Comments on: Citing historical errors, FRC leader removes David Barton's Capitol Tour video from You Tube

By: Warren

Warren — Wed, 30 May 2018 21:22:23 +0000

patriotsheart – doesn’t it bother you a little bit that FRC also sees the errors in Barton’s work? Doesn’t it bother you a little that Barton stealthily corrected himself without telling anyone?

By: Richard Willmer

Richard Willmer — Wed, 30 May 2018 21:04:42 +0000

In reply to Tom Van Dyke. Mr Fortenberry is rigorous, although our last encounter (to do with the authorship of the Pentateuch) ended in stalemate: he couldn't really produce conclusive evidence to back his position (he did seem to accept that it was ultimately a matter of faith, not fact), and neither could I (although the dispute over the contents of the Torah between the Jews and the Samaritans is quite powerful 'circumstantial evidence' for the position I was expounding).

By: patriotsheart

patriotsheart — Wed, 30 May 2018 19:50:33 +0000

In reply to Bernie.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8SmYvKUKOv0

By: jimmiraybob

jimmiraybob — Wed, 30 May 2018 19:06:52 +0000

Tom,
I believe that Ed Brayton asked , “who of the ‘powers that be’ in the universities claims that ‘the founders were all deists’?”
I assume that you have an answer and just forgot to post it.

By: Tom Van Dyke

Tom Van Dyke — Wed, 30 May 2018 19:06:51 +0000

Jimmy, Ed Brayton doesn’t need anyone to hold his coat.

By: Bill Fortenberry

Bill Fortenberry — Wed, 30 May 2018 19:06:51 +0000

Well, Tom, by the time Barton is taken off the scene, I plan to have my research known enough to stem the tide. Speaking of which, you should read my article on the conversion of Benjamin Franklin which available online at: http://www.increasinglearning.com/franklin-conversion.html

By: Bernie

Bernie — Wed, 30 May 2018 19:06:50 +0000

I wonder if Barton will counter with some remarks against the FRC?

By: Patrocles

Patrocles — Wed, 30 May 2018 19:03:54 +0000

TVD,
thanks for linking to the
http://blogs.georgefox.edu/political-science/author/mhall/
which I didn’t know even if I’m rather knowledgeable about Quakers.
I agree with Hall: “Founders” should not be limited to a little band of nominal Anglicans with a superficial knowledge of deistical literature. It should not exclude the middle-class inspirators and meddlers nor the unwashed evangelical masses who had to do the dirty work. (For that’s the decisive point against which Barton reacts: rewriting history in an elitist/anti-populist mood and expulsing the Evangelicals from American history.)

By: Tom Van Dyke

Tom Van Dyke — Wed, 30 May 2018 19:03:52 +0000

Not very much interest in the answer, apparently, if it can’t be used as a weapon. Thank me very much.

By: Tom Van Dyke

Tom Van Dyke — Wed, 30 May 2018 19:03:51 +0000

My apologies for this “jimmiraybob” person following me to your blog, Warren. As for my old internet foil Ed Brayton calling me out, since he hasn’t checked back in here—Mark Noll and George Marsden have become the gold standard in the American academy for religion and the Founding, and proved my point—we trust that Ed finds the answer from historian Mark David Hall satisfactory.
There is indeed a common perception–“the Founders were all deists”–that persists even among “Christian” historians, let alone the “secular” ones. No, they weren’t all Jerry Falwell evangelicals–in fact zero of them were–but their God was monotheistic, governed or guided man’s affairs, spoke in the Bible, and there is an afterlife with reward or punishment.
And that was my point here, not getting sucked into an internet debate that parses my words at the cost of ignoring the ideas behind them. I’m getting too old for that [stuff].
😉