Bart Frederick

Christian, Husband, Father, Attorney. I just write about things I think are important.

[Bart Frederick @bartcf1]

https://t.co/50xYWco6va

[Bart Frederick @bartcf1]

"I slap labels on worldviews I don't like so I don't have to contend with them, and then pretend my answers are the default."

Great way to put it. The last clause is the key to what we call "secularism," or "secular humanism." We pretend that secularism is a neutral default, when in fact it's riddled with assumptions that, by nature, must go unquestioned because to question them would immediately expose secularism as every bit a "religion" as the worldviews that have deities.

[Eve Keneinan 𝛗☦️ن @EveKeneinan]

Atheists really need to pick a lane.

Without God, the gods return.

And nobody sane wants that.

God renders the gods null.

It's not even hard to see why. If God is, then gods are merely creatures, perhaps powerful and splendid ones, but they don't merit worship, ever, nor are they intrinsically holy — that depends solely on their disposition toward God, whether they, the gods, properly worship God.

Since God truly is, the gods are truly null.

But a waning of the sense of the reality of God, a dark and atheistic time like ours, "the eclipse of God" one philosopher put it, will cause us to lose our sense of the nullity of gods, and many new idols will be erected.

The "New Atheists" thought that if you could remove God, you'd get an age of reason. But that isn't what happens. When you remove God, you remove any ultimate reason for things. And if you do that, you poison reason at the root, which renders it delirious.

The delirium of reason breeds monsters.

Old gods and monsters stir and wake, old cracked idols ponderously rise as golems.

Belief in God is one of the greatest goods in the world, and one of the many reasons is that it keeps the gods in check.

It also has the great advantage of being true, but even if you don't believe in God, for some strange reason, you should most definitely want to live in a society that does.

[Bart Frederick @bartcf1]

@HeyitsMarkus As a Christian, are you comfortable with the state teaching them secular humanism instead?

[Bart Frederick @bartcf1]

@JonahDispatch Nah, Pat Buchanan’s “Suicide of a Superpower” is where it’s at.

[Bart Frederick @bartcf1]

@Womp_Tomp Spot on. Our children will learn a “religion” at school whether we want them to or not. It’s just a matter of which one.

[Bart Frederick @bartcf1]

@DylanoA4 So true. Diffucult to know whether you actually even know something until you try to articulate it verbally or in writing.

[Bart Frederick @bartcf1]

@ZachWLambert “He/him” in bio

[memetic_sisyphus @memeticsisyphus]

Can you imagine, public schools being used to teach your kids values you don’t agree with!

[Bart Frederick @bartcf1]

@hijkkji @mehdirhasan @NYCMayor And while your comparison of the Crusades to 1400 years of Jihad is a separate topic, it is a false equivalency and I am happy to address that too if you’d like.

[Bart Frederick @bartcf1]

No. The comparison point for Christianity is Jesus. Christians are to emulate him, while Muslims are to emulate Muhammad. Do you dispute that?

Regarding ISIS’ emulation of Muhammad:

- Muhammad ordered the deception and murder of those critical of him, including Muhammad ibn Maslama, Asma’ bint Marwan, and Abu ’Afak.

- he ordered the execution of prisoners of war, typically by beheading. E.g., Al-Nadr ibn al-Harith and Uqba ibn Abi Mu’ayt

- he ordered the beheading of hundreds who surrendered to him, with taking of their women and children as slaves/sex slaves

- as is obvious from the foregoing, he was a violent, murderous warlord.

And let’s not forget the numerous Koran verses and Hadiths that direct his followers to kill, subjugate, or forcibly convert unbelievers. I can quote those if you need them.

ISIS did all the above, just like their prophet. I could give you examples of that (as well as their own stated theological basis for doing so). Just let me know if you need it.

[Bart Frederick @bartcf1]

No, they don’t “worship” him, as he’s not viewed as god, but as his prophet. But Muslims are taught to emulate him. And ISIS did exactly that. Do you really want to challenge me on that? I can provide specifics if you’d like. If you’re a Muslim, it’s in your interest not to respond.

[Josh Howerton @howertonjosh]

Important for Christians to understand why secular progressives ardently attempt to erase the (vast) Christian influence + presence in our nation’s founding:

The strategy = “Rewrite the PAST to control the FUTURE.”

“How do we keep Christianity and Christians from influencing the legislated morality of the country and continue its hurl toward more evil?

By deceiving people into believing the US was never largely influenced by Christianity in the past, so it never should be in the future.”

[Spencer Askew @spencer_askew]

How to annihilate secular moralism with one meme:

[Bart Frederick @bartcf1]

@mtaibbi As a plain statement of current law, this is correct. But this shouldn’t be where your thought ends. The law can, and should be changed to fit the world we now live in.

[Bart Frederick @bartcf1]

I said the use of God’s military instruction in the OT has never been interpreted as being an instruction outside that specific context. I didn’t say that Christians are pacifists; we clearly aren’t. The nascent form of the just war doctrine has existed since the fourth century. The Crusades are the perfect example of just war. Defensive and existential in nature, the wars were a direct response to four centuries of rape, murder, subjugation, and conquest of three quarters of the Christian world. The crusades were an under reaction.

[Bart Frederick @bartcf1]

@albirkit @mehdirhasan @grok did George Bush give Jesus, the Bible, or Christianity as his rationale for invading Iraq?

[Bart Frederick @bartcf1]

@albirkit @mehdirhasan “Bush drew inspiration from this.” No he didn’t.

Nor would that application be consistent with 2,000 years of the church’s interpretation of the OT.

[Bart Frederick @bartcf1]

@_ipso_facto @mehdirhasan @grok Thanks for the concession.

[Bart Frederick @bartcf1]

@_ipso_facto @mehdirhasan @grok I’ll make it easy for you. Pick one of my statements and explain how it’s false. If you repost that list of irrelevant points we’ll all take it as a concession.