The spectacular fall of YEC beliefs

Especially apt since it was written by James Madison a few years before he drafted the First Amendment. That is something that the Radial Religious Right used to harp upon constantly, "original intent".And of course Faith must keep herself very carefully ignorant, as evidenced by her refusal to read that document (Message 48). If she only read the first paragraph, then she would have missed so many points:

• That neither government nor religion can dictate individual beliefs.
• That civil government has no authority over religion nor faith.
• That religion is weakened and corrupted by government support.
• That in matters of faith we must not allow the majority to impose tyranny over the minorities.
• That neither government nor religion be allowed to "overleap the Great Barrier which defends the rights of the people." IOW, the Wall of Separation being described by the drafter of the First Amendment.
• A listing of the great evils that happen when there is a church-state establishment.
• How those evils and tyranny will drive people away from our shores. Mention and comparisons are made with the Spanish Inquisition that was still in effect at the time (from c. 1492 to c. 1835, a "brief and minor issue" according to apologists).

Basically, Madison was against almost everything that the Religious Right is for. And for which Faith has voiced support and desire for in the past (before she took the fall-back position of not wanting to turn the USA into such a religious tyranny, only that she desires to live in one).

You should provide more information on this and other of your "points".This one kind of sounds like the first chapter of Chris Rodda's Liars for Jesus, which examines a number of Christian revisionist authors (eg, William Federer, David Barton), compares how each version borrowed from and extrapolated from each other, and then presents the actual history of what had actually happened. Not an easy read, because she gets into a lot of detail and quotes sources extensively.The first chapter deals with a claim that Congress had ordered by printing of Bibles. In reality (as I recall, so do look it up and read it for yourself), a publisher had printed too many Bibles to sell and so was lobbying Congress to buy them off of him. I think that his over-production had something to do with the Colonies not yet having the capacity to print enough books which used to be imported from England but now that source was gone, etc.

Remember that the strongly affiliated will also include those of us who are members of one of the know chapters of Club Christian that have no issues with any of the findings of science and are not members of the Christian Cult of Ignorance.

Thank you for spelling all that out. I now recognize that as Madison's treatise that I read a long time ago and it is what I thought it was when PaulK first brought it up: against any kind of state enforced church or doctrine imposed on the people, basically an elaboration of freedom of conscience which was the big Puritan concern of the day; and Madison's concern was more for the church because an alliance with the state corrupts it. No, it is not against Christian principles running the government, it is against forcing people to believe something, which has nothing to do with having a basically Christian worldview as the foundation of governing principles.Thank you again, because I wouldn't have been able to spend the time to get that far into it.Edited by Faith, : No reason given.

I have too much on my mind to get into that but if David Barton is its source then I rescind it.Would you also object to the idea that the first moves toward literacy in Europe were made in order to teach the Bible? Are you aware that the original motto of Harvard University was not the single word "Veritas" but something that included Christ in it? Online it is given variously as Truth for Christ and the Church or Glory to Christ etc., and I'm not going to spend more time looking it up. But also Oxford University had a Christian worldview and aim too and still has Christian titles for its various departments. The original aim of education in the west was to further Christianity. How far we have fallen.Edited by Faith, : No reason given.Edited by Faith, : No reason given.Edited by Faith, : No reason given.

You do realize that there is a difference between Harvard University and Harvard Divinity School? While the Divinity School is certainly part of the University it is only one part.You do understand that education in the West was simply trying to catch up to the general education level found in the rest of the world, particularly the Muslim, Taoist, Buddhist nations?

I note that you still manage to miss both my point and Madison’s.Madison was protesting against a bill which would see Christian ministers - except for Quakers or Menonists - supported by tax monies raised by the state government.And this was considered - by Madison - to be an establishment of religion.

I agree with him.

Then I am glad that you have changed your mind. Establishment does not require a state church.

I don't know how you manage to be so completely wrong about everything having to do with Christianity. I suppose you must have taken courses in it.

Yet the fact remains, the Christian West lagged far behind the rest of the civilized world when it came to education, literacy, personal freedom, standards of living and societal justice.

Produce your evidence.

The colleges and universities that existed in the Muslim, Taoist and Buddhist world during the Dark Ages of the West.Really Faith, learn just some basic history. Look at the actual history of China and India and the marvel that was the Muslim world.

Nonsense. You have no evidence. Universal literacy and then general educqation was a goal in the west and nowhere else that I know of, and it was because of the Christian desire to create a populace that could read the Bible.Edited by Faith, : No reason given.

Your lack of a passport and an education plus a mind constricted by biblical truths makes you an unreliable source Faith.But it's true that at least here in the UK religion had a large influence in education, particularly following the reformation. But its motives were not altruistic, they were to promote the Church's influence. 'Get them young.'The church actively tried to prevent secular, state-based education - the last thing a religion wants is an enquiring mind and different answers than their own.

quote:

---

Prior to the nineteenth century, there were few schools. Most of those that existed were run by church authorities and stressed religious education.[11] The Church of England resisted early attempts for the state to provide secular education.[12]

​

In 1811, the Anglican National Society for Promoting the Education of the Poor in the Principles of the Established Church in England and Wales was established. The schools founded by the National Society were called National Schools. They were eventually absorbed into the state system under the Butler Act (1944), and to this day many state schools, most of them primary schools, maintain a link to the Church of England, reflecting their historic origins.

​

The Protestant non-conformist, non-denominational, or "British schools" were founded by Society for Promoting the Lancasterian System for the Education of the Poor, an organisation formed in 1808 by Joseph Fox, William Allen and Samuel Whitbread and supported by several evangelical and non-conformist Christians.[13]

​

In 1814, compulsory apprenticeship by indenture was abolished. By 1831, Sunday School in Great Britain was ministering weekly to 1,250,000 children, approximately 25% of the population. As these schools preceded the first state funding of schools for the common public, they are sometimes seen as a forerunner to the current English school system.

---

History of education in England - WikipediaThe Catholics resisted saying the Mass in English until the mid 20th century for fear that once the public understood what they were actually saying they'd see how daft it was. They were correct to worry.