Tribute Thread For the Recently Raptured Faith

The writers of this book are not idiots. They would know if the Protestant Reformation belonged in that history book or not.And your idea of "truthful criticism" is nothing but a personal slanderous attack on me which is officially against the rules here, though the place has been given over to sheer anarchy over the last few years, even with overt justification of this kind of personal attack. Really pretty sleazy stuff going on.In any case it's got nothing to do with truth, it's all about your basic hateful attitude toward me personally. And I am pretty good at recognizing misrepresentations of Christianity in films. Edited by Faith, : No reason given.

quote:

---

The writers of this book are not idiots. They would know if the Protestant Reformation belonged in that history book or not

---

I invite you to contribute to uncovering the truth then. You can start by identifying the book in question.

quote:

---

And your idea of "truthful criticism" is nothing but a personal slanderous attack on me which is officially against the rules here, though the place has been given over to sheer anarchy over the last few years, even with overt justification of this kind of personal attack. Really pretty sleazy stuff going on.

---

Exactly Faith. When people dare to truthfully criticise you, you start lying just like that. It’s exactly the same with the criticism of Trump, we get the fake news lies and the conspiracy lies.But you are happy to credit absolutely fake news like Pizzagate.

quote:

---

In any case it's got nothing to do with truth, it's all about your basic hateful attitude toward me personally. And I am pretty good at recognizing misrepresentations of Christianity in films.

---

You are pretty good at seeing what you want to see. As the first sentence there proves.

An example of the author’s bias You will note that the presentation is clearly slanted. Taking no position on an issue that cannot be objectively established either way is presented as taking a side.Not only are the authors clearly biased, their presentation is clearly biased , too. Chapter 4

I'm really tired of your throwing something I supposedly said about Pizzagate at me without ever quoting it. I don't remember what I said. Please provide evidence.

I can probably track it down, although the last time you demanded evidence and I gave it it just got ignored.But are you going to claim that you condemned Pizzagate as - at the least- implausible and in need of evidence ? Because you know full well you would have gone a lot further if it had been directed at Trump or anyone you support.

All I remember is that there was some evidence for it and I wasn't in a position to say it was wrong.

Some evidence ? You mean an email that seemed to be oddly worded - but might be just the writer’s style ? You think that’s even worth considering as evidence that a pizza restaurant has a basement full of abused children ?

As I said I don't remember anything about it. Nothing. And I have no desire to reopen the discussion. Just quote what you claim I said.

Here’s one example:

quote:

---

The only thing I know for sure about Pizzagate is that some very strange emails belonging to John Podesta were hacked and leaked, and what's strange about them is that there is no way to make sense of them. They seem to be about pizza or other food but nobody talks about food that way, so it appears they are some kind of code, and there are reasons to think the code refers to sex acts with children. We could look it up I suppose but I'd rather wait for HG.

---

Message 99

Thank you. Now I remember at least that the email did not read like any normal discussion of pizza. And that's all I said. I also remember there being a lot more information about coded language but it wasn't enough to build a case on so my position was Don't Know, No Clear Evidence one way or the other. The weirdness of the communications raises suspicions of something going on that is being hidden. You have no cause to denounce me in the vile terms you do for such a judgment.Edited by Faith, : No reason given.Edited by Faith, : No reason given.

quote:

---

Thank you. Now I remember at least that the email did not read like any normal discussion of pizza. And that's all I said.

---

It certainly is not all you said Goes rather further, does it not ?

The claim comes from Religion and Traditional Values in Public School Textbooks: An Empirical Study. by Paul C. Vitz. It's from 1985, and is basically the author looking at a bunch of public school textbooks and claiming they don't cover religion (especially Christian and Jewish religion) as much as he thinks they should; nor do they give adequate coverage to 'traditional family values'. On world history textbooks; he writes this on the subject of Protestantism:

quote:

---

One of the strange characteristics of many of the texts was their failure to mention the Protestant Reformation, or to give it very little emphasis. For example, American Book hardly refers to Protestantism and not at all to the Reformation; Riverside which has twenty pages on Tanzania and 19 pages on the history of the Netherlands; 16 pages on ancient Crete. It makes no reference to Martin Luther and Calvin and there is almost nothing on Protestantism. The absence of reference to Protestantism in Holland is particularly noteworthy given that country's history. Silver-Burdett's text, although generally one of the relatively better treatments of religion, hardly mentions the Reformation. Holt and Scholastic have nothing on the Reformation but their orientation is more on world cultures than world history. Even the texts that do take up the Reformation usually do not discuss the theological differences that were at issue. Religious differences, the fundamental basis of the conflict, are typically omitted. For example, Scott-Foresman mentions Martin Luther and the break from the Catholic Church, but no reason of any kind for the break is mentioned. Only McGraw-Hill and in a minor way Follett refer to plausible religious reasons for the Reformation. This neglect of Protestantism further supports the thesis that some kind of repression or denial of Christianity (especially Protestantism) is demonstrated by how these texts treat the Christian religion.

---

Unfortunately the pdf version I found seems to be missing the list of which books he's talking about here. I think 'American Book'; the one he claims does not mention the Reformation, is a book called People of the World from 1982; but that might be a separate book from the social studies seciton of the same artlce. Can't find anything else on this book, so hard to know what to say.Edited by caffeine, : No reason given.

quote:

---

Actually they are complaining that news stories misrepresent the facts, and that they do this often in the direction of denigrating the Christian point of view.

---

And yet Chapter 2 is practically dedicated to the complaint that reports don’t reflect Christian belief. chapter 2In fact I would say that they are complaining not because the reporting is not objective but because it is. The authors effectively define objectivity as agreement with their religious beliefs. But true objectivity must deal with the fact that those beliefs are not objectively demonstrable and cannot treat them as fact.

That is incredibly lacking in information. No titles, not even a clear description of the subject matter. And some pretty clear bias on the author’s part - for instance he complains that very little attention was paid to the life of Jesus (which is not historically that important and lacking in good sources, too)

It's odd that other people can recall what you say much better than you can. Regarding Pizzagate (that John Podesta's hacked emails contained coded messages about a child sex ring run by Hillary Clinton out of the Comet Ping Pong pizzeria in Washington DC), you were all over the place about it in the Fake polls, fake news thread, but Paul is probably thinking of where you said something like this from Message 99: If you follow the sub-thread forward from there you'll see that you were imbuing something as absurd as Pizzagate with some kind of credibility. It's like believing there's some basis in fact for Hawthorne's Young Goodman Brown.The Pizzagate conspiracy theory evidently originated at a white supremacist Twitter account, see Pizzagate Conspiracy Theory over at Wikipedia.AbE: Should have read forward before posting, I see Paul already tracked down the Faith quote.--PercyEdited by Percy, : Fix spelling; AbE.