Were Most Of America's Founding Fathers - Christians

[DriftingSand]

Likewise, the signers of the Constitution and the Articles of Confederation were Christians. Peruse this, if you will:

Religion of the Founding Fathers of America

And good day to you all.

 

[Hollie]

They caved to peer pressure. Simon and Schuster won't. Nelson had no problem printing the book until they were pummeled into submission. The editor in chief is clearly lacking certain manly attributes -- stones.

Conspiracy theories won't help you with this disaster.

But Christians sure have offered you a cushy life. The A-number one best system of governance the world has ever seen brought to you by -- Christians.

On the other hand, it's interesting that those very Christians made sure that they and others were protected from Christianity.

 

[DriftingSand]

=Hollie;9055713]The Right's Favorite Historian Comes Apart at the Seams

The Right's Favorite Historian Comes Apart at the Seams | Mother Jones

Glenn Moots of Northwood University wrote that Barton in The Jefferson Lies is so eager to portray Jefferson as sympathetic to Christianity that he misses or omits obvious signs that Jefferson stood outside "orthodox, creedal, confessional Christianity." A second professor, Glenn Sunshine of Central Connecticut State University, said that Barton's characterization of Jefferson's religious views is "unsupportable." A third, Gregg Frazer of The Master's College, evaluated Barton's video America's Godly Heritage and found many of its factual claims dubious, such as a statement that "52 of the 55 delegates at the Constitutional Convention were 'orthodox, evangelical Christians.'"

I, too, stand outside of orthodox, creedal, confessional Christianity but, then, so did Christ and the Apostles. Jefferson was in good company.

That's to say nothing of Barton's even more out-there theories, like his claims that Jesus opposed the minimum wage, the Founding Fathers denounced the Theory of Evolution, and the Sally Hemings affair was a liberal plot. Another evangelical professor, Warren Throckmorton of Grove City College, has co-authored a book, Getting Jefferson Right, that systematically debunks Barton's theories about the the country's third president. (Throckmorton has been a Barton critic for years, but this is far and away his most comprehensive takedown.)

Deflection and not relevant to the topic at hand. We know the libs are in trouble when they resort to defamation of character. Watch out ... your M.O. is oozing from your pores.

 

[DriftingSand]

Conspiracy theories won't help you with this disaster.

But Christians sure have offered you a cushy life. The A-number one best system of governance the world has ever seen brought to you by -- Christians.

On the other hand, it's interesting that those very Christians made sure that they and others were protected from Christianity.

No ... protected from a state religion!! Big difference.

 

[Hollie]

The Right's Favorite Historian Comes Apart at the Seams

The Right's Favorite Historian Comes Apart at the Seams | Mother Jones

For more a decade, the religious right's leading authority on America's founders and their divine inspiration has been David Barton, a fast-talking Texan with a bachelor's degree in Christian education and a climate-controlled underground vault stocked with tens of thousands of antique documents, including Bibles, diaries, and correspondence. Barton has turned the study of America's Christian roots into a lucrative business, hawking books and video sermons, speaking at churches and political confabs, and scoring a fawning New York Times profile and interviews on the Daily Show. He's got friends in high places: "I almost wish that there would be like a simultaneous telecast and all Americans would be forced—at gunpoint no less—to listen to every David Barton message," Mike Huckabee told an Evangelical audience in March of 2011. "I never listen to David Barton without learning a whole lot of new things," Newt Gingrich told conservatives in Iowa that same month.

That's probably because much of what David Barton writes seems to have originated in David Barton's head.
.

 

[Hollie]

But Christians sure have offered you a cushy life. The A-number one best system of governance the world has ever seen brought to you by -- Christians.

On the other hand, it's interesting that those very Christians made sure that they and others were protected from Christianity.

No ... protected from a state religion!! Big difference.

The state religion of Christianity.

 

[Hollie]

=Hollie;9055713]The Right's Favorite Historian Comes Apart at the Seams

The Right's Favorite Historian Comes Apart at the Seams | Mother Jones

Glenn Moots of Northwood University wrote that Barton in The Jefferson Lies is so eager to portray Jefferson as sympathetic to Christianity that he misses or omits obvious signs that Jefferson stood outside "orthodox, creedal, confessional Christianity." A second professor, Glenn Sunshine of Central Connecticut State University, said that Barton's characterization of Jefferson's religious views is "unsupportable." A third, Gregg Frazer of The Master's College, evaluated Barton's video America's Godly Heritage and found many of its factual claims dubious, such as a statement that "52 of the 55 delegates at the Constitutional Convention were 'orthodox, evangelical Christians.'"

I, too, stand outside of orthodox, creedal, confessional Christianity but, then, so did Christ and the Apostles. Jefferson was in good company.

That's to say nothing of Barton's even more out-there theories, like his claims that Jesus opposed the minimum wage, the Founding Fathers denounced the Theory of Evolution, and the Sally Hemings affair was a liberal plot. Another evangelical professor, Warren Throckmorton of Grove City College, has co-authored a book, Getting Jefferson Right, that systematically debunks Barton's theories about the the country's third president. (Throckmorton has been a Barton critic for years, but this is far and away his most comprehensive takedown.)

Deflection and not relevant to the topic at hand. We know the libs are in trouble when they resort to defamation of character. Watch out ... your M.O. is oozing from your pores.

You're in deep denial. You are incapable of understanding that your fundamentalist heroes are the ones who are trashing Barton as a fraud.

 

[thebrucebeat]

there shouldn't have been damage to begin with. Had the naysayers simply asked him to come forward to discuss the issues perhaps all this nonsense could have been avoided. However, it's my belief that the naysayers are deathly afraid of the actual truth so it became necessary to blackball him before he had a chance to set the record straight. I can guarantee you that his next book won't leave any stone unturned.

the "naysayers" are his own publishers!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
The conservative thomas nelson imprint!!!!!!!!!!!

They caved to peer pressure. Simon and Schuster likely won't. Nelson had no problem printing the book until they were pummeled into submission. The editor in chief is clearly lacking certain manly attributes -- stones.

You would make such an accusation when you know the peers that brought his lazy scholarship to light were conservative scholars?
Thomas Nelson has a reputation to protect, and Barton threatened it by being incompetent. They had no choice. He embarrassed the imprint.
Simon and Schuster won't tolerate it any more than they did. Probably less, as it has a wider readership.

 

[DriftingSand]

=thebrucebeat;9055849]

You would make such an accusation when you know the peers that brought his lazy scholarship to light were conservative scholars?
Thomas Nelson has a reputation to protect, and Barton threatened it by being incompetent. They had no choice. He embarrassed the imprint.
Simon and Schuster won't tolerate it any more than they did. Probably less, as it has a wider readership.

Again ... the word "conservative" can be defined differently by different folks. You would call Romney a "conservative." I would not. I would call him middle-of-the-road. But it's also important to realize that many true conservatives can disagree on certain issues. We're not like Liberals who walk in lock-step on every issue and take their marching orders from CNN and CBS.

Thomas Nelson just hurt their "reputation" in my opinion. I certainly won't buy any of their products unless and until they offer Barton a public apology and give him the opportunity to redeem himself.

Glenn Beck has offered to sponsor (pay for) the publishing of Barton's book. He mentioned Simon & Schuster. I don't know who will ultimately publish it but if Beck wants to maintain his credibility then he will have to follow through with his promise. I'm not Beck's number one fan either and find him a tad bit insincere but perhaps he will do this one good deed.

 

[Chuckt]

Likewise, the signers of the Constitution and the Articles of Confederation were Christians. Peruse this, if you will:

Religion of the Founding Fathers of America

And good day to you all.

Yup.

 

[Chuckt]

Conspiracy theories won't help you with this disaster.

But Christians sure have offered you a cushy life. The A-number one best system of governance the world has ever seen brought to you by -- Christians.

On the other hand, it's interesting that those very Christians made sure that they and others were protected from Christianity.

Hollie,

I went to a secular college and they had a book on every president and what his religion was in the library. It was predominantly Christian.

Good day.

Chuck

 

[thebrucebeat]

=thebrucebeat;9055849]

You would make such an accusation when you know the peers that brought his lazy scholarship to light were conservative scholars?
Thomas Nelson has a reputation to protect, and Barton threatened it by being incompetent. They had no choice. He embarrassed the imprint.
Simon and Schuster won't tolerate it any more than they did. Probably less, as it has a wider readership.

Again ... the word "conservative" can be defined differently by different folks. You would call Romney a "conservative." I would not. I would call him middle-of-the-road. But it's also important to realize that many true conservatives can disagree on certain issues. We're not like Liberals who walk in lock-step on every issue and take their marching orders from CNN and CBS.

Thomas Nelson just hurt their "reputation" in my opinion. I certainly won't buy any of their products unless and until they offer Barton a public apology and give him the opportunity to redeem himself.

Glenn Beck has offered to sponsor (pay for) the publishing of Barton's book. He mentioned Simon & Schuster. I don't know who will ultimately publish it but if Beck wants to maintain his credibility then he will have to follow through with his promise. I'm not Beck's number one fan either and find him a tad bit insincere but perhaps he will do this one good deed.

How can Glenn Beck maintain what he never had?

 

[Chuckt]

=thebrucebeat;9055849]

You would make such an accusation when you know the peers that brought his lazy scholarship to light were conservative scholars?
Thomas Nelson has a reputation to protect, and Barton threatened it by being incompetent. They had no choice. He embarrassed the imprint.
Simon and Schuster won't tolerate it any more than they did. Probably less, as it has a wider readership.

Again ... the word "conservative" can be defined differently by different folks. You would call Romney a "conservative." I would not. I would call him middle-of-the-road. But it's also important to realize that many true conservatives can disagree on certain issues. We're not like Liberals who walk in lock-step on every issue and take their marching orders from CNN and CBS.

Thomas Nelson just hurt their "reputation" in my opinion. I certainly won't buy any of their products unless and until they offer Barton a public apology and give him the opportunity to redeem himself.

Glenn Beck has offered to sponsor (pay for) the publishing of Barton's book. He mentioned Simon & Schuster. I don't know who will ultimately publish it but if Beck wants to maintain his credibility then he will have to follow through with his promise. I'm not Beck's number one fan either and find him a tad bit insincere but perhaps he will do this one good deed.

How can Glenn Beck maintain what he never had?

It isn't about maintaining. He's a benefactor.

 

[MaxGrit]

Sorry you're embarrassed but there really isn't much I can do about that. I'm in another profession.

I know that you won't take time to watch this video but Barton defends his book AFTER the recall. So it now becomes his word against the words of his attackers. What most folks don't want to admit is that Barton has the legitimate data and documents to back up his original claims. Anyway, for anyone TRULY interested in the truth here's Barton defending himself and his credibility (fast forward to 13:55. The earlier portion is simply a long introduction). Barton is a good man who truly wants the truth to be known. I don't believe that he EVER intentionally mislead anyone:

David Barton Defends His Recalled Book Thomas Jefferson Lies w/ Glenn Beck in GBTV Answering Critics - YouTube

Good video. A solid apology, full of evidence to support his scholarship about the claims in the book. He easily destroys the credibility of those subpar "academics".

Thanks MaxGrit.

Dear Christians and other truth-seekers. Please contact Wallbuilders and offer Barton your moral support. He's always been under attack by satanic, anti-Christ forces and he's always taken their verbal attacks with a grain of salt. He's not used to a group of pseudo-christians and non-historians coming out of the woodwork and denouncing his works with such fervor.

I first met Barton in the mid to late 80s after I accepted Christ. I met him at a family Bible camp in the Montana mountains. He was nothing but humble, gracious, and honest. I heard him speak and I saw first hand a few of the original documents he had in his possession. That was some 25 or so years ago. He's a Christian warrior who's sole purpose is to reveal truth in history. He's under attack by modern academics but which one of us isn't? He's just taking a greater amount of heat because he's on the front lines. Pray for him and his ministry.

I, for one, will buy his book the moment it goes back into print (thanks to Glenn Beck). Now Beck is a Mormon - a religion which I do not believe is in line with biblical Christianity. But God has used non Christians and even pagans to reach certain, beneficial ends (anyone ever hear of Nebuchadnezzar?).

If you haven't heard Barton's rebuttal to his detractors then I urge you to give him the time of day. Listen to his side of the story instead of buying into the rhetoric of the "bruces" and "hollies" of the world.

 

[Hollie]

Maintaining those sterling standards of The Stupid, Barton is still demonstrating that his earlier lies, fabrications and mangling history was not a fluke.


David Barton tackles women’s voting rights

David Barton tackles women's voting rights | MSNBC


Far-right pseudo historian David Barton is known for having some creative ideas on history, but late last week, the conservative media personality broke some new ground.

…Barton explained that women were not given the right to vote when the Constitution was written because the Founding Fathers were trying to protect the institution of the family by giving every “family” a right to vote through the male head of the household.

Responding to a question from a listener who argued that the Founding Fathers denied women the right to vote not out of sexism but rather based on the biblical principle that a house divided against itself cannot stand, Barton said that this interpretation was exactly right because not allowing women to vote was designed “to keep the family together.”

There’s one small problem with this: Barton, as is too often the case, is wrong.

 

[DriftingSand]

First of all, Barton is, once again, providing factual evidence based on factual documentation that reflects the general thinking or mindset of that era. He, himself, isn't attacking or "tackling" anything. He's read the literature of the day and he's simply reporting the news, as it were.

But are we supposed to be surprised that MSNBC and the rest of the mainstream media is smearing a Christian or a conservative. Yawn. That's yesterday's news. Who can believe a word they say? They're the same folks defending the actions of a rogue, ultra-liberal President and sweeping his plethora of lies under the proverbial rug. If anyone can't be trusted it's the liberal media and their lackey underlings.

 

[Hollie]

First of all, Barton is, once again, providing factual evidence based on factual documentation that reflects the general thinking or mindset of that era. He, himself, isn't attacking or "tackling" anything. He's read the literature of the day and he's simply reporting the news, as it were.

But are we supposed to be surprised that MSNBC and the rest of the mainstream media is smearing a Christian or a conservative. Yawn. That's yesterday's news. Who can believe a word they say? They're the same folks defending the actions of a rogue, ultra-liberal President and sweeping his plethora of lies under the proverbial rug. If anyone can't be trusted it's the liberal media and their lackey underlings.

Right. Just retreat to "it's all a conspiracy".

 

[Hollie]

http://www.splcenter.org/get-informed/intelligence-files/profiles/david-barton

David Barton’s ascendant star as a self-taught “historian” and influential leader of the evangelical far right crashed in a storm of ridicule when the world’s largest Christian publisher recalled Barton’s 2012 book, The Jefferson Lies, for too many serious whoppers — the kind of gross factual mistakes that are a death knell for any real historian. A prolific propagandist, Barton has long promoted the canard that our Founding Fathers never intended the separation of church and state but rather sought to construct a Christian nation. His Texas-based group, WallBuilders, sells an abundant bounty of books and DVDs pushing Barton’s fun-house vision of religious patriotism. And this distorted message has sold well. Anointed “one of the 25 most influential Evangelicals” by Time Magazine in 2005, Barton has been a political consultant to the Republican National Committee and served as vice chairman of the Texas Republican Party. Although even a large group of conservative Christian history scholars has meticulously refuted the claims in his Jefferson book, Barton continues to sell it and to promote his views online and in the media.

 

[Gadawg73]

A 5th grader can see through the weakness of David Barton as anyone and everyone that disagrees with him on any issue is labeled a "secularist". Amazing anyone that objectively thinks for themselves would believe anything this clown spouts. One only has to look at the long list of Barton's critics to know he has no credibility. The top Baptist Christian historians dismiss him. Barton may be an expert at dodging questions but he has no respect for the study of history. Barton has a Bachelor of Arts degree from one university and a honorary degree from another. The man has no credentials whatsoever in Christian history much less history of any sort. Barton actively promotes a non secular government for America.

 

[Newby]

On the other hand, it's interesting that those very Christians made sure that they and others were protected from Christianity.

No ... protected from a state religion!! Big difference.

The state religion of Christianity.

So they would have approved of an Islamic state? Your blind hatred has obviously robbed you of any honesty or common sense. Altho, I'm guessing you never had any of either to begin with.