tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1237087217187172116.post7990713057304853013..comments2024-03-27T18:18:11.525-06:00Comments on American Creation: Forrest Church: So help me God & The First Great BattleBrad Harthttp://www.blogger.com/profile/17669677047039491864noreply@blogger.comBlogger9125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1237087217187172116.post-63237788331122610602008-07-05T12:46:00.000-06:002008-07-05T12:46:00.000-06:00Brian: " Even if you cast doubt on whether he said...Brian: " Even if you cast doubt on whether he said "so help me God" at the end of the oath, you haven't changed really anything."<BR/><BR/>hmmm ... Personally, I think the study of history has value, and that evidence should be needed prior to accepting a claim as being historically propable :-)<BR/><BR/>While the act of misrepresenting histories facts with fictional account for it does not <I>really change</I> the past, I think that an accurate record of history is important.<BR/><BR/>I particularly think it important to correct those who fabricate history to suit their own purposes. If such corrections really have no effect, then what motives so many to invent such fictions?bpabbotthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17047791198702983998noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1237087217187172116.post-24296607035678456302008-06-30T14:30:00.000-06:002008-06-30T14:30:00.000-06:00Ray, I respect your scholarship. I really do. You'...Ray, I respect your scholarship. I really do. You've taken a lot of time on it. It's just that I see your efforts leading toward (at best) a pyrhhic victory (for your side). Washington was a devout believer in God, and his inauguration reflected that in every way. Even if you cast doubt on whether he said "so help me God" at the end of the oath, you haven't changed really anything.Brian Tubbshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15412421076480479001noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1237087217187172116.post-7244836054918324772008-06-29T19:26:00.000-06:002008-06-29T19:26:00.000-06:00I doubt that there is any controversy whatsoever i...I doubt that there is any controversy whatsoever in Christian circles where the issue of G.W.'s oath is raised. They <I>want</I> to believe that the Founders were mostly Christian and motivated to create a Christian nation.<BR/>.<BR/>Only when the issue is raised in public circles are there any questions.<BR/>.<BR/>The issue has the effect of strengthening the Christian Right politically.<BR/>.<BR/>.Phil Johnsonhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06756814849309388483noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1237087217187172116.post-7328100306220634342008-06-28T16:52:00.000-06:002008-06-28T16:52:00.000-06:00I wouldn't get hung up on the "o" word. Sometimes ...I wouldn't get hung up on the "o" word. Sometimes obsessiveness can lead to meticulously good works of scholarship. I can be a bit obsessed too when it comes to chasing footnotes. And Peter Lillback's book certainly seems obsessed in pouring through all of the primary sources to answer the "Deist" claim.Jonathan Rowehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04079637406589278386noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1237087217187172116.post-14025366288352093482008-06-28T16:33:00.000-06:002008-06-28T16:33:00.000-06:00Brian is right. I'm obsessed. The more important q...Brian is right. I'm obsessed. <BR/><BR/>The more important question than asking "so what????" is why are so many of our distinguished national institutions so intransigent when it comes to recognizing what actually took place at Washington's first inauguration? Could it be that there are some who don't see the "cake" still standing, but see a chain of falling dominos instead.Ray Sollerhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07950061062767093373noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1237087217187172116.post-52388848997695698872008-06-28T15:54:00.000-06:002008-06-28T15:54:00.000-06:00It matters to me whether George Washington said SH...It matters to me whether George Washington said SHMG and I'm grateful for the work that's been done on this. I'm an "outsider", not from the US. The blurring of the distinction between religion or "Church" and government or "State" matters a great deal to me. Since I understood that the US was founded on the basis that people are free to practice the religion of their choice, including none, I would submit, was important historically, as I understand it, at least in part because so many immigrants to America had suffered oppression in the old "religious" countries, religious in the sense that there was a state religion (or none) and all citizens were forced in one way or another to abide by it. <BR/>For me, that is an important issue in modern times. In fact, if it wasn't, there really wouldn't be so much of an issue here. <BR/>People refer to history and tradition in order to rationalize and defend modern day practices, such as the SHMG part of the oath. That may make sense, or not. But either way, it's important to know history if you're going to rely on it.<BR/>The idea that George Washington, who seems to have been a Christian, would leave out the phrase seems to indicate a respect for religions other than Christian, as well as no religion at all, that is often lacking today.<BR/>I think it will be some time before America is ready for an avowedly atheist President.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1237087217187172116.post-54985666873750126832008-06-28T13:05:00.000-06:002008-06-28T13:05:00.000-06:00I think this argument matters because George Washi...I think this argument matters because George Washington was...well...George Washington. If there ever was a life or legacy in American history that has been more dissected than Washington's I would be surprised.Lindsey Shumanhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13536959819608584779noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1237087217187172116.post-89622365486641815312008-06-28T12:02:00.000-06:002008-06-28T12:02:00.000-06:00Brian,There is no question that GW was a devout be...Brian,<BR/><BR/>There is no question that GW was a devout believer in God and wanted the American Citizens to be "religious" in the sense that they believed in God and a future state of rewards and punishments.<BR/><BR/>Ray will probably give his own answer but from what I can tell, the motivation has to do with treating atheists with equal respect and not subjecting them to such things as "under God" in the Pledge of Allegiance. We need to get Michael Newdow's clever musical video on the matter posted here.Jonathan Rowehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04079637406589278386noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1237087217187172116.post-73867868517015081252008-06-28T11:07:00.000-06:002008-06-28T11:07:00.000-06:00Respectfully, I still don't understand the near-ob...Respectfully, I still don't understand the near-obsessive desire to knock down this traditional understanding of the inaugural oath. <BR/><BR/>EVEN IF YOU ARE RIGHT and Washington did NOT say the oath...so what????<BR/><BR/>We know, for a fact, that George Washington appealed to the American people to pray in his inaugural address. And we know he went to a church service immediately AFTER the inauguration. <BR/><BR/>I just don't see how dropping "so help me God" gains you anything. George Washington bathed his inauguration in religious language and symbolism. "So help me God" is icing on the cake. <BR/><BR/>Remove that icing, and you still have the cake, and there's no way you can get rid of that.Brian Tubbshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15412421076480479001noreply@blogger.com