Were Most Of America's Founding Fathers - Christians

[DriftingSand]

Most all of the Founders were Christians.
Christians that owned and fucked their slaves, consumed massive amounts of alcohol, contributed handsomely to the local HO house, smuggled, avoided taxes whenever they could and fought like HELL against the main Christian theme of the day in that world: The claim that God ran the earth and that the common man had to answer to the crown monarchies of the world and not doing so was a Christian sin.
And the Founders rebeled against that and ALL Christian mandates from government.

^^^^^^^^^^^^^^some of the lies that Barton dispels^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

 

[JakeStarkey]

David Barton as reputable historian of the Founders has been dispelled.

Move along.

 

[kjw47]

Not all FF's were Christian. Why so desperate to force your religion onto others?

99.9999% were Christian. Thank them for shedding their blood so that you could have the right to hate them, Christians in general, and Christianity in general. Have a nice day.

It doesn't serve your argument to simply make up this stuff as you go.

99% being told they are Christian today is a huge lie--Jesus started one single religion--those who learn Jesus' truths can easily see his teachers.

 

[thebrucebeat]

Neither of you are worthy of 'rebuttal', you offer nothing but lies and personal insults.

You are the personal insult king.
No one on these boards is any worse than you in use of vulgarity and invective.
This post of yours is simply verification of my point and could be added to my previous list of your unresponsive posts.

And who did you complain about before him? Oh I think I know.

Glad to see you aren't disagreeing with my assessment of Newby's posting habits.
That would be ludicrous. The data is all over these threads and is absolutely indisputable.

 

[thebrucebeat]

The word "conservative" has different meanings to different folks. There's one word that will always trump such a title and that word is "truth." No man that I know of has spent as much time and effort to dig into the early documents and know as much about the subject as David Barton. He puts your knowledge and mine combined to shame.

Take a look at your recent quotes. You've applied my name to statements made by Newby. See our post #327

A historian is anyone who studies history and uncovers historical facts. One needn't have a University degree to read and study history. I've known fantastic sculptors, musicians, and other professionals who've never taken formal training.

Sorry for the quote problem. That is a site glitch. Couldn't help that. Above each of the quotes they are attributed to Newby.
Everyone who reads history is not a historian. There are standards to research that need to be met, and Barton fell over on his shoelaces and got caught, and not only by his betters but by people of a conservative academic bent.
Barton, in other words, was "trumped" by truth.

 

[thebrucebeat]

Neither of you are worthy of 'rebuttal', you offer nothing but lies and personal insults.

You are the personal insult king.
No one on these boards is any worse than you in use of vulgarity and invective.
This post of yours is simply verification of my point and could be added to my previous list of your unresponsive posts.

Tit for tat ... my dad's bigger than your dad ... blah, blah, blah.

Have you ever, EVER, seen me use the kind of language in a post that Newby is very well known for on these threads?
What about his tendencies is worthy of you defending?
What have you ever seen comparable coming from me?

 

[Chuckt]

99.9999% were Christian. Thank them for shedding their blood so that you could have the right to hate them, Christians in general, and Christianity in general. Have a nice day.

It doesn't serve your argument to simply make up this stuff as you go.

99% being told they are Christian today is a huge lie--Jesus started one single religion--those who learn Jesus' truths can easily see his teachers.

Unfortunately your position is esoteric and you don't have unity with a majority of anyone.

 

[DriftingSand]

David Barton as reputable historian of the Founders has been dispelled.

Move along.

Wrong. He has defended his position based on his knowledge of the customs of the day and the literature that he has at his fingertips. I'm certain that the new edition of his book will come complete with explanations that should clear up all the misunderstandings and false accusations.

 

[JakeStarkey]

David Barton as reputable historian of the Founders has been dispelled.

Move along.

Wrong. He has defended his position based on his knowledge of the customs of the day and the literature that he has at his fingertips. I'm certain that the new edition of his book will come complete with explanations that should clear up all the misunderstandings and false accusations.

That defense has been exploded as posted clearly in this thread and on the Board.

His new book will of course be looked at carefully, as will his sources and footnotes and conclusion.

Perhaps he can repair the damage he has created.

 

[DriftingSand]

David Barton as reputable historian of the Founders has been dispelled.

Move along.

Wrong. He has defended his position based on his knowledge of the customs of the day and the literature that he has at his fingertips. I'm certain that the new edition of his book will come complete with explanations that should clear up all the misunderstandings and false accusations.

That defense has been exploded as posted clearly in this thread and on the Board.

His new book will of course be looked at carefully, as will his sources and footnotes and conclusion.

Perhaps he can repair the damage he has created.

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.

 

[emilynghiem]

And thank the gods the founders framed a model of government that provided me protections from those who wield their religion like a bloody truncheon.

So you're thanking a group of wise Christians. Thanks. We're once again in agreement.

Not all FF's were Christian. Why so desperate to force your religion onto others?

Dear Hollie and DriftingSand:
Because my own background was not traditionally "Christian"
I see a distinction between people who are
* "neighbors in Christ" (ie reconcilable in the Christian spirit)
* people who are or are not followers of Christ by the Bible (traditional Christian
or some Jews and Muslims who are part of Christianity)
* people who are NOT reconcilable whether Christian or not

NOTE: some "nonchristians" fall under "reconcileable as neighbors in Christ";
some "Christians" fall under "irreconcilable" in Christ because they do not forgive.

So I tell you honestly I have trouble labeling who is Christian or not merely by affiliation.

(1) I would say that even if Founding Fathers were Deist, nonchristian, or irreconcileable whether Christian or nonchristian by tradition,
the laws that were passed down are "Christian in spirit".
The spirit of truth and justice that fulfills Biblical law also fulfills natural laws
as embodied in the Constitution, and its derivatives PRACTICED in the
SPIRIT of natural laws which is based on "consent of the governed"
and "equal justice and liberty for all"

Some of the physical practices, such as slavery and now corporate political abuses,
are NOT with the spirit but AGAINST justice, but the spirit of the laws is still intact.

So by the SPIRIT of the laws, yes, I would say the founding fathers and foundation of America is Christian.

Because the Christian Bible instructs followers to respect civil authority, where it is clear the courts belong to secular authority, this is not against the Bible or Christianity to have a secular state under secular laws. These are supposed to be in harmony.

So even where founding fathers and laws insisted on secular govt,
this is IN KEEPING with Christian faith and not against it.

I personally believe Jefferson was more of a Naturalist, focusing on where
the spirit and teachings of Jesus in the Bible fulfill natural laws.

Since I relate to that approach to Christianity, God and Jesus
I do not see secular Constitutional laws as being opposed to Christianity.

Christianity equally includes natural laws and secular gentiles under them;
Constitutional laws equally align with Christian principles; so these are
ideal in harmony anyway. I believe the most Christian aspect of the founding
fathers is the process of carrying the laws of justice by conscience, so this
is independent of traditional Christian practice or any religion or no faith at all;
since the concept of Jesus as universal Justice fulfills all laws anyway regardless of culture.

(2) Note: I see all the people on this thread being of GOOD CONSCIENCE, seeking truth and forgiving and correcting faults as being "neighbors connected in Christ" or by conscience.

So even where people are secular, we can still be one in spirit or conscience, and still be
acting as "Christians" in that sense. The physical or cultural tradition and language
of Christianity comes second; the spirit comes first and fulfills all else that follows it.

 

[thebrucebeat]

wrong. He has defended his position based on his knowledge of the customs of the day and the literature that he has at his fingertips. I'm certain that the new edition of his book will come complete with explanations that should clear up all the misunderstandings and false accusations.

that defense has been exploded as posted clearly in this thread and on the board.

His new book will of course be looked at carefully, as will his sources and footnotes and conclusion.

Perhaps he can repair the damage he has created.

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!!!!!!!!!!!

 

[Hollie]

David Barton as reputable historian of the Founders has been dispelled.

Move along.

Wrong. He has defended his position based on his knowledge of the customs of the day and the literature that he has at his fingertips. I'm certain that the new edition of his book will come complete with explanations that should clear up all the misunderstandings and false accusations.

It’s really remarkable that anyone would defend Barton when his fraud was so calculated and when his knowledge of the historical record was so amateurishly presented. But to float conspiracy theories and defend a liar and charlatan is really disturbing.

Even that bastion of ID’iosy, the Disco’tute, has made a point to distance itself from Barton. That’s quite remarkable as the ‘tute is among the more notorious of the snake pits that has its own share of fraudsters and charlatans.


Disco Institute Damage Control? Barton Book Dumped - The Panda's Thumb

Well, this is interesting! Pseudo-historian David Barton, whom we last heard from here on the Thumb declaring that America’s Founding Fathers had considered evolution, and rejected it for creationism, has had his newest book examined and rejected by a group of conservative authors headed by the Discovery Institute’s Jay W. Richards.

From the New York Times Artsbeat blog for August 14, 2012:
Last month the History News Network voted David Barton’s book “The Jefferson Lies” the “least credible history book in print.” Now the book’s publisher, Thomas Nelson, has decided to stop publishing and distributing it.

The book, which argues that Thomas Jefferson was an enthusiastic orthodox Christian who saw no need for a wall of separation between church and state, has attracted plenty of criticism since it appeared in April, with an introduction by Glenn Beck. But the death knell came after Jay W. Richards, a senior fellow at the Discovery Institute and the author, with James Robison, of “Indivisible: Restoring Faith, Family and Freedom Before It’s Too Late,” began to have doubts and started an investigation.


The Times blog refers to a detailed August 7th, 2012 article by Thomas Kidd at World Magazine, which notes :
Richards says in recent months he has grown increasingly troubled about Barton’s writings, so he asked 10 conservative Christian professors to assess Barton’s work.
Their response was negative. Some examples: 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.”



It goes on and the embedded links here: Disco Institute Damage Control? Barton Book Dumped - The Panda's Thumb present a really grotesques picture of Barton as a liar and a total fraud.


As summarized from the link:

Wow. We know how much the Discovery Institute needs to feed on disinformation and polemics. That one of their leaders had to reject Barton’s book is a strong indication that the book must be really, really, really bad!

 

[Hollie]

Because as all findings in the modern cognitive sciences have inarguably shown, religious fundamentalists have no control over the insidious magical influence of The Stupid

Living by a hateful, skewed, and deranged worldview is one thing, but making the rest of us suffer because of it is another.

At the attached link are several video segments wherein Barton manages to mangle, twist. Lie and generally make a complete ass of himself as he totally gets American history wrong.


Cue The Tape: How David Barton Sees The World

Cue The Tape: How David Barton Sees The World : NPR

David Barton is not a historian. But his version of American history is wildly popular with churches, schools and the GOP. With help from historians Warren Throckmorton and Michael Coulter, co-authors of Getting Jefferson Right, we fact-checked a few of Barton's more common claims. Watch video examples of Barton's messages and see how they compare with the Constitution, historical text and the Bible.

No wonder the far, far, --------> way the hell over there to the far reaches of the right, fundies are such a laughing stock.

 

[DriftingSand]

Here's the question posed by the OP:

"Were Most Of America's Founding Fathers - Christians"

We've all heard all sorts of bizarre opinions, excuses, insults, anecdotes, fibs, lies, half-truths, and subject-changing but how many of the naysayers, trolls, haters, et al., have actually answered the simple question? Not many. Most don't like the fact that the majority of our founders were Christians fleeing King George and the Anglican Church.

Many will use statements made by our founders who opposed the organized religion of the Anglican church to "prove" that they were "against Christianity" when the truth of the matter is that they simply wanted to worship Christ in their own way without government intrusion; thus, the Amendment that allowed for "freedom of religion."

So, we can all feel blessed that we live in a land that allowed us the freedom to speak our minds; worship (or not worship) as we see fit; assemble together in peaceful protest; etc. These men fought hard and died hard so that we could sit in our soft, cozy computer chair and rant day in and day out. Be grateful!! I am.

 

[Hollie]

Oh my, I'm on a religious bong high over this new era for truth in religion as the religious entities are declaring truth in advertising. Yahoo! Can you hear the choir of angels singing Hallelujah?

Oops! You can only sweep the dirt under a clean carpet for so long before a big pile becomes visible underneath it. A big pile of dirt.



The Right's Favorite Historian Comes Apart at the Seams

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

On Thursday, Barton's publisher announced that it was recalling Barton's newest book, The Jefferson Lies, from stores and suspending publication because it had "lost confidence" in the book's accuracy. That came one day after NPR published a scathing fact-check of Barton's work, specifically his claim that passages of the Constitution were lifted verbatim from the Bible. NPR's conclusion: "We looked up every citation Barton said was from the Bible, but not one of them checked out." Likewise, although Barton frequently regales audiences with a story about how Congress commissioned the printing of Bibles in order to promote Christian values among the populace, NPR found that "Congress never published or paid a dime for the 1782 Bible." Rather, "It was printed and paid for by Philadelphia printer Robert Aitken."

 

[DriftingSand]

that defense has been exploded as posted clearly in this thread and on the board.

His new book will of course be looked at carefully, as will his sources and footnotes and conclusion.

Perhaps he can repair the damage he has created.

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.

 

[Hollie]

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 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.

 

[Hollie]

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.'"


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.)

 

[DriftingSand]

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

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.

A few of the signers of the Declaration of Independence:

Adams, John - Congregationalist and later a Unitarian
Adams, Samuel - Congregationalist.
Bartlett, Josiah - Bartlett was a Congregationalist.
Braxton, Carter - Braxton was a member of the Episcopal church.
Carroll, Charles - Roman Catholic
Chase, Samuel - Chase was an Episcopalian
Clark, Abraham - Clark was a Presbyterian
Clymer, George - Was both a Quaker and an Episcopalian
Ellery, William - Ellery was known as a Congregationalist and a devout Christian
Floyd, William - Floyd was a Presbyterian
Gerry, Elbridge - Gerry was an Episcopalian
Gwinnett, Button - Gwinnett was an Episcopalian and a Congregationalist
Hall, Lyman - Hall was a Congregationalist and served as a minister in Connecticut
Hancock, John - Hancock was a Congregationalist
Harrison, Benjamin - Harrison was a member of the Episcopal church
Hart, John - Hart was a Presbyterian
Hewes, Joseph - Hewes was a Quaker and an Episcopalian
Heyward, Thomas - Heyward was a member of the Episcopal church
Hooper, William - Hooper was an Episcopalian
Hopkins, Stephen - He was a Quaker with an active interest in the church
Hopkinson, Francis - Hopkinson was an Episcopalian
Huntington, Samuel - He was a Congregationalist
Jefferson, Thomas - Jefferson was probably best called a Deist, but he is also claimed by Unitarians and some Christian denominations
Lee, Francis Lightfoot - Lee was an Anglican and a devout Christian
Lee, Richard Henry - Lee was an Anglican and known as a sincere Christian
Lewis, Francis - Lewis was an Episcopalian
Livingston, Philip - Livingston was a Presbyterian
Lynch, Thomas - Member of the Episcopal Church
Madison, James - Member of the Episcopal Church
McKean, Thomas - McKean was a member of the Presbyterian Church
Middleton, Arthur - Member of the Episcopal Church
Morris, Lewis - Morris was an Episcopalian
Morris, Robert - Member of the Episcopal Church
Morton, John - Member of the Episcopal Church
Nelson, Thomas Jr. - Nelson was a member of the Episcopal church
Paca, William - Paca was an Episcopalian and a consistent Christian
Paine, Robert - Paine left Calvinism to become a Unitarian
Penn, John - Penn was a member of the Episcopalian church
Read, George - Read was an Episcopalian
Rodney, Caesar - Rodney was an Episcopalian
Rush, Benjamin - Rush was a Presbyterian
Ross, George - Ross was an Anglican
Rutledge, Edwards - Rutledge was an Anglican
Smith, James - Smith was a Presbyterian
Stockton, Richard - Stockton was a Presbyterian
Stone, Thomas - Stone was an Episcopalian
Taylor, George - Taylor was a Presbyterian
Thornton, Matthew - Thornton was a member of the Presbyterian Church
Walton, George - Walton was an Episcopalian
Williams, William - Williams was a Congregationalist and a devout Christian
Witherspoon, John - Witherspoon was a Presbyterian
Wolcott, Oliver - He was a Congregationalist and a devout Christian
Wythe, George - Wythe was a member of the Episcopal church

First Amendment Religion Clauses: Signers of the Declaration of Independence - Christian Background