Peace, I’m out. You either get it or you don’t.

Then I logged on tonight and read some of your recent comments .. again .. dissappointing.

I think I have spoken rather plainly to you about what my concerns are. unfortunately you have chosen to ignore that and assume an agenda. oh well…

Peace,

Dave

June 15, 2012 at 2:44 am

“But the fact is that Barton hath already caught the strict separationists in a lie.”

Who are these “strict separationists”? And what was the “lie” they told?

Once again you make claims without evidence.

I am not sure what you are fighting for here or what you think is the critical issue. For me .. credibility and honesty coming from Christianity is key. Without it we look like idealistic fools who will twist anything to support our beliefs. If Barton put this out as a polemic he sure did a lousy job of it .. so much so that a whole book can be accurately written challenging his poor conclusions and research. IMHO, integrity in Christians is more important than any so called win against so called revisionist historians or liberals or whatever or whoever you think the other side is. I don’t get your reasoning that Barton wins just because he gets (in your opinion) one thing right but punts 99 out of 100 factoids.

I have no interest in the culture war ( with all the mudslinging, overstatement of points, false information and so forth). I am interested in integrity as a people of God. And if that integrity (being like Christ) loses us a few points in the culture war then so be it.

Dave

You might want to check out American Creation where we feature news about Dr. Gregg Frazer’s new book (and other things as well, including news on Drs. Throckmorton and Fea).

The “key Founders” — the first 4 Presidents, Ben Franklin, James Wilson, G. Morris and A. Hamilton — were not “strict Deists” in the absentee Landlord sense. Yet, they weren’t “Christians” in the orthodox sense either. They were, as Dr. Frazer categorizes them, “theistic rationalists” which is somewhere in between. The theistic rationalists were theological unitarians. So others might term them “unitarians.” There are smoking guns that prove this the case with Jefferson, J. Adams and Franklin. The others rely more on circumstantial evidence. They were all theists (that is believed in an active personal God). Hamilton was not provably an orthodox Christian until the end of his life (after his son died in a duel). The other FFs were not provably orthodox Christians during any time in their adult life when they did the work “Founding” the nation. I’m not aware of other key Founder than Hamilton having an end of life conversion to orthodox Christianity. George Washington, for instance, died a Stoic death where he asked for no ministers and said no prayers. But you never know what’s going on in someone’s head and heart before they take their last breath.

David Holmes prefers to term the key Founders “Christian-Deists,” as opposed to the non-Christian deism of Ethan Allen, Thomas Paine and Elihu Palmer. But those three were the only notable “strict Deists” among the Founders. (It’s debatable whether Palmer was a notable Founder).

There were a lot of orthodox Christians among the 2nd and lower tier Founders. They include John Witherspoon, John Jay, Roger Sherman, Samuel Adams and Patrick Henry.

With regards to the rest, well, we just don’t know. Proving they had some kind of formal affiliation with an orthodox Church — which THEY ALL DID — really proves nothing other than they had some kind of formal affiliation with an orthodox Church.

It would be error to assume, as some do, the rest were “all” something. Elias Boudinot and Fisher Ames were probably orthodox Christians. Benjamin Rush was an orthodox Christian Universalist who believed in the doctrine of universal salvation, believing all would be saved through Christ’s universal, as opposed to limited Atonement. Timothy Pickering was a unitarian, and William Livingston may have been. John Marshall was a unitarian who converted to orthodoxy shortly before he died. Joel Barlow was either a strict deist or perhaps an atheist.

Now the cards are on the table, Brother Throckmorton, my point all along. ;-O

“While few of these major founders could be considered “Christian,” and probably did not set out to establish a uniquely “Christian nation,” neither were they deists. They all believed in an active God who, to various degrees, governed the world by his providence and, at times, might even enter into the affairs of humankind.”

Note from the above quote of Fea’s article .. that he says that few of the founding fathers could be considered Christian and that they probably did not set out to establish a uniquely Christian nation. So you are IMHO picking about words while missing the broader point.

Dave

As long as that set of disinfo thrives, Barton will have traction.

Here is what I am getting from you .. You agree with Barton because he is (in your opinion) getting one thing right .. never mind that his research is easily discredited, that it often appears to be contrived and that he refuses to deal with fellow Christian critiques in an honest and upright way. Never mind that he dismisses those critiques with dishonest information on public radio. As long as he says something you agree with then thats good .. or he wins or whatever. At least thats how I hear you.

This same attitude occurs with those who have a more conservative view on homosexuality. I am not putting you in this catagory .. just making a comparison across different issues. Once again .. often conservative Christians do not make distinctions between a conservative gracious pastoral positiion and a smear campaign of disinformation. Their logic is .. if its antigay .. its good .. regardless of the reliability of the information.

I want to see the whole package .. a postion with integrity regardless of the topic.

Dave