- Joined
- Aug 21, 2013
- Messages
- 23,086
- Reaction score
- 2,375
- Location
- United States
- Gender
- Undisclosed
- Political Leaning
- Conservative
You do like to proclaim yourself right, yet you can not back up your claims.
After all, you have yet to refute the point that Dr Rev Abercrombie, who was the minister at the Church that Washington attended with his wife about Washington's beliefs.
His own minster, in response to Dr Wilson's inquiry about Washington's beliefs specifically said that Washington was a Deist.
He knows more about the founding fathers than you ever will. You can't even get Washington right.
And, he consistently lies about it. there is no going around that fact. Using him as a source is about the same as using Infowars as a source.
Balderdash
And?? So what?? That has nothing to do with what the man thought. People who knew him said he was a deist.
No one knew him better than his adopted daughter, Nelly. "George Washington’s adopted daughter, having spent twenty years of her life in his presence, declared that one might as well question Washington’s patriotism as question his Christianity."
"In Volume XII of these writings, (writer and historian Jared Sparks - 1789-1866) delved into the religious character of George Washington, and included numerous letters written by the friends, associates, and family of Washington which testified of his religious character. Based on that extensive evidence, Sparks concluded: "To say that he [George Washington] was not a Christian would be to impeach his sincerity and honesty."
https://wallbuilders.com/george-washington-christian/
You're busted, Ramoss.
I see you immediately went back to David Barton. How very .. well, predictable. David Barton is not reliable.. and therefore your attempt to use him as a source is not acceptable.
It got so bad that the publisher withdrew the book, citing loss of confidence.
Publisher Pulls Controversial Thomas Jefferson Book, Citing Loss Of Confidence : The Two-Way : NPR
I see you immediately went back to David Barton. How very .. well, predictable. David Barton is not reliable.. and therefore your attempt to use him as a source is not acceptable.
Barton answers and refutes that nonsense: https://www.wallbuilders.com/downlo...vidBartonRespondstohisConservativeCritics.pdf
So nice try.
I don't give a rat's rear end about your "No No" denials. You've got zero credibility with that horse manure, and I've documented why. So get a new dog - that one of yours won't hunt.
Because you said so?? And, you basically are 'documenting' it with a known liar. So, who do I listen to?? SOmeone who had their books not being published anymore due to a lack of confidence by the publisher, or people who actually have degrees in being historians?? That doesn't take much consideration to decide to go with the people who actually have education in the field.
You're busted, Ramoss. Time and again your false charges and narratives are cast down. Yet still you flail away.
No need to stick around here for more of that nonsense.
I love how you try to dismiss the points made, using a discredited source, and then rely on that source to show that that source isn't discredited. You know that is not rational or logical, don't you??
Flush
Gonzo Rodeo is, of course, wrong. Atheism in the 18th and 19th centuries was not punishable by death. Deism, the religious faith of an impersonal God who creates Creation and then walks away, was embraced by those of the Enlightenment thinks, atheists and believers in something. American leaders who had problematic issues with faith, such as Washington and Madison, used the language of Deism.
Jefferson's great contribution would the "humanizing" of the concept, that the Creator designed a universe in which a Supreme Moral Teacher, such as Jesus, would bring the love of service to others and charty to all to a cold world.
Jefferson Deism is enjoying a mild resurgence in the US.
That response, of course, can not counter the point made. It is a sign of your surrendering though.
In your dreams, Ramoss. Want to try for Jefferson now?
Well, you have totally failed with Washington, since you only rely on a source that is thoroughly discredited. That source had it's book on Jefferson removed by the publisher due to a 'lack of confidence of it's accuracy.'
Nonsense. You failed on Washington. So now you're going to run away from claiming Jefferson was a deist?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?