God is in control and has blessed this country like no other and when we disgrace Him we suffer the consequences of our disobedience, whether you believe or not. The bible has predicted the events we see today with a weakened America, Israel, Iran and Russia…

,

Sorry, bud, but these folks are not Jewish. They’re Christian, period. Jews do not, have not, and will not accept your JC as anything. end of discussion. If you wish to delude yourself into thinking they’re Jews, feel free to do so.

Will there be a Christians for Mohammed group?

“They wanted this up there because they think God is the foundation of our government,” Gaylor said. “Boy, are they misinformed.”

Obviously this guy has never read any of the founding fathers. You know, the guys who were present and laid the foundations of our govt.

Come on Allahpundit, whenever we religious conservatives talk about “abortion or the gays” we get told we’re not staying on message and that these “distractions” are why the ‘party’/cause/whatever is faltering.

I forgot to add that during the Holocaust, Dr. Schlamm was in Bergen-Belsen.

While I’m here, I’ll add that today’s “Jews for Jesus” include Jay Sekulow, top guy of the American Center for Law and Justice, who does a lot of good for conservative causes.

Well Allah is the same as my God. The disagreement occurs between Judaism, Christians, and Muslims because for Jews, the savior hasn’t arrived yet. For Christians, the savior has arrived. For Muslims, Jesus was a prophet, but Muhammed was the ultimate prophet of God.So essentially these three groups are arguing about what amounts to splitting hairs. We all believe in the EXACT SAME God.

Rightwingguy on July 18, 2009 at 4:15 PM

If the Koran came from Allah, then Allah is not the God of the Bible, because the Koran denies that Jesus died on the cross and was resurrected. It also denies that He is God. Those aren’t minor points of disagreement. Gentile and Jewish believers in Jesus proclaim that the Tenach (Old Testament) points toward Jesus as God, savior and messiah; and that the New Testament confirms His identity.

While most Jews believe that “the savior hasn’t arrived yet,” a small but growing number of Jewish men and women do believe that Jesus was (and is) God and the messiah whose coming and atoning death were foretold by their prophets.

As I have pointed out recently, the better-known “Jews for Jesus” have included British Prime Minister Benjamin Disraeli, composer Felix Mendelssohn (who wrote to music for “Hark, the Herald Angels Sing,” my favorite carol), and William Herschel, the planetary astronomer who discovered Uranus (no jokes, please).

Disraeli wrote, “Christianity is completed Judaism, or it is nothing. Christianity is incomprehensible without Judaism, as Judaism is incomplete without Christianity…Rome indeed boasts that the authenticity of the second Testament depends upon the recognition of her infallibility. The authenticity of the second Testament depends upon the congruity with the first…

“When Omnipotence deigned to be incarnate, the Infallible Word did not select a Roman, but a Jewish frame. The prophets were not Romans but Jews; she who was blessed above all women, I never heard she was a Roman maiden. No, I should look to a land more distant than Italy, to a city more sacred even than Rome.

“The first preachers of the gospel were Jews, and none else…No one has ever been permitted to write under the inspiration of the Holy Spirit, except a Jew. For nearly a century, no one believed in the good tidings except Jews…The pupil of Moses may ask himself, whether all the princes of the house of David have done so much for the Jews as that prince who was crucifed on Calvary. Had it not been for Him, the Jews would have been comparatively unknown…Christians may continue to persecute Jews (and by doing so misrepresent their Master) and Jews may persist in disbelieving Christians, but who can deny that Jesus of Nazareth, the Incarnate Son of God, is the eternal glory of the Jewish race?”

In our own time, New York physician Vera Schlamm, a Holocaust survivor (who recently died), once wrote, “When I accepted him [Jesus], it was strictly because God showed me, yes, Jesus is the expected Messiah, and that was reason enough to believe in him. I learned the Jesus had ushered in a New Covenant prophesied by Jeremiah [Jer. 31:30-33].

“Do we need to protect ourselves against the ‘disgrace’ of becoming Jews who believe in Jesus? Should we keep a chain on the door of our heart so we don’t have to see if he is out there, if he is real? No, for if Jesus is the Messiah, it is no disgrace for a Jew to believe.”

The book on the bottom says “Shakespeare” and the one on top very boldly says “Holy Bible.”

You can see the sculpture at http://www.edhamiltonworks.com.

My whole point was that the Islam, Christianity, and Judaism revolve around the same God. Not that they share similar tenets. I don’t agree with Islam at all, btw. I was simply pointing out we share lots of commonalities.

Rightwingguy on July 19, 2009 at 5:23 AM

Christianity, Islam, Judaism, Mormonism, are all Abrahamic religions…that is the common thread….Abraham.

They simplisticly blame religion for all the ills in the world, when in fact, religion is just another vehicle for the power mad to distort in order to justify totalitarianism.

RadClown on July 18, 2009 at 11:26 AM

Yeah, I know what you mean…every night thousands of battered women and their children are attended to by those “power mad” people.
Every day in thousands of hospitals, people are attended to and cared for by those “power mad” people.
Every day, during inclimate weather, thousands of people and familys are taken care of by those “power mad” people.
And times of natural disasters, throughout the world, those “power mad” people are their “taking over”.
Doctors are flown in to care for people who would never have a chance of a normal life…flown by those “power mad” people.
You live in a fantasy world of evil, if you think religion is made up of “power mad” people.
Every major church has hundreds of stories of extending a hand to the “least among us”, and receiving nothing in return.
The only “power” the “power mad” people have, is the power of healing from Christ.

Medium | Larger | Largest
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.

We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness. — That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed, — That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness. Prudence, indeed, will dictate that Governments long established should not be changed for light and transient causes; and accordingly all experience hath shewn that mankind are more disposed to suffer, while evils are sufferable than to right themselves by abolishing the forms to which they are accustomed. But when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same Object evinces a design to reduce them under absolute Despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such Government, and to provide new Guards for their future security. — Such has been the patient sufferance of these Colonies; and such is now the necessity which constrains them to alter their former Systems of Government. The history of the present King of Great Britain is a history of repeated injuries and usurpations, all having in direct object the establishment of an absolute Tyranny over these States. To prove this, let Facts be submitted to a candid world.

He has refused his Assent to Laws, the most wholesome and necessary for the public good.

He has forbidden his Governors to pass Laws of immediate and pressing importance, unless suspended in their operation till his Assent should be obtained; and when so suspended, he has utterly neglected to attend to them.

He has refused to pass other Laws for the accommodation of large districts of people, unless those people would relinquish the right of Representation in the Legislature, a right inestimable to them and formidable to tyrants only.

He has called together legislative bodies at places unusual, uncomfortable, and distant from the depository of their Public Records, for the sole purpose of fatiguing them into compliance with his measures.

He has dissolved Representative Houses repeatedly, for opposing with manly firmness his invasions on the rights of the people.

He has refused for a long time, after such dissolutions, to cause others to be elected, whereby the Legislative Powers, incapable of Annihilation, have returned to the People at large for their exercise; the State remaining in the mean time exposed to all the dangers of invasion from without, and convulsions within.

He has endeavoured to prevent the population of these States; for that purpose obstructing the Laws for Naturalization of Foreigners; refusing to pass others to encourage their migrations hither, and raising the conditions of new Appropriations of Lands.

He has obstructed the Administration of Justice by refusing his Assent to Laws for establishing Judiciary Powers.

He has made Judges dependent on his Will alone for the tenure of their offices, and the amount and payment of their salaries.

He has erected a multitude of New Offices, and sent hither swarms of Officers to harass our people and eat out their substance.

He has kept among us, in times of peace, Standing Armies without the Consent of our legislatures.

He has affected to render the Military independent of and superior to the Civil Power.

He has combined with others to subject us to a jurisdiction foreign to our constitution, and unacknowledged by our laws; giving his Assent to their Acts of pretended Legislation:

For quartering large bodies of armed troops among us:

For protecting them, by a mock Trial from punishment for any Murders which they should commit on the Inhabitants of these States:

For cutting off our Trade with all parts of the world:

For imposing Taxes on us without our Consent:

For depriving us in many cases, of the benefit of Trial by Jury:

For transporting us beyond Seas to be tried for pretended offences:

For abolishing the free System of English Laws in a neighbouring Province, establishing therein an Arbitrary government, and enlarging its Boundaries so as to render it at once an example and fit instrument for introducing the same absolute rule into these Colonies

For taking away our Charters, abolishing our most valuable Laws and altering fundamentally the Forms of our Governments:

For suspending our own Legislatures, and declaring themselves invested with power to legislate for us in all cases whatsoever.

He has abdicated Government here, by declaring us out of his Protection and waging War against us.

He has plundered our seas, ravaged our coasts, burnt our towns, and destroyed the lives of our people.

He is at this time transporting large Armies of foreign Mercenaries to compleat the works of death, desolation, and tyranny, already begun with circumstances of Cruelty & Perfidy scarcely paralleled in the most barbarous ages, and totally unworthy the Head of a civilized nation.

He has constrained our fellow Citizens taken Captive on the high Seas to bear Arms against their Country, to become the executioners of their friends and Brethren, or to fall themselves by their Hands.

He has excited domestic insurrections amongst us, and has endeavoured to bring on the inhabitants of our frontiers, the merciless Indian Savages whose known rule of warfare, is an undistinguished destruction of all ages, sexes and conditions.

In every stage of these Oppressions We have Petitioned for Redress in the most humble terms: Our repeated Petitions have been answered only by repeated injury. A Prince, whose character is thus marked by every act which may define a Tyrant, is unfit to be the ruler of a free people.

Nor have We been wanting in attentions to our British brethren. We have warned them from time to time of attempts by their legislature to extend an unwarrantable jurisdiction over us. We have reminded them of the circumstances of our emigration and settlement here. We have appealed to their native justice and magnanimity, and we have conjured them by the ties of our common kindred to disavow these usurpations, which would inevitably interrupt our connections and correspondence. They too have been deaf to the voice of justice and of consanguinity. We must, therefore, acquiesce in the necessity, which denounces our Separation, and hold them, as we hold the rest of mankind, Enemies in War, in Peace Friends.

We, therefore, the Representatives of the united States of America, in General Congress, Assembled, appealing to the Supreme Judge of the world for the rectitude of our intentions, do, in the Name, and by Authority of the good People of these Colonies, solemnly publish and declare, That these united Colonies are, and of Right ought to be Free and Independent States, that they are Absolved from all Allegiance to the British Crown, and that all political connection between them and the State of Great Britain, is and ought to be totally dissolved; and that as Free and Independent States, they have full Power to levy War, conclude Peace, contract Alliances, establish Commerce, and to do all other Acts and Things which Independent States may of right do. — And for the support of this Declaration, with a firm reliance on the protection of Divine Providence, we mutually pledge to each other our Lives, our Fortunes, and our sacred Honor.

Let us ban the Dec of Independence

Hicsuget imagine if it used the word Allah

Your stupidity is only eclipsed by your immense unearned ego

“In God we trust” does not establish a religion. It merely acknowledges that most Americans have one.

skydaddy on July 19, 2009 at 10:25 PM

Of course it does not and the court will agree. What we have here is the king of pomposity -Hicsuget just spinning b.s.

If others find the words “There is no god,” or “There is no god but Allah,” or “Hail Satan” comforting, would you object to their being engraved on a government building?

hicsuget on July 18, 2009 at 3:03 PM

Artwork and slogans glorifying Man (as The Worker) as the ultimate figure in the universe abounded in the Soviet Union. Today in North Korea, the Dear Leader’s visage is displayed everywhere as an object of veneration. I’m pretty sure than in India, government holidays coincide with Hindu religious festivals. And of course in pagan Rome, the entire city was expected to turn out for Saturnalia and other religio-civic holidays. (That’s what helped get the early Christians in trouble – they separated themselves from civic life.)

“In God we trust” does not establish a religion. It merely acknowledges that most Americans have one.

Granted the separation of church and state is very important and must be maintained. But we do encounter a gray area in that the founders obviously based their thoughts on their beliefs–beliefs of a most ENLIGHTENED nature. They still are ENLIGHTENED. Yes, these beliefs remain in fabric woven by the founders. That is solid American History and should be left in place. To be ignored or not. I would think such a wonderful organization as the above would focus on the oppression of Islam. Much more useful!

“The First Amendment was not written to protect the people of this country from religious values; it was written to protect religious values from government tyranny.”

Just a couple of quotes from that soft-headed believer, President Ronald Reagan.

And since when has atheism shown an aversion for the taste of human blood?

Saltysam on July 19, 2009 at 11:13 AM

A couple of thoughts:
–Men kill for power, defense, independence. Historically, they’ve done it across a spectrum of beliefs or non-beliefs.
–My view, posted further upthread, is that the word God on the government buildings is OK, or even healthy.
–My point about people killing each other was that people take the differences in interpretations of the divine seriously enough to support violence. It would be more honest if people rallied to war over territory or wealth, but perhaps it wouldn’t be as popular.

But what would the first Chief justice of the Supreme court know? And what would an author of the Federalist Papers know?

Any atheist with any integrity (!!!) would admit that this curren kerfuffle over “In God We Trust” would be shocking to ALL the founders.

per the Establishment Clause, they do have a point.

How does mentioning God establish a state religion?

The Northwest Ordinance of 1787 (same year Congress enacted the First Amendment), stated in Article III: “Religion, morality, and knowledge being necessary to good government and the happiness of mankind, schools and the means of education shall forever be encouraged.”

Atheists have no integrity in this debate because they must ignore such facts to advance their cause. Christians aren’t coming out of left field to enact fanciful novelties, but are conserving what already exists.

We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.

And for the support of this Declaration, with a firm reliance on the protection of Divine Providence, we mutually pledge to each other our Lives, our Fortunes, and our sacred Honor.

In case you couldn’t tell…/sarc

BTW, to those Atheists out there; your rights come from man, so they can be removed at any time. There is no such thing as inalienable (or unalienable) rights, they are all privileges now. Thanks for that.

Let’s avoid having our children fight to the death over some guy’s interpretation of what God/Allah is saying to him.

dedalus on July 18, 2009 at 8:33 PM

This view of the history of human conflict is naively pretentious. It will not change human conflict, nor its inseparable connection with faith riddled abstracts.

Atheists are being used to destroy the old faith, because it has become an obstacle to the new power elite. They are preparing the granite for their new statues and symbols as we speak.

Our children, and our children’s children, will fight to the death over some’s guys interpretation of his own place in the exertion of power as atheism reaches for the heavens to define itself and legitimize it’s creed…in full fledged contradiction.

And since when has atheism shown an aversion for the taste of human blood?

tcn on July 19, 2009 at 12:23 AM

My whole point was that the Islam, Christianity, and Judaism revolve around the same God. Not that they share similar tenets. I don’t agree with Islam at all, btw. I was simply pointing out we share lots of commonalities.

Well Allah is the same as my God. The disagreement occurs between Judaism, Christians, and Muslims because for Jews, the savior hasn’t arrived yet. For Christians, the savior has arrived. For Muslims, Jesus was a prophet, but Muhammed was the ultimate prophet of God.So essentially these three groups are arguing about what amounts to splitting hairs. We all believe in the EXACT SAME God.

Rightwingguy on July 18, 2009 at 4:15 PM

Not possible. The God of Christianity is a God of reason, Who works in reasonable ways that are knowable by revelation and by Natural Law. Allah is outside of reason, conforms to no known pattern of reason, and does not reveal himself to anyone. Ergo, murderous terrorists can coexist with Allah, but not with the God of Christianity. They are not the same at all.

Read some of JPII’s theology. It may enlighten you on this topic, whether you ascribe to Catholicism or not.

It may be that the Establishment Clause was intended to make room for the States to establish their own, respective religions.

Kralizec on July 17, 2009 at 9:31 PM

Bingo! The federalist papers clearly state that the establishment clause was intended to prevent the nascent federal government from establishing any one religion from being established. This to avoid another “Church of England” situation.

Individual states did, in fact, establish official religions within their own constitutions. Massachusetts, for one, did this, and Episcopalianism was the official religion until the late 19th century.