Irational fear of hell still naggs me from time to time

[Drich]

what a joke.. you have no idea how badly you have been brain washed. seriously take 8 mins out of your life and just watch the monuments explained.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mGH-6adzue0

So you believe the bullshit of known liar, David Barton?  And you're stupid enough to post his lies as part of an argument.  I thought I might have to watch a minute or two before I came across a lie, but the first words out of his mouth all were lies.  And you believe him?  You are one stupid motherfucker.

http://www.liarsforjesus.com/downloads/LFJ_FINAL.pdf

Myths regarding the printing, financing, distribution, or recommending of Bibles by our early Congresses are among the most popular of all the religious right American history lies. Most are variations of the same three stories – two involving the Continental Congress, and one an act signed by James Madison.

---

The first is the story of the Continental Congress importing Bibles in 1777.  

• According to William Federer, in his book America’s God and Country Encyclopedia of Quotations: “Continental Congress September 11, 1777, approved and recommended to the people that 20,000 copies of The Holy Bible be imported from other sources. This was in response to the shortage of Bibles in America caused by the Revolutionary War interrupting trade with England. The Chaplain of Congress, Patrick Allison, brought the matter to the attention of Congress, who assigned it to a special Congressional Committee, which reported:
  • That the use of the Bible is so universal and its importance so great that your committee refers the above to the consideration of Congress, and if Congress shall not think it expedient to order the importation of types and paper, the Committee recommends that Congress will order the Committee of Commerce to import 20,000 Bibles from Holland, Scotland, or elsewhere, into the different parts of the States in the Union. Whereupon it was resolved accordingly to direct said Committee of Commerce to import 20,000 copies of the Bible.” ...

... William Federer’s version of the 1777 Bible story is typical of those found in the majority of religious right American history books. It tells half of the real story, includes a quote from an actual committee report, but ends with a fabricated resolution. The resolution is created to change the outcome of the story from Congress dropping the matter, which is what really happened, to Congress proceeding to import the Bibles …In addition to changing the outcome of the story, none of the religious right American history books fully explain why Congress was considering importing the Bibles in the first place. Most mention that the war with England caused a shortage of Bibles, which is true, but this is only half the story. Congress’s consideration of the matter had to do with the prevention of price gouging…

---

The second of the top three myths about Congress and the Bible involves the edition of the Bible begun by Robert Aitken in 1780, and completed in 1782.

• According to William Federer, in his book America’s God and Country: “Robert Aitken (1734-1802), on January 21, 1781, as publisher of The Pennsylvania Magazine, petitioned Congress for permission to print Bibles, since there was a shortage of Bibles in America due to the Revolutionary War interrupting trade with England. The Continental Congress, September 10, 1782, in response to the shortage of Bibles, approved and recommended to the people that The Holy Bible be printed by Robert Aitken of Philadelphia. This first American Bible was to be ‘a neat edition of the Holy Scriptures for the use of schools’:
  • Whereupon, Resolved, That the United States in Congress assembled...recommend this edition of the Bible to the inhabitants of the United States, and hereby authorize [Robert Aitken] to publish this recommendation in any manner he shall think proper.”

Elsewhere in the same book, Federer includes a second version of the story, in which Aitken was “contracted” by Congress to print his Bibles.

• According to Federer: “Congress of the Confederation September 10, 1782, in response to the need for Bibles which again arose, granted approval to print ‘a neat edition of the Holy Scriptures for the use of schools.’ The printing was contracted to Robert Aitken of Philadelphia, a bookseller and publisher of The Pennsylvania Magazine, who had previously petitioned Congress on January 21, 1781.”

There are many versions of this story floating around, all worded to mislead that Congress either requested the printing of the Bibles, granted Aitken permission to print them, contracted him to print them, paid for the printing, or had Bibles printed for the use of schools. Congress did none of these things. All they did was grant one of several requests made by Aitken by having their chaplains examine his work, and allowing him to publish their resolution stating that, based on the chaplains’ report, they were satisfied that his edition was accurate …The actual resolution is edited in various ways. The purpose of this editing is to omit that Congress also had a secular reason for recommending Aitken’s Bible, and, in most cases, to turn the resolution into a recommendation of the Bible itself, rather than a recommendation of the accuracy of Aitken’s work.



http://www.liarsforjesus.com/

Sorry just don't get what you are saying today.. I don't get your objection.. are you saying the bible does not exist? or that it was not commissioned or the bible do not say what say what david barton said it says?

Claim 1; the bible he held up was a copy of what the first bible printed in english in america looked like. which dismisses all the other conjecture you posted about where america sourced it's bibles... because bottom line all that is being claim is this is what the firt english copy of the bible look like that was printed here. made no assertions as to why it was printed.
what is posted below supports that assertion:
http://www.philadelphiafaithandfreedom.c...ntingpress
from that link we get the term "The congress bible"

claim2 it was commissioned by the congress.it was. despite what else happened it was indeed comissioned by the congress. which is enough to end the conversation as no other interpretation of congress would allow such a printing. which leads us to 'proof' 2


https://www.loc.gov/exhibits/religion/rel04.html
about 2/3 the way down on the page we get to see and read the words out of the bible this website identifies as an original copy of the congress bible.



claim 3 he said it is printed in the bible certifying congress approves it's use to the US citizenry.
on the above link you can read from a picture of the original book those very words/or you can read a modern transcript.

So everything David barton was true. That is why I do not get you objection... that is you are so stupid to attribute the rest of your clip from the liars website to be something David barton said... Again I gave you three point in what barton said and I verified them, nothing else you seem to be objection pertains to what he said in the video.

If that's the case then you do know you are half assing/phoning in a strawman objection right?

---

what are you talking about google Iroquois confederacy.. the thre branches of government, the seperation of powers, that is the back bone of our constitution!!!

Our structure of government is largely a reaction to the flaws the Founders saw in the British system, namely the House of Lords, whose members consist(ed) of the senior bishops of the Church of England, royalty, and those voted in by the Sovereign and their peers (not the common folk).  Moreover, it was the House of Lords that, until 2009, when a separate Supreme Court was established, held a judicial role.  So, the Founders did the following:

Kept a bicameral legislature (our Congress has both a House of Representatives and a Senate)
Kept a member of the executive in the legislature (our Vice President is the President of the Senate, who casts tie-breaking votes)
Changed one part of the legislature from being filled by monarchy or religious leadership to being filled by anyone, with regular elections (no House of Lords)
Created a separate Supreme Court

And while the Iroquois Confederacy may have been an influence of Franklin's Albany Plan, there's no evidence in the mounds of notes and records we have of the Founders and their long road towards forming our government that it was the model for it.  Quite the opposite, in fact.  

But, I'm sure you're not going to listen because you're a blessed by god Google scholar whose shit doesn't stink.  That's how you roll, after all.

 

Says the douche that claim our fore fathers were not Christian... what happened to that lie sport? why are you waving that flag anymore? could it be that no matter how your professor sold you that lie one guy out of 50 can't even in this day and age of fake news be sold as a MAJORITY???

Who give a sh*t what a fail professor thinks how our country's government was founded when he doesn't even fact check a known lie??? when he stretches the faith on one man to cover 50 others.. maybe just maybe this douche is wrong about how the orgins of the government was started as well.

Also did I fail to mention I sourced my observation that the government was founded on the principles of the Iroquois confederacy on the words of Thomas Jefferson... Hmm.. maybe ask your professor who that man was, and why his opinion on what shaped the constitution trumps what your professor has to say about the constitution, any day of the week..