Specially for bob...

---

History Lesson

Actually the whole series is pretty good, but probably more truth than most athiests can handle. :wink:

Alright, to be fair...I clicked your link, saw what it was, etc..but this isn't so much about that.You complain/aren't fond of other people talking undue shots at you, but whenever you post something like this, you take shots at others. Now isn't that the pot calling the kettle black...

OK, I have heard of David Barton. I have quite a long rebuttal against those videos and Barton's arguments in general.If I post it, will you read it? I know that you probably won't accept it as you prefer his version and thats up to you to decide. But my points will be backed up by specific references and the post will be quite long as he does lie an awful lot.

Originally Posted By: bobaliciousOK, I have heard of David Barton. I have quite a long rebuttal against those videos and Barton's arguments in general.If I post it, will you read it? I know that you probably won't accept it as you prefer his version and thats up to you to decide. But my points will be backed up by specific references and the post will be quite long as he does lie an awful lot. I'll read it...but what I buy is (or will be) the result of verifyable evidence. He's got quite a bit. I do seriously doubt you do. Barton really doesn't argue anything...he just presents the historical facts. Athiests/humanists/secularists have already run off with the incorrect interpretation of the whole "church and state" issue...as taught them in school (I remember it myself). Most of them offer viewpoints that are built on that and similar lies/ommisions...so I'll be interested to see what you have to add to what they've already said.

I just spent 10 days living in a house that was built 500yrs before the American constitution was inked. I think you need to travel outside the US for some perspective.
242yrs does not a success story make in the grander scheme of nations.

I also love how he finds that part of the bible that suggests taking from the poor and giving to the rich is a basis for an economy. Isn't that part of what the first settlers wanted escape?

Or was Robin Hood just a tale of a Communist?

I got as far as "we're the only nation out of that 192 [in the UN] that do [sic] not average a revolution every twenty to thirty years" and decided I was wasting my time.

Originally Posted By: thorI'll read it...but what I buy is (or will be) the result of verifyable evidence. He's got quite a bit. I do seriously doubt you do. Barton really doesn't argue anything...he just presents the historical facts. Athiests/humanists/secularists have already run off with the incorrect interpretation of the whole "church and state" issue...as taught them in school (I remember it myself). Most of them offer viewpoints that are built on that and similar lies/ommisions...so I'll be interested to see what you have to add to what they've already said. What Barton presents are quote-mines, out of context lines from documents, straight out lies and rewordings as well as his famous line "Now that doesn't sound very secular/atheist/non-religious." --------------Declaration of IndependenceNow, what Barton does in this first main argument is try to associate the Declaration of Independence (DoI) with Christianity. He starts out talking about the Creator mentioned in the DoI and how it was believed that certain rights such as life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness were granted from this creator. John Locke had a similar belief but worded it as life, liberty and property, but it seems that Thomas Jefferson's version is more popular. Barton then goes on to make one big assumption about what the founding fathers meant when they wrote the DoI: Originally Posted By: BartonThere are four basic principles that we said;1 - There is a creator god.2 - The creator god created man and he created all men equal. He gave his son to die for each and every man, he didn't give him to die just for some. And therefore, that's where we got on early in the civil rights movement, because we looked at what Paul said... Removed this bit because its Christian waffle and has no relevance to the argument.Did you notice what he did there? Using NO verifiable evidence, Barton made the unfounded assumption that the Creator mentioned in the DoI was the Christian God. He tried to throw in some Biblical justification by quoting Paul's 'all of the same blood' line and a bit of Revelations, but neither of that is historical evidence and in fact goes against what Thomas Jefferson would have believed as he was a strong Deist and rejected Christianity, the Bible and religion's influence in government. It was Thomas Jefferson himself that propagated the phrase "separation of church and state."----------This is gonna take a bit of time to get to all the points in these videos, so I'll be posting in small segments. Otherwise you might be waiting over a week for the whole thing.

Originally Posted By: RadWhy do you require verifiable evidence, but expect us to take your word for it? In just the one episode I gave a link for (there are several others), he provided two documents and a lot of verifiable evidence (old textbooks, etc). Apparently you missed that.

Originally Posted By: bobaliciousDid you notice what he did there? Using NO verifiable evidence, Barton made the unfounded assumption that the Creator mentioned in the DoI was the Christian God.This can't be what you were going to write. Is this the best you've got?OK...I'll bite (for fun). What god, if not the Jewish/Christian god, was he then referring to? Quote:It was Thomas Jefferson himself that propagated the phrase "separation of church and state."I guess you missed the part where he states where it may be found that that phrase had been used approx. 200 years before Thomas Jefferson did. And I do note you're skirting the issue, which is how what Jefferson wrote was re-interpreted in 1947 to mean something other than what it was originally intended to mean...which is why so many folks educated after that time believe just as you do.---------- Quote:This is gonna take a bit of time to get to all the points in these videos, so I'll be posting in small segments. Otherwise you might be waiting over a week for the whole thing. OK

Originally Posted By: Ineligible

I got as far as "we're the only nation out of that 192 [in the UN] that do [sic] not average a revolution every twenty to thirty years" and decided I was wasting my time. :smile:

Exactly what I would expect from a liberal who's afraid of the truth. At least bob has some guts.

Originally Posted By: thor Originally Posted By: bobaliciousDid you notice what he did there? Using NO verifiable evidence, Barton made the unfounded assumption that the Creator mentioned in the DoI was the Christian God.This can't be what you were going to write. Is this the best you've got?OK...I'll bite (for fun). What god, if not the Jewish/Christian god, was he then referring to?Jefferson, as well as a number of other founding fathers, were deists. This is different from theism because they believe that there was a creator that created the universe in whatever form but had no further influence afterwards. No divine intervention, no messiahs. Hence this god being referred to simply as the Creator, as deists believe that to be its only role. Originally Posted By: thor Quote:It was Thomas Jefferson himself that propagated the phrase "separation of church and state."I guess you missed the part where he states where it may be found that that phrase had been used approx. 200 years before Thomas Jefferson did.As I said, Jefferson propagated the phrase. I didn't say he came up with it. (And just in case you can't tell the difference, it means that he used it a lot.) Originally Posted By: thorAnd I do note you're skirting the issue, which is how what Jefferson wrote was re-interpreted in 1947 to mean something other than what it was originally intended to mean...which is why so many folks educated after that time believe just as you do.As I said, I'm taking my time with this, going through the videos and addressing the points as they arise. Don't worry thor, you'll be resorting to lies and conspiracy accusations soon enough.

Originally Posted By: thorAt least bob has some guts.Thanks.

so much to say and so little time! remind me, Ill come back to this shit on monday if I get time by then to stop by again.Money calls ya know, 2 patios worth of cement, a deck foundation, a new sub floor and tile to be laid in the entire ground level of a house.. far to busy to piss away my day here, once my coffee is gone I got shit to do, but remind me, Ill be back to shit on this.

Originally Posted By: thor Originally Posted By: bobaliciousDid you notice what he did there? Using NO verifiable evidence, Barton made the unfounded assumption that the Creator mentioned in the DoI was the Christian God.This can't be what you were going to write. Is this the best you've got?OK...I'll bite (for fun). What god, if not the Jewish/Christian god, was he then referring to?right there, you openly admit that you are assuming a Christian god. That is pure arrogance.And do, pray tell, what UN countries are in this constant state of revolution? I don't seem to remember the Canadian revolution.

Canada doesn't count... don't you know that yet.

I wish I had time to comment, more than a "way to go bob" or something like but I'm busy today and tomorrow. Like Chance I'll be back Monday.

Originally Posted By: bobalicious

Originally Posted By: thor

Originally Posted By: bobalicious

Did you notice what he did there? Using NO verifiable evidence, Barton made the unfounded assumption that the Creator mentioned in the DoI was the Christian God.

This can't be what you were going to write. Is this the best you've got?

OK...I'll bite (for fun). What god, if not the Jewish/Christian god, was he then referring to?

Jefferson, as well as a number of other founding fathers, were deists. This is different from theism because they believe that there was a creator that created the universe in whatever form but had no further influence afterwards. No divine intervention, no messiahs. Hence this god being referred to simply as the Creator, as deists believe that to be its only role.

I know what a diest is, and it is the Christian/Jewish God they believe in. Just ask one (if you can find one). But you skirted the question. If not the Christian God, in spite of all the other evidence stacking up, which one?

Originally Posted By: thorI know what a diest is, and it is the Christian/Jewish God they believe in. Just ask one (if you can find one).Sorry, what? The Deist god is NOT the Abrahamic god. The Abrahamic god is an intervening god, the Deist god is not. The only thing they have in common is that they are both beliefs that some entity created the universe, after that they are completely different. By your logic, the Hindu god is the same god as the Abrahamic god as well simply because they both created the universe.So you either don't know what Deism is, or you're ignoring the point. Originally Posted By: thorBut you skirted the question. If not the Christian God, in spite of all the other evidence stacking up, which one? I'll get to "all the other evidence" in a while. The Creator for them was the only known theory for the world at the time, Cosmology was around for quite a while but it was still in its intellectual infancy at the time. (Just as in a few hundred years it will be seen to be now.) It was not referring to any one god but to nature, saying that without man-made laws and institutions, in nature we are all the same, we are all equal and not subject to anyone else.There is no indication that the Creator mentioned ion the DoI is the Christian god.

I think that Thor's head might explode if he started to consider that the founding principals of the USA were not so much Christian as they are Masonic.

Quote:

Exactly what I would expect from a liberal who's afraid of the truth.
You like throwing around personal insults, don't you, thor? I bet you don't like receiving them. But don't worry, I'm not stooping so low.

It's not fear of the truth, it's disgust at untruth. When you are dealing with someone who has just told a big blatant lie without twitching, you know you are dealing with a liar. And that means everything has to be checked, and it's just not worth it.

There's a simple rule that has been handed down: it says Thou shalt not bear false witness (Ex 20:16; cf Deut 5:20, Matt 19:18, Mark 10:19, Luke 18:20). Why is it, thor, that the people you direct us to as exemplars have so much trouble with that commandment? We are all sinners, but when I see a video of someone who makes a big steaming ball of his sin and presents it with a hypocrite's smile as virtue, you will have to forgive me if the churning of my stomach prevents me from continuing.

Like I said, he's a big ol' pot. :grin:

Besides...those words seem so big.

Yeah, I'm not as polite.