|
Post by pianoman on Nov 24, 2008 18:05:16 GMT -5
I seek not to enter into the "debate" only to make one point. Everyone is right....and wrong!!
If you have google, google, John Hanson, the first president of the U.S., a black man, and also a Moor, which is somewhat along the lines of a Muslim. I fear that history, like everything else in the world is tainted by man's hand and there is no, undisputed account. As much as we need to be right (some of us) we really need to recognize that we really can't even go back and back up statements by using history and quotes. There are too many inaccuracies. Jesus preached love, and told of His Father. If we seek those things, they are not tainted, when the Father chooses to reveal them to us, because He has the power to do so. Sorry, but there is really no fodder here for attack. Peace in the name of Jesus, Poor confused Pianoman
|
|
|
Post by rational on Nov 24, 2008 18:15:47 GMT -5
[/i] Since "Rational" probably wouldn't admit to anything I would or could say on the subject lets go directly to some of the sources.[/quote] Listing the "sources" would have been enlightening. First, did you consider that the Declaration of Independence does not in any way describe the christian god but describes " the Laws of Nature and of Nature's God." This is deist philosophy and fails to support a belief in christianity. And no mention of Jesus or christianity. But you have edited the quote and made it a complete sentence, replacing the semi-colon with a period. That is just deceitful. Here is the rest of the quote that you conveniently left out: ...but I apprehend it has received various corrupt changes, and I have, with most of the present Dissenters in England, some doubts as to his divinity; though it is a question I do not dogmatize upon, having never studied it, and think it needless to busy myself with it, when I expect soon an opportunity of knowing the Truth with less trouble. I see no harm, however, in its being believed, if that belief has the good consequence, as probably it has, of making his doctrines more respected and better observed; especially as I do not perceive that the Supreme takes it amiss, by distinguishing the unbelievers in His government of the world with any particular marks of His displeasure.No mention of Jesus or christianity. But Franklin does mention christianity in some of his writings. In Toward The Mystery, Franklin wrote: "I have found Christian dogma unintelligible. Early in life I absented myself from Christian assemblies."In his Autobiography Franklin wrote: "My parents had early given me religious impressions, and brought me through my childhood piously in the dissenting [puritan]way. But I was scarce fifteen, when, after doubting by turns of several points, as I found them disputed in the different books I read, I began to doubt of Revelation itself. Some books against Deism fell into my hands; they were said to be the substance of sermons preached at Boyle's lectures. It happened that they wrought an effect on me quite contrary to what was intended by them; for the arguments of the deists, which were quoted to be refuted, appeared to me much stronger than the refutations; in short, I soon became a thorough deist."(Emphasis added)Adams was a Unitarian. He also wrote to Jefferson: "I almost shudder at the thought of alluding to the most fatal example of the abuses of grief which the history of mankind has preserved -- the Cross. Consider what calamities that engine of grief has produced!"In a letter to Samuel Miller, 8 July 1820, Adams admitted his unbelief of Protestant Calvinism: "I must acknowledge that I cannot class myself under that denomination." In A Memorial and Remonstrance Madison summed up christianity from Constantine to the Reformation: "During almost fifteen centuries has the legal establishment of Christianity been on trial. What has been its fruits? More or less in all places, pride and indolence in the clergy, ignorance and servility in the laity; in both, superstition, bigotry, and persecution."Not a ringing endorsement of christianity. In a letter to Adams in 1823 Jetterson wrote: "The day will come when the mystical generation of Jesus by the Supreme Being as his father, in the womb of a virgin, will be classed with the fable of the generation of Minerva in the brain of Jupiter." In a letter to Ezra Stiles Ely, 25 June 1819, jefferson wrote: "You say you are a Calvinist. I am not. I am of a sect by myself, as far as I know." In a letter to Adams dated January 24, 1814 Jefferson had the following to say regarding the gospels: The whole history of these books is so defective and doubtful that it seems vain to attempt minute enquiry into it: and such tricks have been played with their text, and with the texts of other books relating to them, that we have a right, from that cause, to entertain much doubt what parts of them are genuine. In the New Testament there is internal evidence that parts of it have proceeded from an extraordinary man; and that other parts are of the fabric of very inferior minds. It is as easy to separate those parts, as to pick out diamonds from dunghills.Even more telling as to what the stand of the founding fathers was is the wording in "Treaty of peace and friendship between the United States of America and the Bey and Subjects of Tripoli, of Barbary". In Article 11, it states: "As the Government of the United States of America is not in any sense founded on the Christian religion; as it has in itself no character of enmity against the laws, religion, or tranquillity, of Musselmen; and as the said States never have entered into any war or act of hostility against any Mehomitan nation, it is declared by the parties that no pretext arising from religious opinions shall ever produce an interruption of the harmony existing between the two countries." (Emphasis added)This document was created when most of the founding fathers were alive, some of them worked on its development, and Adams signed it.
|
|
|
Post by ariandgabe on Nov 25, 2008 10:28:45 GMT -5
Excellent reminder my Brother Dowdy, but when the enemy is out to kill, he does not listen to reason. He is simply out to kill;
Matt 12:14 14 Then the Pharisees went out and plotted against Him, how they might destroy Him.NKJV
Once again he is out to destroy the last few remnants of Christianity, with the help of Pianoman, Rational and the like because he KNOWS his time is short.
John 16:1-4 "These things I have spoken to you, that you should not be made to stumble. 2 They will put you out of the synagogues; yes, the time is coming that whoever kills you will think that he offers God service. 3 And these things they will do to you because they have not known the Father nor Me. 4 But these things I have told you, that when the time comes, you may remember that I told you of them. NKJV
NO ONE on the face of this earth denies that the US of A is/was a Christian Country, NO ONE 'except' those that want to bring this Great Country down. The hate is so evident, and so is the paranoia. No shred of truth is allowed to exist, because even Satan knows that a 'little leaven leaveneth the whole lump.'
You don't see Rational and Pianoman on Muslim sites bashing the Koran and quoting it and telling its followers just how crazy some of its writings are, do you? If you read Rationals answers to ANY Cristian related question, you will see this inbred hatred and the desire to demean anything related to the Bible, no matter how dumb his answers sound. Just read his posts and you will see that Rational is NOT 'rational' at all.
But to see Pianoman holding Rationals hand is nothing short of 'Visa' oops, I mean 'priceless'.
My dear brother, I believe that we more then achieved our goal and I know we have touched the hearts of those that still have some flicker of light in them, and as for the rest, we were to WARN them of the imminent dangers headed arrived to this country.
I have learned a great deal here, people will always 'reveal' what it is they are 'mindful of'. Rational IS NOT even 'mindful' of the heavenly things, his understanding of the Bible is no more then Pianomans or the rest of the 'haters of the truth'. We are not to continue with 'senseless' arguments with those that openly reject Christ as Rational does. But to see a 2X2 like Pianoman grab hold of an atheists hand should be a wake up call for all 2X2's. It is also a revelation of what Pianoman is 'mindful of'.
As I said before, todays Christianity will fight to stand in line to take on the seal of the anti-Christ. How sad.
John 4:23-24 23 But the hour is coming, and now is, when the true worshipers will worship the Father in spirit and truth; for the Father is seeking such to worship Him. 24 God is Spirit, and those who worship Him must worship in spirit and truth." NKJV
TRUTH. As Pianoman wrote some time back regarding him 'teaching' contradicting Biblical doctrine to his school children; "I have found a way to even do that".
John 8:31-32 Then Jesus said to those Jews who believed Him, "If you abide in My word, you are My disciples indeed. 32 And you shall know the truth, and the truth shall make you free." NKJV
But those that do not, or who straight out refuse to hear and understand the Word of God, Jesus has this to say:
John 8:43-47 43 Why do you not understand My speech? Because you are not able to listen to My word. 44 You are of your father the devil, and the desires of your father you want to do. He was a murderer from the beginning, and does not stand in the truth, because there is no truth in him.
When he speaks a lie, he speaks from his own resources, for he is a liar and the father of it. 45 But because I tell the truth, you do not believe Me. 46 Which of you convicts Me of sin? And if I tell the truth, why do you not believe Me? 47 He who is of God hears God's words; therefore you do not hear, because you are not of God." NKJV
I pray for all unbelievers here, that they would give themselves a chance to repent and turn to God, the Father of Jesus Christ, and to all those that call themselves Christian but refuse to accept the truth, to open their eyes to be able to see just how dark the darkness they are walking in.
And to those fellow Christians who feel and mourn over the dying of this once blessed country of ours, I pray that you will never give up.
2 Cor 6:3-10 3 We give no offense in anything, that our ministry may not be blamed. 4 But in all things we commend ourselves as ministers of God: in much patience, in tribulations, in needs, in distresses, 5 in stripes, in imprisonments, in tumults, in labors, in sleeplessness, in fastings;
6 by purity, by knowledge, by longsuffering, by kindness, by the Holy Spirit, by sincere love, 7 by the word of truth, by the power of God, by the armor of righteousness on the right hand and on the left, 8 by honor and dishonor, by evil report and good report; as deceivers, and yet true; 9 as unknown, and yet well known; as dying, and behold we live; as chastened, and yet not killed; 10 as sorrowful, yet always rejoicing; as poor, yet making many rich; as having nothing, and yet possessing all things. NKJV
|
|
|
Post by ariandgabe on Nov 25, 2008 10:46:14 GMT -5
Teenager4now wrote: I don't honestly think that God looks down on any nation and thinks.. "thats a great nation"
Gen 12:2-3 2 I will make you a great nation; I will bless you And make your name great; And you shall be a blessing. 3 I will bless those who bless you, And I will curse him who curses you; And in you all the families of the earth shall be blessed." NKJV
But since your Teen-aged mind is already made up, I will not post the 150 'other' quotes from the Bible regarding the Lord blessing, cursing, helping, punishing nations throughout history.
If you watch the movie; 'The Ten Commandments', you will see what God can do to a great Nation like Egypt.
Don't take my word for it,, read it yourself and 'find', knock and it will be opened unto you!!!
In Jesus name: Odon
|
|
|
Post by rational on Nov 25, 2008 14:58:07 GMT -5
Once again he is out to destroy the last few remnants of Christianity, with the help of Pianoman, Rational and the like because he KNOWS his time is short. I have no desire to destroy christianity, judaism, or any other mystical beliefs you might harbor. There was a statement made that America was founded by christians and history just doesn't support that statement. Yet you rail on even in the face of a document produced and signed by some of the founding fathers stating "As the Government of the United States of America is not in any sense founded on the Christian religion;...". John Adams did. It could be because the government of Islamic states were indeed founded by Muslems. Oh, please point this hatred out. Says the person who believes in the paranormal. It would be MasterCard. Show me where heaven is and I will try to become mindful of it. My understanding of the bible is based on the words contained therein and not on the mystical meanings you want to apply. I did not reject Jesus. He, or the character created by his followers, had a lot of good things to say. Maybe pianoman just agreed with my evaluation of a point or two that I made. Show some valid support your points and both he and I will agree with you. Well, what are you going to do? People are at times rational beings. Wow - you have found a way to teach contradicting doctrine. I would think, however, that a life guiding doctrine would be free of contradiction. Well, I am just waiting for god to explain it to me. So far, nothing. Tough to see darkness when you are in the dark. Do you really want the government involved in religion? I have provided a number of references that at least point to the possibility that these founding fathers had no intention of creating a christian nation. If that was their goal one would think there would be at least a single reference to christianity in the document that defines America.
|
|
|
Post by pianoman on Nov 25, 2008 21:30:39 GMT -5
Rational, I think that you would do well to follow me in surrender to ariandgabe's obvious advantage over us. He has again taken quotes from my post and twisted them to suit his need to be superior. I say we let him be superior.
Since he is the new risen profit and the only one chosen by God, to understand His word, the bible even tells us if God is with him who can be against him.
I hope that someday the hatred and venom that he spews will open his eyes to what Christ Walked as well as talked, and that was love for those that he came in contact with. When the Pharisee's tempted him, he only answered them in things that they couldn't answer, or told them to answer his question about John the Baptist and he would answer their question, knowing that they couldn't. Christ never, ever resorted to name calling and having dissenters walking off holding hands in the sunset, but that was the original.
Apparently in ariandgabe's case he, as the new risen messiah feels that he can improve upon the original, so I will step aside in my ignorance and let him, but continue to pray for him. He needs all the prayer he can get.
Also the original Messiah the real Christ did not take others words and twist them to where they would fit His purpose, but again, maybe the new and improved model feels that Christ was just not militant enough.
Just pray that he someday reads the poison that comes out of him onto these pages for all to see, and hopefully he will calm down a little and stay focused on facts and truth. One can only hope.
To save him from needing to cut me down again, I submit myself, a sinner, not too well informed, not totally understanding the scripture, and also not being a new messiah.
I hope that this will end this and let the peace of God rule in our hearts, Poor, Confused, Pianoman
|
|
ddowdy
Junior Member
Posts: 79
|
Post by ddowdy on Nov 26, 2008 2:26:21 GMT -5
Thank you Odon my brother for your kind words and support. In his efforts Mr. "Rational" proved nothing nor did he disprove anything other than that he is adept at misusing quotations, taking them out of context, attributing points of argument and statements that were never made to those with whom he takes exception. As you know my time is limited and as we have discussed this "Rational" fellow is another of those pathetic beings whose existence is defined by arguing and attempting to antagonize people online...a sure sign of an empty and pitiful life bereft of any real human relationships or contact. Although continuing to debate with this poor unfortunate would be an act of charity because it would extend to him a measure of the human contact he so pitiably desires it is beneath either of us to do so. Our point has been proven beyond refute and trust me, it could be even further established to nearly anyone's satisfaction with the exception of Rational. He is what is known in philosophical circles as a Contrarian. In all honesty I believe that God probably gifted him with a fine mind. It is simple to deduce that a very restive and disatisfied soul is the force that drives the poor man though. I would venture to guess that this is probably due to the fact that he has likely never really utilized or developed that gift from God so as all immature shirkers of responsibility do in shifting blame from themselves he has focused his anger on God and God's people. There are many places on the internet where this pathetic fellow could be among his own fellow unfortunates but instead he has chosen this board on which to flog his sorry wares as only a Contrarian would do.
I understand Odon that you love each and everyone on this board. I know that you pray for them and strive to reach each one. Let this one go brother...just as there are sexual perverts, Mr. Rational is an intellectual pervert and your further attempts to convince him of anything as well as, any further debate with him on my part would serve as nothing more than psychological pornography for this misguided fellow to get his jollies with.
As we move on I am certain that you will be the voice of compassion, wisdom, understanding, kindness, inspiration and love for many others just as you have been for me.
|
|
|
Post by rational on Nov 26, 2008 10:14:36 GMT -5
Wow. Let's just look at a few of your claims: I have always provided reference for my quotations, unlike you, so if there are some that you feel are indeed out of context please feel free to point that out. I am a bit surprised at this claim coming from someone who did indeed take a quote out of context and in addition modified the quote to make it appear that we were seeing the whole quotation. You have jumped to the wrong conclusion. I have no desire to antagonize you or anyone else. I was merely pointing out that your belief that the US was founded by a group of christians as a christian nation was in error and provided the references to back up my belief. Are you sure a contrarian is not an investor who deliberately decides to go against the prevailing wisdom of other investors? Although somehow you have failed to explain how some of the founding fathers, including John Adams, wrote a document as the official posttion of the Unites States, and signed it, stating that the US was not a christian nation. You put forth Franklin as a christian when he states in his autobiography that he was a deist. You have established your points only to those refuse to look at the evidence at hand. So with this ad hominem statement is it safe to assume you have nothing to back up your claims and put forth a personal attack in hope of somehow saving face? Thank you Odon my brother for your kind words and support. In his efforts Mr. "Rational" proved nothing nor did he disprove anything other than that he is adept at misusing quotations, taking them out of context, attributing points of argument and statements that were never made to those with whom he takes exception. As you know my time is limited and as we have discussed this "Rational" fellow is another of those pathetic beings whose existence is defined by arguing and attempting to antagonize people online...a sure sign of an empty and pitiful life bereft of any real human relationships or contact. Although continuing to debate with this poor unfortunate would be an act of charity because it would extend to him a measure of the human contact he so pitiably desires it is beneath either of us to do so. Our point has been proven beyond refute and trust me, it could be even further established to nearly anyone's satisfaction with the exception of Rational. He is what is known in philosophical circles as a Contrarian. In all honesty I believe that God probably gifted him with a fine mind. It is simple to deduce that a very restive and disatisfied soul is the force that drives the poor man though. I would venture to guess that this is probably due to the fact that he has likely never really utilized or developed that gift from God so as all immature shirkers of responsibility do in shifting blame from themselves he has focused his anger on God and God's people. There are many places on the internet where this pathetic fellow could be among his own fellow unfortunates but instead he has chosen this board on which to flog his sorry wares as only a Contrarian would do. I understand Odon that you love each and everyone on this board. I know that you pray for them and strive to reach each one. Let this one go brother...just as there are sexual perverts, Mr. Rational is an intellectual pervert and your further attempts to convince him of anything as well as, any further debate with him on my part would serve as nothing more than psychological pornography for this misguided fellow to get his jollies with. As we move on I am certain that you will be the voice of compassion, wisdom, understanding, kindness, inspiration and love for many others just as you have been for me.
|
|
|
Post by rational on Nov 26, 2008 10:18:28 GMT -5
Rational, I think that you would do well to follow me in surrender to ariandgabe's obvious advantage over us. He has again taken quotes from my post and twisted them to suit his need to be superior. I say we let him be superior. I cannot judge whether he is superior or not. Nor do I care. He has god on his side but I ride in a car old enough to be mostly iron and we know god's record when faced with the dreaded iron chariot! Happy Thanksgiving!
|
|
|
Post by Gene on Nov 26, 2008 14:03:00 GMT -5
Thank you Odon my brother for your kind words and support. In his efforts Mr. "Rational" proved nothing nor did he disprove anything other than that he is adept at misusing quotations, taking them out of context, attributing points of argument and statements that were never made to those with whom he takes exception. As you know my time is limited and as we have discussed this "Rational" fellow is another of those pathetic beings whose existence is defined by arguing and attempting to antagonize people online...a sure sign of an empty and pitiful life bereft of any real human relationships or contact. Although continuing to debate with this poor unfortunate would be an act of charity because it would extend to him a measure of the human contact he so pitiably desires it is beneath either of us to do so. Our point has been proven beyond refute and trust me, it could be even further established to nearly anyone's satisfaction with the exception of Rational. He is what is known in philosophical circles as a Contrarian. In all honesty I believe that God probably gifted him with a fine mind. It is simple to deduce that a very restive and disatisfied soul is the force that drives the poor man though. I would venture to guess that this is probably due to the fact that he has likely never really utilized or developed that gift from God so as all immature shirkers of responsibility do in shifting blame from themselves he has focused his anger on God and God's people. There are many places on the internet where this pathetic fellow could be among his own fellow unfortunates but instead he has chosen this board on which to flog his sorry wares as only a Contrarian would do. I understand Odon that you love each and everyone on this board. I know that you pray for them and strive to reach each one. Let this one go brother...just as there are sexual perverts, Mr. Rational is an intellectual pervert and your further attempts to convince him of anything as well as, any further debate with him on my part would serve as nothing more than psychological pornography for this misguided fellow to get his jollies with. As we move on I am certain that you will be the voice of compassion, wisdom, understanding, kindness, inspiration and love for many others just as you have been for me. Boy howdy, dowdy! That's some might fine pontification! But "attempting to antagonize people?" Rational is one of the most level-headed, factual posters on this board, seldom presenting anything other than a position and the observable evidence that supports his position. I would hardly call that "antagonism." It's fine if you see things differently -- but when he shows his facts to support his argument, why get upset about it? Simply counter them with facts that support your position. Doesn't seem so diffiicult, really, to me. Of course, one does need to know where to draw the line between observable facts and faith -- and when to claim faith as a basis for a point of view rather than claiming observable, repeatable phenomena.
|
|
|
Post by pianoman on Nov 26, 2008 16:21:58 GMT -5
Ddowdy wrote ; As you know my time is limited and as we have discussed this "Rational" fellow is another of those pathetic beings whose existence is defined by arguing and attempting to antagonize people online...a sure sign of an empty and pitiful life bereft of any real human relationships or contact. Although continuing to debate with this poor unfortunate would be an act of charity because it would extend to him a measure of the human contact he so pitiably desires it is beneath either of us to do so.
I have heard the phrase "it takes one to know one" and I think that implies that the name caller is simply venting frustrations about his own perception and attempts to mirror it onto another. I agree with Gene and think that Rational is quite rational. I don't always agree with him, but respect his way of making a point and can accept his right to speak his thoughts.
Mr. ddowdy also wrote; As we move on I am certain that you will be the voice of compassion, wisdom, understanding, kindness, inspiration and love for many others just as you have been for me.
I have read both of these "gentlemen's" posts, and have yet to see, these atributes maintained after someone disagrees with either one of them.
Since I posted "Conduct in Posts", I feel I will keep that spirit and say that I pray for these two and maybe one day.........................I surly have no hateful words for anyone, even the one that can't refrain from offering "cool aid" to those that don't agree with him.
I enjoy this quote every time I see it and I will print it and if the shoe fits.....................
My karma ran over my dogma!
Again, Peace in our Lord, Jesus Christ, Poor confused Pianoman
|
|
ddowdy
Junior Member
Posts: 79
|
Post by ddowdy on Dec 1, 2008 17:36:58 GMT -5
I thought this was finished but I will try one more time. Rational--I apologize if you mistakenly feel that I am attacking you personally. You have a fine mind I am sure...I suppose I would just like to see you use it. I would be the first to say that overwhelmingly the men who founded this nation intended an absolute separation between any church and the state. They also absolutely intended a nation in which people were free to worship or not worship in whatever way desired (within the limits of the law) without suffering penalty or prejudice for it. However, none of this dilutes the truth that the majority of those men were in fact, Christians and it was their absolute intent that this nation be a nation founded and based upon fundamental Christian precepts and principles. To deny that is to participate in the intellectual dishonesty that now pervades American education.
You wrote,
"I have no desire to destroy christianity, judaism, or any other mystical beliefs you might harbor. There was a statement made that America was founded by christians and history just doesn't support that statement. Yet you rail on even in the face of a document produced and signed by some of the founding fathers stating "As the Government of the United States of America is not in any sense founded on the Christian religion;...".
Quote:NO ONE on the face of this earth denies that the US of A is/was a Christian Country, NO ONE 'except' those that want to bring this Great Country down. The hate is so evident, and so is the paranoia. No shred of truth is allowed to exist, because even Satan knows that a 'little leaven leaveneth the whole lump.'
John Adams did."
In fact it was John Adams our second President who stated, "The general principles on which the fathers achieved independence were the general principles of Christianity. I will avow that I then believed, and now believe, that those general principles of Christianity are as eternal and immutable as the existence and attributes of God."
His son, John Quincy Adams, also a President and a man who entered into the service of his country while still in his teenaged years, gave a Fourth of July speech at Newberry, Massachusetts in 1837 in which he said the following.
"Why is it that, next to the birthday of the Savior of the world, your most joyous and venerated festival returns on this day?
Is it not that, in the chain of human events, the birthday of this nation is indissolubly linked with the birthday of the Savior? That it forms a leading event in the progress of the gospel dispensation?
Is it not that the Declaration of Independence first organized the social compact on the foundation of the Redeemer's mission upon earth? That it laid the cornerstone of human government upon the first precepts of Christianity?"
A select group of men led by James Madison were primarily responsible for the drafting of our Constitution. Of course, Madison went on to serve our nation in the office of the Presidency. Another of the men in that group was John Jay who became the first Chief Justice of the Supreme Court. He said, "Providence has given to our people the choice of their rulers, and it is the duty as well as the privilege and interest of our Christian nation to select and prefer Christians as their rulers."
In an 1811 decision the Court stated, "Whatever strikes at the root of Christianity tends manifestly to the dissolution of civil government."
George Washington's Farewell Address to the American people has long been regarded as one of the most important speeches in our history. In that Address Washington said, "Of all the dispositions and habits which lead to political prosperity, religon and morality are indispensable supports. In vain would that man claim the tribute of patriotism, who should labor to subvert these great pillars".
Of course the little band of seculars whose squeals and squawks can be found in this thread or any other where Odon (ariandgabe) dares to venture likely haven't any great concern about not being labeled patriots. Others of us though do love this country very much. We love it for its tolerance, its sense of justice and its encompassing freedom. Some of us even believe that its many and rich blessings are, at least in some part, the result of God's favor. Some of us realize that the spirit of secularism which has taken control of our educational system will ultimately subvert those "great pillars" that President Washington spoke of. It is possible that our views no longer represent a majority of the views in this great country. And, it is enlightening to be sure, to realize how we are treated, minimalized and disregarded by many members of the secular majority as evidenced even on this board.
Just one more thing...as revolting as I find the poor fellow, I am sure happy to see that pianoman finally found that friend he has been looking to attach himself too. Rational...there is surely a karmic bonus somewhere for you.
|
|
|
Post by eyedeetentee on Dec 1, 2008 22:25:18 GMT -5
"Rational--I apologize if you mistakenly feel that I am attacking you personally. You have a fine mind I am sure...I suppose I would just like to see you use it."
You imply that he does not use his mind effectively. That is not an attack?
"Just one more thing...as revolting as I find the poor fellow, I am sure happy to see that pianoman finally found that friend he has been looking to attach himself too."
Revolting. hahaha Isn't it disgusting when you are proved to be wrong? Do your shoes still have soles? I bet you stomp a lot in frustration.
Your reply #62 reminds me of statements made to people like Manson, David Koresh, the dude in Utah, and many others. Are you sure you are following the right leader? Is Aryan the new age messiah or the tip of the anti-christ iceberg? Who is the best deceiver?
|
|
ddowdy
Junior Member
Posts: 79
|
Post by ddowdy on Dec 1, 2008 23:07:13 GMT -5
LOL! One clown does not make a circus. Your cohorts need to check in behind you (usual position I'm sure) eyedeet. It is disgusting when one is proved wrong...fortunately I can't recall the last time it happened to me. I am sure you are quite an expert though. I don't get frustrated or stomp in anger...sounds more like something you would do as you struggled to stiffen up your wrist. Who is Aryan? Keep trying though Peaches...it is gratifying to hold your undivided attention this way. Perhaps you will even learn some things.
|
|
|
Post by rational on Dec 2, 2008 0:30:44 GMT -5
I thought this was finished but I will try one more time. Rational--I apologize if you mistakenly feel that I am attacking you personally. I take none of this personally but will point out when the arguments become ad hominem attacks. [/color] Let's see if this claim stands up to scrutiny. Adams was a Unitarian. He stated he was raised as a Congregationalist but that he rejected many fundamental doctrines of Christianity, including the Trinity and the divinity of Jesus. First of all, the quote has no source. It is attributed to Jay on various sites on the Internet but there is no reference that can verify the quote. James Madison also wrote in A Memorial and Remonstrance regarding the history of the western world from Constantine to the Reformation: "During almost fifteen centuries has the legal establishment of Christianity been on trial. What has been its fruits? More or less in all places, pride and indolence in the clergy, ignorance and servility in the laity; in both, superstition, bigotry, and persecution."Does this sound like a christian writing? I never understood why this was used to support a christian nation. Kent followed English law since there was nothing in American law to base a decision on and then 10 years later voted to eliminate the law created by his decision. The amendment stated that "It shall not be declared or adjudged that any particular religion to be the law of the land." Do you feel it should be illegal for one person speak out against a religion? Seems that is a basic freedom that you are attempting to surpress - the freedom of speech. Nothing in this quote speaks of christianity. It is known that Washing was a Deist so his statements here are not surprising. Many contemporaries agreed that the president had never once been known to participate in the communion service. Hardly the sign of a devout christian. You need to look at what David Barton presents with a lot more than a grain of salt. No you don't. You are striving to make christianity the only acceptable religion of the US. Your bias can be read in each and every one of your posts as you try to rewrite history with a christian slant. For every favor you list I think people can point to things that would not indicate favor. And then there are those of us who fear the christian right taking control of any educational system and turning out a generation of children who have been taught myths in place of supported science and promoting the morality of the christian faith as the only acceptable standard for morality. It really doesn't matter if they are a minority or a majority. Religion belings in homes and churches and not in the public arena. Has anyone ever suggested that you were wrong in your religious beliefs? Or that you should repent or you were doomed? Or that you should seek our the Flying Spaghetti Monster so you can understand some obscure text? Consider what your attitude has been towards those who might not share your beliefs in the supernatural. You might want to read: Critique of David Barton's "America's Godly Heritage" Even some christian groups realize the christian right is spining and creating quotes to promote their distorted view of the founding fathers. [/color][/quote] Have I ever told you that I thought you were revolting? And you are the one who is claiming you were marginalized? Re-read what you wrote regarding the information being presented - feel the love. As you know my time is limited and as we have discussed this "Rational" fellow is another of those pathetic beings whose existence is defined by arguing and attempting to antagonize people online...a sure sign of an empty and pitiful life bereft of any real human relationships or contact. Although continuing to debate with this poor unfortunate would be an act of charity because it would extend to him a measure of the human contact he so pitiably desires it is beneath either of us to do so.BTW - You said: I apologize if you mistakenly feel that I am attacking you personally.I did not mistakenly feel you were making a personal attack. It was a personal attack.
|
|
ddowdy
Junior Member
Posts: 79
|
Post by ddowdy on Dec 2, 2008 7:46:49 GMT -5
As usual Rational you are way off base. Tough to get things right huh? Good thing there are jobs for those who can't perform...as teachers. Still, I have to commend you for your creativity in making it up as you go and also for your persistence in continuing to try. Now, I want you to get to work immediately on an especially pithy reply. After that I will decide which direction I want to lead you in next. Peace.
|
|
|
Post by rational on Dec 2, 2008 10:25:39 GMT -5
As usual Rational you are way off base. Tough to get things right huh? Good thing there are jobs for those who can't perform...as teachers. Still, I have to commend you for your creativity in making it up as you go and also for your persistence in continuing to try. Now, I want you to get to work immediately on an especially pithy reply. After that I will decide which direction I want to lead you in next. Peace. As usual you have addressed none of the points. I don't know about the job market. I have one and teaching is part of it. But over the years I have discovered there are those who are terrified to admit they are in error. This makes teaching very difficult but not impossible. You, like others, have little to back up what you claim and resort to simply stating "Your wrong" and then add a non sequitur or two. Post some backup when you find it.
|
|
ddowdy
Junior Member
Posts: 79
|
Post by ddowdy on Dec 2, 2008 15:27:37 GMT -5
Rational writes,
"Post some backup when you find it."
I have supported everything I said. This is not your classroom...just because you say it ain't so, doesn't mean it ain't so. I can sympathize with your comment about trying to teach those who are terrified to admit they are in error. I am experiencing that particular difficulty myself...although I don't know if you are really terrified or, simply overmatched. Do you really believe that you can gain any traction by continuing to employ the tactics of quoting out of context, false attribution and circular logic?
Perhaps the accolades awarded you by the small band of miscreants, misfits and mistakes of nature have deluded you into believing that you actually are presenting a logical, analytical and truthful case for whatever points you are trying to make. Then again, I guess you have to take what you can get.
|
|
|
Post by Gene on Dec 2, 2008 15:58:29 GMT -5
Rational writes, "Post some backup when you find it."I have supported everything I said. This is not your classroom...just because you say it ain't so, doesn't mean it ain't so. I can sympathize with your comment about trying to teach those who are terrified to admit they are in error. I am experiencing that particular difficulty myself...although I don't know if you are really terrified or, simply overmatched. Do you really believe that you can gain any traction by continuing to employ the tactics of quoting out of context, false attribution and circular logic? Perhaps the accolades awarded you by the small band of miscreants, misfits and mistakes of nature have deluded you into believing that you actually are presenting a logical, analytical and truthful case for whatever points you are trying to make. Then again, I guess you have to take what you can get. This is truly puzzling to me. Among other questions, I'm left wondering whether I am a miscreant, misfit, or mistake of nature. On the bright side, at least we've narrowed it down to "insults that start with the letter 'M'."
|
|
ddowdy
Junior Member
Posts: 79
|
Post by ddowdy on Dec 2, 2008 17:09:30 GMT -5
Gene Nelson wrote, "This is truly puzzling to me. Among other questions, I'm left wondering whether I am a miscreant, misfit, or mistake of nature." Well, truthfully I often wonder the same about myself. To be on the safe side I have chosen all of the above and that is just in the M's.
|
|
|
Post by rational on Dec 2, 2008 17:30:50 GMT -5
Rational writes, "Post some backup when you find it."No, you haven't. You have quoted, for example, Franklin in support of your far fetched idea he was a christian even though he states in his autobiography, as I pointed out above, that he was a deist. You tried to support your idea that Washington was a christian with his farewell address in which he never states anything about christianity. This is true and is the reason I do post references to support my claims rather than just saying you are wrong followed by a personal attack. Of course you can. I have replied to each of your supporting quotes and pointed out their errors. Well, I am probably over matched in the name calling and personal attack area. You excel in those areas. As to your ability to support your points - I cannot make a judgment since so far you have failed to provide anything beyond the most elementary discussion points. In any case, I will continue to provide references to support my claims and refute yours. You, on the other hand, act like the equivalent of a toddler who has been told some unpleasant news and resorts to the stamping of feet and screaming. You are making this accusation after you took a quote out of context and even modified it to make it more supportive to your point of view? Point out these items and I will attempt to correct them. Do you really think you can just make a blanket statement, as usual without support, and expect people to believe them? I never understood the reason someone resorts to name calling. I guess you do have to use what you have at hand. So instead of resorting to name calling and avoiding the issues why not point out the errors in the quotes I have taken out of context?
|
|
|
Post by eyedeetentee on Dec 2, 2008 22:09:02 GMT -5
No, Gene, ddowdy does not insult or attack. He is a faithful follower of Our Holy Aryan who teaches, as it is written in Jelehekaliah, "For ye who are led to the sovereign light by thy new Messiah, Aryan/Odon, be not led to insult thine underlings and those who are mistakes of nature. For I, thy great leader to the sovereign light, do declare before ye that ye must love all manner of nature, hold them near, and preach to them the errors of their ways for they know not of the sovereign light nor of I, Aryan/Odon, the great new messiah who has come to enlighten the world."
So you see, what you thought was an insult was actually a ploy to draw you nigh unto Our Holy Aryan, Father of all, knower of all, leader of all, and most high king. Bow before him and his faithful servant. Kiss their robes. They are the new leaders. Hail, Heil (er, Hail), and Hallelujah.
|
|
ddowdy
Junior Member
Posts: 79
|
Post by ddowdy on Dec 4, 2008 16:47:33 GMT -5
Quote: You have a fine mind I am sure...I suppose I would just like to see you use it. I would be the first to say that overwhelmingly the men who founded this nation intended an absolute separation between any church and the state. They also absolutely intended a nation in which people were free to worship or not worship in whatever way desired (within the limits of the law) without suffering penalty or prejudice for it. However, none of this dilutes the truth that the majority of those men were in fact, Christians and it was their absolute intent that this nation be a nation founded and based upon fundamental Christian precepts and principles. To deny that is to participate in the intellectual dishonesty that now pervades American education.
Let's see if this claim stands up to scrutiny.
Adams was a Unitarian. He stated he was raised as a Congregationalist but that he rejected many fundamental doctrines of Christianity, including the Trinity and the divinity of Jesus.
So says the learned Professor Irrational however, the quote says differently. A great amount of other evidence supporting my point exists. I don't care what religion John Adams was...I care what principles and precepts he maintained that the American government was predicated upon. As I say sir, you are a liar.
Quote: His son, John Quincy Adams, also a President and a man who entered into the service of his country while still in his teenaged years, gave a Fourth of July speech at Newberry, Massachusetts in 1837 in which he said the following.
"Why is it that, next to the birthday of the Savior of the world, your most joyous and venerated festival returns on this day?
Is it not that, in the chain of human events, the birthday of this nation is indissolubly linked with the birthday of the Savior? That it forms a leading event in the progress of the gospel dispensation?
Is it not that the Declaration of Independence first organized the social compact on the foundation of the Redeemer's mission upon earth? That it laid the cornerstone of human government upon the first precepts of Christianity?"
Nothing to say to this Professor Irrational?
Quote: A select group of men led by James Madison were primarily responsible for the drafting of our Constitution. Of course, Madison went on to serve our nation in the office of the Presidency. Another of the men in that group was John Jay who became the first Chief Justice of the Supreme Court. He said, "Providence has given to our people the choice of their rulers, and it is the duty as well as the privilege and interest of our Christian nation to select and prefer Christians as their rulers."
First of all, the quote has no source. It is attributed to Jay on various sites on the Internet but there is no reference that can verify the quote.
More lies from the Professor. The quote has a number of sources. If you aren’t bright enough to find them send me a private message admitting the fact that you are a lying moron and I will be kind enough to provide you with a source. I’ll give you a hint Professor…it doesn’t come from the video source you think it does.
James Madison also wrote in A Memorial and Remonstrance regarding the history of the western world from Constantine to the Reformation: "During almost fifteen centuries has the legal establishment of Christianity been on trial. What has been its fruits? More or less in all places, pride and indolence in the clergy, ignorance and servility in the laity; in both, superstition, bigotry, and persecution." Does this sound like a christian writing?
Actually this sounds very much like Christian writing. Many of us who consider ourselves Christians detest the organized Christian churches whom we believe to have perverted the message of Christ and committed great evil and wrong in His name. That doesn’t alter the fact that the man (Madison) was a Christian. In fact here is a little something for you to chew on Professor.
I have sometimes thought there could not be a stronger testimony in favor of religion or against temporal enjoyments, even the most rational and manly, than for men who occupy the most honorable and gainful departments and [who] are rising in reputation and wealth, publicly to declare the unsatisfactoriness [of temporal enjoyments] by becoming fervent advocates in the cause of Christ; and I wish you may give in your evidence in this way. Letter by Madison to William Bradford (September 25, 1773)
Quote: In an 1811 decision the Court stated, "Whatever strikes at the root of Christianity tends manifestly to the dissolution of civil government."
I never understood why this was used to support a christian nation.
Kent followed English law since there was nothing in American law to base a decision on and then 10 years later voted to eliminate the law created by his decision. The amendment stated that "It shall not be declared or adjudged that any particular religion to be the law of the land."
Do you feel it should be illegal for one person speak out against a religion? Seems that is a basic freedom that you are attempting to surpress - the freedom of speech.
More lies. I do not feel anyone’s right to free speech should be curbed when it comes to religon. And as someone who has been a sworn officer of many courts I take offense to your allegation that I am trying to supress someone’s freedom of speech. Again sir…you are a liar.
Quote: George Washington's Farewell Address to the American people has long been regarded as one of the most important speeches in our history. In that Address Washington said, "Of all the dispositions and habits which lead to political prosperity, religon and morality are indispensable supports. In vain would that man claim the tribute of patriotism, who should labor to subvert these great pillars".
Nothing in this quote speaks of christianity. It is known that Washing was a Deist so his statements here are not surprising.
Many contemporaries agreed that the president had never once been known to participate in the communion service. Hardly the sign of a devout christian.
You are a liar Professor…once again. I guess its like anything else huh? After the first one they just get easier and easier.
Quote: Of course the little band of seculars whose squeals and squawks can be found in this thread or any other where Odon (ariandgabe) dares to venture likely haven't any great concern about not being labeled patriots. Others of us though do love this country very much. We love it for its tolerance, its sense of justice and its encompassing freedom.
No you don't. You are striving to make christianity the only acceptable religion of the US. Your bias can be read in each and every one of your posts as you try to rewrite history with a christian slant.
Once again you lie. I am not rewriting anything. Only presenting the facts which you have either misunderstood, misconstrued or, more probably, reconstructed through prevarication as seems to be your habit.
Quote: Some of us even believe that its many and rich blessings are, at least in some part, the result of God's favor.
For every favor you list I think people can point to things that would not indicate favor.
That is fine. Everyone is entitled to their own opinion.
Quote: Some of us realize that the spirit of secularism which has taken control of our educational system will ultimately subvert those "great pillars" that President Washington spoke of.
And then there are those of us who fear the christian right taking control of any educational system and turning out a generation of children who have been taught myths in place of supported science and promoting the morality of the christian faith as the only acceptable standard for morality.
You have no need for fear. I would never support supplanting science with any kind of religious education. I, personally feel there could be a place for Christian precepts and principles but I would never attempt to force them on anyone.
Quote: It is possible that our views no longer represent a majority of the views in this great country.
It really doesn't matter if they are a minority or a majority. Religion belings in homes and churches and not in the public arena.
“ It's so obvious that secularization expands across the country -- and we've seen it in Europe -- it follows, socialism follows and the loss of a lot of our freedoms. Our freedom is built on faith in God and when we lose that sense of history, we lose a whole lot more than just a little bit of history. We lose what we are as a people.”
Sen. J. DeMint, S.C. (Speaking about current secular attempts to rewrite U.S. history just as our good professor is doing.)
If you read Rationals answers to ANY Cristian related question, you will see this inbred hatred and the desire to demean anything related to the Bible, no matter how dumb his answers sound.
Oh, please point this hatred out.
Gladly my limp wristed, lily livered, left wing loser.
And then there are those of us who fear the christian right
Fear is the brother of hate. I am sure you fear many things Professor.
In the Professor’s handiwork we see the smear work an anti-Christian bigot. His intent to distort history and maliciousness is made clear right from the start when he begins to lie and distort. He attacks Christianity and lies about the original peoples of the colonies. Of course he depends upon his readers paying no mind to the thousands of references to Christianity and invocations of Bible quotes in the writings of early Americans --early America was a nation consisting predominantly of Christians. Here are some of his lies laid bare:
Lie #1: The majority of the Founding Fathers were deists. We have the congregational records of the Delegates to the Constitutional Convention. Among the delegates were 28 Episcopalians, 8 Presbyterians, 7 Congregationalists, 2 Lutherans, 2 Dutch Reformed, 2 Methodists, 2 Roman Catholics, 1 unknown, and only 3 deists--Williamson, Wilson, and Franklin--this at a time when church membership entailed a sworn public confession of biblical faith. Of the 55 Founding Fathers Episcopalians, the Presbyterians, the Congregationalists, and the Dutch Reformed (which make up 45 of the 55) were Calvinists. For those who may not know: Calvinism is one of (if not THE) most dogmatic and fundamentalist branches of Christianity.
Lie #2: Jefferson was a Founding Father The Founding Fathers refers to the fifty five delegates to the Constitutional Convention (2), but Jefferson was not among them.
Lie #3: Thomas Paine was a Founding Father Again, Paine never attended the Constitutional Convention.
Lie #4: Washington Was a Deist Now the dictionary defines a deism as(askoxford.com):
deism
/deeiz’m, day-/
• noun belief in the existence of a supreme being, specifically of a creator who does not intervene in the universe. Compare with theism.
It defines theism as:
theism
/theeiz’m/
• noun belief in the existence of a god or gods, specifically of a creator who intervenes in the universe. Compare with deism.
We see that while theists and deists both believe in God, the critical difference between the two is that while a theist believes God intervenes in the Universe, a deist does not. So which was Washington? Anyone who takes the time to read Washington's writings (something Professor Irrational must dread) will find the truth in examples such as this: In a 1773 letter to a friend whose niece had died:
The ways of Providence being inscrutable, and the justice of it not to be scanned by the shallow eye of humanity, not to be counteracted by the utmost efforts of human power and wisdom, resignation, and, as far as the strength of our reason and religion can carry us, a cheerful acquiescence to the Divine Will is what we are to aim.
Or in his Thanksgiving Address where he implores Americans to submit to the will of God:
WHEREAS it is the duty of all nations to acknowledge the providence of Almighty God, to obey His will, to be grateful for His benefits, and humbly to implore His protection and favour….
Now perhaps Professor Irrational could explain to us how George Washington could be a deist who does not believe in providence, but simultaneously believe in providence.
In conclusion: Today we have powerful liberal anti-Christian organizations who work to spread historical myths about early America and attempt to force Christianity out of the public square. Our lying Professor is an example of this. If these prevaricators succeed, then indeed, we will have ignored the lessons from history. Fortunately, most Christians today agree with the principles of separation of church and State, just as they did in early America. As I have already said, it is freedom OF religion, not freedom FROM religion.
You have complained that I call you names. That indicates a lack of respect. How can I respect someone whose self worth is invested in misleading a small pack of rubes who are too intellectually lazy to discover the truth for themselves? How can I respect someone whose living is derived from misleading the youth of our country? So I will have whatever fun I want to have with you my friend. Thank God or Darwin or whomever that you and I haven’t met personally. I know I do. A quote from someone (whom I don’t remember) about George Steinbrenner and Reggie Jackson comes to mind. “One was born a liar, the other has been convicted.” You sir are both.
This argument started over the men who founded this nation and whether or not they were Christians. I say that by an overwhelming majority they were and you say I am wrong. To change the argument into something else simply because you cannot defend your initial position is the tactic of a desperate person. I am not advocating government sponsored religious activities nor do I want religion or anything else shoved down the throats of our citizens. However I do believe that what our founding fathers intended with respect to religion was not the elimination of religion from the lives of our people nor, the elimination of religious reference and inspiration from public view.
|
|
|
Post by pianoman on Dec 4, 2008 17:21:38 GMT -5
Quote from Ddowdy: Gladly my limp wristed, lily livered, left wing loser.
Mr. Dowdy, do you really have to stoop to this? An intellectual conversation or debate only loses significance when you resort to name calling, and that DOES show hatred. Please refrain as has your friend Ariandgabe. Also please read his last post in "Why the Cruelty".
I am not suggesting you stop your debates. When you stay on track, you have the opportunity to prove your point as did Jesus.
I started reading your post and when I got to the name calling I just stopped. Until then, I was reading your quotes and glad to see them. I did feel that you were supporting your position better with quotes as Rational had accused you if lacking in, but the name calling, I just shake my head.
Please brother, Jesus really has a hard time living in a heart that possesses that bitterness.
I wish you the best in your efforts, and Peace as always to all, Pianoman
|
|
|
Post by rational on Dec 4, 2008 23:15:44 GMT -5
Quote: You have a fine mind I am sure...I suppose I would just like to see you use it. I would be the first to say that overwhelmingly the men who founded this nation intended an absolute separation between any church and the state. They also absolutely intended a nation in which people were free to worship or not worship in whatever way desired (within the limits of the law) without suffering penalty or prejudice for it. However, none of this dilutes the truth that the majority of those men were in fact, Christians and it was their absolute intent that this nation be a nation founded and based upon fundamental Christian precepts and principles. To deny that is to participate in the intellectual dishonesty that now pervades American education. Let's see if this claim stands up to scrutiny.A single quote. A quote that was sent to Adams in the form of a newspaper clipping by Jefferson. Have you read what Adams’ said in response to Jefferson? He said the newspaper probably got some of it wrong. Adams noted, he had thought he said “American” where the article said “christian.” The full text can be found in: The Adams-Jefferson Letters The Complete Correspondence Between Thomas Jefferson and Abigail and John AdamsEdited by Lester J. Cappon And that evidence is where? Actually, I am only quoting from various documents that Adams, and other founding members, wrote and, in some cases, signed. Consider the following from Adams: In A Defence of the Constitutions of Government of the United States of America - 1787-1788: "The United States of America have exhibited, perhaps, the first example of governments erected on the simple principles of nature; and if men are now sufficiently enlightened to disabuse themselves of artifice, imposture, hypocrisy, and superstition, they will consider this event as an era in their history. Although the detail of the formation of the American governments is at present little known or regarded either in Europe or in America, it may hereafter become an object of curiosity. It will never be pretended that any persons employed in that service had interviews with the gods, or were in any degree under the influence of Heaven, more than those at work upon ships or houses, or laboring in merchandise or agriculture; it will forever be acknowledged that these governments were contrived merely by the use of reason and the senses."Emphasis addedFrom that same document: ". . . Thirteen governments [of the original states] thus founded on the natural authority of the people alone, without a pretence of miracle or mystery, and which are destined to spread over the northern part of that whole quarter of the globe, are a great point gained in favor of the rights of mankind." Emphasis addedIn a document written by many of the founding fathers, approved by the entire senate (many who were also founding fathers), and signed by Adams: As the Government of the United States of America is not in any sense founded on the Christian religion; as it has in itself no character of enmity against the laws, religion, or tranquillity, of Musselmen; and as the said States never have entered into any war or act of hostility against any Mehomitan nation, it is declared by the parties that no pretext arising from religious opinions shall ever produce an interruption of the harmony existing between the two countries. Emphasis addedTreaty of TripoliWell, given that JQA was a Unitarian who did not believe in the divinity of jesus, did not believe the biblical inerrant, and held the unusual belief that the law of man superseded the word of God I find it difficult to classify him as a christian. Perhaps you have a different definition that you could share with us. In fact JQA elected to be sworn into the Presidency using a law book rather than the bible. No, it comes from the same source as the majority of your material, David Barton and internet lists of pro-christian quotes. Barton has repeatedly had to retract some of his questionable quotes, including some he created by Madison. Well, that is convenient. You ask for some references that the US was not founded by people who supported christianity, I provide a number of references, and you dismiss them by claiming that, in this case, Madison was not talking about your type of christianity. Perhaps it it time for you to specifically define your version of christianity so we are both addressing the same thing. Next you will be telling me that when Franklin said he was a deist that he really was confirming he was a christian. I guess he changed his mind. “Religious bondage shackles and debilitates the mind and unfits it for every noble enterprise, every expanded prospect.”Madison to William Bradford, Jr. (1774) First of all, I asked you a question and did not make a statement. You do not feel that someone's free speech should be curbed when it comes to religion but that is exactly what the supreme court case you are quoting supports - people speaking out against christianity, including calling Jesus a basta rd and Mary a who re. You continue to call me a liar but fail, as usual, to support your claim. But back to the point, do you consider Chief Justice James Kent to be one of the founding fathers? Again you fail to support your premise. Where is the falsehood? No, you are not rewriting anything nor offering anything to support your premise. Your arguments are nothing but gainsaying. Not actually an opinion. Was 9/11 a display of favor on the US? Was the SFO earthquake? The Johnstown flood? The dust bowl drought of the mid 193os? Hurricane Katrina? Maybe you need to define "favor". As does the christian right: www.harpers.org/archive/2006/12/0081322As I pointed out earlier, even other christian denominations are speaking out about this distortion. Well, that is a very good example of hatred and personal attack but I meant one I had made, not what you could write. Fear is not hate. There is little I hate but I do fear when ideas like intelligent design are being promoted as science and bans against working with stem cells is stopping research that could help many in need. Hmmm, all I have done is provide you with quotes from the people involved. Just because I pointed out that Franklin considered himself a deist and you disagree with him does not make me a liar. In fact, it seems to me that... Well we will let that go. Your numbers only reveal the surface. Take the case of Washington. He was a social Episcopalian but was never considered an official communicant. Benjamin Franklin is also listed as an Episcopalian but said himself he was a Diest. That is a fair distinction, although somewhat artificial and perhaps a little off base. Some consider the Founders to be those who signed the Declaration of Independence in 1776 or participated in the Revolution. The group you mentioned are often considered the Framers who drafted the Constitution. Still others consider The Founding Fathers of the United States to be the political leaders who signed the Declaration of Independence or otherwise participated in the American Revolution as leaders of the Patriots, or who participated in drafting the United States Constitution eleven years later. en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Founding_Fathers_of_the_United_StatesAnd then there are those who want to keep people like Jefferson (author of the Declaration of Independence) and Paine (author of Common Sense) out of the group because they certainly are not helping to support the idea of christian founders. There are writings that support both sides of this coin. As pointed out, Washington was never known to take the eucharist. Unfortunately, people like Mason Locke Weems have promoted the myth of Washington and christianity and others like Barton pick it up and quote it without examination - until he got caught, that is. Weems was the same man who spread the myth of Washington and the cherry tree. You might want to examine who is actually spreading the myths. From what I have seen there is the christian right trying to create their myth and others opposing. Until the 1970's there was never the thought that the founders were christian nor that the US was founded as a christian nation. Having your respect means very little to me. You have shown your character when entering into discussions with me and others so the loss or gain of your respect is meaningless. Not only did I say you were wrong I also produced the writings of the people to back up my claims. How you can twist my quoting what people wrote into my prevarication is difficult to follow but then that is outside of the discussion. The argument was only changes to respond to statements you made in your valiant try to support your claims. I am not sure who you think is trying to eliminate religion from anywhere. Churches get tax breaks and donations to the religion of your choice is tax deductible. That means every citizen supports religions. Even me.
|
|
ddowdy
Junior Member
Posts: 79
|
Post by ddowdy on Dec 5, 2008 2:05:04 GMT -5
To pianoman...you are correct. I apologize for offending you.
From Rational:
No, it comes from the same source as the majority of your material, David Barton and internet lists of pro-christian quotes. Barton has repeatedly had to retract some of his questionable quotes, including some he created by Madison.
More lies. I didn't know who Barton was until you mentioned him. You know how to get the cite. You have already admitted to me that you are a liar...PM me back with the rest of it and you get the cite.
Perhaps it it time for you to specifically define your version of christianity so we are both addressing the same thing. Next you will be telling me that when Franklin said he was a deist that he really was confirming he was a christian.
You just can't get it right can you? I really don't think that the small band of admirers you have think that much less of you...after all many of the qualities you display (deceptiveness, circular logic, prevaricative creativity, etc.) are traits they likely have great regard for. We both know how you treasure the status they accord you. Hopefully it is still mostly intact. This is most likely the end of it for me...humiliating you is beginning to bore me and, in truth, pianoman's last post has me feeling a little sad for you and, a lot sorry for you. Quit your practice of always trying to reframe the debate topic...in fact just quit. I for one, am tiring of you.
|
|
|
Post by pianoman on Dec 5, 2008 3:06:45 GMT -5
Rational, I applaud you for not "going there" and resorting to name calling in your discussions.
Mr Dowdy, I am glad to accept your apology, and extend mine to you as I have written things that I regret, and were not a good example.
I enjoy your debates and will really read them if I see you use the professional approach that Mr Rational uses.
Mr Dowdy, you do have to admit that he doesn't call you names.
Mr rational, I want to commend you on your professional approach to your posts. While I don't always agree with you, as I get the feeling that you do not believe in God, that does put us quite a distance apart, in belief, but I still respect you right to your opinion, and appreciate you not resorting to personal attacks.
I know that we have been linked together and I do find that funny seeing as you are accused of Godlessness, and I am accused of being a 2x2.
Mr. Dowdy, You have some valid and good points, but you do need to provide a bit more backup and quoted material.
I just would like to see both continue to debate in a professional manner. That is what it is about.
I commend you both if you can continue in a professional manner.
As always, peace to all, Pianoman
|
|
ddowdy
Junior Member
Posts: 79
|
Post by ddowdy on Dec 5, 2008 4:08:48 GMT -5
I have always supported my points...if you can't see that check again. It is the fellow you admire so much who is all over the place in this argument attempting continuously to reframe the debate each time he gets his *** handed to him. That is okay though I know how much you admire him.
You are a good man pianoman and I feel badly about the start you and I got off too. Perhaps in time I will feel the same about rat. It is very difficult for me to get beyond the fact that rat. is simply an intellectually dishonest purveyor of claptrap who makes his living by producing nothing, contributing nothing, only misleading and misinforming. What I can't seem to do is bring myself to respect him. Maybe if I found out more about him I could respect him...why don't you pianoman pm me with his name and the school where he teaches? Maybe if I found out more about him I could find some common ground that we share and from there build some respect for the man. I am certainly willing to try.
|
|