tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1237087217187172116.post2739513928044683664..comments2024-03-28T10:44:30.518-06:00Comments on American Creation: Lillback Repeats Phony QuotationBrad Harthttp://www.blogger.com/profile/17669677047039491864noreply@blogger.comBlogger5125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1237087217187172116.post-17300859324786819602022-11-14T07:34:05.969-07:002022-11-14T07:34:05.969-07:00Christianity was not abundant in the founding. Enl...Christianity was not abundant in the founding. Enlightenment rationalism was abundant. By the time of the founding, the work of the Holy Spirit in the Great Awakening started by Edwards was long gone, evidenced by many institutional proofsOur Founding Truthhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01072993191810565535noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1237087217187172116.post-11299157846898461142022-09-26T19:41:20.391-06:002022-09-26T19:41:20.391-06:00Yes, unnecessary. Christianity was abundant in th...Yes, unnecessary. Christianity was abundant in the Founding and there is no need to gild the lily.Tom Van Dykehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07121072404143877596noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1237087217187172116.post-23476258469550362302022-09-26T08:10:53.620-06:002022-09-26T08:10:53.620-06:00Indeed. Dr. Lillback is a more reputable scholar t...Indeed. Dr. Lillback is a more reputable scholar than say David Barton. But he still makes certain problematic claims.Jonathan Rowehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04079637406589278386noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1237087217187172116.post-83668880501099306982022-09-25T22:13:01.707-06:002022-09-25T22:13:01.707-06:00I see that Dr. Peter Lillback also said:
"As ...I see that Dr. Peter Lillback also said:<br />"As we continue on, there are other examples that we can turn to on April 18, 1775. Now, this is a contested story, but it reflects this so I’m going to read it as a possibility rather than a fact. It’s Reverend Jonas Clarke, a Lexington pastor and a militia leader. When he was confronted by the demand to turn over the armaments of the militia and to surrender to the British troops, Jonas Clarke or one of his company said, 'We recognize no sovereign but God and no King but Jesus.'”<br />It is disingenuous to describe this as a "contested" story or "as a possibility"; it is in fact a baseless story first circulated on the internet without any evidence to support it. It's a possibility only the same sense that Daniel Webster might have defeated the devil in a contest over a man's soul; it's a story someone told. Since Dr. Lillback knows that it is "contested" he must know <i>why</i> it is "contested", or rather debunked. Jonas Clarke's own account makes no mention of this event and leaves no room for it. No other contemporary account makes mention of it. The oldest version of the story so far found is Charles A. Jennings' 2001 account on the Truth in History website; Dr. Lillback's version appears to be based on it.<br />I actually kind of like that story, but that's all it is--a story.sbhhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05074136019151416282noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1237087217187172116.post-75896581501815211032022-09-25T06:14:05.922-06:002022-09-25T06:14:05.922-06:00Thanks for the background. Yes, often with these q...Thanks for the background. Yes, often with these quotations, what I've observed is some second hand writer analyzes something a founder says and paraphrases it according to their particular understanding. Often "spinning" it.<br /><br />Then another author comes along and quotes the "spun" 2nd hand paraphrase as though the Founder actually said it. Jonathan Rowehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04079637406589278386noreply@blogger.com