Tribute Thread For the Recently Raptured Faith

ABE: When someone attacks me personally as viciously as PaulK so often does -- and you too at times for that matter -- and about something I supposedly said in the past without quoting it, of course I don't remember it. Whatever I said doesn't deserve that kind of attack. /abe================================
I hardly ever remember things I said in the past unless the subject was something I pursued over a long period of time. Pizzagate came and went and I wrote whatever impressions I had of the evidence offered and that was that. I do remember being struck by the email wording as extremely odd for a discussion of pizza but I don't even remember what it actually said. Apparently I found the evidence and the arguments persuasive but not persuasive enough to come to a definite conclusion about it. It remains a matter of odd wording that suggests something being covered up, but nothing clear about what that might be.Edited by Faith, : No reason given.

The paragraph suggests what the authors claim: that the Protestant Reformation is given short shrift in those textbooks or no shrift at all as it were.I get the impression the book by Olasky and Smith is way too focused on the Christian worldview for EvC. A Christian who has spent time reading up on Christian history would be appalled at the way the Reformation and the life of Christ are slighted in textbooks, since we know that these were the most important events in all of human history. But that is not exactly a popular opinion at EvC. Which could possibly be exactly because of the slighting of it over the last century or so.It's interesting that it's specifically Protestantism that is most slighted according to the author, because one thing that I have learned over the last few years is that the Jesuits have been hard at work rewriting history since about the 1920s in their neverending project to overthrow Protestantism or even expunge it from the planet. Before that you can still find books that give a proper weight to these things -- according to us Protestants of course. Edited by Faith, : No reason given.Edited by Faith, : No reason given.

quote:

---

I get the impression the book by Olasky and Smith is way too focused on the Christian worldview for EvC.

---

As I said it is essentially a complaint that reporters do not agree with their bias. Unfortunately they are at best unable to see that, which would be ironic to say the least.

quote:

---

A Christian who has spent time reading up on Christian history would be appalled at the way the Reformation and the life of Christ are slighted in textbooks, since we know that these were the most important events in all of human history.

---

To you they are important, but the life of Jesus was not that important to history, and even the Reformation is only a part of the upheavals of the time.

quote:

---

It's interesting that it's specifically Protestantism that is most slighted according to the author

---

Not entirely - he lists other things like the Eastern Churches. He even complains that the treatment of Catholicism is inadequate.e.g. (concerning US history)

quote:

---

...one thing that I have learned over the last few years is that the Jesuits have been hard at work rewriting history since about the 1920s in their neverending project to overthrow Protestantism or even expunge it from the planet. Before that you can still find books that give a proper weight to these things -- according to us Protestants of course.

---

In other words the decline in vicious anti-Catholic propaganda is due to an evil Catholic plot.I guess i’m going to be accused of making vicious personal attacks for pointing out the obvious truth. Again.

My point was that these events are objectively the most important in all human history, and the fact that you dispute this is evidence of the burying of the truth the book is about.As for the Catholic information I was responding to the quote that suggested it was the history of Protestantism that was most slighted. That's what it said. Edited by Faith, : No reason given.

quote:

---

My point was that these events are objectively the most important in all human history, and the fact that you dispute this is evidence of the burying of the truth the book is about.

---

According to your religious beliefs.. However, school history texts are not supposed to give special credence to religious beliefs - neither yours, nor anyone else’s. That should not be hard to understand.

quote:

---

As for the Catholic information I was responding to the quote that suggested it was the history of Protestantism that was most slighted. That's what it said

---

It said that in the context of claiming that Christianity in general was under-represented. Including Catholicism.That is hardly justification for you to bring up your nasty conspiracy theories. Which is exactly what you did.

Which view is of course according to your PC beliefs. No, I sincerely mean that those events are objectively the most important in all human history though I do expect you to keep wrongly reinterpreting it as merely according to my religious beliefs. Cuz that's today's revisionist dogma, thanks no doubt at least in some part to the influences described in the book under discussion. Which is just another piece of PC revisionism, not believed before the last century or so. And we are not talking about religious beliefs here, I'm talking about objective historical facts. To leave the life of Christ and the Protestant Reformation out of the textbooks is to cripple education and mislead people into believing a false view of history. I responded to the stated claim that Protestantism is particularly slighted. But of course all religion is subject to secularist attack. There are real conspiracies in this world, contrary to PC revisionist dogma which would like to bury that fact since it is a cover for some of them, and for the sake of anybody who might have the intelligence to take it seriously it is certainly justification for exposing them.Edited by Faith, : No reason given.Edited by Faith, : No reason given.Edited by Faith, : No reason given.Edited by Faith, : No reason given.Edited by Faith, : No reason given.Edited by Faith, : No reason given.

quote:

---

Which view is of course according to your PC beliefs. No, I sincerely mean that those events are objectively the most important in all human history though I do expect you to keep wrongly reinterpreting it as merely according to my religious beliefs. Cuz that's today's revisionist dogma, thanks do doubt6 at least in some part to the influences described in the book under discussion.

---

If you believe that you can objectively demonstrate that claim - without assuming your religious beliefs - then go ahead and do it. If you can’t then that’s proof I’m right.Of course my view is neither PC nor revisionist and those are really just terms of abuse you throw in to try to discredit opposing views. The fact that it makes no sense in this context proves it.

quote:

---

Which is just another piece of PC revisionism, not believed before the last century or so.

---

James Madison would disagree, I think.

quote:

---

I responded to the stated claim that Protestantism is particularly slighted.

---

And - given that the context is the allegation that Christianity in general - including Catholicism - has been slighted it hardly justifies the claim that it is due to a Catholic conspiracy to erase Protestantism.

quote:

---

There are real conspiracies in this world, contrary to PC revisionist dogma which would like to bury that fact since it is a cover for some of them, and for the sake of anybody who might have the intelligence to take it seriously it is certainly justification for exposing them.

---

Just like the Protocols of the Elders of Zion exposed the Jewish Conspiracy.

Before commenting, I would like to point out that the original intent of this topic was to announce Faith's rapture from the planet. This did not happen---at least not yet but the topic has morphed into the demise of journalism and global acknowledgment of the life, death, burial, and resurrection of Jesus Christ and what that event meant in a historical context for our culture and values today...in 2018.PaulK seems to argue that the event (alleged event, according to some) was not that influential or notable in Global History. I would agree with Faith that the Christian beliefs of early journalism did attempt to sway culture into an acknowledgment of the importance of a resurrected Christ and the subsequent impact upon human purpose and emphasis.Granted Christianity was only dominant in the West, but the West drove much of the power of the expansion of ideas into the media-at-large while the rest of the world played catchup--Islam being a notable exception. Paul may well argue that secular objectivity should be the benchmark and that the press simply drifted more towards neutral objectivity, but the authors, and Faith---will claim that there is no such thing as neutral objectivity and that by promoting secularism and acceptance of social mores once considered taboo, the press has been influencing popular culture in some arguably destructive ways since the demise of the pro Christian bias.Personally, I think that if this is to change, the people themselves need to change---and wake up to reality. Of course many would argue that a focus on Christian worldviews is not realistic while others would argue that this is, in fact, the root of the problem.

The existence of overtly Christian publications likely simply reflected the generally Christian identity of the population, but I do intend to read the book so I may end up with a different view of some of these things.One thing is for certain though, the change to a secular focus was not just a natural morphing, it was certainly intentionally pursued, which is evidenced by that absence of mention of the life of Christ and the Protestant Reformation which were the two biggest historical influences on western culture.Can we reclaim any of it? The book may suggest ways. My own feeling is as you say, people themselves need to change, meaning we really need a gigantic God-driven revival for that to happen, and although God COULD do that, and we should be praying that He would, at the moment I'm pessimistic. I think this book probably documents the concerted attack on Christianity that is going to take us to the very end.

Nope. The Protocols was ONE document shown to have been a forgery, but I've collected a pretty long list of publications and quotations documenting the plots of the Jesuits against Protestant governments, some I've even quoted at EvC, and some of which are listed in the righthand margin HERE I'm afraid some of the links no longer work but it shouldn't be too hard to find the publications still online anyway. Edited by Faith, : No reason given.Edited by Faith, : No reason given.Edited by Faith, : No reason given.

quote:

---

Nope. The Protocols was ONE document shown to have been a forgery, but I've collected a pretty long list of publications and quotations documenting the plots of the Jesuits against Protestant governments,

---

Of course you miss the point.But even on the level you are considering there are plenty more anti-Semitic works. You could very likely come up with an equally impressive list of citations if you chose to dig in that vile body of work.And let’s note that the list on the right includes Paul Serup’s book and we know how his case fell apart when he came here.

Serup's case did not fall apart, he simply saw no point in arguing with the mentality he found here. His book is extremely well documented.Only a hidebound bias like yours could dismiss that list of sources as you do.

quote:

---

Serup's case did not fall apart, he simply saw no point in arguing with the mentality he found here. His book is extremely well documented.

---

You mean that he ran away because he needed to make a good case?
I mean when he starts on a different set of events altogether, has only circumstantial evidence that can reasonably explained without invoking a conspiracy it is pretty clear he doesn’t have much.

quote:

---

Only a hidebound bias like yours could dismiss that list of sources as you do

---

When we know that low-quality and highly biased secondary sources make the list it is difficult for anyone to take it seriously.
But I guess you can smooth over that fact with baseless personal attacks.

You broke my iron meter.

huh? whats that?