Comments on: Baptist Minister Reacts to David Barton's Justification of Indian Destruction

By: Warren

Warren — Wed, 30 May 2018 21:37:24 +0000

In reply to Patrocles. Pat - Hard to see how you got that message.

By: Warren

Warren — Wed, 30 May 2018 21:37:24 +0000

In reply to jim. Jim - Thanks for that. The entire quote makes it even more clear that Barton is endorsing the concept as well as the book.

The concept of what a covenant truly is and means is unfamiliar to most today, for it far surpasses any legal understandings or obligations with which our current culture is acquainted. God established a covenant with Abraham and his posterity, the Bible recounts not only the duties but also the remarkable benefits produced by that mutual accord. Tim Ballard documents the "extension" of that covenant re-invoked during the establishment of this nation… a covenant made between God and America's early colonists and Founders. The Covenant not only shows the unprecedented blessings America has received as a result of obedience to God but also what every citizen today can do to honor our national covenant with God and thus ensure His continued blessings.

According to Barton, we have a national covenant with God. Honoring it leads to blessings; being unChristian leads to curses, just like Israel. I have not had time to look back at my posts on dominionism, but this seems to be a thread running through most of it -- the promises and challenges to Israel and for America today. Seems odd that if all that were so important that there would be no mention of the United States in holy writ.

By: Richard Willmer

Richard Willmer — Wed, 30 May 2018 17:54:34 +0000

Let’s hope it doesn’t (although I’m not entirely clear exactly what ‘it’ is)!
As is usually the case, my objections to any kind of ‘imposition of religion’ are primarily theological. If the Christian way were to be to ‘impose’ (regardless of what any parts of the OT might suggest) – if GOD’s way were to be to ‘impose’ – then Good Friday would never have happened.

By: Tom Van Dyke

Tom Van Dyke — Wed, 30 May 2018 17:54:34 +0000

But Warren admitted he didn’t expect the bill to go far.
“I didn’t expect it to go anywhere,” he said, noting that the bill was read into the floor Tuesday morning and referred to the committee for Rules, Calendar and Operations of the House. “Quite often bills go there and never come out.”
FTR, I don’t like the council praying any sectarian prayer [i.e., mentioning “Christ”] and I also don’t think the ACLU and its 3 litigants are doing anything beneficial for the nation. A pox on them all with this chickenspit.
In the olden days, a cliche said, “Don’t make a federal case of it!” My sentiments exactly.

By: Tom Van Dyke

Tom Van Dyke — Wed, 30 May 2018 17:54:33 +0000

A bill filed by Republican lawmakers would allow North Carolina to declare an official religion, in violation of the Establishment Clause of the U.S. Bill of Rights, and seeks to nullify any federal ruling against Christian prayer by public bodies statewide.
This is supposed to pass for legitimate journalism?
First, it baldly takes a side. Second, it’s not accurate.
Did you know that Massachusetts had an official established church [Congregationalism] up until 1833? The First Amendment/Bill of Rights only forbids the federal government from establishing religion.
Congress shall make no law….
Not one person in 100 knows that, though. The original Constitution and amendments left religion to the states. The only way to get to a state ban is via the 14th Amendment, via either incorporation [not completely settled yet] or by the “equal protection” clause.
And FTR, the proposed law
http://www.ncleg.net/Sessions/2013/Bills/House/PDF/H494v0.pdf
is symbolic: It does not establish Christianity as the state religion, it only asserts that constitutionally, a state may establish a state religion.
IOW, this one is not going the distance.