[TheRealThing]

You blather and blather, cloud without rain, words without knowledge. "Nature's God": pray tell, that phraseology, from whence, in that time, did it spring? Deism. The four "dig here" spots, not just a politician's words spoken as part of the public persona all politician's use, are an objective test. I'm sorry, TRT, but you are wrong. You have wedded your faith and your politics and love of country and an illegitimate child is the result.

I frankly could not care less that you and I do not agree on this matter, and I can assure you that we do not agree on what constitutes a right relationship with the Almighty. I am not wrong and you cannot mount a meaningful rebuff of my contention that the founders felt as I do. My analysis makes perfect sense while your neo-distortions are ridiculous. But if I understand the nature of your argument, it is that God, the Architect and Creator of this universe and all the life within it, the sum of which BTW man refers to as nature, is somehow separated from the controlling purview of the Creator by a force called Deism. That about right? The clearly worded basis which gave the founders the authority to establish new government, unalienable rights given to them and therefore us, came to us from God Himself. If you want to errantly attribute the founders right understanding of the Lordship and authority of the Godhead to Deism that's unfortunate. But it still doesn't diminish the profound scope of the wording in the first two paragraphs of the Declaration.

Tell you what. I'll spend my life sticking to and proliferating Scripture and a lucid interpretation of the Constitutional documents ala Justice Scalia. And you can spend yours preaching/teaching the gospel as you see it along with a Deistic interpretation of the Constitutional documents, and we'll see who has his head up the highest in the end. In other words, my experiences in life, my relationship with God, the inerrancy of the Scriptures, and the clearly set forth writings which constitute our founding documents are not subject to or mitigated in any way, (in my mind), by an article in the Encyclopedia Britannica. Now, you want to 'dig' for your truth somewhere other than the record or God's Word, go ahead. But let's not kid ourselves here. Why would a child of God deny His power, or the truth of our own national heritage? You're looking for slack or a compromise of the truth and I don't see any allowance for that in the Bible, or in the documents. But good luck with that. :biggrin:

BTW, after many long months of being subjected to your particular brand of circular logic we still find ourselves waiting for you to adequately define a truly illegitimate though not parentless doctrine, essential liberty.