tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1237087217187172116.post8341528609375586928..comments2024-03-28T10:44:30.518-06:00Comments on American Creation: Two Reviews of "Nature's God The Heretical Origins of the American Republic"Brad Harthttp://www.blogger.com/profile/17669677047039491864noreply@blogger.comBlogger5125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1237087217187172116.post-56376020534736341732014-07-08T15:52:46.844-06:002014-07-08T15:52:46.844-06:00http://www.bostonglobe.com/arts/2014/07/04/questio...http://www.bostonglobe.com/arts/2014/07/04/questioning-america-christian-roots/XVNKjkViIzncq9Rr9T7DMM/story.html<br /><br />David Barton's take on history is many things, but "bigoted" is not one of them.<br /><br />Matthew Stewart is a lying SOB. Tom Van Dykehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07121072404143877596noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1237087217187172116.post-33757086460741105212014-07-08T15:25:04.596-06:002014-07-08T15:25:04.596-06:00http://www.newrepublic.com/article/118561/american...http://www.newrepublic.com/article/118561/american-independence-myths-lies-may-comfort-facts-matter<br /><br /><br /><i>"Deism, [Stewart] argues persuasively, “is in fact functionally indistinguishable from what we would now call 'pantheism'; and pantheism is really just a pretty word for atheism.” </i><br /><br />Whatever, pal.<br /><br />Tom Van Dykehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07121072404143877596noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1237087217187172116.post-31741990982657055612014-07-08T12:00:10.837-06:002014-07-08T12:00:10.837-06:00And, Chapter 4 (On The Genealogy of Nature's G...And, Chapter 4 (On The Genealogy of Nature's God) looks like it will be interesting. Time to get back to reading - might reach this one today.jimmiraybobnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1237087217187172116.post-71880236069759523002014-07-08T11:51:00.813-06:002014-07-08T11:51:00.813-06:00Well, given the nature and range of the unorthodox...Well, given the nature and range of the unorthodox religious positions that many of the leading founders/framers held*, it's hard to defend them against the charge of heresy...or heresies and of them being infidels to greater and smaller degrees. Certainly by European Christian standards of the time (Reformed and Catholic). <br /><br />I've only gotten up to Chapter three (Epicurus's Dangerous Idea) but I'd say Stewart’s presentation is generally not new revelation following a year of reading Steven Nadler (on Spinoza)(1) and Jonathan Israel (on the moderate and radical Enlightenment)(2). However, Stewart does appear to succeed in tying together in greater detail some of the more radical elements of the Enlightenment with leading figures and ideas in the American founding and framing. (Have you ever wonder what Jefferson meant by declaring himself an Epicurean or why he referenced Pierre Gassendi or what was up with Giordano Bruno who was burned as a heretic? (hint: Epicurus and infinite worlds))<br /><br />Stewart certainly writes with a viewpoint but the substance appears sound.<br />jimmiraybobnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1237087217187172116.post-31379924782600504892014-07-05T16:14:26.983-06:002014-07-05T16:14:26.983-06:00The LA Times is very fair. When a liberal writes ...The LA Times is very fair. When a liberal writes a book, it's reviewed by a liberal. When a conservative writes a book, it's reviewed by a liberal.Tom Van Dykehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07121072404143877596noreply@blogger.com