Posted on 01/19/2007 6:35:59 PM PST by cf_river_rat
Is Keith Ellison actually the first Muslim to serve in the U. S. Congress? According to the national media, the answer is a resounding “Yes!” For example, among the numerous print media stories, the Washington Post proclaimed: “Keith Ellison, the first Muslim elected to Congress,” and the Associated Press (Pakistan) similarly announced, “Keith Ellison, a 43-year old lawyer from Minnesota, became the first Muslim member of the US Congress.” Among broadcast media, MSNBC pronounced him “the first Muslim elected to Congress,” and CNN reported that, “In a political first, a Muslim has been elected to serve in the U. S. Congress.”
However, as is often the case with the mainstream media, they were wrong: Keith Ellison is not the first Muslim Member of Congress; a Muslim served in Congress during the Founding Era.
(snip)
The first Muslim Member of Congress was John Randolph of Virginia, who served in Congress from 1799-1834. Significantly, Francis Scott Key, author of the “Star Spangled Banner,” befriended Randolph and faithfully shared Christ with him. Randolph eventually converted from Islam to Christianity and became a strong personal advocate for his newfound faith. (Key also shared Christianity with other Muslims, and even bought them copies of the Christian Bible printed in Arabic.)
(Excerpt) Read more at wallbuilders.com ...
David Barton is a very careful historian. Just because he is a Christian does not disqualify him.
Can you document your assertions?
One of the things that distinguishes David Barton is the incredible number of original documents, books, letters, etc., he has in his library. He is very careful in his research and writing.
Don't know the guy, but I've read other stuff he's written. While I often agree with his general views, he has shown a strong tendency, IMHO, to misuse and spin facts in a way that is more common among leftists than righties.
I'm beginning to share your sentiments, but I'd like to hear his side of this debate. Too bad he seems to have taken steps to isolate himself from the general public.
http://www.sunnah.org/history/islamamr.htm
Has a few interesting vignettes about documented muslim slaves.
I doubt there is any reliable info on percentages, it didn't matter so no records were kept.
Interesting. That might well be it. Because he was in the tradition of the Encyclopedists and Deists, who hated and despised the Church, he rooted for the Muslims who conquered Constantinople, without ever having been one himself.
Voltaire said, "Ecrase l'infame," which is pretty much the same attitude.
Then if the business about Francis Scott Keye has any basis, perhaps he managed to persuade him that he was wrong to root for the Muslims, because they were a far worse alternative.
At the time, I doubt anybody in the West viewed Islam as any sort of an alternative, better or worse.
Islam was very near its low point in its contest with western civ, and the whole idea of western/white guilt hadn't even been developed yet.
Barton is full of crap. There is NO evidence that John Randolph was ever a muslim. I searched Russell Kirk's outstanding biography of him seeking to verify this, and there is nothing to support Barton's claims.
He was very sloppy in this particular article. There is ZERO evidence that Randolph was ever a muslim.
Everyone here should read Russell Kirk's outstanding biography of Randolph. Kirk was a devoutly Christian conservative historian, and knew what he was talking about. Kirk also had scholarly credentials and degrees by his name, which Barton does not have.
He based his claim about Randolph on a misquoted letter from 1818 where Randolph described his conversion from agnosticism to Christianity to a friend. There is a single paragraph in the letter where Randolph writes that he was fascinated by the muslim Turks as a child and at one time considered their most famous sultan, Mahomet II, a hero. He NEVER says anything about having been a muslim, and he goes on to describe his childhood fascination with islam as "absurd." The rest of the letter is about how he used to be an agnostic but found Christianity.
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.