Christian Forums

Authored by American diplomat Joel Barlow in 1796
Sent to the floor of the Senate, June 7, 1797,
Unanimously approved.
John Adams signed it and proclaimed it to the Nation.


Annals of Congress, 5th Congress

    Article 1. There is a firm and perpetual peace and friendship between the United States of America and the Bey and subjects of Tripoli, of Barbary, made by the free consent of both parties, and guarantied by the most potent Dey and Regency of Algiers.

    Art. 2. If any goods belonging to any nation with which either of the parties is at war, shall be loaded on board of vessels belonging to the other party, they shall pass free, and no attempt shall be made to take or detain them.

    Art. 3. If any citizens , subjects, or effects, belonging to either party, shall be found on board a prize vessel taken from an enemy by the other party, such citizens or subjects shall be set at liberty, and the effects restored to the owners.

    Art. 4. Proper passports are to be given to all vessels of both parties, by which they are to be known. And considering the distance between the two countries, eighteen months from the date of this treaty, shall be allowed for procuring such passports. During this interval the other papers, belonging to such vessels, shall be sufficient for their protection.

    Art. 5. A citizen or subject of either party having bought a prize vessel, condemned by the other party, or by any other nation, the certificates of condemnation and bill of sale shall be a sufficient passport for such vessel for one year; this being a reasonable time for her to procure a proper passport.

    Art. 6. Vessels of either party, putting into the ports of the other, and having need of provisions or other supplies, they shall be furnished at the market price. And if any such vessel shall so put in, from a disaster at sea, and have occasion to repair, she shall be at liberty to land and re-embark her cargo without paying any duties. But in case shall she be compelled to the land her cargo.

    Art. 7. Should a vessel of either party be cast on the shore of the other, all proper assistance shall be given to her and her people; no pillage shall be allowed; the property shall remain at the disposition of the owners; and the crew protectedand succored till they can be sent to their country.

    Art. 8. If a vessel of either party should be attacked by an enemy, within gun-shot of the forts of the other , she shall be defended as much as possible. If she be in port she shall not be seized on or attacked, when it is in the power of the other party to protect her. And when she proceeds to sea, no enemy shall be allowed to pursue her from the same port, within twenty-four hours after her departure.

    Art. 9. The commerce between the United States and Tripoli; the protection to be given to merchants, masters of vessels, and seamen; the reciprocal right of the establishing Consuls in each country; and the privileges, immunities, and jurisdiction, to be on the same footing with those of the most favored nations respectively.

   Art. 10. The money and presents demanded by the Bey of Tripoli, as a full and satisfactory consideration on his part, and on the part of his subjects, for this treaty of perpetual peace and friendship, are acknowledged to have been received by him previous to his signing the same, according to a receipt which is hereto annexed, except such as part as is promised, on the part of the United States, to be delivered and paid by them on the arrival of their Consul in Tripoli; of which part a note is likewise hereto annexed. And no pretense of any periodical tribute of further payments is ever to be made by either party.

   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.

   Art. 12. In case of any dispute, arising from a violation of any of the articles of this treaty, no appeal shall be made to arms; nor shall war be declared on any pretext whatever. But if the Consul, residing at the place where the dispute shall happen, shall not be able to settle the same, an amicable referrence shall be made to the mutual friend of the parties, the Dey of Algiers; the parties hereby engaging to abide by his decision. And he, by virtue of his signature to this treaty, engages for himself and successors to declare the justice of the case, according to the true interpretation of the treaty, and to use all the means in his power to enforce the observance of the same.

    Signed and sealed at Tripoli of Barbary the 3d day of Junad in the year of the Hegira 1211— corresponding with the 4th day of November, 1796, by

      JUSSOF BASHAW MAHOMET, Bey.
      MAMET, Treasurer.
      AMET, Minister of Marine.
      SOLIMAN KAYA.
      GALIL, General of the Troops.
      MAHOMET, Commander of the City.
      AMET, Chamberlain.
      ALLY, Chief of the Divan.
      MAMET, Secretary.

Signed and sealed at Algiers, the 4th day of Argill, 1211—corresponding with the 3d day of
January, 1797, by

      HASSAN BASHAW, Dey,

And by the agent Plenipotentiary of the United States of America,

JOEL BARLOW.

Interesting.

If the US wasn't specifically founded upon the Christian religion, would it be fair to say the US was founded upon Judaeo-Christian principles?

Pax.

QuoteArt. 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.

The intent (I believe) of the passage in question was to ensure the Tripolians (?) that the U.S. does not object to doing business with Muslim countries, nor to coexisting with them peacefully.   Ours is not a country which will seize their property or invade their country on religious pretexts.  The U.S. is not a Theocracy. 

Some atheists and agnostics and secularists try and use the Treaty of Tripoli in order to bolster their arguments for abortion rights, gay marriage rights and such things, but the treaty merely stated that the U.S. is no carbon copy of England where the Church of England was the state Church and one could be persecuted for practicing a different religion, your property seized etc.   The founders deliberately wished to avoid a State Church for the nation as whole, although the states were free to do so, I believe.

It seems clear from the writings of the founding fathers that America was founded on Judeo-Christian principles as Lee just stated. 

Brian hit the nail right on the head. I wish I could have paraphrased the argument as well as he did. Manna for you.


Windsong

As a non-U.S citizen whose never been to your wonderful country (just because it's very expensive getting there and staying in hotels, etc), I've often wondered just how "Christian" the foundation of the U.S government and constitution is.

Sometimes I detect (and I say this without ANY attitude of criticism or disdain) that many Christians in America (and I could be VERY wrong - it's just something that seems to be the case) seem to confuse the Statue of Liberty with Christianity - that woman symbolizes legalised abortion, pornography, the banning of the Lord's prayer being uttered in public schools; and "freedom of expression" to express anything vile - a lot of GOOD and bad has come from the freedoms Americans have gained from their constitution and system of government.

Legalised abortion, pornography etc are also guaranteed human rights in the constitution of the country I live in - so I'm not criticizing, just wondering if some U.S Christians confuse the Statue of Liberty and system of government with Christianity?

Ananias

Quote from: Brian on Wed Jun 04, 2008 - 10:05:36

QuoteArt. 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.

The intent (I believe) of the passage in question was to ensure the Tripolians (?) that the U.S. does not object to doing business with Muslim countries, nor to coexisting with them peacefully.   Ours is not a country which will seize their property or invade their country on religious pretexts.  The U.S. is not a Theocracy. 

Some atheists and agnostics and secularists try and use the Treaty of Tripoli in order to bolster their arguments for abortion rights, gay marriage rights and such things, but the treaty merely stated that the U.S. is no carbon copy of England where the Church of England was the state Church and one could be persecuted for practicing a different religion, your property seized etc.   The founders deliberately wished to avoid a State Church for the nation as whole, although the states were free to do so, I believe.

It seems clear from the writings of the founding fathers that America was founded on Judeo-Christian principles as Lee just stated. 

To say the US was founded on Judeo-Christian principles is correct in the sense that was the background of the men who did the founding. But to suggest that all of the founders were evangelical fundamentalists just like us is laughable.  There were indeed some very devout men involved, and there were some not so devout men.  I just fail to see how the religious tendencies of these men has much impact on what is right or wrong for us.  After all, isn't truth transcendant?  Does it make me more legitimate if they were more Christian?  Why should I spend a lot of energy trying to prove this issue one way or the other?

Quote from: DennisBut to suggest that all of the founders were evangelical fundamentalists just like us is laughable.

Did someone on this thread suggest that, or are you speaking more generally?

Quote from: Brian on Wed Jun 11, 2008 - 11:36:39

Quote from: DennisBut to suggest that all of the founders were evangelical fundamentalists just like us is laughable.

Did someone on this thread suggest that, or are you speaking more generally?

Generally, and with some hyperbole, but I have heard such comments before.

Quote from: ananias laos on Sat Jun 07, 2008 - 06:23:48
As a non-U.S citizen whose never been to your wonderful country (just because it's very expensive getting there and staying in hotels, etc), I've often wondered just how "Christian" the foundation of the U.S government and constitution is.

Sometimes I detect (and I say this without ANY attitude of criticism or disdain) that many Christians in America (and I could be VERY wrong - it's just something that seems to be the case) seem to confuse the Statue of Liberty with Christianity - that woman symbolizes legalised abortion, pornography, the banning of the Lord's prayer being uttered in public schools; and "freedom of expression" to express anything vile - a lot of GOOD and bad has come from the freedoms Americans have gained from their constitution and system of government.

Legalised abortion, pornography etc are also guaranteed human rights in the constitution of the country I live in - so I'm not criticizing, just wondering if some U.S Christians confuse the Statue of Liberty and system of government with Christianity?

Ananias

And here I thought the Statue of Liberty symbolized our being a nation of immigrants!   Boy I need to restudy my history!

Personally, I just wish all those who talk about our being founded as a Christian nation would delve into the history of our founding, read books about our founders that weren't written to push an agenda as well as the writings of the founders themselves, read our founding documents, dig into the context of the times.

In the end, what you might find is that freedom of religion really wasn't the whole reason for our founding and many of the founders didn't want to see us mix Christianity with government in a way that would identify the two closely, but that doesn't mean that our founding wasn't a noble thing.  We were established by a mixture of political and philosophical idealists and pragmatists who thought that we could do better, that we could, instead of simply following the established methods, fashion a system of government that fit our geography and sociology in a way that the old system couldn't.

Our real history is much more compelling than the simplified telling that so many throw out to further their own agendas.

What does it take to be a "Christian nation"?

I received an update from this site and when I saw this thread I thought the latest article might be of benefit to some of you.

http://www.babylonthegreatisfalling.net/

Click on "What's New."

Quote from: James Rondon on Wed Jun 11, 2008 - 22:16:03
What does it take to be a "Christian nation"?

We're already part of one, but it isn't a geopolitical entity.

Quote from: marc on Thu Jun 12, 2008 - 19:55:36

Quote from: James Rondon on Wed Jun 11, 2008 - 22:16:03
What does it take to be a "Christian nation"?

We're already part of one, but it isn't a geopolitical entity.

Please elaborate.

When the article says the following about Bush and Schwarzenneger it gives me just a bit o' pause:

"The answer is rather simple, yet extremely sad and very hard for any of us to believe. Both of these men hate and despise the God of Israel, the Lord Jesus Christ, and his teachings."

Just because Bush (a deeply dedicated evangelical Christian from what I have read and seen, just not a Christian Zionist, and certainly not a religious pluralist-I'd like to see a reference for this quote) thinks the Arabs are entitled to land and Schwarzenneger doesn't want to offend gays, that is proof that they hate God? Whether one agrees with either man's view or not, that seems a bit strong to me.

Pax.

Quote from: Lee Freeman on Mon Jun 30, 2008 - 17:15:20
When the article says the following about Bush and Schwarzenneger it gives me just a bit o' pause:

"The answer is rather simple, yet extremely sad and very hard for any of us to believe. Both of these men hate and despise the God of Israel, the Lord Jesus Christ, and his teachings."

Just because Bush (a deeply dedicated evangelical Christian from what I have read and seen, just not a Christian Zionist, and certainly not a religious pluralist-I'd like to see a reference for this quote) thinks the Arabs are entitled to land and Schwarzenneger doesn't want to offend gays, that is proof that they hate God? Whether one agrees with either man's view or not, that seems a bit strong to me.

Pax.

I don't agree with all he says either but I believe he gives us much to consider.  Did you read all of the article?

Quote from: marc on Wed Jun 11, 2008 - 15:09:31
And here I thought the Statue of Liberty symbolized our being a nation of immigrants!   Boy I need to restudy my history!

The Statue of Liberty was supposed to be a veiled Egyptian woman and stand in the Suez Canal, you know.

http://www.klif.com/Backside_Of_American_History2.pdf
Read chapter 57, "The Statue of Liberty"

Weak.

This same argument has been passed around for decades.  Weak.

The FACT that the majority of people who came to this nation were Christians and believed in the GOD of Abraham proves that this is a Christian nation.  They only made this stupid document for trade purposes.

Christian nation through and through.  We are now beset by heathen liberal media.  However, we are still at our core a Christian nation.

To what argument are you referring?  The OP isn't an argument, it's a treaty.  If you're referring to posts after it, you'll have to specify.  The post preceding yours was mine, and in it I presented no argument, but a bit of trivia concerning the Statue of Liberty.

As for the media, you must be confused about the thread you're reading, this one has nothing to do with them.

Quote from: WhoIsLikeUntoGOD? on Sat Sep 06, 2008 - 15:23:26
Weak.

This same argument has been passed around for decades.  Weak.

The FACT that the majority of people who came to this nation were Christians and believed in the GOD of Abraham proves that this is a Christian nation.  They only made this stupid document for trade purposes.

Christian nation through and through.  We are now beset by heathen liberal media.  However, we are still at our core a Christian nation.

This nation may have once been a nation based on Christian values but some foreign nations don't see it that way anymore.

I have to admit that putting myself on the other side of the glass looking in it doesn't resemble Christ nor anything He stood for.

bump

Okay, what exactly are those distinctly Judeo-Christian principles and where can I find them in our founding documents?

First, I've never understood the point of the "Christian nation" argument unless its some sort of replacement theology making the United States the new Israel.

Second, the Founders were influenced by Christianity, yet took pains to insist that government and church not be entwined. Prior to the Revolution and even after the adoption of the Articles of Confederacy the official state churches in some states had the power to levy taxes to support their activities. They apparently saw this as not being a good idea.

Third, many of the Founders were Deists who rejected the supernatural revelation of God.

Notably Jefferson made his own heretic Bible which omitted all miracles including resurrection. In the early 1900's copies of the Jefferson Bible were given to new Congressmen who often took the oath of office on a Bible that did not contain the Old Testament and ends with a dead Jesus in the tomb!

Patrick Henry was a believer. When the Virginia Statute on Religious Freedom was being considered the preamble stated
Well aware that Almighty God hath created the mind free.
Henry and others moved to strike "Almight God" and substitute "Jesus Christ" and their amendment failed.

The Founders were influenced by the Bible but many weren't the pious believers the history changers would love for you to believe.

Quote from: WhoIsLikeUntoGOD? on Sat Sep 06, 2008 - 15:23:26
...we are still at our core a Christian nation.

Yep, at our core a Christian nation.

It's around the edges that we aren't so much.  But then, that's where most of the people live.

I had always believed it to be founded on Christian principles. But then someone made an interesting point that caught my eye.

Look what those "Christians" did to the native American's and to the slaves they brought over from Africa. That is not the signs of a Christian nation.

Most of the founders of the US state were empowered by Enlightenment principles rather than Christian ones, per se.

Quote from: Lee Freeman on Tue Jun 03, 2008 - 15:42:01
If the US wasn't specifically founded upon the Christian religion, would it be fair to say the US was founded upon Judaeo-Christian principles?

Pax.

What "principles" are you talking about? 

Quote from: James Rondon on Wed Jun 11, 2008 - 22:16:03
What does it take to be a "Christian nation"?

There cannot be any such thing as a Christian Nation until each and every person acts in accordance with what the Bible says, is a Christian.

In other words, a Christian Nation must start with each and every person, being an individual  Christian both in word, and deed.



The New Earth, will be a Christian Nation, totally and completely.

Enlightenment = The Age of Reason

A time when Philosophy, Science/Reason ruled the thought processes and was the prime motivator in politics and advancement of mankind.  Overlapped with the Renaissance but helped usher in the ideology that would lead to the American Revolution.

it gets worse a lot of our founding fathers were Masons of a high degree and not ignorant of what the mason objective is  either.

Let's bump this one too.

You do realise the Treaty of Tripoli is stating the United States is not a Theocracy?

The First Amendment comfirms it as well.

While the first amendment secures protectection of the Word, it also prohibits the federal from "establishing" religion, meaning an official state religion - Theocracy. 

Yeah, that was the point of this thread.

Marc,

It just that I have seen this pointed to sooooooo many times attempting to take the meaning out of context.  

The secular humanist & historical revisionist always want to quote the first part of Article XI (bolded by the OP) of the Treaty of Tripoli and ignore and refuse to discuss the qualifiers & intent of that statement, such as - " as it has in itself no character of enmity against the laws, religion, or tranquillity, of Mussulmen;", which declares, confirms, & reconfirms, that the federal national branch of the United States is not a Theocracy.

Intent is just so glaringly obvious to even a mind with only basic understanding of language contruction, that it continually amazes me that the secular humanist & historical revisionist still attempt to pose a long disproven & incorrect theory.

The secular humanist & historical revisionist also do not want to discuss, much less study the real history of the American people. It grinds their teeth to admit that the very first settlers concencrated the ground with their lives escaping the tyranny of forced State controlled religion. Freedom from religious oppression IS the core tenet of the founding of America.

The secular humanist & historical revisionist do not want look at the or discuss Causes and Necessity of Their Taking Up Arms - July6, 1775. They never want one to see declarations such as;

"Our forefathers, inhabitants of the island of Great-Britain, left their native land, to seek on these shores a residence for civil and religious freedom"

Which reconfirms the above, plus the intent & understanding of the founders.

or;

"Our cause is just. Our union is perfect. Our internal resources are great, and, if necessary, foreign assistance is undoubtedly attainable. -- We gratefully acknowledge, as signal instances of the Divine favour towards us, that his Providence would not permit us to be called into this severe controversy, until we were grown up to our present strength, had been previously exercised in warlike operation, and possessed of the means of defending ourselves. With hearts fortified with these animating reflections, we most solemnly, before God and the world, declare, that, exerting the utmost energy of those powers, which our beneficent Creator hath graciously bestowed upon us, the arms we have been compelled by our enemies to assume, we will, in defiance of every hazard, with unabating firmness and perseverence, employ for the preservation of our liberties; being with one mind resolved to die freemen rather than to live slaves. "

I could add much much in citation of real history, our history is recorded and clear from the documents, letters, and first hand accounts of the people who lived it.  

I hope & pray someday in our near future, our schools & universities will no longer be indoctination centers of revised disinformation, and become again centers of truth & knowledge.