tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1237087217187172116.post6966053397395682984..comments2024-03-28T10:44:30.518-06:00Comments on American Creation: So Help Me God, Knock on Wood, Did Forrest Church Get It Right?Brad Harthttp://www.blogger.com/profile/17669677047039491864noreply@blogger.comBlogger8125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1237087217187172116.post-31648142749713070802009-11-03T15:54:19.542-07:002009-11-03T15:54:19.542-07:00>There's one area that needs
>further re...>There's one area that needs<br />>further research, and that's how<br />>do we know the particular<br />>biblical verse to which<br />>Washington opened the Masonic<br />>Bible?....<br /><br />Dear Mr. Soller,<br /><br />The owner of this Bible, St. John's Lodge No. 1 in New York City, has maintained for 220 years that President Washington placed his hand at Genesis 49-50, and in fact had modified the book to record that historical note.<br /><br />With all due respect to these other researchers, I do not know where they are finding information. The Bible is on display at Federal Hall, and its owner can be reached via the web.<br /><br />Cordially,<br />JayMagpie Masonhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01390264410632162085noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1237087217187172116.post-85578564448592145362009-10-31T08:53:44.188-06:002009-10-31T08:53:44.188-06:00While pointing out that Washington Irving's ac...While pointing out that Washington Irving's account of the inauguration does not appear to qualify as a personal recollection, you omitted mentioning that we do have such a personal recollection from the French counsel. The French counsel provides the only eyewitness account that quotes the oath recitation along with relating the other details of this first swearing in cermony and there is no "SHMG".<br /><br />While mentioning that The Judiciary Act of 1789 oaths end in "SHMG", you omitted mentioning that it always specifies either and oath or an affirmation, and that it asserts that the the ending "SHMG" is omitted from the affirmations.Explicit Atheisthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05501109533475045969noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1237087217187172116.post-5794458380115866242009-10-30T19:27:47.393-06:002009-10-30T19:27:47.393-06:00Great post as usual Ray.
Thanks for posting this....Great post as usual Ray.<br /><br />Thanks for posting this.Jonathan Rowehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04079637406589278386noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1237087217187172116.post-30239942454307122252009-10-30T11:26:30.461-06:002009-10-30T11:26:30.461-06:00Magpie, I hope we agree that all explications base...Magpie, I hope we agree that all explications based on primary source material need no approval. Your <a href="http://americancreation.blogspot.com/2009/04/so-help-me-god.html" rel="nofollow">"So help me God"</a>argument and all others stand on their own merit. <br /><br />There's one area that needs further research, and that's how do we know the particular biblical verse to which Washington opened the Masonic Bible? I have no reason to question the proposition that Washington opened the Bible to <i>Genesis Chapters 49 and 50</i>. But, in Jerry Bowyer's 1/22/09 article, <a href="http://www.orthodoxytoday.org/articles-2009/Bowyer-Presidents-And-The-Constitution.php" rel="nofollow">Presidents And The Constitution</a>, <i>What Obama, Roosevelt and Madison really said</i>, the author reported:<br /><br />The Wall Street Journal said this week that Washington took his oath on a Bible opened at random that fell upon an obscure passage in the minor prophets. I don't think so. First of all, Washington did nothing at random. Second of all, there's at least one account that says that he opened his Bible to <i>Deuteronomy chapter 28</i>, Moses' farewell address, which is composed of a long list of national blessings and curses which would fall alternatively on just and unjust nations. Than, he gave an inaugural address that said that private virtue was the foundation of public prosperity.[end snippet]<br /><br />Do you have any idea as to what Bowyer's "at least one account" is referring, or how the reference to Dt. 28 got started?Ray Sollerhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07950061062767093373noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1237087217187172116.post-29341981684347804242009-10-30T09:11:36.611-06:002009-10-30T09:11:36.611-06:00Anonymous, Forrest sent me five e-mails after the ...Anonymous, Forrest sent me five e-mails after the August 29th date up to January 1, 2008. During those intervening five months, he gave me no indication that he was slacking off due to his illness. Three of these e-mails are listed here:<br /><br />--- Message sent Oct. 08, 2007 ---<br /><br />Dear Ray,<br /><br />I'm seeking, for my new book, to uncover any hints of AL's [Abraham Lincoln's] response to the National Reform Association efforts (along with anything I can find about his role in putting "So Help Me God" onto the coinage). Your lead is a promising one. If I find anything beyond it, I'll be sure to let you know. I won't be writing this up until summer; anything more you may discover in the meantime I'll welcome (so long as you don't mind being cited in my acknowledgments!).<br /><br />Lv, Forrest [end 10/08/07 message]<br /><br />--- Message sent Oct. 08, 2007 ---<br /><br />tour ended yesterday, Ray, though I have a number of speaking events in Jan and Feb, which I may employ to extend the promotion for the book. thanks for the Hoover info. I couldn't open attachments on the road because I was using my phone to keep, if barely, in touch! lv, F. [end 11/14/07 message]<br /><br />--- Message sent Jan. 1, 2008 ---<br /><br />Dear Ray,<br /><br />A hearty and happy new year!<br /><br />Fyi I attach my thoughts on Huckabee's candidacy [Should Preachers Like Mike Huckabee Run for Public Office?] in light of America's (appropriately) ambivalent attitude toward reverend politicians.<br /><br />http://aol.beliefnet.com/story/228/story_22817_1.html<br /><br />lv, Forrest [end 01/01/08 message]<br /><br />Needless to say, if Forrest had been able to continue working on his proposed book, I would have been glad to assist.Ray Sollerhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07950061062767093373noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1237087217187172116.post-77185565321730057592009-10-30T08:55:54.460-06:002009-10-30T08:55:54.460-06:00Submitted again for your approval, my own "pr...Submitted again for your approval, my own "pro" argument.<br /><br />http://americancreation.blogspot.com/2009/04/so-help-me-god.html<br /><br /> - JayMagpie Masonhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01390264410632162085noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1237087217187172116.post-32236001125545283832009-10-29T22:04:25.786-06:002009-10-29T22:04:25.786-06:00All of this took away from the very interesting di...<i><br />All of this took away from the very interesting discussion which is too important to be diluted with such wasteful exercises.</i><br /><br />What discussion did you find interesting, Anonymous? Not that I expect a reply since I make it this was someone trolling the internet googling "Forrest Church."<br /><br />As for Washington saying So Help Me God, let's say he probably didn't. The historical evidence is nil.<br /><br />But swearing his oath of office on a Bible says "so help me God" in every arguable way.<br /><br />And since "So help me God" was customarily part of most every oath taken in those days, including New York state where he was inaugurated, if Washington has added it, it would have been unremarkable, which would explain why nobody there remarked on it.<br /><br />Previously asked and answered on this blog, Ray, but since you're recapping your original argument from way back, the original demurral should be printed here as well.<br /><br />Me, I think GWash probably didn't say "so help me God," but there's a plausibility he did, and his agreeing to the last-minute offer of a Bible to swear upon still makes it an oath, and says "so help me God" stronger than words ever could.<br /><br />[Nice to see you back at the blog again, Ray. I hope you'll participate in the discussions. I learn something here every day in the comments sections, let alone our main page.]Tom Van Dykehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07121072404143877596noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1237087217187172116.post-60271176891155754452009-10-29T19:24:23.399-06:002009-10-29T19:24:23.399-06:00I found the ad hominem disparagement of Forrest Ch...I found the ad hominem disparagement of Forrest Church unfortunate. Reputable scholars are known to have differing opinions and I can only assume the author chose not to acknowledge that Church was the holder of a PhD from Harvard as a way of diminishing Church's credibility. The author also attacks Church's neglect in not posting a correction to the online edition of his book, as he said he planned to do. Surely he knows that Church discovered he had terminal cancer sometime before February 2008, and died in September of this year. Is it not possible he had other things on his mind?<br /><br />All of this took away from the very interesting discussion which is too important to be diluted with such wasteful exercises.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.com