2012 May 23 |
 |

— Comment #103564 by Michael Merritt and replies
Does “One Nation Under God” Painting Put a Radical Spin on Judicial Review?
Article Page

http://www.theatlanticright.com/social/michael-merritt/2009/10/07/does-one-nation-under-god-painting-put-a-radical-spin-on-judicial-review/103564/
0
0
  1. Michael Merritt I did like the rebuttal painting, Jay, but it does fall short in some places. He likes to point out that many of the figures portrayed were Unitarians. I'm not sure if he's conflating them with the modern day Unitarian-Universalist church, but if so that's not right. Unitarianism is still Christianity; they just have differing views about the relationship of Jesus Christ to God, much in the same way that Mormons have a differing view of Christianity. No doubt that many contemporaries of those figures might have considered them not proper Christians, and it is perhaps this contrarian view of Christianity that also gave them the mind to be revolutionaries, but to act as if they were not Christians when they actually were is just trying to be revisionist. As for Thomas Jefferson, the rebuttalist describes him as "basically an atheist," which is also a misrepresentation. Jefferson had a belief in God, and his editing of the Bible was to tear out the parts where Jesus performed miracles. He still liked the guy as a teacher of morals. Jefferson was still a believer, albeit one opposed to traditional Christian doctrine, even if he is almost quite literally taken as the patron saint of atheists by that group. As for Robert Livingston, he was recalled by the New York Assembly, because they were against the Continental Congress' intentions, but I see no evidence that Livingston himself was against the Declaration. He helped draft it! As for Fisher Ames, [citation needed].