Wednesday, March 4, 2009

I Am Still Learning - ( I was wrong! )

I used to quote an English Teacher of mine who obviously got his incorrect opinions on the founding fathers of this country from the same people who are trying to rewrite the history of the whole United States. The statement that I hear the same spin about on TV that says, "We are a Christian Nation", is as unfounded as saying that we have a nation of either Christians or Atheists. They try to cram their religion down your throat, using the excuse that they are trying to counter against Atheism. They end up losing support, only hurting themselves, and don't put a dent in the armor of the silent Atheists who have enough sense to not get involved in an argument with moralists crackpots.
I would also like to say before I get any further that I will cite the references to which I refer to facts using links. So, if you wish to follow, then, click on the hyperlinked words which are at the crux of the argument. Now, I didn't say this country was founded by or on Atheism or non-spiritual groups. I will return to my English teacher who realise now, actually spouted the Republican Conservative Christian nonsense that is what we were actually missing the point about. We were saying that Christianity was NOT the majority and he said he would defer to "the Rich Christian White Guys who founded this country". Today I asked myself about the words used in these arguments and I see now that the whole argument was a smoke screen since I assumed that his whole argument was based on facts, since he was a teacher. I read later about the founding fathers and I decided to study the original document to see a clue as to their intent. This is what I found:
When it comes to the Declaration of Independence that was signed and later presented as a reason to fight in The War of 1812, between the United States of America and the British Empire (particularly Great Britain and British North America), was fought from 1812 to 1815. We called it the American Revolution. The founding fathers at the time who signed the declaration of independence stood firm to their ideas. On reading the declaration in the first few paragraphs the clue that hit me, at this point in my life was, "...

IN CONGRESS, July 4, 1776.

The unanimous Declaration of the thirteen united States of America,

When in the Course of human events, it becomes necessary for one people to dissolve the political bands which have connected them with another, and to assume among the powers of the earth, the separate and equal station to which the Laws of Nature and of Nature's God entitle them, a decent respect to the opinions of mankind requires that they should declare the causes which impel them to the separation.

OK, so let's stop right here. There was no mention of Jesus, Christianity, or any other form of Christianity which has been intentionally misinterpreted for political and financial control of the United States. I put the words Nature's God into search window at Wikipedia. This is what returned:

Nature's God
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
The term "Nature's God" may refer to the religious and philosophical school known as Deism.

It is also the title of a book by Robert Anton Wilson.

As I follow along I clicked on Robert Anton Wilson. I found out this:
"...Robert Anton Wilson or RAW (born Robert Edward Wilson, January 18, 1932 – January 11, 2007) was an American novelist, essayist, philosopher, psychonaut, futurologist and libertarian.

Wilson described his writing as an "attempt to break down conditioned associations—to look at the world in a new way, with many models recognized as models or maps and no one model elevated to the Truth."[1] ... "My goal is to try to get people into a state of generalized agnosticism, not agnosticism about God alone, but agnosticism about everything."[2]
"

So, he considered the feelings of the original founding fathers and the words in the declaration and decided to use it as the title to his book. Unfortunately he seems to have jumped clear off the path of what I am seeking to learn. So, I returned to what the original statement was and it said, "...The term "Nature's God" may refer to the religious and philosophical school known as Deism." So, I decided to look up Deism which wikipedia tells me is:
"...Deism is a religious and philosophical belief that a supreme natural God exists and created the physical universe, and that religious truths can be arrived at by the application of reason and observation of the natural world. Deists generally reject the notion of supernatural revelation as a basis of truth or religious dogma. These views contrast with the dependence on divine revelation found in many Christian,[1] Islamic and Judaic teachings.

Deists typically reject most supernatural events (prophecy, miracles) and tend to assert that God (or "The Supreme Architect") has a plan for the universe which he does not alter either by intervening in the affairs of human life or suspending the natural laws of the universe. What organized religions see as divine revelation and holy books, most deists see as interpretations made by other humans, rather than as authoritative sources.

Deism became prominent in the 17th and 18th centuries during the Age of Enlightenment, especially in the United Kingdom, France and the United States, mostly among those raised as Christians who found they could not believe in either a triune God, the divinity of Jesus, miracles, or the inerrancy of scriptures, but who did believe in one god. Initially it did not form any congregations, but in time deism strongly influenced other religious groups, such as Unitarianism, and Unitarian Universalism, which developed from it. It continues to this day in the form of classical deism and modern deism."

OK, so we now know that the founding fathers were either deists and/or members of the Freemasons which isn't about brick layers, it is about what the movie National Treasure hinted at, an independent group called the Knights Templar. The whole dissertation about the Freemasons is:

"... Freemasonry
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
(Redirected from Freemasons)
Jump to: navigation, search
"Freemasons" redirects here. For other uses, see Freemasons (disambiguation).

The Masonic Square and Compasses.
(Found with or without the letter G)Part of a series of articles on
Freemasonry

Core Articles
Freemasonry · Grand Lodge · Masonic Lodge · Masonic Lodge Officers · Grand Master · Prince Hall Freemasonry · Regular Masonic jurisdictions

History
History of Freemasonry · Liberté chérie · Masonic manuscripts

[show]Masonic Bodies
Masonic
Masonic bodies · York Rite · Order of Mark Master Masons · Knights Templar · Scottish Rite · Knight Kadosh · The Shrine · Tall Cedars of Lebanon · The Grotto · Societas Rosicruciana · Grand College of Rites · Swedish Rite · Order of St. Thomas of Acon · Royal Order of Scotland · Research Lodge
Masonic groups for women
Women and Freemasonry · Order of the Amaranth · Order of the Eastern Star · Co-Freemasonry
Masonic Youth Organizations
DeMolay · A.J.E.F. · Job's Daughters · International Order of the Rainbow for Girls
[show]Views of Masonry
Anti-Masonry · Anti-Masonic Party · Anti-Freemason Exhibition · Christianity and Freemasonry · Catholicism and Freemasonry · Suppression of Freemasonry · Masonic conspiracy theories · Taxil hoax
[show]People and Places
James Anderson · Albert Mackey · Albert Pike · Prince Hall · John the Evangelist · John the Baptist · William Schaw · Elizabeth Aldworth · List of Freemasons · Lodge Mother Kilwinning · Freemasons' Hall, London · House of the Temple · Solomon's Temple · The Library and Museum of Freemasonry
[show]Masonic Miscellany
Great Architect of the Universe · Square and Compasses · Pigpen cipher · Eye of Providence · Hiram Abiff · Sprig of Acacia · Masonic Landmarks · Pike's Morals and Dogma· Propaganda Due · Freemasonry and the Latter Day Saint movement · Dermott's Ahiman Rezon

This box: view • talk • edit
Freemasonry is a fraternal organisation that arose from obscure origins in the late 16th to early 17th century. Freemasonry now exists in various forms all over the world, with a membership estimated at around 5 million (including around 480,000 in England, Scotland and Ireland alone, and just under two million in the United States).[1][2] The various forms all share moral and metaphysical ideals, which include, in most cases, a constitutional declaration of belief in a Supreme Being.[3]

The fraternity is administratively organised into Grand Lodges (or sometimes Orients), each of which governs its own jurisdiction, which consists of subordinate (or constituent) Lodges. Grand Lodges recognise each other through a process of landmarks and regularity. There are also appendant bodies, which are organisations related to the main branch of Freemasonry, but with their own independent administration.

Freemasonry uses the metaphors of operative stonemasons' tools and implements, against the allegorical backdrop of the building of King Solomon's Temple, to convey what has been described by both Masons and critics as "a system of morality veiled in allegory and illustrated by symbols."[4][5]

I suggest everyone should look up the whole article and you will see these people had no interest in supporting the Christian Church, they believed in God, but not in a religious way. Ben Franklin said: "...Lighthouses are more useful than churches."

And James Madison wrote volumes on the separation of church and state and was quoted as saying:"...Every new and successful example, therefore, of a perfect separation between the ecclesiastical and civil matters, is of importance; and I have no doubt that every new example will succeed, as every past one has done, in showing that religion and Government will both exist in greater purity the less they are mixed together (Letter to Edward Livingston, July 10, 1822).
I must admit moreover that it may not be easy, in every possible case, to trace the line of separation between the rights of religion and the civil authority with such distinctness as to avoid collisions and doubts on unessential points. The tendency to a usurpation on one side or the other or to a corrupting coalition or alliance between them will be best guarded against by entire abstinence of the government from interference in any way whatever, beyond the necessity of preserving public order and protecting each sect against trespasses on its legal rights by others." (Letter Rev. Jasper Adams, Spring 1832).

Thomas Jefferson actually wrote something called "the wall of separation" which once can look up at http://www.usconstitution.net/jeffwall.html
He wrote:
"...To messers Nehemiah Dodge, Ephraim Robbins, & Stephen S. Nelson, a committee of the Danbury Baptist association in the state of Connecticut.
Gentlemen
The affectionate sentiments of esteem & approbation which you are so good as to express towards me, on behalf of the Danbury Baptist association, give me the highest satisfaction. my duties dictate a faithful & zealous pursuit of the interests of my constituents, and, in proportion as they are persuaded of my fidelity to those duties, the discharge of them becomes more & more pleasing.
Believing with you that religion is a matter which lies solely between man & his god, that he owes account to none other for his faith or his worship, that the legitimate powers of government reach actions only and not opinions, I contemplate with sovereign reverence that act of the whole American people which declared that their legislature should "make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof;" thus building a wall of eternal separation between Church & State. Congress thus inhibited from acts respecting religion, and the Executive authorised only to execute their acts, I have refrained from prescribing even those occasional performances of devotion, practiced indeed by the Executive of another nation as the legal head of its church, but subject here, as religious exercises only to the voluntary regulations and discipline of each respective sect,
[Jefferson first wrote: "confining myself therefore to the duties of my station, which are merely temporal, be assured that your religious rights shall never be infringed by any act of mine and that." These lines he crossed out and then wrote: "concurring with"; having crossed out these two words, he wrote: "Adhering to this great act of national legislation in behalf of the rights of conscience"; next he crossed out these words and wrote: "Adhering to this expression of the supreme will of the nation in behalf of the rights of conscience I shall see with friendly dispositions the progress of those sentiments which tend to restore to man all his natural rights, convinced that he has no natural rights in opposition to his social duties."]
I reciprocate your kind prayers for the protection & blessing of the common father and creator of man, and tender you for yourselves & the Danbury Baptist [your religious] association assurances of my high respect & esteem. ..."

Th Jefferson
Jan. 1. 1802.

"...This all may seem anti-religious or anti-God to anyone who is trying to find witches to burn or heathons to prosthelize to, but, as is the correct pensions of my heart, I do not wish to take the rights of any man, but to people of religion, I refrain from feeling they deserve more rights than anyone else."
It isn't a big miraculous stretch to see that Bill Maher is condemned by the religious community. In some web pages I see them refer to the "mythical" wall of separation of Thomas Jefferson that I just copied the unedited text from the Library of Congress website. I will say it was never pointed out to me as a child. I see now what I was taught was bullshit because what I was told that the Christians were fleeing the Church of England's repressive rules about how one had to belong to THE RIGHT CHURCH. The actual fact is that the Freemasons who date back to the 1300's were the ones who were trying to get away from the Christians which were the Church of England which was related to the Catholic Church. And the notion that anyone who isn't a Christian has only the option of being an antheist is politically motivated horseshit. Enough said,
Later,
Azmildman

No comments:

Post a Comment