Posted on 05/02/2005 4:14:11 PM PDT by CHARLITE
A left-leaning group called the Interfaith Alliance is protesting the influence of Christianity in U.S. history.
A liberal action group has challenged the views of a well-known conservative who points in detail to the influence Christianity has had on U.S. history.
David Barton, founder of Wallbuilders, regularly gives tours of the U.S. Capitol to spotlight the faith-based underpinnings of key moments in American history. But the Interfaith Alliance—a group from the religious left—recently objected to a Barton excursion, accusing him of revising history.
The tour in question was for Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist, but the alliance didn't complain to Barton—they went to the media.
"They seem to be committed to a fairly active goal of secularism," Barton said. "What I do is simply walk through the Capitol and pull out religious documents that are already depicted in the Capitol and show the originals."
Representatives for the Interfaith Alliance did not respond to an interview request.
Gary Bauer, president of American Values, said if anyone is revising history, it's not Barton.
"It's the history books in most of our schools that are giving a distorted view," he explained. "Mr. Barton has done an incredible job of researching the beliefs of our founding fathers and the strong role that faith played in those events leading up to 1776."
The Interfaith Alliance, Bauer added, gets a free ride from the media in citing the influence of religion on their political activities, while Christian conservatives are attacked.
Peter Sprigg, a spokesman for the Family Research council, agreed.
"It's astonishing how far the left has gone in trying to strip religion from the public square—in this case almost literally," he said. "And yet liberal Christians—liberal 'people of faith,' as they put it . . . are just as politically active as conservatives."
FOR MORE INFORMATION
Our founders believed there was, indeed, a proper role of Christian principles in education, government and the public affairs of our nation. The video [1] "America's Godly Heritage" reveals their plan, shows where we got off track and what the cost has been. Perfect for church groups and as an educational history supplement.
[1]http://www.family.org/resources/itempg.cfm?itemid=3342&refcd=CE05DCZL&tvar=no
I have no problem with that. Except the time and place to do it is in your church, not in a public school.
Christians make young earth creationism a political idea when they demand it be taught at public expense.
Wow, someone I actually agree with on every point. Well said, narby!
Evolution has nothing to do with truth either. it's only a theory, a failing one at that. It should not be taught to the exclusion of all other theories.
By the way, America was founded upon Christian principles, whether we teach Creation in schools or not.
Wonderful. We have a disagreement about the scripture.
Which is all I have about Genesis vs. evolution. Genesis only has a few hundred words of detail about the creation. Not nearly enough to tell the method God used for any of His work.
I interpret the Bible my way, and you interpret it another. But the bottom line is that neither of our interpretations should be taught in science class. Pushing creationism there invites a negative reaction that is not helpful in bringing people to understand God.
Bring people into your church. THEN talk about HOW you believe God created the universe. Attempting to do it the other way round does more damage than good.
And creationism does not have to be about the bible either.
You can choose to believe it happened as God said, or not.
Regardless creationism is a sound theory, with more science to support it than does evolutionism.
That's why evolution should not be taught if it is excluding all other theory.
Yeah, I know that. And I've done quite extensive research into the real meaning behind the First Amendment and "separation of Church and State" (which I don't doubt we would completly agree on).
But that is completly separate from pushing a particular interpretation of Genesis, not shared even among all Christians (The Catholic Church is famous on the evolution side of the argument), into science class.
Are you afraid of "BLOW BACK", That's what the left is counting on, Fear!!
Well, how does the Bible say God created the species?
My problem is that it doesn't say much at all. A couple of sentences that can, and has, been interpreted many different ways. Not nearly enough detail to really commit your life to.
I'll repeat. God created the universe, and He gave us the Bible. There can be no contradiction between the two.
If you want to understand God's creation, then you have to study it, and the best method to do so is science. That has been done, and all evidence (your post notwithstanding) points to evolution.
I'm sorry, your claims that "creationism has more science to support it" is woefully inaccurate. You really have no idea.
Perhaps students could learn about natural selection only rather than the less scientifically supportable notions of Evolution, like the claim that all living things share a common ancestor.
Not necessarily. Some states (and some parties) are inclined to vote for "days" after the election is concluded (especially if they are losing) and worst yet, have those votes count.
Some, even allow their citizens to vote after they have passed. Go figure.
Go GOP in Washington.
And what discrepancy of scripture is there? Christ came and fulfilled prophecy, he served the purpose as was foretold in old testament prophecy. He was not meant to live on, He was God's sacrifice for your sin so you can live forever. I don't think you have a very good understanding of just what Christ did, and why. What will be the purpose of Christ's second coming, do you think he's coming to rule the earth for 1000 years? That is wrong. Christ's millennium has already past, it's almost up. You better hit the books and start trying to understand Daniels prophacies.
(Sigh) Again, you have to realize that the bible isn't about how he created things, it's about YOU.
As far as how he created things, there is enough information there to give you a few clues where Christs new kingdom is, it tells us in Genisis. You restrict God to your concept of time, and that's a mistake.
I suppose you think God created us in his image, therefore God looks like us? Those few words in Genisis tell you a lot of things, and there isn't a great discrepancy or many different interpretations either. The churches have (for the most part) a consensus on what everything means. It appears that your bible studies haven't gone very deep.
Your "interpretation" of Genesis may leave "plenty of room for evolution", but your thought processes quite apparently don't leave much room for any other viewpoint.
If you can't stay on topic, especially when you start your rants on a thread with the 2nd post, then why bother "contributing" at all? Start your own thread. There's no reason to hijack this one.
CA....
I'll just stop here and suggest to you that these questions, and answers to them have been written about in much greater detail than I could ever express to you. You should take the time and look up these wrtings by the fathers of the church, written since the beginning of the church (st. peters') Your questions and thoughts have all been asked before.
One of my favorite authors and fathers of the church is St. Augustine, most, if not all his works are available here:
http://www.newadvent.org/fathers/
As are many others. Take the time and enjoy some of them.
The "topic" is "Nations Christian Roots attacked". My personal experience along that line are witnessing people who hate Christians because a few of them are forcing a particular enterpretation of Genesis into public school science classes.
I am completely on topic, and it's the inability of many creationists to recognize the anger they provoke thats a large part of the problem.
Why do you think the Kansas school board is world famous, if not for the fact that many people feel very strongly about their children being taught something they disagree with?
A famous saying in the crevo threads is that "creationism is a cancer on conservatisim". Your post is an example why, because you apparently have no clue that some people, many of them Christians, really dislike fundimentalist creationism.
I used to think the day/age theory could be used to resolve Genensis with an old Earth. However, a careful study of Genesis does not permit this. Death does not come into creation until Adam sins. Evolution (particles to Man) requires untold generations of life/death.
The Bible documents a very recent create (a few thousand years ago.) The Bible gives the geneology of Adam to Noah. And from Noah to Jesus. Following the counfounding of language at Babel (5th generation following Noah), Mankind spread across the post-flood world. Bill Cooper in "After the Flood" shows in non-biblical/pagan sources (predating Roman conqeust) that the British, Irish, Saxon, Norwegian geneologies trace their ancestry from Noah or a son of Noah. This time frame amounts to thousands of years, not billions which evolutionists claim evolution requires to "work."
What the heck is "fundamentalist creationism"?
From the very beginning, the church has never been afraid of science, but rather, it embraced(s) it. Discovery of God's work is something to be marvelled. Remember, God created us in his own image, By that reason, we should be able to learn and understand how he does (did) things. We only discover what he has already created however.
And the Bible specifically says there were no deaths of any creature prior to this? Could not this mean deaths of a creature with a soul? Bottom line, I don't interpret it the same way as you.
The Bible gives the geneology of Adam to Noah. And from Noah to Jesus.
And Genesis doesn't give any detail about what came between, and how long the time period was from the "dust" to the "man". I chose to interpret Adam as being the first creature with a soul. The first "man", yet his parents were not human, by God's standards, as they did not have a soul. That could certainly have been only a few millenia ago.
People of good faith can interpret the Bible in many different ways. Just look at how many Christian denominations there are, each with very honest and good people among their ranks. This is just another of those religious arguments that will never be settled. I don't mind if you teach things that I don't believe. Unless and until you insist on your particular interpretation be taught in public school. That's a bridge too far.
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.