Buffman

"Madison's Detatched Memoranda,"

http://members.tripod.com/~candst/detach.htm

Radorth

You keep asking this, but here you just took it out of the context of my asking you if you agreed. I was sincerely intersted in your answer. You are also playing dumb, I think, and you will continue to use this rhetorical question whenever you see a quote Barton has used and you don't wish to repond to.

Its like me asking you if you ever quote the same things quoted on misleading atheist sites. It's absolutely no different Buffman, and you know it.

Anybody notice the how far we are off the issue of why the first Congress started hiring chaplains 9 days after their first meeting? And all we have is the opinion of one single person out of 55 founders asking whether it is kosher?

Thread highlights:

Rad misread Barton and Buffman was able to make Rad look stupid

Barton was correct.

The founders' slavery compromises, etc. means they got confused about what "separation" really meant.

One founder questioned whether chaplains should be hired by Congress, and this fact somehow makes the other 54 founders' thoughts either null and void, or not worth discussing.

Anne Hutchison was banished by Puritans and she wasn't a Quaker, therefore no Christian deserves any credit for opposing slavery. (Something like that. I'm still trying to figure out the logic and/or point).

We have tacit admission that Roger Williams preached church and state separation " way back when." Still nothing on Hooker though.


Rad

Radorth

I have this question which I hope will spur the debate to a more meaningful level.

Should the taxpayers (if a majority agree to do so) support military chaplains of various denominations?

Rad

Buffman

Rad

Its like me asking you if you ever quote the same things quoted on misleading atheist sites. It's absolutely no different Buffman, and you know it.

Horsepuckey! I work damn hard at getting original sources and I have already told you that I send messages to those sites who use inaccurate quotes. I am tired of telling you that . I am also tired of you not answering my question concerning where you took that, and many of the other, quotes from. Why are you avoiding answering such a simple question? Are you afraid that it will reveal something you don't wish others to know about you? Don't fear! They already know far more than they need to know about you.

Anybody notice the how far we are off the issue of why the first Congress started hiring chaplains 9 days after their first meeting? And all we have is the opinion of one single person out of 55 founders asking whether it is kosher?

The other issues are not separation issues of course, and since the Quakers came out against slavery in 1680, I suppose that makes them 'strict separationists." (January 14, 2003 12:36 PM)

Are you or aren't you the one who posted this off subject statement first? Yes or no! Don't try to blame me for your own screw-ups. I just try to expose your propaganda technique for what it is.

Barton was correct.

About what? When? Some 14 years after the first publication of his questionable quotes? Of course he was correct after having been shown/discovering that he was wrong. What you should be asking is why was he wrong in the first place? What were his motives for publishing unsupported/referenced/original quotes?

One founder questioned whether chaplains should be hired by Congress, and this fact somehow makes the other 54 founders' thoughts either null and void, or not worth discussing.

You have it wrong again! Are you an intentional liar or just lacking any desire for accuracy? (I bet you have no idea just how messed up that statement really is. All that tells me is that you don't care, in the slightest, about accurate history or anything else.) You are making a fool of yourself. Please stop! You are even beginning to make me pity you.

Should the taxpayers (if a majority agree to do so) support military chaplains of various denominations?

Open your own topic if you seek answers about Military Chaplains. This topic is about Congressional Chaplains.

Radorth

So what? I'm saying you still use quotes they use. Same difference. You also quote some positiveatheism sites which use bogus or out of context quotes. You don't trust everything they say. I don't trust everything Barton says. It's EXACTLY the same thing Buffman, but your thinking is so biased, you can't see it. And AGAIN, Barton has admitted some quotes are wrong and instructs people not to use them. What atheist site has ever done that?

You STILL have not answered the question:

What quote did Barton ever manufacture?

Rad

Radorth

Oh please. I posted that because Keitht mixed up his issues and I was trying to get us back on track. Go read it. But it appears you are so biased in your thinking and cynical about my motives, you can't even see the forest for the trees here.

The only fool here is the one who claims to be a "careful researcher," makes up rules for others he himself doesn't follow, repeats rhetorical and inane questions he doesn't actually care about, attacks other peoples intelligence and motives and is still lauded as being witout bias.

I follow my rules bub, and nobody here follows yours, not even you.

Rad

Buffman

Rad

So what? I'm saying you still use quotes they use. Same difference.

Of course I use quotes that are accurately sourced. And I provide the sources which is something you hardly ever do out of fear that someone will discover that yours are just propaganda. So there is a huge difference. The fact that you can find no difference is testimony to your lack of desire or ability to find an accurate source...or to even understand what one really is.

You also quote some positiveatheism sites which use bogus or out of context quotes.

I have challenged you before on that absurd allegation. If you know of any inaccurate quotes, get off your loud mouth duff and notify them and provide the accurate ones. That's what I do. Are you just too lazy or just as unsure of what you know as you are demonstrating in these forums?

You don't trust everything they say.

I don't trust anyone that does not provide a verifiable original source reference. And when they do provide one, I verify it. What do you do? Accept everything on faith?

I don't trust everything Barton says. It's EXACTLY the same thing Buffman, but your thinking is so biased, you can't see it.

There you go again. Making things up whenever you don't like the answers that folks provide you. You are probably EXACTLY the kind of unknown author that wrote some of the Gospels. How pathetic!

And AGAIN, Barton has admitted some quotes are wrong and instructs people not to use them. What atheist site has ever done that?

The positive atheism site. The one you claim you never read.

You STILL have not answered the question:
What quote did Barton ever manufacture?

I provided you with at least two URLs that gave a list of his fabricated, inaccurate and patently wrong quotes. I also provided an analysis of some of his more current statements made on the Robertson 700 Club program exposing further historical inaccuracies. If you are incapable or unwilling to read my posts and follow up to confirm the accuracy of my statements/ references, then you have personal problems that no one can resolve.

I can only wonder why someone who puts out a quote that no other scholar has ever seen, and then retracts it along with admitting that it was wrong, would not be accused of fabricating some of his quotes. They aren't simply error quotes. They are made-up quotes. I call that fabrication. What do you call it? Deal with it! The man is a Christian propagandist. He is not a historian. There are many wonderful and accurate Christian historians. Why would you ever use anything from Barton (or Federer)...unless you are merely a less adept Christian propagandist?