[TheRealVille]

If you sincerely meant your statement to be a compliment, then thank you. I used to enjoy a good margarita before a Mexican meal, but it has been years since I had one. I just don't care for the taste of beer and most alcohol and I don't drive after even one drink, so I completely abstain except on very rare occasions.

The wine tastings were more about good conversation than they were about wine. When my wife mentioned to the restaurant manager (on the phone) one day that it was my birthday, he led a group of strangers in a chorus of Happy Birthday and brought a fresh baked fruit tart to the table where the wine tasting was being held. I never expected something like that to happen to me in this area when I moved here.

No matter how much I disagree with someone, you should know by now that I have no problem complimenting an attribute that I respect in someone. I also have no problem agreeing with someone when I find something we agree on. There are a few Christians on here that I respect a lot, as far as their Christianity goes, yours is one of them that I do.

[TheRealVille]

Maddow may be the most useless human to ever see the earth.

Not that I'm a fan of her, but she hit the nail on the head on Meet The Press today.

[MustangSally]

^I will say though, that if I were going to be a Christian, I'd want to be one like you. You don't push your view on anybody, you don't think you have to go to a building on Sunday, and you drink alcohol.

Didn't Jesus drink alcohol?

[MustangSally]

FYI
The sabbath is any day that a group uses for rest or worship

[TheRealVille]

Didn't Jesus drink alcohol?

That was what I was saying.

[TheRealVille]

FYI
The sabbath is any day that a group uses for rest or worship

Not in the biblical Jewish tradition that we were talking about. The sabbath is the 7th day of the week, Saturday, at least as far as recorded time goes biblically.

[TheRealThing]

Thanks, I will do so. FTR, after several years of reading nearly every thread on this forum, I am still waiting to see you to school somebody on any subject. Happy Jewish Sabbath, RT. :biglmao:

When one's habit is to wake every morning and make things up as they go, anything is possible. :biggrin:

[TheRealVille]

^ Hello pot, meet kettle. You lie more than anybody else I know, that claims Heaven as their future home. nicker:

[TheRealThing]

Again, you cannot vote on citizen's rights. It's not voteable.

Only if your understanding of what constitutes citizen's rights is accurate, which of course IMO, it is not. In one breath you cite polls that suggest most folks are pro gay rights or pro abortion on demand. The next you say the SCOTUS has the right to dictate law, in an act which witnesses 5 people overturn the will of 60% of the people of an entire state. So in the end, which way should it be in your opinion? Should majority rule as in the case of prop 8, or should the judiciary dictate social standing, declaring the result of the referendum null and void?

Obviously, anyone who reads your posts knows you'd be screaming if the court had a conservative majority.

[TheRealVille]

Only if your understanding of what constitutes citizen's rights is accurate, which of course IMO, it is not. In one breath you cite polls that suggest most folks are pro gay rights or pro abortion on demand. The next you say the SCOTUS has the right to dictate law, in an act which witnesses 5 people overturn the will of 60% of the people of an entire state. So in the end, which way should it be in your opinion? Should majority rule as in the case of prop 8, or should the judiciary dictate social standing, declaring the result of the referendum null and void?

Obviously, anyone who reads your posts knows you'd be screaming if the court had a conservative majority.

No, I didn't They interpret law, when the question is aked before them.


The state didn't have the right to make that call. No, the majority shouldn't rule, if it is stepping on other's rights. It's non voteable, and the SCOTUS interpreted it right.

[Hoot Gibson]

No matter how much I disagree with someone, you should know by now that I have no problem complimenting an attribute that I respect in someone. I also have no problem agreeing with someone when I find something we agree on. There are a few Christians on here that I respect a lot, as far as their Christianity goes, yours is one of them that I do.

The difference between us, RV, is that I respect other people's religion even if it requires them to proselytize. If a Jehovah's Witness or a Mormon missionary knocks at my door, and I have some free time, I will invite them into my home. Not because I expect them to convert me to their faith, but because they sincerely believe that they are fulfilling their religious duty in explaining their beliefs to me. I certainly will never buy into Scientology, but I would welcome a chance to have a devout Scientologist like Tom Cruise explain his religious beliefs to me over a cup of coffee.

Barack Obama's intolerance of faiths other than Islam and Jeremiah Wright's warped version of Christianity is one of the things that makes him so unworthy of trust. You, who are constantly complaining about other people pushing their beliefs at you, should have a big problem with Obama's attempts to force Christians to pay for medical procedures and other things that violate their religious beliefs. It is just a matter of time before Obama, or somebody like him, moves to strip tax-exempt status from churches that don't support liberal political policies such as gay marriage.

[TheRealVille]

The difference between us, RV, is that I respect other people's religion even if it requires them to proselytize. If a Jehovah's Witness or a Mormon missionary knocks at my door, and I have some free time, I will invite them into my home. Not because I expect them to convert me to their faith, but because they sincerely believe that they are fulfilling their religious duty in explaining their beliefs to me. I certainly will never buy into Scientology, but I would welcome a chance to have a devout Scientologist like Tom Cruise explain his religious beliefs to me over a cup of coffee.

Barack Obama's intolerance of faiths other than Islam and Jeremiah Wright's warped version of Christianity is one of the things that makes him so unworthy of trust. You, who are constantly complaining about other people pushing their beliefs at you, should have a big problem with Obama's attempts to force Christians to pay for medical procedures and other things that violate their religious beliefs. It is just a matter of time before Obama, or somebody like him, moves to strip tax-exempt status from churches that don't support liberal political policies such as gay marriage.

I'm a firm believer that churches shouldn't receive tax exempt status, unless they can prove that they are putting out the same amount of what they save, to do things like help the poor, and things that they claim they do, that you and others here have said they should do, at the local level. If they push a political candidate, or party, they should be stripped of that tax free status immediately. The church here in Paintsville that got caught endorsing political candidates should never again receive tax breaks.

[Hoot Gibson]

I'm a firm believer that churches shouldn't receive tax exempt status, unless they can prove that they are putting out the same amount of what they save, to do things like help the poor, and things that they claim they do, that you and others here have said they should do, at the local level. If they push a political candidate, or party, they should be stripped of that tax free status immediately. The church here in Paintsville that got caught endorsing political candidates should never again receive tax breaks.

The power to tax is the power to destroy and once the federal government begins taxing legitimate churches, our freedom of religion will be gone. As for endorsing political candidates, there are no bigger offenders than predominately black Christian churches, which frequently give hypocrites like Obama a Sunday forum during campaigns. Liberals never seem to have a problem with all of the money that Democrats raise through black churches but they waste no time condemning churches for supporting traditional religious values usually held by Republican candidates without actually endorsing any candidate or party.

[TheRealThing]

^ Hello pot, meet kettle. You lie more than anybody else I know, that claims Heaven as their future home. nicker:

Well, if you had any say so about my eternal sted, or remotely a glimmer of the true nature of the judgment, I might be concerned. Since that isn't the case, your predilection to compare yourself to other men is still as strong a deterrent for your approach to truth as ever. The standard you and all men should be using for the purpose of self examination is that of Jesus Christ. You rave on and on about not getting somebody else's religion forced on you, as if the truth were somehow subjective when it comes to God and His relationship with men. An argument in and of itself which, defies logic. My commission and my charge, is to share the gospel. Evidenced by the following verse;
Matthew 28:18-20 (KJV)

"18 And Jesus came and spake unto them, saying, All power is given unto me in heaven and in earth.
19 Go ye therefore, and teach all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost:
20 Teaching them to observe all things whatsoever I have commanded you: and, lo, I am with you alway, even unto the end of the world. Amen."

Now, I will do as I am commanded by my savior. I will be first to admit that I could have done a much better job at this than the record will indicate. But, in excuseless humility before my King, I'm steady and I like doing it. In this time of deception and the dawn of lying wonders, Christians will rise to the challenge. There will be an awakening of the church, and many will be added. And yet, I always worry about my country because I know that whether speaking of an individual, a body of believers such as a local church, or an entire nation such as the United States, willful acts of disobedience such as attempts to legalize homosexuality at the federal or state level and otherwise turning away from the truth, always means to walk a road of tears for those who do it. America was so recently the world's bastion of Christianity and rest assured, God is not mocked. Any one who would care to be the least bit honest about our state of affairs can see that He has taken His hand of blessing from our land.

You will no doubt want to laugh the idea of that off but, to do so, would mean becoming willfully ignorant of the truth around us. The violence in our schools, the direction of the SCOTUS, confusion about who we are at the national level. The lack of compassion for the millions slain on the abortionist's slab. Our national wealth is gone and in it's place we are in debt to the tune of 17 trillion dollars while to make matters even worse, the target debt is to be at least 22 trillion by 2016. Nobody really believes the cost of ObamaCare is doable. We can't or won't defend our own borders, as those in congress are so lax, even that seems a waste of money. No nation fears us anymore certainly not Russia, China or even Ethiopia. In short, America is a ghost of what she was as recently as the first day of W's inauguration. To turn a blind eye is to deny the truth.

[TheRealThing]

No, I didn't They interpret law, when the question is aked before them.


The state didn't have the right to make that call. No, the majority shouldn't rule, if it is stepping on other's rights. It's non voteable, and the SCOTUS interpreted it right.

Which, as I have already pointed out is a departure from the opinion you posted about all this not so long ago. AFTR, the SCOTUS sidestepped the issue which happily reaffirmed state sovereignty.

[TheRealVille]

Well, if you had any say so about my eternal sted, or remotely a glimmer of the true nature of the judgment, I might be concerned. Since that isn't the case, your predilection to compare yourself to other men is still as strong a deterrent for your approach to truth as ever. The standard you and all men should be using for the purpose of self examination is that of Jesus Christ. You rave on and on about not getting somebody else's religion forced on you, as if the truth were somehow subjective when it comes to God and His relationship with men. An argument in and of itself which, defies logic. My commission and my charge, is to share the gospel. Evidenced by the following verse;
Matthew 28:18-20 (KJV)

"18 And Jesus came and spake unto them, saying, All power is given unto me in heaven and in earth.
19 Go ye therefore, and teach all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost:
20 Teaching them to observe all things whatsoever I have commanded you: and, lo, I am with you alway, even unto the end of the world. Amen."

Now, I will do as I am commanded by my savior. I will be first to admit that I could have done a much better job at this than the record will indicate. But, in excuseless humility before my King, I'm steady and I like doing it. In this time of deception and the dawn of lying wonders, Christians will rise to the challenge. There will be an awakening of the church, and many will be added. And yet, I always worry about my country because I know that whether speaking of an individual, a body of believers such as a local church, or an entire nation such as the United States, willful acts of disobedience such as attempts to legalize homosexuality at the federal or state level and otherwise turning away from the truth, always means to walk a road of tears for those who do it. America was so recently the world's bastion of Christianity and rest assured, God is not mocked. Any one who would care to be the least bit honest about our state of affairs can see that He has taken His hand of blessing from our land.

You will no doubt want to laugh the idea of that off but, to do so, would mean becoming willfully ignorant of the truth around us. The violence in our schools, the direction of the SCOTUS, confusion about who we are at the national level. The lack of compassion for the millions slain on the abortionist's slab. Our national wealth gone and in it's place we are in debt to the tune of 17 trillion dollars while to make matters even worse, the target debt is to be at least 22 trillion by 2016. Nobody really believes the cost of ObamaCare is doable. We can't or won't defend our own borders, as those in congress are so lax, even that seems a waste of money. No nation fears us anymore certainly not Russia, China or even Ethiopia. In short, America is a ghost of what she was as recently as the first day of W's inauguration. To turn a blind eye is to deny the truth.

Share the gospel in breath, lie in another. I get it, Jesus covers that. Hoot, and a couple more here might could share the gospel with me, but you will never be able to. They "live it" more than you. One sin is as big as others, yet you pick and choose, and have your pet sins.




Let me know when that happens, I might start getting worried.

[TheRealThing]

Share the gospel in breath, lie in another. I get it, Jesus covers that.




Let me know when that happens, I might start getting worried.

Still can't respond without slamming me? When that ol Pez dispenser opens up, only one thing is ever going to come out of there, LOL. Like a hocker on a doorknob, you'll never let yourself get pinned down, right RV?

[TheRealThing]

Share the gospel in breath, lie in another. I get it, Jesus covers that. Hoot, and a couple more here might could share the gospel with me, but you will never be able to. They "live it" more than you. One sin is as big as others, yet you pick and choose, and have your pet sins.




Let me know when that happens, I might start getting worried.

So, according to you if Kermit Gosnell murders live babies on his slab, that would be the same in God's eyes as overeating at a family reunion?

[TheRealVille]

So, according to you if Kermit Gosnell murders live babies on his slab, that would be the same in God's eyes as overeating at a family reunion?

Sin is sin, according to God. If you are a liar, are you going to a less hot hell than a murderer? James said if you are guilty of breaking one part of the law, you are guilty of breaking all of the law.

[MustangSally]

Not in the biblical Jewish tradition that we were talking about. The sabbath is the 7th day of the week, Saturday, at least as far as recorded time goes biblically.

So you only use the definitions that fit you:dudecomeon:

[MustangSally]

That was what I was saying.

^I will say though, that if I were going to be a Christian, I'd want to be one like you. You don't push your view on anybody, you don't think you have to go to a building on Sunday, and you drink alcohol.

Seems like you're saying it's unchristian to drink alcohol. Guess I'm misreading your comment:truestory::truestory:

[TheRealVille]

So you only use the definitions that fit you:dudecomeon:

No, history. Sunday is the 1st day of the week, the Sabbath is the last. The Jewish people, through the years, have used saturday as their Sabbath. In the Jewish sense, days started at one evening, and went until the next evening. The 7th day of the week started at Friday evening, and went until Saturday evening. Sunday started at Saturday evening, and went until Sunday evening, and so on.

[MustangSally]

Sabbath or a sabbath is generally a weekly day of rest or time of worship. It is observed differently in Abrahamic religions and informs a similar occasion in several other practices. Although many viewpoints and definitions have arisen over the millennia, most originate in the same textual tradition. The term has been used to describe a similar weekly observance in any of several other traditions; the new moon; any of seven annual festivals in Judaism and some Christian traditions; any of eight annual pagan festivals (usually "sabbat"); an annual secular holiday; and a year of rest in religious or secular usage, originally every seventh year.http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sabbath




A Ten Commandments monument which includes the command to "Remember the Sabbath day, to keep it holy".

Portal icon Christianity portal

Sabbath in Christianity is a weekly day of rest or religious observance, derived from Biblical Sabbath (Hebrew: שַׁבָּת‎, shabbâth, Hebrew word #7676 in Strong's, meaning intensive "repose").
Seventh-day Sabbath observance, i.e., resting from hard labor from sunset to sunset on the seventh day (from Friday to Saturday), similarly to Shabbat in Judaism, is practiced by seventh-day Sabbatarians.
Also, in the 2nd century AD, the observance of a corporate day of worship on the first day (Sunday, or Saturday night) had become commonplace, as attested in the patristic writings.[1] For such worshipers the term "Lord's Day" came to mean the first day or Sunday. From the 4th century onwards, Sunday worship has also taken on the observance of Sunday rest in some Christian traditions, such as the Puritans of the 16th and 17th centuries. Among these "first-day Sabbatarians", Sunday worship and/or rest eventually became synonymous with a first-day "Christian Sabbath".
Non-Sabbatarianism, the principle of Christian liberty from being bound to physical Sabbath observance, has significant historical support. Non-Sabbatarians focus on Sabbath's typological meaning, i.e., its representation of present or future spiritual rest in Christ.

Most dictionaries provide both first-day and seventh-day definitions for "Sabbath" and "Sabbatarian", among other related uses.http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sabbath_in_Christianity

[TheRealVille]

Sabbath or a sabbath is generally a weekly day of rest or time of worship. It is observed differently in Abrahamic religions and informs a similar occasion in several other practices. Although many viewpoints and definitions have arisen over the millennia, most originate in the same textual tradition. The term has been used to describe a similar weekly observance in any of several other traditions; the new moon; any of seven annual festivals in Judaism and some Christian traditions; any of eight annual pagan festivals (usually "sabbat"); an annual secular holiday; and a year of rest in religious or secular usage, originally every seventh year.http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sabbath




A Ten Commandments monument which includes the command to "Remember the Sabbath day, to keep it holy".

Portal icon Christianity portal

Sabbath in Christianity is a weekly day of rest or religious observance, derived from Biblical Sabbath (Hebrew: שַׁבָּת‎, shabbâth, Hebrew word #7676 in Strong's, meaning intensive "repose").
Seventh-day Sabbath observance, i.e., resting from hard labor from sunset to sunset on the seventh day (from Friday to Saturday), similarly to Shabbat in Judaism, is practiced by seventh-day Sabbatarians.
Also, in the 2nd century AD, the observance of a corporate day of worship on the first day (Sunday, or Saturday night) had become commonplace, as attested in the patristic writings.[1] For such worshipers the term "Lord's Day" came to mean the first day or Sunday. From the 4th century onwards, Sunday worship has also taken on the observance of Sunday rest in some Christian traditions, such as the Puritans of the 16th and 17th centuries. Among these "first-day Sabbatarians", Sunday worship and/or rest eventually became synonymous with a first-day "Christian Sabbath".
Non-Sabbatarianism, the principle of Christian liberty from being bound to physical Sabbath observance, has significant historical support. Non-Sabbatarians focus on Sabbath's typological meaning, i.e., its representation of present or future spiritual rest in Christ.

Most dictionaries provide both first-day and seventh-day definitions for "Sabbath" and "Sabbatarian", among other related uses.http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sabbath_in_Christianity

So, by that, we are a Christian nation, even though historical documents, and founder's writing say we are not? Because Congress set up Sunday as a day to not pass laws? Did you ever read the Treaty of Tripoli, or other historical US documents like I posted earlier? What about the establishment clause?

[TheRealVille]

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances.

From the 5th Congress:
Art. 11. As the Government of the United States of America is not, in any sense, founded on the Christian religion; as it has in itself no character of enmity against the laws, religion, or tranquillity, of Mussulmen; and, as the said States never entered into any war, or act of hostility against any Mahometan nation, it is declared by the parties, that no pretext arising from religious opinions, shall ever produce an interruption of the harmony existing between the two countries.


It's official, we aren't a Christian nation. We don't have a set "state" religion. I will take official writings over BGR interpretations any day.

[nky]

Interesting "debate"
Personally I feel we were founded on Christian principals. Our founding fathers were religious to varying degrees(many had various religious degrees, with some being ordained ministers) but they also knew to keep religion out of government(see what was happening in Europe at the time). They purposely kept faith out of U. S. Constitution which is one reason the Bill of Rights was needed to convince some states.
But to say religion and religious beliefs didn't play a role in the founding/shaping of this country is disingenuous.

[TheRealThing]

Sin is sin, according to God. If you are a liar, are you going to a less hot hell than a murderer? James said if you are guilty of breaking one part of the law, you are guilty of breaking all of the law.

Actually, according to scripture Psalm 116:11 (KJV) 11 I said in my haste, All men are liars.

But in the scripture you refer to, James was pointing out that breaking the law in the smallest point was sufficient indictment to condemn man to hell. In our terms even as much as a parking violation makes one a lawbreaker. Same thing with God's law and that's why James said (paraphrased) even if one were to keep the entire law but have only one little slip up, one bad thought, one little fib. The idea is that no man could ever merit salvation by any amount of good behavior and to illustrate that James said; James 2:10 (KJV)
"10 For whosoever shall keep the whole law, and yet offend in one point, he is guilty of all."

"There is none that doeth good, no, not one." or like the saying goes, "there has only been one perfect Man, and they crucified Him"

All men who would dare to face the judgment devoid of the covering of the Lord's shed blood will fail. So, you can compare yourself to me or Adolf Hitler, only one thing matters to God. What is your decision about the Lordship of Jesus Christ? Nothing more, nothing less.

[RunItUpTheGut]

Not that I'm a fan of her, but she hit the nail on the head on Meet The Press today.

Im not only saying that because of he beliefs and opinions, but the overall wacko ideas he and her followers conjure up.

Makes a regular liberal, such as yourself seem like Mitch Mcconnell.

[TheRealThing]

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances.

From the 5th Congress:
Art. 11. As the Government of the United States of America is not, in any sense, founded on the Christian religion; as it has in itself no character of enmity against the laws, religion, or tranquillity, of Mussulmen; and, as the said States never entered into any war, or act of hostility against any Mahometan nation, it is declared by the parties, that no pretext arising from religious opinions, shall ever produce an interruption of the harmony existing between the two countries.


It's official, we aren't a Christian nation. We don't have a set "state" religion. I will take official writings over BGR interpretations any day.

Your source is "Right Wing Watch"?
And wonder of wonders, Article 11 has some mysteriously inconsistent 'baggage' associated with it. From your source we see this statement, "In recent years, some “Christian nation” advocates have argued that Article 11 never appeared in the treaty. They base the claim on research conducted by a Dutch scholar, Dr. C. Snouk Hurgronje, published in The Christian Statesman in 1930. Hurgronje located the only surviving Arabic copy of the treaty and found that when translated, Article 11 was actually a letter, mostly gibberish, from the dey of Algiers to the ruler of Tripoli."

It’s clear that the English version of the treaty, which Congress approved, contained the famous Article 11. Why the article was removed from the Arabic version of the treaty, who did it and when remains another mystery.

To me what is clear, is that the absolute assertions made by the writer of your article are somewhat less than absolute. There are two possibilities, either the language was included in the treaty or it was not. The only surviving Arabic copy does not include Article 11. Language stating that America was not founded on the Christian Religion is entirely consistent with the concept spoken of by Jefferson regarding the wall of separation between the church and state. This does not mean that the founding fathers in any way denied the existence of God or our desperate need of His hand of guidance and blessing upon this land. Nor does it imply in any way that Godly men were not strongly influenced by His precepts in their decisions and governance as heads of state. And, let's get real here for just a second. To whom is the treaty addressed? I'll take the Arab world for a thousand Alex!

I mean, how likely would the congress really have been, to go Bible thumping to a group of Imams? Nobody ever claimed that American founding documents ever name Jesus Christ. But, as "Man's Creator" was clearly mentioned, it can only be referring to God. Be that as it may, I know for certain that I have outlined on here why the fathers knew that any official alignment of the state with the church, would surely produce results similar to those in England where nobody knew where the rule of Mad King George stopped and the purview of the Anglican Church started. We are a Christian nation even though the constitution forbids an official state church. So finally now, you are agreeing with me on this matter and at long last you've got it right?

[TheRealVille]

Your source is "Right Wing Watch"?
And wonder of wonders, Article 11 has some mysteriously inconsistent 'baggage' associated with it. From your source we see this statement, "In recent years, some “Christian nation” advocates have argued that Article 11 never appeared in the treaty. They base the claim on research conducted by a Dutch scholar, Dr. C. Snouk Hurgronje, published in The Christian Statesman in 1930. Hurgronje located the only surviving Arabic copy of the treaty and found that when translated, Article 11 was actually a letter, mostly gibberish, from the dey of Algiers to the ruler of Tripoli."

It’s clear that the English version of the treaty, which Congress approved, contained the famous Article 11. Why the article was removed from the Arabic version of the treaty, who did it and when remains another mystery.

To me what is clear, is that the absolute assertions made by the writer of your article are somewhat less than absolute. There are two possibilities, either the language was included in the treaty or it was not. The only surviving Arabic copy does not include Article 11. Language stating that America was not founded on the Christian Religion is entirely consistent with the concept spoken of by Jefferson regarding the wall of separation between the church and state. This does not mean that the founding fathers in any way denied the existence of God or our desperate need of His hand of guidance and blessing upon this land. Nor does it imply in any way that Godly men were not strongly influenced by His precepts in their decisions and governance as heads of state. And, let's get real here for just a second. To whom is the treaty addressed? I'll take the Arab world for a thousand Alex!

I mean, how likely would the congress really have been, to go Bible thumping to a group of Imams? Nobody ever claimed that American founding documents ever name Jesus Christ. But, as "Man's Creator" was clearly mentioned, it can only be referring to God. Be that as it may, I know for certain that I have outlined on here why the fathers knew that any official alignment of the state with the church, would surely produce results similar to those in England where nobody knew where the rule of Mad King George stopped and the purview of the Anglican Church started. We are a Christian nation even though the constitution forbids an official state church. So finally now, you are agreeing with me on this matter and at long last you've got it right?

No. I don't know what article you are talking about, but it's not one I've read. I posted the official wording from the 5th Congress, I don't give a rat's rear about your conspiracy theory version. We can read the official version, we don't need a Christian sites trying to add a different meaning to suit their needs. 2nd bold: Again, which god? The Christian god? The Deist god? The Unitarian god?


http://www.stephenjaygould.org/ctrl/treaty_tripoli.html