Here is a great little quote that I happened to find the other day. This was written to John Adams. It goes as follows;
"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."
Thomas Jefferson
I remember reading this quote when I was perusing a collection of Jefferson letters and essays. One of these days I really need to check out his version of the Bible.
ReplyDeleteNow I learned something. He wrote his own version of the Bible? I did not know that.
ReplyDeleteOff subject but that Adams dude and that other Adams dude are both related to me.
ReplyDeletePeace, feen
"It is the will of Heaven that the two countries should be sundered for ever; it may be the will of Heaven that America shall suffer calamities still more wasting and distresses yet more dreadful. If this is to be the case, the furnace of affliction produces refinement in states as well as individuals; but I submit all my hopes and fears to an overruling Providence, in which, unfashionable as the faith may be, I firmly believe."
ReplyDeleteJohn Adams at the signing of the Declaration of Independence.
"The general Principles, on which the Fathers Atchieved Independence, were the only Principles in which that beautiful Assembly of young Gentlemen could Unite... And what were these general Principles? I answer, the general Principles of Christianity, in which all those Sects were united: And the general Principles of English and American Liberty, in which all those young Men United, and which had United all Parties in America, in Majorities sufficient to assert and maintain her Independence.
ReplyDeleteNow 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; and that those Principles of Liberty, are as unalterable as human Nature and our terrestrial, mundane System." John Adams
Link
If you look, this was a quote from a letter written by Thomas Jefferson to John Adams. I can pull tonnes of stuff from history if you would like.
ReplyDeleteTink,
ReplyDeleteJefferson didn't write his own version, he merely took the existing one and extracted all the passages he didn't agree with or felt were immoral. I'm guessing there wasn't much left.
Also, why am I not surprised that JD, whose reading comprehension seems to be on the level of a 5 year old, completely misses the mark yet again. I wouldn't harp on his obvious intellectual deficiencies if not for the fact that he's such a smug a-hole about it.
Yes, and there you have the keywords- Smug A Hole. You are right, I would never bother if he was a little more humane about being incorrect all of the time.
ReplyDeleteYou know, I am not all that versed in the "Founding Fathers". I am trying to read up a little more on that part of history cause it is so important on the colonial thing. It is good that you guys told me about that cause I did not know.
@ Feeno- Very cool that you are a distant relative of John Adams.
ReplyDeleteCheck out Susan Jacoby's book "Freethinkers." It's on google books, so you can read a bit without having to purchase it or go to the library. Of course, JD simply disregards her as a "yenta" (his words) because she writes stuff he doesn't want to be true, but that should be all the endorsement you need, right? ;)
ReplyDeleteThanks, gonna put that on the list. I think that I have heard of that book. Yenta huh? Wow, so rude.
ReplyDeleteIt really is incredible what denial can do to the human mind.
ReplyDeleteYeah. It causes him to have certainty that no one who disagrees could possibly be right or have anything of value to say, even without having to actually read what they write or hear what they say. One thing though, it rather simplifies life, which might be what the simpleton needs.
ReplyDeleteCheck out Susan Jacoby's book "Freethinkers." It's on google books, so you can read a bit without having to purchase it or go to the library. Of course, JD simply disregards her as a "yenta" (his words) because she writes stuff he doesn't want to be true,
ReplyDeleteIs this the thus far discredited book in which the author mischaracterized the religious beliefs of William Lloyd Garrison and you refuse to provide any other examples because you are afraid I will discredit her other assertions as well?
Wow.... Awesome.
ReplyDeleteYeah, indeed. He hasn't bothered to even look at the book, but he's sure that it's discredited. It's just like his love affair with Berlinski and how they both can know that Dawkins is wrong even when they have no idea what Dawkins' argument even is. I'd like to say that JD is one of a kind, but he's not. Unfortunately people like JD are all too common. You see them in the tea bagger groups, the birthers (JD is probably part of both), the Rethuglican heirarchy, Xian identity groups, Xian hate groups, etc.
ReplyDeleteI'm sorry, but perhaps you could clear up any confusion as to my recollection of events....
ReplyDelete1) You made the ridiculous claim that "It was freethinkers and non-Xians that led the way to outlawing slavery'.
2) I asked you to back up you assertion and you linkdump and fail to cite a single example of said "freethinkers".
3) I immediately gave the example of Wlliam Wilberforce as someone we could compare any "freethinker" you could come up with. (I could have just as easily cited William Weld or George Bourn, but why discuss anything like FACTS with you that youre just going to reject without any basis anyway)
4) I later had to ask TWICE for you to come up with one name so we cold make a comparison and to Wilberforce and you finally relented by providing a name (albeit a last name only,Garrison)
5) I quickly and without any effort whatsoever come up with four different reference re: Garrison..
a) William Lloyd Garrison was the "son of a pious Baptist mother"?
b) "Garrison was born in the United States in 1805 . Although he was born much later, his religious thought was greatly influenced by the religious awakening that America experienced in the mid-1700s . This movement consisted of the notion that there should be “an organization of an army of believers to crush out the forces of sin and false religion”. There was no excuse for sin, and it was the duty of religious people or the faithful to remove sin from the face of the earth. These views continued within the New England Baptists throughout the 1800s. Garrison’s mother, Fanny, was abandoned by her family after joining the Baptists . His father left the family when Garrison was only three, and thus, he was greatly influenced by his mother’s religious ideology. Even at a young age, Garrison was noted for his piety and faithfulness in these religious beliefs. In fact, as a teenager, he considered becoming a missionary"
c) from The US History Companion..
"A deeply religious Baptist, Garrison denounced slaveholding as an abomination in God's sight and demanded immediate, unqualified emancipation."
d) from newworldencyclopedia.org....
"Following the passage of the Thirteenth, Fourteenth, and Fifteenth Amendments to the Constitution ending slavery and providing the legal basis of full citizenship for former slaves, the deeply religious Garrison retired from his lifelong mission.....Garrison credited Reverend John Rankin of Ohio as a primary influence on his career, calling him his "anti-slavery father" and saying that Rankin's "book on slavery was the cause of my entering the anti-slavery conflict."
And today I quickly found 2 more.....
e) "Garrison maintained the piety inspired by his mother and Martha Farnham. At this early point, he was a Baptist, and quite devout in his observance of that faith. One of his fellow workers was Tobias Miller, a Baptist missionary, who often engaged Garrison in long theological discussions, and gave Garrison serious thoughts about joining the ministry. Although the ministry tempted him, Garrison ultimately stayed with newspapers" and...
f) "is creer had been an impossibility without the fervor and single-heartedness derived from an absorption of the Word of God as his simple education and his essentially Protestant and individualfaith led him to interpret it. His speech and writings are full of the far-seeing and fervent zeal of the Old Testament propets — he delighted in phrases which would have been cant in the mouth of another. If Jeremiah and Isaiah were inspired, so without profaness may we say that Garrison was inspired"
Is anything I have written above false or unverifiable?
ReplyDeleteBesides some book that appears to be catagorically false concerning the motivations of Garrison, can you cite for us just one single other source wich would say that his motivations were not religious in nature?
Have you even the slightest doubt that I could fnd many other references as well about the religious convictions of Garrison?
Would you please name your next "freethinker" so that I might examine their motivations as well?
The real sequence of events:
ReplyDeleteI presented a publication for JD, who refused to even look at it, even when I presented the link to it on google books, so that he could read for himself without having to buy it or go to the library. JD proceded to denounce the book before even reading it and continued to make the demand that I supply him names when they are all contained in the link that he refuses to look at and still refuses to look at. I supplied Garrison, who is a freethinker, but JD looks for sources, doesn't understand the context, but still thinks that he's proven the book is false, without ever having read what's in the book. JD comes here to brag about how he's falsified some argument that he's not heard and doesn't even know what it is.
Is there anything more intellectually dishonest than this?
And, to make himself that much more of a hypocrite, JD gets all testy if someone doesn't click on a link he provides, even though he now calls it a linkdump whenever someone else links to something. It must be so easy to be so closed-minded and simple minded.
ReplyDeleteOr, if he does not like what is in the link, then he gets testy.
ReplyDeleteSometimes, I feel bad. It is like shooting fish in a barrel.
I supplied Garrison, who is a freethinker
ReplyDeleteDefine "freethinker"
but still thinks that he's proven the book is false, without ever having read what's in the book
One aspect of the book is proven false. Please tell me another "freethinker" that has done more than Christian abolishionists.
JD comes here to brag about how he's falsified some argument that he's not heard and doesn't even know what it is
Your argument (since I obviously need to remind you) was that "It was freethinkers and non-Xians that led the way to outlawing slavery'.
I have demonstrated conclusively, citing multiple sources that the motivations of William Lloyd Garrison were religious in nature. You have pointed to a book and have not even bothered to offer a counter argument because you don't have one.
Is there anything more intellectually dishonest than this?
Were I in your shoes GCT and I wished to point out the obvious to someone like me, I would name an entire list of said "freethinkers" along with their accomplishments and cite numerous sources to back up my assertion. Apparently you cannot do so because you would have already done so.
Garrison was more influenced by the writings of Thomas Paine, which is what set him on his quest for abolitionism and women's rights. If you had read even a couple pages you would have learned that. Instead, you are too busy avoiding anything that might be counter to what you believe. You're intellectually a coward.
ReplyDeleteAnd, additionally, your argument is stupid to begin with. For every Wilberforce that you cite, there's at least as many (and probably at least twice as many) Xians who had no issue with or even defended slavery. You're counting the hits and ignoring the misses. It wasn't Xianity that ended slavery, it was select people who may or may not also have believed in Xianity. In fact, the Bible does not condemn slavery, so it's much more Biblical and more Xian to defend slavery. The abolitionists are un-Biblical as are the modern Xians that look with revulsion upon slavery and act as if Xianity was the saving grace of the world that abolished it.
Finally, I'm standing on principle, which is why I'm not doing your homework for you. Why should I go to any effort to elucidate you if you abjectly refuse to consider anything that I have to say? If I can give you a link to a book that explains things and you are too lazy, obstinate, and intellectually cowardly to even look at it (all the while insisting that I look at every single link that you put forth) why should I spend my time explaining every single jot and tittle in the link I provide? You're simply going to claim the author is a "yenta" (showing your sexism and racism all at once) and not worth listening to, since you've already made up your mind regardless of what anyone else says.
This, in short, is the position of the weak-minded. People like you have to shut out all other possibilities because you are, quite frankly, not equipped to deal with the possibility of being wrong. Then, you act like a smug a-hole to try and hide your insecurities. Too bad you're completely transparent to anyone who has at least 2 brain cells to rub together.
I also see, JD, that you've removed my posts from your blog. What a coward you are. You can't handle having your bad arguments eviscerated, so you have to destroy the evidence and run away. How pathetic.
ReplyDeleteSo, for others to see, when you claim that faith alone gets one into heaven, you're claiming that god only cares what we believe in, not how we act. I understand that you are too stupid to get that, but perhaps someday you'll learn some basic logic.
Also, when you start asking about Pranger's armies, you're moving the goalposts and introducing red herrings. When the dumbass talks about war to stop genocide (which doesn't include Iraq, Afghanistan, or Iran) and then turns a blind eye and doesn't advocate war to actually stop genocide, then he comes off as a dumbass, and so do you for not being able to see that.
He made this statement;
ReplyDelete"No practicing Christian has ever practiced genocide." I give him a list, then he wants me to define genocide. I want him too, as he made the claim. And, he is quoting Dawkins again. Too funny.
Well, you see, those so-called Xians weren't actually Scottish.
ReplyDeleteApparently, we have to have evil in this world because god can't remove free will, except for those Xians who are compelled to do good by the holy spirit, which somehow saves the idea of faith being the only requirement for heaven, because they don't have to do works, except for the ones that god forces them to do by taking over their free will, which god can't do because then we would all be robots and we couldn't have evil, which is only allowed because we have free will that god won't violate, except in the case where....
Of course, none of this will get through. How can it to a person who bans others simply because he doesn't like their ability to show his arguments are unfounded and don't make sense? That is why he banned me. He made a threat to do so and claimed that I had to answer his red herring. When I pointed out my position and why it was sound and why his was a red herring, he banned me for it. I didn't use abusive language. I did not swear or threaten. I did not attack others. I simply pointed out the logical flaw in his argument. He's an intellectual coward is all, much like many Xians and rethuglicans out there.
Yes, I know.... I would only ban someone for hate talk.... That would be it for me. But, maybe you have to flip it around and look at it from his perspective. He cannot keep up, and his pride stands in the way. I cannot imagine how it must feel to have everything I said be shot down with no hope of rebuttal.
ReplyDeleteThis is what it does though. Xian doctrine supposedly teaches you to be humble and servile to your faults and mistakes. Call me crazy, but you rarely see that. There is so much I do not know (which is why I blog for research), and I have no trouble admitting it. All that it takes to get a grasp on your personal beliefs, or denying any belief, is to be informed.
I banned one commenter for making threats. It happens, but I reserve it only for those who do extreme things like threatening me.
ReplyDelete"I cannot imagine how it must feel to have everything I said be shot down with no hope of rebuttal."
The thing is that sometimes I think people like JD and MDC (JD's little sycophant) think they are winning these exchanges - that they are destroying our bad arguments because they can't be wrong. I think it goes to a larger tendency that links to the inerrancy of scripture and that if one part is wrong, then all of it is wrong - which transfers to their arguments where everything they say must be right or else it throws their whole entire worldview into chaos, which must be avoided at all costs.
Yes, that is fair.... Not just that, but delusion and denial are very powerful. Religion is the antithesis to being self aware....
ReplyDeleteYou need to put it on your blog.... Consider it a trophy of sorts. You have been silenced cause he is so frustrated. Love it.
ReplyDeleteI have been thinking more about it. You are right, some people can have the house of cards fall, and they can walk away on the other side with no issue. However, some people cannot. And, this is an example of that.
ReplyDeleteyou've removed my posts from your blog. What a coward you are. You can't handle having your bad arguments eviscerated
ReplyDeleteYou've eviserated nothing Einstein. Every one of your comments are still up that predate your refusal to retract your patently false statement that you still refuse to retract. Can I go on your blog and say that you think that the rape of children is OK and then not back up that statement in any way? Please continue to prove your social autism.
When the dumbass (Prager) talks about war to stop genocide (which doesn't include Iraq, Afghanistan, or Iran) and then turns a blind eye and doesn't advocate war to actually stop genocide, then he comes off as a dumbass, and so do you for not being able to see that.
"Human Rights Watch released a report that the government of Sudan "is giving [Sudanese Arab gangs] a license to rape" black women and girls in Darfur' Larry Prager 4/8/08 Link
"Obama: "The genocide in Darfur shames the conscience of us all."
Obama is certainly right that Darfur "shames the conscience of us all." But he offers not one suggestion concerning what to do about it. Nor one lesson that he draws from it." Dennis Prager 8/5/08 Link
"the UN has voted China onto its Security Council and has never condemned it. China's sponsoring of Sudan and its genocidal acts against its non-Arab black population, as in Darfur, goes largely unremarked on at the UN, let alone condemned, just as is the case with its cultural genocide, ethnic cleansing and military occupation of Tibet." Dennis Prager Link
To say Prager hasnt spoken out specifically on Darfur is incorrect as usual. What else can he do as a journalist except make people aware of what is going on?
Of course, none of this will get through. How can it to a person who bans others simply because he doesn't like their ability to show his arguments are unfounded and don't make sense?
In order to back up your assertion, please list all of the other comments of yours that I deleted prior to you telling me that I'm alright with the forcible rape of children......
You can't. I never did and I never had to tell anyone to go away either. Is it beginning to sink in that you are a complete ass yet or no?
I must admit that I'm new at this method of argumentation where you cite just one single source (a book) and then don't cite anything from it and then refuse to back up assertions made based on the book by refusing to name names and cite other sources to support your argument. Wow! I'll be King of the Internet!
ReplyDeleteJD,
ReplyDelete"You've eviserated nothing Einstein."
Wait, you're still addressing me here?
If I didn't cause you any consternation, why did you feel the need to lie about what I said?
"Can I go on your blog and say that you think that the rape of children is OK and then not back up that statement in any way?"
I never said you thought that. I said that your theology allows it (it's the logical conclusion) and that it's a sign that your theology is really not about morality. I even gave you a chance to retract your idea of faith being the only necessity to reach heaven, and you re-iterated it. In fact, the support for my claim was your own words. Don't blame me because your ideology is morally bankrupt.
"To say Prager hasnt spoken out specifically on Darfur is incorrect as usual. What else can he do as a journalist except make people aware of what is going on?"
We both know that the rethuglican party pays very little lip service to Darfur and Pranger is no exception. They have been very supportive of war in Iraq and Afghanistan, and even pushing for war with Iran. Pranger then goes and chides a bumper sticker for saying war isn't the answer and claims that it is the answer for genocide? As I've already pointed out Iraq, Iran, Afghanistan...not genocide. Actual instances of genocide like Darfur are largely ignored. Pranger is not asking us to go into Darfur and commit to war. He also didn't support going into Rwanda I'm sure, and he didn't support Clinton going into Bosnia either. Sorry, but my point still stands.
"In order to back up your assertion, please list all of the other comments of yours that I deleted prior to you telling me that I'm alright with the forcible rape of children......"
The evidence is on your blog. There's two threads missing comments of mine, and we weren't discussing the same topic in both threads. Oops.
"I must admit that I'm new at this method of argumentation where you cite just one single source (a book) and then don't cite anything from it and then refuse to back up assertions made based on the book by refusing to name names and cite other sources to support your argument."
What you continually fail to understand - even though I keep saying it to you in a very direct fashion - is that I object to you not even bothering to look at the links cited and dismissing them without even looking at them. Why should I provide more support that you will simply dismiss out of hand without even being familiar with the arguments or links? If I cite Dawkins, you'll simply dismiss him just like your hero Berlinski (epic fail on that one!) That you can't or won't understand this makes you an idiot of the highest degree and/or intellectually cowardly and dishonest. So, which is it? Are you simply and idiot or are you a cowardly liar, or both? My money is on "both."
So is mine.... Very selective in what you want to hear and read.
ReplyDeletetink,
ReplyDeleteYou may enjoy this thread where our pal JD is up to his usual tricks. He levels personal attack at me after personal attack and then claims that I'm the one using ad hominem because I point out that an omni-benevolent god seems to allow rape and suffering. I think JD needs his meds.
Wow.... Either he needs his meds, or he needs to cut out the sauce.
ReplyDeleteMy latest was this- I asked him whether he would trust his kids to be watched by the Catholics or a public school teacher. Because, in JD land, a kid is more at risk to be abused by a public school teacher than a Catholic priest. So, he says that he would send them to either a Catholic or Protestant school. I send him an article about decades long abuse of children in Catholic institutions. Then he tells me that this would not affect him because if I had looked at the article, the abuse mostly happened with orphaned and underprivileged kids, and that is not his children. He is cruel and insane.
Here it is... I still beat myself up for giving this five minutes of my life. My bad;
ReplyDeleteI checked out the article you cited Tink. Your question was "Would you trust your child too the public school system (which you probably already do) or allow Catholic priests to watch them for a couple of hours?"
If you'll re read the article you cited, the st majority of kids were adjudicated, orphans or indigent. That's a different story that what school I'm going to put my kid in.
February 16, 2010 2:27 PM
tinkbell13 said...
And there it is.... The true love of Jesus ringing through JD.
If you'll re read the article you cited, the st majority of kids were adjudicated, orphans or indigent. That's a different story that what school I'm going to put my kid in.
The Catholics, well its just the poor kids. My kids have better than that. Way to radiate that compassion of Jesus to all of us heathens.
February 17, 2010 6:19 AM
JD Curtis said...
No idiot. You asked me where I would put my kids and I told you. Would I put them in an orphanage? No.
February 17, 2010 11:58 AM
tinkbell13 said...
No, you insensitive retard.... A housefly has more depth than you. Your comment is cruel, and you lack the basic insight to even see that.
Yeah, I'm detecting some paranoid delusion in his posts along with a strong martyr complex and extremely low self-esteem. That's on top of his god complex that makes him think he can do no wrong.
ReplyDeleteAnd, the more futile his arguments become to himself, the more manic he is becoming.
ReplyDeleteHa ha ha ha ha
ReplyDeleteI love the infighting between JD and Marcus, because it's causing JD to cite stuff like the above. This is a guy who probably thinks those blacks got there because of affirmative action.
Well, there is a reason why Marcus goes to his site, and does not bother with the likes of us. Marcus should have deleted comments, not you. I have not been over there for awhile, real busy with work.
ReplyDelete