tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5516627478339613810.post2248708379533771296..comments2023-11-02T03:10:39.674-07:00Comments on GeeeeeZ!: Sunday Faith BlogZhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/15989573357446569262noreply@blogger.comBlogger66125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5516627478339613810.post-42866937734169575122011-02-15T16:37:20.410-08:002011-02-15T16:37:20.410-08:00Craig, exactly what God would Jefferson be referri...Craig, exactly what God would Jefferson be referring to? Allah? Ra the Sun God? Get real, please.<br /><br />For heaven's sake, I mention the laws of nature. How does that make me a non believer?<br /><br />What religion or religious belief do you suppose they were imbued with? What Bible? <br /><br />You're really reaching now. <br /><br />PrisAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5516627478339613810.post-41098720717601665972011-02-15T16:20:14.838-08:002011-02-15T16:20:14.838-08:00I don't know Barton, I just admire that SOMEON...I don't know Barton, I just admire that SOMEONE is speaking up in fighting the insane, overt slamming of things Christian in this country, as if that's a plague or something.<br /><br />If he 'lies', as you and others put it (and oh, my GOSH, he must be doing something right because there's a cottage industry of Barton-haters on Google!) he's exaggerating to make great points.Zhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15989573357446569262noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5516627478339613810.post-22370026314778527922011-02-15T14:02:44.979-08:002011-02-15T14:02:44.979-08:00"Giving me rights" wasn't one of the...<i>"Giving me rights" wasn't one of them.</i><br /><br />Just as I thought. Those 27 Amendments are superfluous.Craighttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06124629994153584904noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5516627478339613810.post-3644225092910055412011-02-15T13:10:29.245-08:002011-02-15T13:10:29.245-08:00You pick Jefferson as an example when it's so ...<i>You pick Jefferson as an example when it's so well known he was the least of the believers, though he DID believe and mentions Christ, too, in much of his writings.</i><br /><br />Z,<br /><br />I didn't "pick" Jefferson. Pris brought up the line from the Declaration as an illustration of the Founders belief in a Creator. Something I never denied. I merely pointed out that Jefferson's idea of Creator, impersonal first cause, might not be so easily conflated with the God of the bible. For the record, Jefferson admired the character Jesus for his philosophy. Jefferson didn't believe in the divinity of Christ, the Trinity and thought the miracles in the bible were nonsense.<br /><br />My only reason for commenting is David Barton. If the centrality of Christianity in the formation of our nation and the shaping of our govt. is so obvious, why does Barton need to distort, misrepresent and lie? He's been proven to be a liar.Craighttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06124629994153584904noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5516627478339613810.post-4873251210923009012011-02-14T23:08:14.008-08:002011-02-14T23:08:14.008-08:00The government is constrained from infringing upon...The government is constrained from infringing upon a pre-existing natural [God-given] right, like self-defense.(((Thought Criminal)))https://www.blogger.com/profile/17311656184275255223noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5516627478339613810.post-81575164362039627292011-02-14T23:03:50.980-08:002011-02-14T23:03:50.980-08:00As Papaw taught me while showing me how to use the...As Papaw taught me while showing me how to use the sights to shoot accurately with an M1 Garand - he handed me the Constitution and said "This lists your rights." Then he handed me the rifle and said "This keeps them."<br /><br />The US Goverment was set up to do a few, clearly defined, highly limited things. <br /><br />"Giving me rights" wasn't one of them. <br /><br />We give the government consent, not the other way around. Pris said it well.(((Thought Criminal)))https://www.blogger.com/profile/17311656184275255223noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5516627478339613810.post-1381195684206028942011-02-14T16:15:31.374-08:002011-02-14T16:15:31.374-08:00"Our founders were Christians or Deists, and ..."Our founders were Christians or Deists, and that's obvious. What they weren't, were supporters of an establishment by the government of a religion, or the church."<br /><br />Craig, the quote above, is from my comment. What is it about a Deist, that you don't understand?<br /><br />"That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed,"<br /><br />If I may be so bold to add: Yes, the consent of the governed, who derive their rights from the creator! <br /><br />It is the people who loan these powers to the government through our consent, not the other way around.<br /><br /><br />PrisAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5516627478339613810.post-8805890136639073252011-02-14T15:14:38.364-08:002011-02-14T15:14:38.364-08:00Wow, Craig, I'm actually surprised at your arg...Wow, Craig, I'm actually surprised at your arguments because they're so thin.<br />I said that I believe the founding forefathers looked at their faith as the CS Lewis comment I quoted, plus they are MUCH more overt in many of their writings..Jesus Christ is mentioned many more times than I knew until I really researched.<br /><br />Nobody's over-inflating...nobody's denying Christianity's goodness isn't echoed in our faiths....Everybody knows governments are instituted by MEN, what do you expect, God sitting as President of the United States???\<br /><br />You pick Jefferson as an example when it's so well known he was the least of the believers, though he DID believe and mentions Christ, too, in much of his writings. <br /><br />Man, Google Barton and see the onslaught...some deserved, some showing REAL fear of what he says..<br />The hilarious part is some school parents and the School Board condemning him for teaching Middle East History from a Christian point of view; this from schools pushing to have Islamic history taught including fasting and praying five times a day,..you can't make this stuff up. THat's FINE, but do NOT teach Middle Eastern history with Christianity involved! :-)/Zhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15989573357446569262noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5516627478339613810.post-51560004075362807392011-02-14T12:51:44.022-08:002011-02-14T12:51:44.022-08:00After all, if we gain our rights from the Creator,...<i>After all, if we gain our rights from the Creator, the left want's that refuted and discredited, because they believe our rights should come from our government.<b>[Correct]</b> How else can they gain control?</i><br /><br />The next line from the Declaration, after the line you quoted;<br /><br /><b>That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed,</b><br /><br />Jefferson believed it too.<br /><br /><i>We have recognized our Christian foundation through American traditions. It is part of our culture, try as you might to negate it, and we are not willing to comply with your wishes.</i><br /><br />No, I don't want to negate it. Over-inflating it is just as bad.Craighttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06124629994153584904noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5516627478339613810.post-18035251513675158642011-02-14T12:50:49.683-08:002011-02-14T12:50:49.683-08:00The above quote from the Declaration of Independen...<i>The above quote from the Declaration of Independence is a fact. It substantiates the argument that belief in the Creator was very much instrumental in our founding.</i><br /><br />Jefferson also mentions "Nature's God" and "Laws of Nature". His idea of "Creator" doesn't, in any way, resemble the "Creator" one would associate with Christianity. He denied the divinity of Jesus, as did Franklin and Madison and probably many more, and the Trinity.<br /><br />I have no doubt that some of the Founders and Framers were devout Christians. Many would have said their values derived from their religion. Many others believed those values aren't inherent in or exclusive to Christianity.<br /><br />I've read the Federalist Papers, Madison's notes on the Constitutional Convention and religion, Christianity or Christian Values just isn't a topic much discussed. I don't see the need for people like Barton to portray the centrality of Christianity at the founding where it didn't exist, unless it's to prop up their cause. <br /><br /><i>All David Barton does is bring this to the forefront through historical documents and writings, to disabuse those arguments which for far too long, have denied the Christian influence on our founding. </i><br /><br />No, he doesn't. That's my point in posting how he has distorted or lied. When he said "26 (?, whatever # he used) of the signers were Seminary students", that's misleading and he knows it. In the 17th and 18th century, Seminary was what <b>all</b> institutions of higher learning were called. He makes it sound like they were all studying for the clergy. At that time, training for the clergy was done at a Theological Seminary. Maybe one or two of the founders did that but you wouldn't know if you got your history from Barton. Really, very little of what he 'teaches' is true.Craighttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06124629994153584904noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5516627478339613810.post-25221873377423725832011-02-14T12:24:09.699-08:002011-02-14T12:24:09.699-08:00""I believe in Christianity as I believe...""I believe in Christianity as I believe the sun has risen, not only because I see it, but because by it I see everything else by it.""<br /><br />Yes Z. This says it beautifully.<br /><br />PrisAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5516627478339613810.post-2101947759401377752011-02-14T10:05:20.266-08:002011-02-14T10:05:20.266-08:00Pris, thanks...I've been thinking about this a...Pris, thanks...I've been thinking about this a little this morning and I believe it actually is a fear of some secularists (and Christians and others of faith) that Christians want a theocracy the minute they ask to please not take crosses down or to leave the Ten Commandments where they were, don't take them down.<br /><br />My sidebar on my blog home page has a quote from C. S. Lewis which I think very well illustrates how the Christianity of nearly ALL of the founding fathers reflects on this country. Here it is:<br /><br />"I believe in Christianity as I believe the sun has risen, not only because I see it, but because by it I see everything else by it."<br /><br />That's self-evident in about every piece of writing by our fathers.<br /><br />Mr. Obama has left "Creator" out 3 times now from his reciting of that part of the Dec. of Ind. you cited....that's fairly stunning; mostly so that the media didn't mention it. Of course, they're probably thrilled, but it is dishonest and uncurious on their part not to delve into those ommissions; Any Republican president would have been seriously taken to task.<br />Imagine if Palin or Bachmann left any words our while reciting any piece of Americana? It would be everywhere.<br /><br />I don't feel ANY of us needs to defend CHristianity. It's something I've seen take over peoples' lives and make their lives immeasurably better, it's snuck up on me and many others when we were least expecting it and didn't even WANT it necessarily... well, to go on would be ridiculous...it would overload my comments pages!<br /><br />But, suffice it to say this country WOULD be far better off, and WAS, if we do live by the true words of Christianity (and Judaism), not the nutty evangelist money-grubbers, not those faking faith and mocking soldiers with "God hates fags"...ETCZhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15989573357446569262noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5516627478339613810.post-45827583606496714612011-02-14T09:45:49.517-08:002011-02-14T09:45:49.517-08:00Craig, I think you, like many, confuse Christian b...Craig, I think you, like many, confuse Christian belief and values, with the church or clergy.<br /><br />It's clear that our founders disowned anything resembling the Church of England.<br /><br />Some had problems with the clergy, or the church, but to extrapolate that into non belief, or a lack of influence of Christianity in our founding, is the error that's frequently made.<br /><br />Our founders were Christians or Deists, and that's obvious. What they weren't, were supporters of an establishment by the government of a religion, or the church.<br /><br />Craig said - "I agree, religion/Christianity was part of the culture in the late 17th century. To say it is the foundation of the establishment of our country is not supported by facts."<br /><br />The Declaration of Independence; "We hold these truths to be self evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty, and the Pusuit of Happiness."<br /><br />The above quote from the Declaration of Independence is a fact. It substantiates the argument that belief in the Creator was very much instrumental in our founding.<br /><br />If this is not the foundation of our country, what is it? <br /><br />IMO, you confuse establishment of religion, or the Church, with Christian belief, either intentionally, or mistakenly. <br /><br />It was not merely part of the culture, it was mirrored all through our founding because our founding fathers were believers. <br /><br />All David Barton does is bring this to the forefront through historical documents and writings, to disabuse those arguments which for far too long, have denied the Christian influence on our founding. <br /><br />And that, is what sticks in your craw.<br /><br />After all, if we gain our rights from the Creator, the left want's that refuted and discredited, because they believe our rights should come from our government. How else can they gain control? <br /><br />We have never had a theocracy, and as far as I know, no one is seeking that, except of course Islam. <br /><br />We have recognized our Christian foundation through American traditions. It is part of our culture, try as you might to negate it, and we are not willing to comply with your wishes.<br /><br />PrisAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5516627478339613810.post-7355319320826922992011-02-14T08:11:31.840-08:002011-02-14T08:11:31.840-08:00Craig "To say it is the foundation of the est...Craig "To say it is the foundation of the establishment of our country is not supported by facts."<br /><br />You need to read all the writings of the founders. One can't help but be influenced when one is so steeped in CHristianity as they were.<br /><br />Scotty, we're meant to be stewards...and I agree with your thoughts but I always remember that, too.Zhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15989573357446569262noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5516627478339613810.post-92033054335094195082011-02-14T07:20:49.774-08:002011-02-14T07:20:49.774-08:00Don't forget Ecclesiastes ;)Don't forget Ecclesiastes ;)(((Thought Criminal)))https://www.blogger.com/profile/17311656184275255223noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5516627478339613810.post-65875769326478957702011-02-14T06:50:49.122-08:002011-02-14T06:50:49.122-08:00Ducky could be correct as far as Barton’s affiliat...Ducky could be correct as far as Barton’s affiliation with the dominionist world view. He certainly uses a lot of the catch phrases. A LOT of the “TV Preachers” are unashamedly dominionist.<br /><br />As a Christian, I pretty much view what Barton does a waste of time. I think it misses the Mark 16 commandment,<br /><br />Mar 16:15 Then he said to them, "As you go throughout the world, proclaim the Good News to all creation. <br /><br /> If we are to accept the Bible for what it is and what is says, it’s all a waste of time and takes away from the more important things.<br /><br />Depending on what day it is, I often struggle with the issue of how much a Christian should be involved in politics. There’s that dirty/seedy side of politics I see and wonder if that’s where one should be. It also requires a lot of compromise, one look at what happen at CPAC would prove that point……so I wonder.<br /><br />If one takes a stroll through Daniel, Isaiah, Ezekiel and Revelation it would appear it’s all moot.Scottyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16121811949825846208noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5516627478339613810.post-65384422044874122112011-02-14T06:42:12.377-08:002011-02-14T06:42:12.377-08:00Does anyone remember what happened when the Franks...Does anyone remember what happened when the Franks paid a ransom of silver to Scandinavian Vikings to persuade them to not raid Frankish villages for plunder?<br /><br />The Vikings took the silver, raised a larger army, captured the Frankish silver mines, and brutally forced the Franks to dig up more silver.<br /><br />Ron Paulism is stupid in any era.(((Thought Criminal)))https://www.blogger.com/profile/17311656184275255223noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5516627478339613810.post-40188267293158763892011-02-14T06:26:14.948-08:002011-02-14T06:26:14.948-08:00Imagine if these words appeared in a piece of legi...<i>Imagine if these words appeared in a piece of legislation or treaty today;<br /><br />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 tranquility, of Mussulmen (Muslims)<br /><br />Think anyone would make a stink? You probably know this is Article 11 of the "Treaty of Tripoli". It was published in the major newspapers of the day, ratified unanimously by the U.S. Senate on June 7, 1797 and signed by John Adams.</i><br /><br />::raises hand::<br /><br />I would make a stink. <br /><br />The Treaty of Tripoli of 1797 committed the United States [in Article 10 of that treaty] to make a tribute payment to the Tripolitan States as extorted ransom against further piracy and slavetaking against American commercial vessels, their crews and their passengers.<br /><br />Today it would be like offering Osama Bin Laden and his followers billions of dollars not to hijack and crash commercial airliners into our civilian infrastructure anymore. <br /><br />Now, this timid surrender-as-foriegn-policy tactic might today well be "acceptable" to historically ignorant, logically deficient, militantly imbecilic anti-American politicians like Ron Paul and his fellow leftists at an ANSWER rally or a window-smashing anti-capitalist WTO riot, but to sovereignty-minded libertarians and national security conservatives like myself and everyone else in the right-wing, it's a suicide note.<br /><br />We saw how the Treaty of Tripoli went. It resulted in more piracy, more hostage-taking, more enslavement of American citizens captured at sea, ended only after 12 years of hard fought war and the honorable mission of the United States Navy and Marine Corps.(((Thought Criminal)))https://www.blogger.com/profile/17311656184275255223noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5516627478339613810.post-50662698663716520632011-02-14T05:51:57.875-08:002011-02-14T05:51:57.875-08:00I don't know what Barton's point is, but I...I don't know what Barton's point is, but I usually avoid government contra religion and religion contra government arguments by positing a entirely different argument:<br /><br />We should not quibble over whether or not there should be institutionally led prayers in public schools. <br /><br />We should not care whether or not a public school presents the view that critical inquiry can logically hold that mankind is the product of intelligently designed functions inherent to or of the universe by an unseen cosmic initiator. We should not care whether or not some men religiously assert that mankind simply rose from Anaximander's dead fish as divined by incoherent primitive speculations involving bizarre necromantic rituals with fossilized rock impressions. <br /><br />No, we shouldn't bother with this rigmarole at all. Instead, we should assert that these social arguments are unnecessary without public schools Americans, especially those without children, are compelled to fund.<br /><br />It's about money and government power, and not about that Johnny might come home wondering what side of his family tree walked out of the mouth of a beached fish.(((Thought Criminal)))https://www.blogger.com/profile/17311656184275255223noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5516627478339613810.post-31377233343277688022011-02-14T04:09:30.559-08:002011-02-14T04:09:30.559-08:00The Craigs, Ducky's, and some others will soon...<i>The Craigs, Ducky's, and some others will sooner accept this as fringe. And why? because they can. It's politically correct, thereby acceptable. </i><br /><br />Instead of telling me what I think, you could easily ask me. <br /><br />I agree, religion/Christianity was part of the culture in the late 17th century. To say it is the foundation of the establishment of our country is not supported by facts. It's clear that David Barton misrepresents, distorts, quote mines and flat out lies to paint a picture of our founding that never existed. He is easily refuted using his own footnoted sources. He gets away with it because few people are willing to check his sources and are satisfied by the appearance of a 'footnote'.<br /><br />I'm not anti-Christian. I'm anti-phony history. If there is a case to be made, then make it. Honestly. This whole revision is being used to push an 'agenda'. Denying rights to certain groups, teaching Creationism/ anti-science, abortion (I get the opposition to it, but the case against must be on merit and not, "the bible says so".), and on and on. I have a beef with Islam or any other religion that might try and foist their beliefs on me. It just so happens, Christians are the dominant religion here and <b>some</b>,not all, are pushing, what I consider, a Theocracy. <br /><br />Imagine if these words appeared in a piece of legislation or treaty today;<br /><br /><b>As the Government of the United States of America is <i>not, in any sense, founded on the Christian religion,</i>—as it has in itself no character of enmity against the laws, religion, or tranquility, of Mussulmen (Muslims)</b><br /><br />Think anyone would make a stink? You probably know this is Article 11 of the "Treaty of Tripoli". It was published in the major newspapers of the day, ratified unanimously by the U.S. Senate on June 7, 1797 and signed by John Adams.<br /><br />Just sayin'.Craighttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06124629994153584904noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5516627478339613810.post-1796706862854112792011-02-14T04:06:59.251-08:002011-02-14T04:06:59.251-08:00Z,
I looked at the link you gave me and it contai...Z,<br /><br />I looked at the link you gave me and it contains many of the same errors and distortions Barton uses.<br /><br />"The bible of the American Revolution" was a name given to the Aitken bible in <b>1930</b> by two guys who were trying to sell leaves and copies of leaves in compilation books titled,<br /><br /><i>An Original Leaf from the Bible of the Revolution, and an Essay Concerning It By Robert R. Dearden, Jr. and Douglas S. Watson.</i><br /><br />They were trying to hype the value of the book.<br /><br /><i> Congress passed a resolution to make every attempt to import 20,000 Bibles in English “from Holland, Scotland, or elsewhere, into the different parts of the Union.”</i><br /><br />Dr. Allison petitioned Congress for the importation of quality paper and type face. That was determined not to be practical, so the idea was floated to loan money for the importation of bibles. It was never passed as a resolution by the Continental Congress no money was loaned.<br /><br /><i>Congressional Resolution was adopted granting Aitken permission and financial support</i><br /><br />This is a bald faced lie. The Resolution wasn't granting permission, it was an endorsement that Aitken could use any way he wanted. Congress didn't give Aitken a dime to print his bible. Aitken ended up losing 3000 pounds on his printing of 10,000 bibles. The reason they are so rare is that very few were sold and the unsold copies were eventually thrown out.<br /><br />Z, Barton goes on to make several untrue statements in the video. You made it clear you're not interested in hearing the facts and will delete any further attempts by me to debunk him. I'm responding now to a direct reply from you, so I hope you don't delete this.Craighttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06124629994153584904noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5516627478339613810.post-37227295442233364712011-02-14T00:02:03.718-08:002011-02-14T00:02:03.718-08:00folks, let's stick to the topic a little bette...<i>folks, let's stick to the topic a little better. I don't want to continue that battle.<br />thanks.</i><br /><br />Sorry I got distracted by the "anonymous" Paulbot sock puppet show performed by one who mendaciously feigns feeling "bullied" because he's been asked to leave and take his stinky anti-Semitic racist socks with him, yet adamantly refuses to do so. Like a bully.<br /><br />As for Barton's presentation, it's a rather dubious presentation of history-as-agenda. I'm not certain I want to contemplate the implications of what remembering that Congress used to meet for worship in a Capitol Building room full of statues means to Barton. <br /><br />If he's saying "Look, America's earliest political leaders were Christians" and stops there, he's not setting off my alarms.<br /><br />If he's saying "Let's take on our Manifest Destiny to make Egypt the 51st state" well, that's something else entirely.(((Thought Criminal)))https://www.blogger.com/profile/17311656184275255223noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5516627478339613810.post-59117898591143270652011-02-13T23:23:50.493-08:002011-02-13T23:23:50.493-08:00Actually, they built an outpost colony named "...Actually, they built an outpost colony named "Enoch" in the land of Nod....(((Thought Criminal)))https://www.blogger.com/profile/17311656184275255223noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5516627478339613810.post-45612414624028264232011-02-13T23:20:39.012-08:002011-02-13T23:20:39.012-08:00folks, let's stick to the topic a little bette...folks, let's stick to the topic a little better. I don't want to continue that battle.<br />thanks.Zhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15989573357446569262noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5516627478339613810.post-14236058064016342342011-02-13T22:59:59.439-08:002011-02-13T22:59:59.439-08:00blessed Irony! :)
Was in reference to a previous ...<i>blessed Irony! :)</i><br /><br />Was in reference to a previous comment that simply evaporated. Let's see if it does better this time.<br /><br />@BEamish. <i>And one day the aliens landed here, proclaiming their discovery a "new world" yet we'd been here all along.<br /></i><br /><br />Did they come in a ship named Santa Maria - the "founding Fathers"? lol.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.com