Free Republic
Browse · Search
Bloggers & Personal
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Arguing with Idiots… Part Deaux (A full-frontal assault on the Temple of Darwin)
Gordon Greene ^ | December 4, 2009 | Gordon Greene

Posted on 12/04/2009 9:55:41 PM PST by Gordon Greene

click here to read article


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 41-6061-8081-100 ... 321-338 next last
To: ColdWater

John Gano was chosen to be Washington’s personal chaplain of the portion of the Continental Army under his direct command. At the close of the war, Washington asked Gano to baptize him by immersion. (See the Evidence of General Washington’s Baptism by L.C. Barnes in the Archives of the American Baptist Historical Society, Rochester, N.Y.)

Although this event in history is doubted by some and even made fun of by modern historians, the evidence shows that it is a fact of history. General Washington was an Episcopalian. His pastor at Williamsburg, Virginia, was a Loyalist (Tory) in sympathy with the British Crown. It is no wonder that George Washington would sit outside the window of the Baptist church in New York City and listen to the preaching of Gano:

Cathcart Writing about John Gano:

~~snip~~

Any wonder that Washington should say of chaplains likeMr. Gano, (and there were other Baptists of his spirit) that “Baptist chaplains were the most prominent and useful in the Army?” (See William Cathcart, Baptist Encyclopedia, Vol. 1, P. 434.)

When the war was over, General Washington had John Gano give the final prayer of Thanksgiving.

There is a portrait of Gano baptizing Washington, Commissioned by the Gano Family. The portrait is hanging in the lobby at the John Gano Memorial Chapel in Liberty, Missouri.


61 posted on 12/05/2009 8:48:47 AM PST by John Leland 1789 (But then, I'm accused of just being a troll, so . . . .)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: Gordon Greene

Thank you so much, Gordon Greene, for these great sources!!!!


62 posted on 12/05/2009 8:50:00 AM PST by betty boop (Without God man neither knows which way to go, nor even understands who he is. —Pope Benedict XVI)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 60 | View Replies]

To: Gordon Greene

I don’t believe in evolution because of conclusive evidence. I believe it is the hypothesis best supported by a preponderance of evidence. As evidence is accumlated for (and against) the hypothesis, my support for it will adjust accordingly.

You believe in God based on no evidence but purely on your faith in His existance. That is fine.

The difference is that my position can be influenced by reason where yours, as you admit, cannot.


63 posted on 12/05/2009 8:51:13 AM PST by Natufian (t)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 44 | View Replies]

To: Gordon Greene
"Wonderful post so I’ve taken the liberty to repost"

Now that you are done taking your bows can we get back to the part where you call those who believe in evolution idiots and explore how that applies to Catholics who comprose 99% of all of the Christians who have ever lived?

64 posted on 12/05/2009 8:51:42 AM PST by Natural Law
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 60 | View Replies]

To: GL of Sector 2814

“(cough)Thomas Paine.”


And I’m sure there were more unbelievers than Thomas Paine. But their number is so few that my general statement is not a false one.


65 posted on 12/05/2009 8:53:57 AM PST by John Leland 1789 (But then, I'm accused of just being a troll, so . . . .)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 59 | View Replies]

To: Freedom'sWorthIt

Thanks for the ping!


66 posted on 12/05/2009 8:55:47 AM PST by Alamo-Girl
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: Natural Law
Catholics who comprose 99% of all of the Christians who have ever lived?

Bear in mind that recent world populations are much higher than before the Reformation. While the percentage of Christians who ever lived who were also Catholic is quite high (probably 75 to 80 percent), it certainly isn't 99%.

Just nitpicking...

67 posted on 12/05/2009 8:57:43 AM PST by GL of Sector 2814 (One man's theology is another man's belly laugh --- Robert A. Heinlein)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 64 | View Replies]

To: Gordon Greene

Thanks for the ping!


68 posted on 12/05/2009 8:57:55 AM PST by Alamo-Girl
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 60 | View Replies]

To: Natural Law; Gordon Greene
Now that you are done taking your bows can we get back to the part where you call those who believe in evolution idiots and explore how that applies to Catholics who comprose 99% of all of the Christians who have ever lived?

Source?

69 posted on 12/05/2009 9:03:16 AM PST by metmom (Welfare was never meant to be a career choice.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 64 | View Replies]

To: John Leland 1789
And I’m sure there were more unbelievers than Thomas Paine. But their number is so few that my general statement is not a false one.

There was also Thomas Jefferson and John Adams (many of the more prominent Founding Fathers were Unitarians and Deists). Given the caveat that your statement was a generalization it's certainly valid.

70 posted on 12/05/2009 9:05:03 AM PST by GL of Sector 2814 (One man's theology is another man's belly laugh --- Robert A. Heinlein)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 65 | View Replies]

To: Gordon Greene

liberals who claim this isn’t a ‘Christian nation’ and, like you pointed out, falsely claim that our nation’s founders were ‘diests’, are obviously quite ignorant of our nation’s history. I don’t particularly like Newt Gingrich, but he has written about our nation’s history, and investigated much of it, and it’s VERY clear that the whole ‘seperation of church and state’ arguments are based on lies and false interpretations of hte constitution and false interpretations of the statements and intents of our founding fathers


71 posted on 12/05/2009 9:10:42 AM PST by CottShop (Scientific belief does not constitute scientific evidence, nor does it convey scientific knowledge)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 60 | View Replies]

To: metmom

Source? Imagination!


72 posted on 12/05/2009 9:14:18 AM PST by count-your-change (You don't have be brilliant, not being stupid is enough.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 69 | View Replies]

To: GL of Sector 2814; John Leland 1789; Gordon Greene
We hear repeatedly on FR that Catholics are not really Christian and that they do not represent the conservative values of the FR community. We are often characterized as evo-atheists, papists, and worse. A simple search of Creation posts will easily reveal the insults and the insulters. The conservative credentials of Catholics and the contributions of Catholics to the revolution can best be summarized by Charles Carroll, the only Catholic signer of the Declaration of Independence;

"Without morals a republic cannot subsist any length of time; they therefore who are decrying the Christian religion, whose morality is so sublime and pure (and) which insures to the good eternal happiness, are undermining the solid foundation of morals, the best security for the duration of free governments."

It is important to note that at the time of the signing of the Declaration of Independence Catholics could not hold office, exercise the franchise, educate their children in their faith, or worship in public in the colonies by edict of the Protestant Parliament and assemblies. I get a sense that many on FR would love to return to that state.

73 posted on 12/05/2009 9:17:38 AM PST by Natural Law
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 70 | View Replies]

To: Gordon Greene
Someone else pointed this out, and I think it bears repeating: the very title of this thread characterizes those with whom you disagree (Evos and atheists) as "idiots". Later in the thread you bemoan the lack of respect by Evos and atheists for Christians, and say that you "don't go to DU and slam you guys"

No, you just do it here.

Isn't this rather hypocritical?

74 posted on 12/05/2009 9:17:54 AM PST by GL of Sector 2814 (One man's theology is another man's belly laugh --- Robert A. Heinlein)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Gordon Greene

The following quote from an octogenarian who had seen Washington when a boy in an incident illustrating Washington’s habit of prayer-—

New Haven, February 18, 1860

“To the Editors of the Evening Post”

“MR. PRINTER—In 1796, I heard the farmer referred to narrate the following incident. Said he, ‘When the British tropps held possession of New York, and the American army lay in the neighborhood of West Point, one morning at sunrise I went forth to bring home the cows. On passing a clump of brushwood, I heard a moaning sound, like a person in distress. On nearing the spot, I heard the words of a man at prayer. I stood behind a tree. The man came forth: it was George Washington, the captain of the Lord’s host in North America.’

“This farmer belonged to the Society of Friends, who, being opposed to the war on any pretext, were lukewarm, and, insome cases, opposed to the cause of the country. However, having seen the general enter the camp, he returned to his own house. ‘Martha,’ said he to his wife, ‘we must not oppose this war any longer. This morning I heard the man George Washington send up a prayer to Heaven for his country, and I know it will be heard.’

“This farmer dwelt between the lines, and sent Washinton many items concerning the movements of the enemy, which did good service to the good cause.

“From this incident we may infer that Washington rose with the sun to pray for his country, he fought for her at meridian, and watched for her in the silent hours of the night.

“Every editor of a newspaper, magazine or journal between Montauk Point and Oregon, if he has three drops of american blood in his veins, should publish this anecdote on the 22nd of February (Washington’s Birthday) while woods grow and waters run. This day I enter on my eighty-eighth year.

“Grant Thorburn Sr.”


75 posted on 12/05/2009 9:28:45 AM PST by John Leland 1789 (But then, I'm accused of just being a troll, so . . . .)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: GL of Sector 2814

Thomas Jefferson and John Adams

These men did neither disdain nor disrespect Christians.


76 posted on 12/05/2009 9:36:36 AM PST by John Leland 1789 (But then, I'm accused of just being a troll, so . . . .)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 70 | View Replies]

To: metmom
"Source?"

Source for what; calling supporters of evolution idiots (see title of thread) or the numbers of Catholics?

77 posted on 12/05/2009 9:50:03 AM PST by Natural Law
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 69 | View Replies]

To: John Leland 1789
I was simply replying to your statement that you were sure there were more unbelievers than Thomas Paine, and gave Adams and Jefferson as examples (Benjamin Franklin was also a Deist, for that matter). I agree that Adams didn't disrespect Christians, although Jefferson is a bit more complex in this respect. Quoting:

Ridicule is the only weapon which can be used against unintelligible propositions. Ideas must be distinct before reason can act upon them; and no man ever had a distinct idea of the trinity. It is the mere Abracadabra of the mountebanks calling themselves the priests of Jesus.

And:

In our Richmond there is much fanaticism, but chiefly among the women. They have their night meetings and prayer parties, where, attended by their priests, and sometimes by a hen-pecked husband, they pour forth the effusions of their love to Jesus, in terms as amatory and carnal, as their modesty would permit them to use a mere earthly lover.

He's certainly showing disdain towards some Christians in regards to their Christianity, but I don't recall him ever doing so towards Christians in general.

Thomas Paine is another matter, or course...

78 posted on 12/05/2009 9:58:06 AM PST by GL of Sector 2814 (One man's theology is another man's belly laugh --- Robert A. Heinlein)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 76 | View Replies]

To: GL of Sector 2814
"Bear in mind that recent world populations are much higher than before the Reformation. While the percentage of Christians who ever lived who were also Catholic is quite high (probably 75 to 80 percent), it certainly isn't 99%."

Prior to the reformation the Christian population had expanded and contracted several times due in part to plagues and conquest. The number is valid. However, even if, for arguments sake, the number were reduced to 89% or 79% the point is still valid.

79 posted on 12/05/2009 10:04:26 AM PST by Natural Law
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 67 | View Replies]

To: Gordon Greene
"Wonderful post so I’ve taken the liberty to repost"

Now that you are done taking your bows can we get back to the part where you call those who believe in evolution idiots and explore how that applies to Catholics who comprose 99% of all of the Christians who have ever lived?

Still waiting for a response...........

80 posted on 12/05/2009 10:06:12 AM PST by Natural Law
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 64 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 41-6061-8081-100 ... 321-338 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
Bloggers & Personal
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson