The Boyer Sisters, Part 2

[DaisyD]

21 hours ago, Palimpsest said:

They said they got them free in return for pimping them on the blog.  

Those headwraps look good for bad hair days but wouldn't they be pretty easy to make.

$20 and a couple of coupons would get you the stuff to make every one of those "garlands". You wouldn't even need a sewing machine...

[BackseatMom]

http://www.sew4home.com/projects/fabric-art-accents/stretchy-headbands-pleated-turban-styles

There are a ton of tutorials for these kinds of headbands for free. There are also a bunch of cute ones for sale on etsy that are 1) cheaper and 2) don't support the subjugation of women. So, you have options, some of which might actually be clean/new. 

 

[SoybeanQueen]

On 12/13/2016 at 9:19 PM, snarkysally said:

This is not what the Bible teaches.  

Yeah, actually, it is. The only sin that is specifically mentioned in the Bible  as separating someone from God permanently is denying that God exists.

[Coconut Flan]

On 12/15/2016 at 7:59 AM, laPapessaGiovanna said:

Honestly snarkysally didn't remind me of a past poster but of a current one that sometimes likes to troll us in a similar way (iirc last time it Dwas re Hillary pneumonia)

Deliver me from the pretend nurse who clearly knew almost nothing about a patient with pneumonia. 

[Gabe]

10 hours ago, SoybeanQueen said:

Yeah, actually, it is. The only sin that is specifically mentioned in the Bible  as separating someone from God permanently is denying that God exists.

Honestly if you want to be technical about it, Blasphemy against the Holy Spirit is the only mentioned eternally unforgivable sin.

Mark 3:28 Verily I say unto you, All sins shall be forgiven unto the sons of men, and blasphemies wherewith soever they shall blaspheme: 29 But he that shall blaspheme against the Holy Ghost hath never forgiveness, but is in danger of eternal damnation:

Although steadfastly denying God's existence likely fits the category of blaspheming the Holy Spirit. 

I found this article the other day, it made me think of FJ. http://www.vox.com/2016/4/21/11451378/smug-american-liberalism

[Palimpsest]

Oh, look. Now Gabe is trying to get feisty.

News for you, @Gabe.  Not everyone on FJ and on this thread is American or identifies as liberal.  Not all of us are atheists either, as we already explained at length.  

[Gabe]

3 minutes ago, Palimpsest said:

Oh, look. Now Gabe is trying to get feisty.

News for you, @Gabe.  Not everyone on FJ and on this thread is American or identifies as liberal.  Not all of us are atheists either, as we already explained at length.  

When did I ever say any of these things? 

[formergothardite]

@Gabe, have you ever read Liars for Jesus? 

[Gabe]

2 minutes ago, formergothardite said:

@Gabe, have you ever read Liars for Jesus? 

I have read the first chapter on the website, but didn't feel like paying money for the rest.

[formergothardite]

25 minutes ago, Gabe said:

I have read the first chapter on the website, but didn't feel like paying money for the rest.

I got mine off ebay. It actually is a very good book. Not an easy read, but very informative about the creating of a fake American history to appeal to the religious right. I had heard about it here, but then one of my friends who homeschooled recommended it. She found it very difficult to find a homeschool history curriculum that didn't teach fake Christian history and was running into a lot of problems in homeschool groups with people trying convince her that the fake history is a real history.

Do you agree or disagree with the premise? The author is pretty thorough with her research* and it would be very hard to disprove her. 

*one of the downsides to this book is that she does tend to spend so much time giving you the entire context of the historical document that it can get tedious to read. 

ETA: IMO this book and Lies My Teacher Told Me are must read books for every American. One of the problems with society is that people don't know history. If you don't know it, you can't learn from it. 

[Palimpsest]

36 minutes ago, Gabe said:

When did I ever say any of these things? 

Short memory span?  We remind you of this article.     

1 hour ago, Gabe said:

I found this article the other day, it made me think of FJ. http://www.vox.com/2016/4/21/11451378/smug-american-liberalism

 

[Gabe]

37 minutes ago, formergothardite said:

I got mine off ebay. It actually is a very good book. Not an easy read, but very informative about the creating of a fake American history to appeal to the religious right. I had heard about it here, but then one of my friends who homeschooled recommended it. She found it very difficult to find a homeschool history curriculum that didn't teach fake Christian history and was running into a lot of problems in homeschool groups with people trying convince her that the fake history is a real history.

Do you agree or disagree with the premise? The author is pretty thorough with her research* and it would be very hard to disprove her. 

*one of the downsides to this book is that she does tend to spend so much time giving you the entire context of the historical document that it can get tedious to read. 

I have been through a good quantity of Washington's papers myself and I am not a very big fan of him in general. (My libertarian views + the Whisky Rebellion etc, leave me with a bad taste in my mouth.)

If by "the premise" you mean the assertion that unscrupulous historians have been mythologizing American History to promote their own worldview. I am happy to say I agree. If you wish to make the argument that it is primarily a Christian scam I have to disagree with your assertion. 

Most of the American Founding Fathers were explicitly Christian. (By most I mean more than 50% by "Founding Fathers" I mean members of the state legislatures at the time of, and after the War for Independence and members of the continental congress.)

I read a standard Washington biography which was probably based on reverend Weems' when I was young, but I never really invested too much in the story. My favorite of the founding Fathers is Patrick Henry.

I disliked the Liars for Jesus book's first chapter because it was arguing very specifically against a few possibly mythological claims for which there is no proof rather than examining the substance of the arguments for a substantial and robust faith that can be made from Washington's papers.

Whether his many allusions to "divine providence" or other religious references were simply because he was ingrained in a Christian culture and so spoke and wrote it's language or because he was a deeply religious man is another argument entirely, and one which the book does not (in it's first chapter) address.

On another note, I am very much against a nationalistic Christian worldview. I think that the way in which many conservative Christians deify the state and the military and the founding fathers borders on blasphemy and is an outrage to true Christianity.

[Gabe]

 

3 minutes ago, Palimpsest said:

Short memory span?  We remind you of this article.     

 

And... Palimpsest yet again with a smug assumption about Gabe, tries to put words in his mouth based on an article that he didn't write. Let me make take a look here.

based on Alexa.com statistics, FJ's viewership is 70+% American. Based on my (admittedly limited) experience here the dominant political viewpoint is liberal.

I never claimed FJ members were all Liberal or American. I didn't claim, all FJ members were Atheists and the article in question uses the word atheists only once. The article in question was written by a self professed Liberal and posted to a website which is generally described as having a liberal or progressive editorial perspective.

[formergothardite]

19 minutes ago, Gabe said:

If you wish to make the argument that it is primarily a Christian scam I have to disagree with your assertion. 

Well the book was meant to address specific people who are pushing fake Christian history. If you read the book, she doesn't claim it is just Christians doing this, but the book is a response to people like David Barton who have created empires by spreading lies. She started writing the book after having a debate and realizing people were linking to all these Christian fake history websites as "proof" of things like Congress importing Bibles.

19 minutes ago, Gabe said:

I disliked the Liars for Jesus book's first chapter because it was arguing very specifically against a few possibly mythological claims for which there is no proof rather than examining the substance of the arguments for a substantial and robust faith that can be made from Washington's papers

The first chapter is dispelling the myth that Congress impored Bibles. She provided very through proof that this is a myth. The part about Washington was his reply to someone asking the government to buy excess Bibles that no one was buying. Washington politely declined. The other part about Washington was when he had his secretary tell a guy who printed Bibles that if he wanted a job in the government he would have to go through the proper channels to get that job. 

 

[Gabe]

 

4 minutes ago, formergothardite said:

Well the book was meant to address specific people who are pushing fake Christian history. If you read the book, she doesn't claim it is just Christians doing this, but the book is a response to people like David Barton who have created empires by spreading lies. She started writing the book after having a debate and realizing people were linking to all these Christian fake history websites as "proof" of things like Congress importing Bibles.

The first chapter is dispelling the myth that Congress impored Bibles. She provided very through proof that this is a myth. The part about Washington was his reply to someone asking the government to buy excess Bibles that no one was buying. Washington politely declined. The other part about Washington was when he had his secretary tell a guy who printed Bibles that if he wanted a job in the government he would have to go through the proper channels to get that job. 

 

The first chapter that I read was focused on Washington's prayer at Valley Forge and discrediting his enthusiastic biographer (Weems)

Did we read the same first chapters?

[DaisyD]

@Gabe Are you sure it was the first chapter and not an excerpt?

I haven't read the book at all, though I may add it to my list. It sounds interesting. 

1 hour ago, Gabe said:

On another note, I am very much against a nationalistic Christian worldview. I think that the way in which many conservative Christians deify the state and the military and the founding fathers borders on blasphemy and is an outrage to true Christianity.

On this we agree. I suspect, however, we agree for different reasons. Many conservative Christians seem to be of the impression that ours is a Christian nation, and should reflect that in it's laws. They tend to ignore that separation of church and state was a vital part of bringing 13 colonies (all with very different reasons for existence) together.

I'd be very interested in where you got the more than 50% were Christian number. I'm not arguing it (my bet is it was a lot more), I'm actually hoping that there's some kind of record that states what flavor of Christian they were. 

[formergothardite]

1 hour ago, Gabe said:

 

The first chapter that I read was focused on Washington's prayer at Valley Forge and discrediting his enthusiastic biographer (Weems)

Did we read the same first chapters?

We weren't even reading the same book.  I did not realize there was a volume 2, the book you were speaking of. I had  just read the first book. 

I just read that chapter and can add the Prayer at Valley Forge to the list of things I thought were real but probably aren't. And that is the point of Chris Rodda's books. She is debunking stories that are being sold as true. All of the various Christian history books I used presented that story as absolutely true with no mention of the dubious origins. This chapter also addresses the false claims that Washington wrote a prayer book(another story I was taught), when every single sign points to the prayer book not being written by him. The Christian right is selling lies and are working to erase real history and make the fake version the only one being taught. David Barton is writing public school history books filled with lies. This should horrify everyone. 

I think it is important to not try to change history to fit a preconcieved mold. I have no doubt Washington believed in God, but was he a once saved, always saved man who always attended church(his diaries show that when home he rarely went to church), who would be just like an current evangelical Christian? No.

If anyone wants to read the first chapter about Washington, Valley Forge and fake prayer books, here is the link.

http://www.liarsforjesus.com/index.html

[formergothardite]

19 minutes ago, DaisyD said:

I'd be very interested in where you got the more than 50% were Christian number. I'm not arguing it (my bet is it was a lot more), I'm actually hoping that there's some kind of record that states what flavor of Christian they were. 

I would think way more too. But I'm guessing many did not hold beliefs that are inline with current evangelical Christians, which is exactly why they decided to start writing a fake history.  

[flycat]

On 12/16/2016 at 7:01 PM, DaisyD said:

That movie made me cry soooo hard. I hadn't ever really thought about it being based on real people. 

Oh gosh, I had forgotten about that movie! Must add to my need to watch list. 

[JermajestyDuggar]

2 hours ago, formergothardite said:

I got mine off ebay. It actually is a very good book. Not an easy read, but very informative about the creating of a fake American history to appeal to the religious right. I had heard about it here, but then one of my friends who homeschooled recommended it. She found it very difficult to find a homeschool history curriculum that didn't teach fake Christian history and was running into a lot of problems in homeschool groups with people trying convince her that the fake history is a real history.

Do you agree or disagree with the premise? The author is pretty thorough with her research* and it would be very hard to disprove her. 

*one of the downsides to this book is that she does tend to spend so much time giving you the entire context of the historical document that it can get tedious to read. 

ETA: IMO this book and Lies My Teacher Told Me are must read books for every American. One of the problems with society is that people don't know history. If you don't know it, you can't learn from it. 

I totally agree with you there. I'm embarrassed to say that at the age of 18, I had no clue that there were many varying accounts of history and many were white washed or christianized or watered down to please those in power. Reading A People's History by Howard Zinn blew my mind and it was all downhill after that. I didn't trust much in the way of Americanized history after that and questioned a lot of stuff I was taught. 

[ladyamylynn]

2 hours ago, Gabe said:

 

And... Palimpsest yet again with a smug assumption about Gabe, tries to put words in his mouth based on an article that he didn't write. Let me make take a look here.

Lil' Gabester learned a new word! How many times will he use it today? 

[December]

1 hour ago, formergothardite said:

I would think way more too. But I'm guessing many did not hold beliefs that are inline with current evangelical Christians, which is exactly why they decided to start writing a fake history.  

 

 

Deism, in particular, was quite influential on the beliefs of many of the Founding Fathers like Thomas Jefferson and it definitely doesn't fall neatly in line with many modern evangelical beliefs.

[JermajestyDuggar]

3 hours ago, Gabe said:

3 hours ago, Palimpsest said:

 

And... Palimpsest yet again with a smug assumption about Gabe, tries to put words in his mouth based on an article that he didn't write. Let me make take a look here.

 

Talking about yourself in the third person can come off as narcissistic and/or obnoxious. Just something to think about when posting. 

[refugee]

56 minutes ago, December said:

Deism, in particular, was quite influential on the beliefs of many of the Founding Fathers like Thomas Jefferson and it definitely doesn't fall neatly in line with many modern evangelical beliefs.

I remember that Jefferson wrote his own version of the gospels, taking all the miracles out, IIRC.

[katilac]

1 hour ago, refugee said:

I remember that Jefferson wrote his own version of the gospels, taking all the miracles out, IIRC.

Yes: http://uuhouston.org/files/The_Jefferson_Bible.pdf