifty!
There is only one of the statements in Belle's post that I really agree with--the one that says people are leaving church and finding God. But I have a feeling it doesn't mean the same to me as it did to him!
Link to comment
Share on other sites
GarthP2000
Lifted,
Rather inspiring set of quotes you have there. Too bad the ones dealing with the 'Christian basis' of this country are historically flawed/inaccurate.
But, to each his own.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
George Aar
I find it interesting that both Robert E. Lee and Ulysses S. Grant both laud the Bible for it's accuracy and wisdom and yet these two were both principal players in the worst bloodletting slaughter in American History.
Obviously, it worked out real well for them...
Link to comment
Share on other sites
dmiller
And the Dalai Lama said .....
"A bowl is most useful when it is empty"
Bet he didn't say that at suppertime! ;) :D ;)
Edited by dmillerLink to comment
Share on other sites
Ron G.
Lifted Up...
Thanks for the quotes! They're appreciated.
George...
Grant and Lee were both men of great character and integrity. They were doing their duty as they understood it.
Garth...
Give us ONE example of inaccuracy or mendacity.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
GarthP2000
Ron,
OK! :)
Link that shows the quote to be undocumentedHere's another well known, yet erroneous quote thats bandied about by those who think that this country was founded on the Bible:
Link that shows the quote to be undocumented as well
Also, look at this one:
The fundamental basis for Moses Law is "I am the Lord Thy God". That _alone_ disqualifies the Constitution, particularly when you consider the 1st Amendment (ie., "Congress shall make no law regarding the establishment of religion, nor shall prohibit the free exercise thereof".), from being based on the Law of Moses. Same principle applies to the bill of rights as not being based upon "teaching we get from Exodus and St. Matthew, from Isaiah and St. Paul".
If anything, the entire document of the Constitution is based upon the ideals and principles of the Enlightenment period, much of which had conflict with the Bible, the church, and religion in many respects. Do an indepth study of that period to see what I mean.
Snopes has a really good section dealing with this very topic.
P.S., Ooopsie! I gave 3 examples instead of one. My bad. ;)
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Ron G.
Garth,
Snopes has an agenda and everything they put out is NOT accurate.
The quotes, in and of themselves, are the opinions of the individual speaking them, and had little to do with the founding of the nation. I think if you found an HONEST source, you'd find the Patrick Henry quote to be accurate, but looking further, you'd find that Patrick Henry was not only a devout Christian, but a devout anti federalist and opposed the constitutional convention.
Washington believed very strongly in a supreme being, but never, as far as I know, endorsed Christianity.
Belief in a supreme being is central to Washingtons activities in other endeavours apart from his political or military life, yet it would entwinw through everything he was and everything he did.
Harry Truman was also engaged in the "extra curricular" activities that Washington was engaged in as are a few on this very forum.
I have to admit, however, that that Truman quote is new to me, but as I recall, the nations founding had been pretty much accomplished by the time Truman came along, so such a quote would have nothing to do with the principles upon which the nation was founded.
Belief in a supreme being is central to the founding of our nation in that natural rights MUST come from a higher source than the state. Thus, the Bill of Rights is, in theory, inviolate. This is why the socialist left seeks to destroy God in the public forum. Without God, there are no unalienable rights, and without unalianable rights, there can be no individual liberty leaving the people open to socialist economic and social mechanisms.
Unfortunately for the fundie zealots, there is no provision to impose their views on others.
Unfortunately for the secular socialist atheist ACLU zealots, there is no prvision for separating men from God.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Raf
I know, Amazon.com's "about the author" has an agenda, as does David Barton. Unfortunately for your point, David Barton's agenda would lead him to verify the Patrick Henry misquotation, not to dismiss it. That he dismissed it is telling. That you accept it in the absence of evidence while slandering the source is equally telling.
Edited by RafLink to comment
Share on other sites
Belle
I guess I've been pondering whether the Bible really is the end all and be all source of all answers. It seems to be fallible and therefore NOT the God breathed word. I also consider that there most likely were political agendas involved with the writing of some of the books as well as the decision on what should be included in the Bible.
Considering the Presidents in Lifted's post - many of them were Diests and also seem to have felt the same way.
Historical and modern Deism is defined by the view that reason, rather than revelation or tradition, should be the basis of belief in God. Deists reject organized/revealed religion and promote reason as the essential element in making moral decisions (but still rationally conclude tolerance of such religions).
This information came from Wikipedia. Not sure about the integrity or lack of agenda there either, but I believe I have read and heard most of this information in other places as well:
Washington – Diest
W Wilson – Presbyterian
Grant – No Religious Affiliation
McKinley –Methodist
T Roosevelt – Dutch Reformed Church
A jackson – Presbyterian
J Adams – Unitarian/Diest
JQ Adams - Unitarian/Diest
Reagan – Disciple of Christ
Freedom of belief: Individual members are free to follow their consciences; they are expected to extend that freedom to others. Members are encouraged to seek guidance from scripture, study, and prayer, but to develop their own opinions about most issues.
Herbert Hoover – Quaker
Early Friends believed that Christ, not the Bible, was the Word of God; for example, according to Robert Barclay the scriptures "are only a declaration of the fountain, and not the fountain itself, therefore they are not to be esteemed the principal ground of all Truth and knowledge, nor yet the adequate primary rule of faith and manners" (Apology prop. 3).
In nearly all cases however, modern Friends believe in the necessity of being continually guided by the inward light. Divine revelation is therefore not restricted to the Bible, but rather continues even today; this doctrine is known as continuing revelation.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
GarthP2000
Ron,
My post here went into an entirely new topic area, and it would've derailed this thread, so I'm starting a new thread.
See ya there Ron. :)
Link to comment
Share on other sites
GT
"I have always strenuously supported the right of every man to his own opinion, however different that opinion might be to mine. He who denies to another this right, makes a slave of himself to his present opinion, because he precludes himself the right of changing it."
Thomas Paine
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Lifted Up
I wouldn't knock Grant and Lee, unless you want to knock everyone else who believes the Bible and is not a pacifist. And, maybe you would...I don't know. Either way, here is a quote from another principal player in the same bloodletting you refer to, upon being presented with a Bible...
"In regard to this Great Book, I have but to say, it is the best gift God has given to man. All the good the Savior gave to the world was communicated through this book."
Abraham Lincoln
Link to comment
Share on other sites
coolchef1248 @adelphia.net
and abe never lied!
Link to comment
Share on other sites
George Aar
No doubt that Lee and Grant were dedicated, honorable men. But they were on opposing sides of a stuggle, both convinced that they were instruments in the hand of The Almighty (as was Lincoln) and very much set on the destruction of one another. And in the process managed to help kill off several hundred thousand of their fellow citizens.
Maybe it's just me, but I find that to be somewhat ironic, given that the Bible is so often regarded as some sort of roadmap to God's love and contains the words of The Prince of Peace himself. One could hope that whatever guidance they derived from "the Good Book" is not as widely accepted today...
Oh, and yes, Snopes does have an "agenda"! How dare they put that sort of stuff on the internet when I've grown so comfortable with my urban myths!
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Galen
Belle-
Paine wrote a great deal and a century later his writings were used as the definative for Deists.
However Many of the founding Fathers lived before Paine, and really did not agree with him much.
To hold up one roman catholic individual as the definative for the entire religion spanning over a 1000 years would also be poor.
I agree that diests generally were strongly against organised religion. They were generally very much against Papal rule. They were also Biblical fundys by todays' standards.
Reason as coming from focused study of the Bible, rather than a single man's revelations, or the teachings of organized religion (understood to be Papal or Anglican).
This is mis-leading. Unitarians back then was like saying Monotheists, those who beleive in a single diety. Jews were and are Unitarians. TWI is Unitarian. It was not for another hundred years that the Unitarians joined with the Universalists. to say Diest and Unitarian is almost saying the same thing.
The writings of Washington, the prayers of Our Worshipful Past Master geo. Washington, reveal him to be as much a unitarian as diest. He strongly beleived in a single diety, the Creator of the heavens and Earth.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Lifted Up
Being famous and/or a historical figure of the past does not, IMO, make the people quoted in my post the authorities on life any more or less than the people quoted in Belle's original post. However, if the purpose of the post was to illustrate what a group of "successful" people believed about God and/or the Bible, I felt some balance would be a good idea.
Promoting these people as the authorities on life and/or Biblical authority, or lack thereof, then pointing out their shortcomings, or anything we don't liek about them, certainly would be an effecient way to discredit anything they say. For example, just speaking for myself, I don't think I would want to guide my life according to the gospel of Stephen King. You apparently would not model your life after Grant and Lee.
However, George, I am not so sure that a quote from, or a story about someone who uses the Bible and Christianity as the basis for his/her pacifism...opposition to war or killing...would bring you any closer to believing that God, Christianity, or the Bible has authority any more than Grant and Lee and the others.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Belle
LiftedUp Posted:
Ya know, Lifted. You foot-U-ME-D the purpose of my post was when I clearly stated it before I even posted the quotes:Then I further clarified my reason for posting the quotes after seeing how you had derailed what I had HOPED the discussion would have been about;
I NEVER, NEVER, NEVER said that I BELIEVED all of them. NOR did I EVER mention anything about WHO said those things. I DON’T give a rip about who said them. I was more concerned about WHAT was said. It is only proper to give credit to the speaker, that is why their names are included. He11, I don’t even know who half the people are!Perhaps I should have posted this in the doctrinal section to have gotten the discussion I was hoping for, but so few people wander down there AND I do not want a discussion using “Chapter & Verse” – frankly – it does not help me when I the “pondering” is about the integrity of the Bible to begin with.
I thought about posting in the “About the Way” section, but it wasn’t TWI – Related in any way – except maybe that TWI could be partially responsible for my musings ….. AND the fact that you so aptly illustrated the holier-than-thou-I-don’t-give-a-S H I T-about your-NEEDS/QUESTIONS/CONCERNS-I’m-just-going-to-throw-MY-agenda-down-your-throat attitude we learned in TWI.
We got pretty darn good at reading between the lines and picking up on the double meanings of every thing that was said. Maybe you were one of the people who was really good at talking like that and so project that communication style onto everything you read. I wasn’t and I’m still not. I prefer to plainly and clearly communicate with no double entendres or “ya know what I mean” (wink, wink) messages behind what I say. Maybe you just had a knee-jerk reaction to the quotes, in which case I would have preferred some comments about the contents of the quotes themselves and not merely some rebuttal quotes.
Then put me in George’s camp, because I’m pretty upset about the direction this thread has taken (primarily thanks to your initial post, Lifted) and if that’s the “Christian” way - to just spew quotes back to someone who has what I consider to be valid concerns….and so wonderfully established by those who merely congratulated and thanked you for your “so there!” response…..then I’ll hang with the curmudgeon’s like George any day. At least he’s up for some dialog.
Galen, thank you for clarifying that for me about the diests. I suppose I should read up some more on them. ;)
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Belle
Given that there are a lot of quotes, I expected that some people would comment on the one(s) that resonated or struck a chord with them…Here is an example of what I would have liked to have happened:
That’s a funny way to put it, but it’s so true. Remember how we were real good at laughing at the Catholic religion. I know more Catholic “jokes” than I could have imagined thanks to TWI.I was raised Southern Baptist and I remember hearing jokes about us thinking we were the only ones in Heaven – which I don’t ever remember being taught, but apparently it seems we did think that way and it was funny to everyone else.
Funny how we can justify laughing at others because of what they believe…it’s even funnier when we come around to seeing the validity in some of the things they believe. We can really learn from each other when we quit laughing at and attacking one another’s beliefs.
Things that we took so seriously in TWI are funny to me now..... Happy Ho Ho, "Bless & Treat", "Blessed Eggs", Resurrection Sunday (instead of Easter)....
That’s just funny. I don’t care she is or what her “agenda” is, it’s a funny statement….unless you’re so defensive you can’t see the humor in it and laugh at yourself every once in a while.
So how DID Noah get penguins, polar bears, kangaroos and Tasmanian devils into the ark? Interesting question, no?I think Elbert is onto something there. Some people call it karma….I think that’s what they mean by karma anyway… I mean, aren’t the consequences of our decisions what bites us in the a$$ so many times? We’re our own worst enemy at times. (Please note I did not say ALL THE TIME in either sentence.)
BTW: I only know one Elbert and he was quite a trip! I have no idea who this Elbert is, though. It’s an odd name; I wonder where it comes from.
Believe what? Most religions consider others who don’t believe exactly as they do are flawed, but because they AT LEAST believe in God, they are partially okay, but God forbid someone be atheist, agnostic or – gasp – wiccan! How does not believing in God or believing the Bible is the “inerrant God breathed word” make someone an animal?This seems to be where I have arrived in my thinking. I see no profit in dissecting scriptures; spending hours upon hours memorizing or reading scriptures; throwing around “chapter & verse” for every situation; concentrating on so much minutia that life becomes serious, burdensome and dictated by “what does the word say?”. It seems as though an all loving God would make it pretty easy to understand and know what His will is and how we should live. Jesus seems to have summed it up nicely into just two commandments….so why do we have to make it so much more complicated by arguing about whether someone should be baptized to be saved….and should that baptism be by “fire” or by “water” – theoretically or literally…..what exactly ordination is…whether we should tithe and/or how much we should give and where we should give it...etc…
There. That’s just a paltry amount of thoughts and things that came to mind when I read those quotes. THOSE are the kinds of things I preferred to discuss. They don’t require rebuttal quotes that aren’t really relevant when one considers the contents of the quotes, some additional comments, observations and discussions about the original quotes would be nice, but not if the comments are going to be along the same vein of thought as the first response to them.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
coolchef1248 @adelphia.net
belle thank you for shareing your thoughts :) i could not agree with you more
keep em comming!
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.