tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8697060800242665861.post6381489469684587586..comments2023-11-07T10:47:56.941-05:00Comments on The Past isn't Past: Ben Franklin and the "Virtue" of the FoundersMark Byrneshttp://www.blogger.com/profile/02022137257615203375noreply@blogger.comBlogger6125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8697060800242665861.post-12758976651292775702010-10-18T19:26:35.502-04:002010-10-18T19:26:35.502-04:00Oh, I think at least some policing of the comments...Oh, I think at least some policing of the comments is in order. Otherwise the end result is more confusion than when the author started.<br /><br />We do not disagree about Franklin---I simply assert that even the stupid Christian Nationist wingnuts are hip to him and Jefferson.<br /><br />My constant complaint is that "the Christian Nation thesis" is more strawman than fact in these arguments.<br /><br />[For the record, soteriologically speaking, in a letter to Whitefield, Franklin rejects "works" as a way of getting into heaven. He thought it would be a gift from God, unearnable by man. And that said, he was completely agnostic on Christian dogma and the Bible.]Tom Van Dykehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07121072404143877596noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8697060800242665861.post-38823253944809340972010-10-18T19:13:59.453-04:002010-10-18T19:13:59.453-04:00It seems more than implicit to me--it is the only ...It seems more than implicit to me--it is the only evidence offered for the Christian nation assertion in the letter.<br /><br />Franklin (the subject of my post) clearly separated virtue from religion--he was fundamentally concerned with actions, not faith. People who emphasize Christian faith and use Franklin to support their case either do not know Franklin or are being dishonest. Franklin's concern was with the ideal of public virtue, and he recognized that people of ANY faith, or none, were capable of it.<br /><br />Franklin's support of churches was practical. If a church aided the cause of encouraging virtue, he was all for it--and he considered any church potentially useful that way. He praised Christianity as a moral system (like Jefferson did). He did not to my knowledge pass judgment on the validity of various faiths.<br /><br />The Christian nation argument does not promote any of this, and its proponents cannot accurately use Franklin to advance their views.<br /><br />BTW, if every author is to be held responsible for the accuracy of the comments section, everyone will shut down comments!Mark Byrneshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02022137257615203375noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8697060800242665861.post-69680830805730581662010-10-18T18:37:50.075-04:002010-10-18T18:37:50.075-04:00Oh, I see. You were referring to “Only a virtuous ...Oh, I see. You were referring to “Only a virtuous people are capable of freedom. As nations become corrupt and vicious, they have more need of masters.” <br /><br />Well, there's an implicit link of Franklin to Christianity there. But Franklin supported churches of all stripes, promoting the "virtue" that a republic needs, and as you know, numerous other Founders saw a necessary link between virtue and religion.<br /><br />So, OK, the author's a little fuzzy and conflating there, but still more right than wrong.<br /><br />The live question is what she wrote about rights being endowed by our creator and under "natural law." This Franklin undoubtedly believed, and that central truth is the true casualty of these culture wars.Tom Van Dykehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07121072404143877596noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8697060800242665861.post-17390036344723685782010-10-18T18:27:22.226-04:002010-10-18T18:27:22.226-04:00Listen, Mark, I'm not grenade-tossing. I hear...Listen, Mark, I'm not grenade-tossing. I heard Beck say it myself, and was passing along the info. <br /><br />I'm up on this stuff, and was pleased to hear Beck say it.<br /><br />As for Barton, although my POV is closer to his than yours, I don't want to get stuck defending him. He's sloppy [although he's corrected most of his amateurish errors], and reads too much into some quotes [see Adams on the "Holy Ghost" at Barton's Wallbuilders site---Adams is actually being sarcastic there, but Barton takes him straight, no chaser].<br /><br />As for the Franklin letter against Paine, Barton [if I recall] uses it as "proof," but it's still disputed the actiual letter was directed at paine or <i>Age of Reason</i>, as it's undated.<br /><br />As for Adams' thanksgiving proclamation, I found it meself, and it does serve as a principled rejoinder to the Tripoli argument.<br /><br />Please do stop by our groupblog, American Creation. We have disparate views from secular to evangelical and your participation would be extremely welcome.<br /><br />And for the record, the Christian Identity thing vs. Barton is a smear. There is no principled reason to reject his explanation that he didn't know they were whackjobs.<br /><br />The rest of Goldberg's piece was the usual rehash of Barton's sins, most of which he's corrected. There were more historical errors in Goldberg's comments section from the left than in any Beck university piece. She should mow her own lawn first.Tom Van Dykehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07121072404143877596noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8697060800242665861.post-43877431954631634602010-10-18T18:13:24.626-04:002010-10-18T18:13:24.626-04:00Can you please give me a source for that statement...Can you please give me a source for that statement by Beck? I'd be interested in seeing it. Even so, can someone who stated that he doubted the divinity of Christ be called ANY kind of Christian? I suspect most the Christian proponents of the Christian nation case would say "no."<br /><br />More to the point, my post was prompted by a letter (cited in the post, with a link to the original) which explicitly used Franklin as evidence for the idea that the founders were Christians founding a Christian nation. Franklin's own words, quoted extensively in my post, demonstrate that he at least had no such intention.Mark Byrneshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02022137257615203375noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8697060800242665861.post-6029834157357658692010-10-18T17:57:11.387-04:002010-10-18T17:57:11.387-04:00One of the stranger aspects of the contemporary at...<i>One of the stranger aspects of the contemporary attempt to argue that the Founders created a "Christian nation" is its use of Benjamin Franklin. For example, as I noted in a recent post, Glenn Beck has appropriated Franklin's image for his own purposes.</i><br /><br />I've heard Glenn Beck <i>explicitly</i> note that Franklin was not an orthodox Christian. Criticisms should be fair, and well-sourced.Tom Van Dykehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07121072404143877596noreply@blogger.com