Championship Subdivision Football | FCS Football | Stadiums | Blogs | Forums

Glenn Beck's decision to start pushing Mormon history on his show has some of his usual supporters seeing red. Brannon Howse of the ultra-wingnut Worldview Matters didn't like that at all:

On his radio show last week, Brannon Howse of Worldview Matters accused Glenn Beck of "bait and switch" tactics to bring Christians together into a coalition on shared goals and then draw them into Mormonism by using manipulative double language. "He's setting up a conspiracy theory of hidden truths showing this to be a Mormon Christian country."
Howse has been a big supporter of Beck, especially as he has presented the lies of David Barton, who works with Howse's organization as well.

Then on his show on Wednesday, Beck discussed an obscure archeological find, the Bat Creek Stone, that Beck believes has been hidden from the public by the Smithsonian Institution and others because it is evidence of ties between ancient Israel and Native Americans -- which, although Beck did not say this explicitly, would also be evidence for claims (albeit recently disputed within the LDS Church) made in the Book of Mormon. Howse, on his radio show, said he was "stunned" to hear Beck "laying down Mormon teaching" and "when [Beck] started talking about the Bat Creek Stone. . . . I didn't stay with it, it was just too weird." (While Howse presented no evidence that Mormons have used the Bat Creek Stone to promote such a view, Beck's use of it was characteristically wacky, as the theory he promoted has long been discredited by archeologists.) Howse continued:

http://scienceblogs.com/dispatches/2010 ... _to_be.php" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Dumbass Conks are shitting their beds something fierce, alienating "normal" people. You Conks gotta be embarrassed by some of these fvcks, aintcha? Party's getting splintered up all over the place. Holy train wreck, Batman!

dbackjon wrote:
Then on his show on Wednesday, Beck discussed an obscure archeological find, the Bat Creek Stone, that Beck believes has been hidden from the public by the Smithsonian Institution and others because it is evidence of ties between ancient Israel and Native Americans

Wow. What a moron. Such a shame people take him seriously.

Skjellyfetti wrote:

dbackjon wrote:
Then on his show on Wednesday, Beck discussed an obscure archeological find, the Bat Creek Stone, that Beck believes has been hidden from the public by the Smithsonian Institution and others because it is evidence of ties between ancient Israel and Native Americans

Wow. What a moron. Such a shame people take him seriously.

I know NOONE who takes him seriously. Just like I know NOONE who takes Sarah Palin seriously....Ya'll need to stop obsesssing about these TV personalities....

Cap'n Cat wrote:

Dumbass Conks are shitting their beds something fierce, alienating "normal" people. You Conks gotta be embarrassed by some of these fvcks, aintcha? Party's getting splintered up all over the place. Holy train wreck, Batman!

You wish.

AZGrizFan wrote:

Skjellyfetti wrote:
Wow. What a moron. Such a shame people take him seriously.

I know NOONE who takes him seriously. Just like I know NOONE who takes Sarah Palin seriously....Ya'll need to stop obsesssing about these TV personalities....

Beck, Palin, Obama......

AZGrizFan wrote:
I know NOONE who takes him seriously. Just like I know NOONE who takes Sarah Palin seriously....Ya'll need to stop obsesssing about these TV personalities....

nativist takes him very seriously.

I remember him advising youngterrier to watch his show regularly... with a pen and paper in hand... and take notes.

Skjellyfetti wrote:

dbackjon wrote:
Then on his show on Wednesday, Beck discussed an obscure archeological find, the Bat Creek Stone, that Beck believes has been hidden from the public by the Smithsonian Institution and others because it is evidence of ties between ancient Israel and Native Americans

Wow. What a moron. Such a shame people take him seriously.

Sk and I agree on two things. Dylan is great and Beck is moron

OL FU wrote:

Sk and I agree on two things. Dylan is great and Beck is moron

And Georgia Southern sucks!

religious squabbles are so funny.
and yet human history is chock full of them.

Skjellyfetti wrote:

AZGrizFan wrote:
I know NOONE who takes him seriously. Just like I know NOONE who takes Sarah Palin seriously....Ya'll need to stop obsesssing about these TV personalities....

nativist takes him very seriously.

I remember him advising youngterrier to watch his show regularly... with a pen and paper in hand... and take notes.

Hell, CSUBucdaddyo has a line endorsing his "9/12" ( ) project in his sig. But yeah, no one takes hims seriously.

Skjellyfetti wrote:

AZGrizFan wrote:
I know NOONE who takes him seriously. Just like I know NOONE who takes Sarah Palin seriously....Ya'll need to stop obsesssing about these TV personalities....

nativist takes him very seriously.

I remember him advising youngterrier to watch his show regularly... with a pen and paper in hand... and take notes.

....advice I don't listen to....and anyone who knows ANYTHING about history would not take Beck seriously, especially when he allies himself with David Barton, a man who MADE UP quotes from the founding fathers and has no legitimacy among Historians

Skjellyfetti wrote:

OL FU wrote:

Sk and I agree on two things. Dylan is great and Beck is moron

And CRAP STATE sucks!

Now, thats better!

AZGrizFan wrote:

Skjellyfetti wrote:
Wow. What a moron. Such a shame people take him seriously.

I know NOONE who takes him seriously. Just like I know NOONE who takes Sarah Palin seriously....Ya'll need to stop obsesssing about these TV personalities....

You may not, but I can give you $32 million reasons why many people take him seriously. Hell, Beck's and Rush's talking points are represented by half the posts on this forum alone.

youngterrier wrote:....advice I don't listen to....and anyone who knows ANYTHING about history would not take Beck seriously, especially when he allies himself with David Barton, a man who MADE UP quotes from the founding fathers and has no legitimacy among Historians

I've read several of Barton's works, and the man knows our history, sorry.
The so-called "historians" who believe Barton doesn't have legitimacy are the very ones who are the revisionists. Barton has written and spoken on several occasions that many, if not, most of the founding fathers weren't what we would call "Christians" in today's terminology. He has claimed on several occasions that people like Franklin, Jefferson, Payne, Madison, etc. had real, serious, and personally doubted in the divinity of Christ.

What the revisionists have tried to claim, and have unfortunately convinced many in our society who just don't know any better is the erroneous claim that the founders were deists. Nothing could be further from the truth. While most of the founders did have severe doubts about Christ's divinity, the overwhelming majority were extremely religious people, Jefferson certainly included.

kalm wrote:

AZGrizFan wrote:
I know NOONE who takes him seriously. Just like I know NOONE who takes Sarah Palin seriously....Ya'll need to stop obsesssing about these TV personalities....

You may not, but I can give you $32 million reasons why many people take him seriously. Hell, Beck's and Rush's talking points are represented by half the posts on this forum alone.

Says the guy who is cs.com's official parrot for mediamatters, HuffPoo, salon.com, commondreams, and The Center for American Progress.

I guess Beck just burned his bridges at Liberty....

Skjellyfetti wrote:

AZGrizFan wrote:
I know NOONE who takes him seriously. Just like I know NOONE who takes Sarah Palin seriously....Ya'll need to stop obsesssing about these TV personalities....

nativist takes him very seriously.

I remember him advising youngterrier to watch his show regularly... with a pen and paper in hand... and take notes.

He wants to be a mormon so bad, but he's just too embarrassed to admit it in public.

What's hilarious about this squabble is that you have two groups, the christian right and the mo's, who agree that virgins can have babies, and that people can walk on water, come back from the dead, and fly up into the sky - calling each other liars. The cream of the jest is that they're both right.

kalm wrote:

AZGrizFan wrote:
I know NOONE who takes him seriously. Just like I know NOONE who takes Sarah Palin seriously....Ya'll need to stop obsesssing about these TV personalities....

You may not, but I can give you $32 million reasons why many people take him seriously. Hell, Beck's and Rush's talking points are represented by half the posts on this forum alone.

Agreeing with some of the things he says and taking him seriously are two TOTALLY different things. I thought you were smarter than that....guess I was wrong.

Baldy wrote:

youngterrier wrote:....advice I don't listen to....and anyone who knows ANYTHING about history would not take Beck seriously, especially when he allies himself with David Barton, a man who MADE UP quotes from the founding fathers and has no legitimacy among Historians

I've read several of Barton's works, and the man knows our history, sorry.
The so-called "historians" who believe Barton doesn't have legitimacy are the very ones who are the revisionists. Barton has written and spoken on several occasions that many, if not, most of the founding fathers weren't what we would call "Christians" in today's terminology. He has claimed on several occasions that people like Franklin, Jefferson, Payne, Madison, etc. had real, serious, and personally doubted in the divinity of Christ.

What the revisionists have tried to claim, and have unfortunately convinced many in our society who just don't know any better is the erroneous claim that the founders were deists. Nothing could be further from the truth. While most of the founders did have severe doubts about Christ's divinity, the overwhelming majority were extremely religious people, Jefferson certainly included.

Depends on how you define religious and christian. I'm religious, but I aint christian.

There are widly varying degrees too. Take Joltin Joe or 89 Hen - hardcore dogma believing, pedophile protecting catholics whose church has little to do with what the mythical jesus taught. Fuck Joltin Joe claims to be an expert on the fucking robes worn by priests. They're cultists/catholic fetishists.

Now take a bloak like Soulman. Fucking smart, levelheaded with the wonderful ability to put the nonsense of christianity into perspective for people. Dude's church, life and faith very closely resemble what it means to love christ and be a christian.

Take the rest of the motherfuckers here, including you, who can accept that jesus was an actual character, may have doubts about his divinity, but want to have nothing to do with organized religion and in general, dont give a fuck about christianity.

BTW, having doubts about the divinity of christ pretty much makes you a jew.

D1B wrote:

Baldy wrote: I've read several of Barton's works, and the man knows our history, sorry.
The so-called "historians" who believe Barton doesn't have legitimacy are the very ones who are the revisionists. Barton has written and spoken on several occasions that many, if not, most of the founding fathers weren't what we would call "Christians" in today's terminology. He has claimed on several occasions that people like Franklin, Jefferson, Payne, Madison, etc. had real, serious, and personally doubted in the divinity of Christ.

What the revisionists have tried to claim, and have unfortunately convinced many in our society who just don't know any better is the erroneous claim that the founders were deists. Nothing could be further from the truth. While most of the founders did have severe doubts about Christ's divinity, the overwhelming majority were extremely religious people, Jefferson certainly included.

Depends on how you define religious and christian. I'm religious, but I aint christian.

There are widly varying degrees too. Take Joltin Joe or 89 Hen - hardcore dogma believing, pedophile protecting catholics whose church has little to do with what the mythical jesus taught. **** Joltin Joe claims to be an expert on the **** robes worn by priests. They're cultists/catholic fetishists.

Now take a bloak like Soulman. **** smart, levelheaded with the wonderful ability to put the nonsense of christianity into perspective for people. Dude's church, life and faith very closely resemble what it means to love christ and be a christian.

Take the rest of the motherfuckers here, including you, who can accept that jesus was an actual character, may have doubts about his divinity, but want to have nothing to do with organized religion and in general, dont give a **** about christianity.

BTW, having doubts about the divinity of christ pretty much makes you a jew.

Or neo-pagan, a group that has undergone explosive growth in the past 10-15 years.

D1B wrote:

Baldy wrote: I've read several of Barton's works, and the man knows our history, sorry.
The so-called "historians" who believe Barton doesn't have legitimacy are the very ones who are the revisionists. Barton has written and spoken on several occasions that many, if not, most of the founding fathers weren't what we would call "Christians" in today's terminology. He has claimed on several occasions that people like Franklin, Jefferson, Payne, Madison, etc. had real, serious, and personally doubted in the divinity of Christ.

What the revisionists have tried to claim, and have unfortunately convinced many in our society who just don't know any better is the erroneous claim that the founders were deists. Nothing could be further from the truth. While most of the founders did have severe doubts about Christ's divinity, the overwhelming majority were extremely religious people, Jefferson certainly included.

Depends on how you define religious and christian. I'm religious, but I aint christian.

There are widly varying degrees too. Take Joltin Joe or 89 Hen - hardcore dogma believing, pedophile protecting catholics whose church has little to do with what the mythical jesus taught. **** Joltin Joe claims to be an expert on the **** robes worn by priests. They're cultists/catholic fetishists.

Now take a bloak like Soulman. **** smart, levelheaded with the wonderful ability to put the nonsense of christianity into perspective for people. Dude's church, life and faith very closely resemble what it means to love christ and be a christian.

Take the rest of the motherfuckers here, including you, who can accept that jesus was an actual character, may have doubts about his divinity, but want to have nothing to do with organized religion and in general, dont give a **** about christianity.

BTW, having doubts about the divinity of christ pretty much makes you a jew.

Doesn't matter if they were Jews, Christians, Buddhist, Hindu or whatever. The founders in general (even Jefferson, who revisionists have tried to paint as a Deist) were VERY religious people.

Knowing Jefferson's history and reading his writings, I'm sure he would be disgusted to see how far out of context the court system has taken his wall of separation comments. His actions speak louder than out of context words from judicial activists 150 years after he wrote them.

Baldy wrote:

D1B wrote:
Depends on how you define religious and christian. I'm religious, but I aint christian.

There are widly varying degrees too. Take Joltin Joe or 89 Hen - hardcore dogma believing, pedophile protecting catholics whose church has little to do with what the mythical jesus taught. **** Joltin Joe claims to be an expert on the **** robes worn by priests. They're cultists/catholic fetishists.

Now take a bloak like Soulman. **** smart, levelheaded with the wonderful ability to put the nonsense of christianity into perspective for people. Dude's church, life and faith very closely resemble what it means to love christ and be a christian.

Take the rest of the motherfuckers here, including you, who can accept that jesus was an actual character, may have doubts about his divinity, but want to have nothing to do with organized religion and in general, dont give a **** about christianity.

BTW, having doubts about the divinity of christ pretty much makes you a jew.

Doesn't matter if they were Jews, Christians, Buddhist, Hindu or whatever. The founders in general (even Jefferson, who revisionists have tried to paint as a Deist) were VERY religious people.

Knowing Jefferson's history and reading his writings, I'm sure he would be disgusted to see how far out of context the court system has taken his wall of separation comments. His actions speak louder than out of context words from judicial activists 150 years after he wrote them.

Baldy, and the rest of you conk motherfuckers and religous whackjob and abortion clinic bombers, shit was 200 years ago, some of it applies now, some of it don't.

AZGrizFan wrote:

kalm wrote:
You may not, but I can give you $32 million reasons why many people take him seriously. Hell, Beck's and Rush's talking points are represented by half the posts on this forum alone.

Agreeing with some of the things he says and taking him seriously are two TOTALLY different things. I thought you were smarter than that....guess I was wrong.

I understand why your upset about who defines your party.

Keep watching TV, keep falling for the same old party line bullcrap as usual. There's nothing like a good storyline. They're TV personalities making a buck of suckers left and right...literally. We need to focus on the real problems, not the ones TV personalities or political parties want us to focus on. That's all a distraction. There are hungry in my city, I do my best to feed them. There are homeless in my city, I do my best to shelter them wherever possible. I try to support those shelters with food and money for operations. More than that, my community works together to solve those tragic issues faced by those who are facing horrible situations. That's just a portion of the 'real" problems faced in our country that we need to refocus on..all of us. Not party lines. Not TV personalities. Not religious or nonreligious events. Our neighbors. They are the real storyline. They are the party in need. They should be our focus.