... Franklin’s motion for prayer was ignored by the other attendees at the Constitutional Convention and that prayer he proposed, to bring together the two fractious sides, never took place. So his claim that this convention was “based on prayer” is absurd. Indeed, one could just as easily argue that it was based on drunkenness,...
Tuesday, October 21, 2014
Brayton Calls Out Billy Graham
Check out Ed's remarks here. A taste:
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
10 comments:
And part of that instruction was to pray privately, not publicly, which you have flouted your entire life and demand that others do so as well.
Brayton lies, too. That we should only pray in private is not what Jesus meant.
He was speaking of hypocrites who pray insincerely.
5"When you pray, you are not to be like the hypocrites; for they love to stand and pray in the synagogues and on the street corners so that they may be seen by men. Truly I say to you, they have their reward in full.
Tom Van Dyke writes, "[Ed] Brayton lies, too. That we should only pray in private is not what Jesus meant.
Is this one of many instances where Tom goes off on a tangent other than the subject of the blog, but Tom will argue no one else is allowed to follow him down a rabbit hole of his creation?
Here's what Ed stated, And part of that instruction was to pray privately, not publicly, which you [Billy Graham] have flouted your entire life and demand that others do so as well.
The RSV (in context) Matthew 6:
1 "Beware of practicing your piety before men in order to be seen by them; for then you will have no reward from your Father who is in heaven. 2 "Thus, when you give alms, sound no trumpet before you, as the hypocrites do in the synagogues and in the streets, that they may be praised by men. Truly, I say to you, they have received their reward. 3 But when you give alms, do not let your left hand know what your right hand is doing, 4 so that your alms may be in secret; and your Father who sees in secret will reward you. 5 "And when you pray, you must not be like the hypocrites; for they love to stand and pray in the synagogues and at the street corners, that they may be seen by men. Truly, I say to you, they have received their reward. 6 But when you pray, go into your room and shut the door and pray to your Father who is in secret; and your Father who sees in secret will reward you. 7 "And in praying do not heap up empty phrases as the Gentiles do; for they think that they will be heard for their many words. 8 Do not be like them, for your Father knows what you need before you ask him.
Of course what Ed asserts is unconvincing given the logical contradictions in the Bible regarding this topic. One could argue this from multiple perspectives, all of which have biblical support where all can't be true.
For those of us who suffered through innumerable Billy Graham broadcasts in our youth, where we could mouth the words before this preening narcissist voiced them, where Graham's prayers weren't directed at God but millions watching on TV; Mr. Graham's a 1960s/1970s exemplar of what's being critiqued in the book of Matthew.
So here we have Van Dyke arguing that this passage means the very thing that made Billy Graham so attractive to some and famous for doing.
Now if one went back and read all Jon Rowe's blog posts that cites Ed Brayton's blog post, I think it'd be trivially easy to find what's really going on here.
Tom Van Dyke suffers from the same affliction we encountered from some liberals during the George W. Bush era and now, a majority of conservatives during the Barack Obama presidency (Rush would call it a regime). Let's call it Ed Brayton Derangement Syndrome, in honor of those liberals who suffered from George Bush Derangement Syndrome.
Actually I'm sick of ignoramuses improperly using the Bible to smear Christians. Ed Brayton is completely twisted on this, and as usual is fatuous with his Cliffs Notes Biblicizing.
As for your opinion that Billy Graham violated Matthew 6, please take it somewhere else, Michael. Judging other people's religious worth is above the pay grade and out of bounds on this history blog.
Thank you.
And as often is the case, Ed fails to observe the distinction between a lie and a simple untruth. A person lies when they make an assertions contrary to what they know or belief with an intent to deceive. Is Graham actually lying, or only repeating something he believes is true?
Judging by the vile comments of some of Ed's readers, even they attribute the quote more to Graham's ignorance or dementia than to moral failure.
As someone (Probably Mr. Internet) once said, Every lie is an untruth; but not every untruth is a lie.
lee states, "A person lies when they make an assertions contrary to what they know or belief with an intent to deceive."
That's a very low bar for dishonesty there.
When people assert that which is not factually true, they are misinforming others. Casually promoting one's beliefs as objectively true, when they can be easily validated as not being true or without evidence is one of the most insidious forms of lies told.
I argue we have a moral imperative to not promote assertions with high confidence that they are true unless we've already previously validated they are true. Billy Graham goes beyond even by that standard. He promotes his evidence-less beliefs with certainty. Mr. Graham's an great example of the big liar. He promotes his beliefs as if they are true when they are without evidence, often falsified, and often not only without evidence - but wholly irrational.
It's not difficult to not lie by misinforming others. Mr. Graham has made a living pushing lies that have misinformed billions. And that's the lie beliefs are facts.
Me earlier, "Is this one of many instances where Tom goes off on a tangent other than the subject of the blog, but Tom will argue no one else is allowed to follow him down a rabbit hole of his creation?"
Tom Van Dyke responds to me,
"As for your opinion that Billy Graham violated Matthew 6, please take it somewhere else, Michael. Judging other people's religious worth is above the pay grade and out of bounds on this history blog."
Heh.
Truth. We tossed someone for his incessant attacks on Mormonism. We don't do that here. Go back to Ed Brayton's blog, where that kind of thing is its reason for being.
My "low bar" is the commonly accepted definition. It contains the state of mind of the individual regarding what he knows, the false propositions that he asserts, and his intent to deceive. Pick up any introductory philosophy book.
@ "Casually promoting one's beliefs as objectively true, when they can be easily validated as not being true or without evidence is one of the most insidious forms of lies told."
No, it is one of the most insidious forms of intellectual laziness. A moral vice in itself, yes, but distinct from lying.
As for his career of "lying," he is only repeating the lies of Moses, Isaiah, Jesus, Paul, et. al. If Graham by "faith" believes what he reads in the Bible is true, I guess it does not really count as lying does it.
Our visitor from the Bearded Spock Universe is inured to such rhetorical savagery, where every error is a "lie."
In this universe, we seek truth, not error.
To move beyond this unpleasantness, Lee, I submit--with no real proof mind you--that some of the more religious of the Framers resisted the call for divine intervention because they knew they were making a deal with the devil on slavery and on secularism.
Virginia.
Post a Comment