Time to regulate Bible and samurai sword ownership

[Armistead]

Originally Posted by Sailor Steve

My objection wasn't to your comments on Anglicanism vs Puritanism vs Catholicism but you your specific comment "...our nation actually became founded out of the hate of the KJV." Only a very few people came here seeking 'religious freedom', and I don't believe that which version of the bible they read had anything to do with it. That is what I asked for documentation on.

Actually if you study the issue, many of the Puritans {believers in the Geneva bible and Doctrine} were persecuted by the COE, {KJV believers} many tortured and killed.

The actual core of them wanting to come to America was over this. They hated the KJV with it's taint of Rome and the latin vulgate. They refused any KJV bible and brought with them their beloved Geneva. You're wrong to assume people came here for religious freedom per say. More one group of believers left than many with different beliefs. Those that came did so with one religious mindset, not seeking religious freedom for all. All in all, only about a 10% difference between the two, but some big differences.

If you study the links in detail, it's rather clear, but again a long study.

[Sailor Steve]

Originally Posted by Armistead

Actually if you study the issue, many of the Puritans {believers in the Geneva bible and Doctrine} were persecuted by the COE, {KJV believers} many tortured and killed.

The actual core of them wanting to come to America was over this. They hated the KJV with it's taint of Rome and the latin vulgate. They refused any KJV bible and brought with them their beloved Geneva. You're wrong to assume people came here for religious freedom per say. More one group of believers left than many with different beliefs. Those that came did so with one religious mindset, not seeking religious freedom for all. All in all, only about a 10% difference between the two, but some big differences.

If you study the links in detail, it's rather clear, but again a long study.

First, while I'm trying to cure myself of being a grammar nazi, especially when it's someone I'm disagreeing with, I have to point out that the phrase is per se, Latin for "by itself" or "of itself". I apologize, but that's one that drives me crazy.

Again, my exception wasn't that your arguments, it was to your assertion that this argument was responsible for the founding of the United States.

Virginia: Agriculture and wealth.
Delaware: Founded as New Sweden so the Dutch government could gain a foothold in the New World.
North Carolina: Founded by Virginians seeking to expand.
South Carolina: As North Carolina.
New Jersey: Founded as part of the ex-New Netherlands contract. The founders promised new settlers religious freedom, but that was to attract workers for an economic charter. They also promised representative government for the same reason.
New York: Founded by James, Duke of York, as part of the New Netherlands settlement. Economic.
Pennsylvania: Founded so the Quakers could have religious freedom. They had their own bible, but hostility toward the KJV does not seem to be a part of the reason they came here. Pennsylvania was arguably the first colony to guarantee true freedom of worship to all its citizens. The puritans of Massachussetts certainly did not.
Georgia: Founded as a place for those in debtor's prison to start a new life, and as a buffer to the Spanish holdings in Florida.

So of the original thirteen colonies, only two were founded for religious reasons, and only Massachussetts had the Puritans. The US was mostly founded by economic expansionists and the English Government, which wanted their own foothold in the new world.