Of course, those teachings being pretty well identical to any other ethical system - our failure to follow such would result in failure - but it's because the ethical systems are ALL sound, not because there's something supernaturally superior about Jesus' teachings.

I weary of the pretense by *some* Christians that there's some qualitative difference between the 'teachings' of Jesus as interpreted by this or that Church, and the teachings of the Buddha, Hillel or any other similar teacher.

Oct 11, 2011 -- 5:26AM, snoopygal wrote:

LeahOne, I made no claim of  superiority or exclusiveness. But did Buddha and Hillel or anyone else really say the same things Jesus did? Did they say love your enemies?

Love your enemies in world religions: www.unification.net/ws/theme144.htm

And while we are at it, the Golden Rule: www.religioustolerance.org/reciproc.htm

Christianity is nothing special. In fact, the only thing it offers that other religions don't seem to is salvation theology, a notion I find repugnant.

I can only suppose, that if they needed to separate church from state, that church and its Judeo-Christian values...were intrinsic to the founding of our Country

Oct 11, 2011 -- 5:10PM, lulu2 wrote:

I can only suppose, that if they needed to separate church from state, that church and its Judeo-Christian values...were intrinsic to the founding of our Country

The suggestion that only Judeo-Christian values are suitable for establishing a republican or democratic form of government cannot be supported by history. The Sumer and Indian democracies, Greek and Roman republics, Germanic states, and the Iroquois Confederation were not based on Christianity. The American Founding Fathers felt they needed to separate church and state because they wished to prevent theocracies such as existed in the Massachusetts Bay and Virginia colonies. As the Father of the Constitution, James Madison, wrote:

"Notwithstanding the general progress made within the two last centuries in favour of this branch of liberty, and the full establishment of it in some parts of our country, there remains in others a strong bias towards the old error, that without some sort of alliance or coalition between Government and Religion neither can be duly supported. Such, indeed, is the tendency to such a coalition, and such its corrupting influence on both the parties, that the danger cannot be too carefully guarded against. And in a Government of opinion like ours, the only effectual guard must be found in the soundness and stability of the general opinion on the subject. Every new and successful example, therefore, of a perfect separation between the ecclesiastical and civil matters, is of importance; and I have no doubt that every new example will succeed, as every past one has done, in showing that religion and Government will both exist in greater purity the less they are mixed together. It was the belief of all sects at one time that the establishment of Religion by law was right and necessary; that the true religion ought to be established in exclusion of every other; and that the only question to be decided was, which was the true religion. The example of Holland proved that a toleration of sects dissenting from the established sect was safe, and even useful. The example of the colonies, now States, which rejected religious establishments altogether, proved that all sects might be safely and even advantageously put on a footing of equal and entire freedom; and a continuance of their example since the Declaration of Independence has shown that its success in Colonies was not to be ascribed to their connection with the parent country. if a further confirmation of the truth could be wanted, it is to be found in the examples furnished by the States which had abolished their religious establishments. I cannot speak particularly of any of the cases excepting that of Virginia, where it is impossible to deny that religion prevails with more zeal and a more exemplary priesthood than it ever did when established and patronized by public authority. We are teaching the world the great truth, that Governments do better without kings and nobles than with them. The merit will be doubled by the other lesson: the Religion flourishes in greater purity without, than with the aid of Government" -- James Madison (Letter to Edward Livingston, July 10, 1822).