Were the Founding Fathers atheists?

Pedro posted an article claiming that the founding fathers were not Christian, that they were deists, and that they WOULD have been atheists if they had had modern science. Here was my response:

---

The founding fathers were NOT Christian. Big deal. Christians shouldn’t care. The governing authorities in Jesus’ time sure did not care about him.

The founding fathers were deists, but would NOT have been atheists, because the question of where original variety (information) in the universe came from is not answered. With no original variety, gravity could not have caused the collapse of mass into stars and solar systems, etc. So where did this original information/variety come from? Their answer would have been “deism”.

Most theists (including the ones in this string of comments) are not rational. But Jesus did not teach anything like most theists. He never would have encouraged war, violence, or banning scientific research. JESUS would never start a war. By contrast, the statement that atheists and deists did not start wars is obviously untrue. The founding fathers were DEISTS, and who do you think started the revolutionary war?

BTW, Subjective “miracles” are not proof of anything.

I am not 100% certain of anything, but I don’t live by certainties, I live by reasonable probabilities.

I am a theist. I am Christian.

Christianity is a form of panENtheism, which is a form of pantheism. Pantheism is not anti-theism. Pantheism holds that God = Reality.

PanENtheism additionally holds that the visible universe is not the entirety of Reality. God = Reality, but Reality is bigger than 20 billion light years of space. This is scientific fact; the MHI of quantum physics states this.

Christianity furthermore states that REALITY is personal. This is the sticking point; this is the hard one to accept.

-micah redding
http://thereddingbrothers.blogspot.com/

Satan a Snake? Angels are Dragons? Old Testament Word and The Secrets of the Bible

I was doing a little browsing and stumbled onto some weird facts that, to me anyway, were rather shocking.

1) The Nephilim. In Genesis 6, these are the offspring of the "sons of God" and the "daughters of men". This word is usually translated "giants", as it is in Numbers 13:33. But the word actually just derives from "nephal", meaning "fallen". The Nephilim were simply "the fallen ones".

2) The Serpent. The serpent was more cunning than the beasts of the field, and tempted Eve to eat of the Tree of Knowledge of Good and Evil. When she did so, her eyes were opened, and she could discern good and evil. Interesting thing is, the word "serpent" here is the EXACT same word for "foretelling the future, divination, prophesying" or "discerning". So, the DISCERNER (serpent) was more DISCERNING (cunning) than the beasts, and tempted Eve to eat of the Tree of DISCERNING (knowledge of) Good and Evil. See a pattern?

3) The Seraphim. The Seraphim are described in Isaiah 6:1-6 as beings immensely close to the glory of God, whose sole purpose is to display that glory. They have six wings, two to cover their eyes, two to cover their feet, two to fly with. I always imagined them as humans, and they were always described as being at the very top of the different orders of angels (seraphim, cherubim, archangels, angels, etc).

Interesting thing is, the word "seraphim" means literally "fiery serpent", and is translated that way in most locations, including Numbers 21:6-8 and Deuteronomy 8:15. So, we have "fiery serpents" with wings...hmmm. Sounds to me like dragons.

So the seraphim are not some "angelic" human beings with wings. Instead, they are huge, fiery, six-winged dragons. Wow...weird.

And that may be connected back to the serpent in the garden of Eden. The serpent (assuming it was something like a seraphim), would have been a glorious dragon accustomed to flying. And as his punishment, he had to crawl on the ground, no longer flying or walking.

Weird.

The Simplicity of Revelation and Eschatology

Revelation is a very complex book. Most of it is written in symbols only familiar to those steeped in the Jewish religion. And the number of bizarre interpretations of it available make the book very confusing. But there are a few steps you can take to understand it better. We may not be able to figure out everything about it, but we can probably make out the main points. Here's how:

1) Realize that Revelation IS symbolic. This should just be common sense. If you think that literal scorpion-horses are going to be set free on the earth, or that plagues are unleashed by angels with literal bowls, then you have some problems in the way you interpret things. Most people, even if they deny it, do accept that Revelation is composed of symbols. That is VERY important to remember.

2) Realize that those symbols are Jewish. It has been said that Revelation is the most biblical book in the bible, because most of it is composed of quotes or direct references to other scriptures. Those symbols are not intended to be interpreted however any modern interpreter desires. They meant specific things to the Jewish-Christian people of the time.

3) Realize the scope of what Revelation says. Revelation was written to the 7 churches of Asia, giving them warnings about things that were going to happen. The things written in Revelation were going to fundamentally impact these people.

4) Realize it was all to happen SOON. At the beginning, through the middle, and at the end, the readers are warned that all of the foretold events would happen SOON. These events would concern the 7 churches, and they would happen to those people.

5) Realize what the ending really is. Revelation ends with a scene of the New Jerusalem coming down from heaven to earth. Many people confuse the identity of the New Jerusalem, and so misunderstand the whole book. The New Jerusalem, as Revelation states, is the bride of Christ. What else is called the bride of Christ in the New Testament? Wouldn't that be the church? And notice that the New Jerusalem came DOWN, people didn't go UP to it. No; the New Jerusalem is something set up on earth, with evil people outside, but with gates always open to people wishing to enter. Also, the New Jerusalem is said to be built on the foundation of the apostles; the church was said to be built on the foundation of the apostles. The New Jerusalem is nothing but the victorious church.

Once we realize that the New Jerusalem is the church, that the events prophesied were to happen soon and to the people Revelation was addressed to, and that the symbols are references to the Jewish religion (not modern day technology), then we are well on our way to realizing what Revelation is talking about.

Baptism and Eschatology and 70 AD

In 1Corinthians 10, Paul compared the post-Exodus Israelites to the first century Christians. His point was to warn of the danger of falling away, and to warn that falling away was a present reality, just as it was for the Israelites post-Exodus.

He pointed out that the Israelites had been led out of Egypt and then "baptized into Moses" by the cloud and the sea.

Whenever we see the phrase "baptized into" in the New Testament, it refers to a process of pledging oneself. John "baptized into" repentance; that is, the people he was baptizing were pledging themselves to repentance. He also "baptized into" forgiveness; the people were being baptized to identify that they had been forgiven, or that they were seeking forgiveness.

Jesus talks about being "baptized into" the Father, the Son, and the holy Spirit. Paul talks about being "baptized into" the death of Christ. Each of these refer to identifying or pledging oneself to a certain cause or individual.

When Peter speaks on Pentecost, he does the same thing. "Change your minds, and be BAPTIZED in the name of Jesus Christ INTO the forgiveness of your sins." These people were being "baptized into" forgiveness (the same as with John) identifying themselves with Jesus and the forgiveness he brought.

So when Paul speaks in 1Corinthians 10 about being "baptized into" Moses, he is not focusing on the water aspects of passing through the Red Sea. He is saying that the Israelites had pledged themselves to Moses by following him through the Red Sea, and by following the cloud of God's glory. By doing so, they had left their old lives behind, utterly and completely.

So the sequence is as follows.

The Passover occured in an event symbolizing the purchase of their lives. Moses then led the people out of Egypt in the beginning of the Exodus. When they got to the Red Sea, the people followed Moses through it, fully cementing their identification with him, and their rejection of their old lives. They then began a period of 40 years of wilderness wandering.

Paul's comparison of the First Century Christians to the ancient Israelites is rife with symbolism.

They too had witnessed a Passover, with Jesus the Messiah as the sacrificial lamb purchasing their lives. They too had been baptized to identify themselves with Jesus and his new movement, and in rejection of their former lives. They too had entered a 40 year period of persecution and struggle. Paul warns that they too could fall back into their old ways, and end up being destroyed as the ancient Israelites were. But if they persevered, they too would eventually enter into the Promised Land.

In making this comparison, Paul revealed a lot about First Century baptism. It was a pledge and identification with Jesus. It both symbolically and actually closed the doors on their old lives, because identifying with Jesus meant rejection by your friends, family, and the religious establishment. Baptism meant entering into the 40 years of persecution and rejection from those you had known.

Only one generation of Israelites were "baptized in the cloud and the sea". Future generations made their pledges to God in other ways; but this one historic action had ramifications for the entire future of the nation.

In a similar way, first century Christians who publicly identified with Jesus through baptism established themselves as a counter-cultural force whose actions and story would reverberate down through the ages. The way God dealt with this publicly identified group would send a message to the rest of the world.

When God vindicated these Christians in 70CE, their public identification with Jesus changed from a mark of persecution to a mark of triumph, and sent a clear message about God's nature ringing down the halls of history.

Without the public identification of that chosen generation, the victory of Jesus would have been vague and indistinct. But by choosing to publicly identify and suffer with Jesus, that generation established an object lesson for all time, and achieved a stunning vindication.

That was the purpose of baptism.

---