Christian Reconstructionist Takes David Barton to Task for Faulty History in The Jefferson Lies

I don’t know how large American Vision’s audience is but I suspect there is at least some overlap between David Barton’s Christian nation audience and American Vision’s Christian reconstruction constituency.

If so, this article today by Joel McDurmon could cause Mr. Barton some heartburn. Mr. McDurmon offers a devastating analysis of Barton’s chapter on Jefferson’s faith. He begins his critique by grounding it in his worldview:

In short, when we create a false reality of what a Christian and biblical society is or may be, we blind ourselves to the real changes and sacrifices we need to make. And in stretching the facts to create that false reality, we discredit ourselves and hand power and opportunity over to liberals to have free reign. But in the end, we have no one to blame but ourselves, because we have deceived ourselves, lied, and become complacent in the first place.

This is why I wish to offer an overview and partial critique of the important factual errors in Barton’s book. It is important that Christians see and understand the depth of these so they can have a true foundation from which to plan and to move forward.

While I have strong differences with Christian reconstructionism, I understand this starting point. We started in a similar place in our book. We did not write it to attack Christianity (as if fact checking Barton is an attack on Christianity), we wrote the book to uphold our faith. A little later in the article, McDurmon calls me a liberal (compared to McDurmon, most people are liberals). It is all the more striking that McDurmon and I come to similar conclusions about the factual problems with The Jefferson Lies. As with other evangelical figures and groups (Chuck Dunn, Colson’s Breakpoint, World magazine), no one can accuse McDurmon and American Vision of being liberal.

I encourage readers to review the entire article, but here is a taste of McDurmon’s analysis of the claim that Thomas Jefferson was theologically orthodox throughout most of his adult years:

Yet Barton selectively quotes [Benjamin] Rush to give just the opposite appearance of Jefferson’s views. Indeed, he uses this sole piece of butchered evidence to prove his claim that “for nearly every Christian doctrine that Jefferson called into question in his last fifteen years, there were times in his earlier sixty-eight years when he had embraced that very same doctrine as orthodox.”[10] As we have seen, this is utter nonsense, and is unsupported by anything Barton has presented. It is not clear by any means that Jefferson at any time in his life held orthodox Christian views. That anyone would claim otherwise, especially upon such terrible evidence, is a disservice to both historical scholarship and the Christian faith.

With all of these exaggerated and outright dishonest claims about Jefferson, there is indeed one thing about Barton’s book that is apt: its title, The Jefferson Lies. They abound not only from the “academic collectivists” and “deconstructionists,” but in this book as well.

As such, it is no surprise that when alerted, Thomas Nelson reacted as quickly as it did.

Bam! By which I mean, he nailed it.

McDurmon closes by telling his readers that he cannot recommend the book because they would need to fact check everything.

While a book like this needs to be written vindicating Jefferson from much liberal nonsense, the reader nonetheless will need to fact-check nearly every claim Barton makes for accuracy. And this is way too much to ask of the average reader. If that is to be the task, it would be better to skip Barton’s book altogether and go read all of Jefferson’s papers directly, because that what the reader will have to do eventually anyway.

Or you can get Getting Jefferson Right where we do the heavy lifting and point you in the right way.

This article is a significant shift for American Vision. Currently, they are hosting, with Kirk Cameron, a cruise featuring the movie Monumental which prominently features David Barton’s stories. If McDurmon submits Barton’s work in Monumental to the same scrutiny as he did to The Jefferson Lies in this article, then there will be a need for a disclaimer at the beginning and end of that movie.


Did Thomas Jefferson Fund the Thompson Hot-Pressed Bible or Simply Buy One?

This post is an additional note to our earlier post on Jefferson and the 1798 Thompson Bible. To briefly recap, David Barton says his description of the situation is accurate; we say it is not. Here is what Barton said in The Jefferson Lies about the Bible, followed by what he told Kirk Cameron in the movie, Monumental. First in his book:

Furthermore, in 1798 Jefferson personally helped finance the printing of one of America’s groundbreaking editions of the Bible. That Bible was a massive, two-volume folio set that was not only the largest Bible ever published in America to that time, but it was also America’s first hot-pressed Bible. President John Adams, several signers of the Constitution and Declaration, and other major Founders joined with Jefferson to help fund that Bible.

Then, in Monumental, Barton said:

This Bible was funded by about a dozen signers of the Constitution and signers of the Declaration as well as by President John Adams and Vice President Thomas Jefferson. They’re the guys that put up the financial backing to do this Bible.

When you see this stuff, you go wait a minute. These guys…why would any atheist, agnostic, or deist promote the Word of God, fund it and want it distributed to every family and everyone in America?

In our previous post, we noted that Jefferson did not finish paying for his copy of the Bible until January, 1799. In that post, we did not list all three payments. However, after getting some additional documentation, we can put together a little better picture of what probably took place. First, note this broadside dated January, 1798 advertising the Thompson Bible.

Figure 1

Because figure 1 is probably a little hard to see, you can click this link to see the PDF, generously provided by the American Antiquarian Society. We thank them for permission to use this image.

Remember that the first ad for this Bible was placed in the Gazette of the United States in April, 1796, also provided by the American Antiquarian Society. See figure 2 below:

 Figure 2

Given the dates of Jefferson’s payments, he either didn’t see this ad or he saw it and did not decide to do anything about it until about two years later.

The date on figure 1 above titled, “Superb Hot-Pressed Family Bible” is January, 1798. Jefferson’s first payment of $5.00 was made the following month on February 26, 1798. He must have seen the ad and it either jogged his memory that he wanted a copy of this Bible or he decided at that point that he would buy one. By that time, the Bible was mostly completed. Consider the text of the ad:

Figure 3

The section in red in figure 3 is especially important: “Happily, what was at that time only contemplated, is now matured, and in a great measure fulfilled; most part of the Work being completed: and the Proprietors only echo the unanimous voice of all who have seen it, when they say, it is the most grand and superb Book ever Printed on this side of the Atlantic.” The Bible was almost complete for the first wave of buyers.

To Jefferson who once said, “I cannot live without books,” this ad must have been irresistible. The Bible was almost complete and the proprietors, rightfully proud of their accomplishment, wanted to offer their “grand and superb book” to a wider audience. Those who had not subscribed at the beginning could still get in on the action. The terms of the purchase were spelled out by Thompson and Small at the end of the broadside (click the image to enlarge it).

Figure 4

Note that a list of subscribers (hundreds by this time – see the full lists in Getting Jefferson Right) was already available for a potential buyer to examine. Then also see the “conditions of publication” in figure 4. Jefferson apparently agreed to the third approach because his first payment of $5 was recorded on February 26, 1798 (“Pd. 5.D. in part of 20.D. subscription for a hot press bible“*) with his second payment of $5 was made on May 26, 1798 (“Gave order on do. in favr. Thompson & Small in part subscription for bible 5.D.“), presumably when “three parts” of the work was done. His final payment of $10 was made on January 5, 1799 (“Gave Thompson & Small ord. on J. Barnes for 10.D. the balance due for a hot press bible.“).

It should be now abundantly clear that Thomas Jefferson did not specially finance or go together with other founders/signers to “put up the financial backing” for this Bible in the manner implied by David Barton in his book and in the movie, Monumental. He purchased one Thompson Bible using a payment plan.

*Citations from Jefferson’s Memorandum Books: Accounts, with Legal Records and Miscellany, 1767-1826, Vol. II, Eds. J.A. Bear & L.C. Stanton, (Princeton: Princeton University Press. 1997), pp. 979, 984, 996.

Earlier posts in this series:

Jefferson and Slavery: A Response to David Barton on the Glenn Beck Show, Part One

Jefferson and Slavery: A Response to David Barton on the Glenn Beck Show, Part Two

Jefferson and Slavery: A Response to David Barton on the Glenn Beck Show, Part Three

Jefferson and the Bible: A Response to David Barton on the Glenn Beck Show, Part Four (This post also discusses the Thompson Hot-Pressed Bible)

Jefferson and the Bible: A Response to David Barton on the Glenn Beck Show, Part Five

Jefferson and the Bible: A Response to David Barton on the Glenn Beck Show, Part Five

When David Barton was clearing the air on the Glenn Beck Show (8/16/12), he muddied the water regarding Jefferson and the so-called Jefferson Bible.  Here is the segment:

Barton begins by saying

He [Jefferson] cut out the passages and put them all together and he told his friends this is what we can use with the Indians, cause you can read the life of Christ here.

Glenn Beck lets this claim go without challenge. However, this is an astonishing claim. We have not been able to find any primary source evidence for it, and Barton doesn’t offer any. Jefferson’s only reference to Indians in relationship to the 1804 version is the title page:

The Philosophy of Jesus of Nazareth, extracted from the account of his life and doctrines, as given by Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John; being an abridgment of the New Testament for the use of the Indians, unembarrassed with matters of fact or faith beyond the level of their comprehension.

While this sounds like Jefferson may have had some interest in getting his book to the Indians, there are no primary source documents that support this conclusion. The only references to the story told by Barton we can find is in Henry Stephens Randall’s 1858 biography of Jefferson and in the introduction to the 1820 version by Cyrus Adler. First, Randall cites a reference to Indians in an undated letter from Jefferson’s grandson, Thomas Jefferson Randolph:

His moral character was of the highest order founded upon the purest and sternest models of antiquity, softened chastened and developed by the influences of the all pervading benevolence of the doctrines of Christ which he had intensely and admiringly studied. As a proof of this, he left two codifications of the morals of Jesus — one for himself, and another for the Indians; the first of which I now possess, viz., a blank volume red morocco gilt lettered on the back “The Morals of Jesus” — into which he pasted extracts in Greek, Latin, French, and English taken textually from the four Gospels and so arranged that he could run his eye over the readings of the same verse in four languages. (p. 671)

In a footnote on page 452, Randall wrote:

This is sometimes mentioned as Mr Jefferson’s “Collection for the Indians,” it being understood that he conferred with friends on the expediency of having it published in the different Indian dialects as the most appropriate book for the Indians to be instructed to read in.

In The Jefferson Lies, Barton does not cite any source for his contention that Jefferson gave his 1804 version to missionaries, or to anyone to use with the Indians.

In any case, Randolph’s knowledge of the “codifications” was second hand. A little later in his letter to Randall, Randolph said, “His codification of the Morals of Jesus was not known to his family before his death and they learnt from a letter addressed to a friend that he was in the habit of reading nightly from it before going to bed.” It appears that his family did not know he cut up the Gospels. Randolph’s knowledge of the 1804 version did not come from Jefferson directly. The most likely scenario is that Randolph took the title page at face value without knowing what Jefferson had told his friends: the 1804 effort was done for his own use. There is another report from Cyrus Adler by a great granddaughter of Jefferson that the extraction was for the use of the Indians but there is no indication that Jefferson said this to anyone beyond the title page of the 1804 version.

Thus, the Randall and family reports are not based in any direct knowledge of Jefferson’s intent. Barton presents no primary source verification which is consistent with our findings as well. As we noted in Getting Jefferson Right, we searched for evidence regarding this claim, and we asked the same of the Monticello  Library research staff as well. Nothing turned up. If Mr. Barton has correspondence or some primary source evidence that Jefferson gave the 1804 to anyone, he should produce it. As it stands the report of the Randolph family members and the footnote in Randall’s biography cannot be verified. The story of Jefferson giving his edited Gospels to missionaries for use with Indians appears to be similar to the story of George Washington and the cherry tree.




Jefferson and the Bible: A Response to David Barton on the Glenn Beck Show, Part Four

During his appearance on the 8/16/12 Glenn Beck show, David Barton addressed two of our critiques of his chapter on Jefferson and the Bible. The first related to verses included in the Jefferson Bible and the second related to Barton’s treatment of the 1798 Thompson Hot-Pressed Bible.

We’ll take the second item first. Barton contends that his depiction of Jefferson’s relationship to the Thompson Bible is correct. We maintain that he misleads readers in the way he described the situation in The Jefferson Lies. Here is what he said about the Thompson Bible in his book:

Furthermore, in 1798 Jefferson personally helped finance the printing of one of America’s groundbreaking editions of the Bible. That Bible was a massive, two-volume folio set that was not only the largest Bible ever published in America to that time, but it was also America’s first hot-pressed Bible. President John Adams, several signers of the Constitution and Declaration, and other major Founders joined with Jefferson to help fund that Bible.

In Kirk Cameron’s movie Monumental, Barton said this:

This Bible was funded by about a dozen signers of the Constitution and signers of the Declaration as well as by President John Adams and Vice President Thomas Jefferson. They’re the guys that put up the financial backing to do this Bible.

Barton added:

When you see this stuff, you go wait a minute. These guys…why would any atheist, agnostic, or deist promote the Word of God, fund it and want it distributed to every family and everyone in America?

He then declares that such actions only make sense if those doing the funding (the Signers) were Christians.

To our eyes and ears, these descriptions taken together sound like Jefferson and a small group of founders went together to financially back the printing of a Bible for some evangelistic purpose.

On the Glenn Beck show, Barton acknowledges that Jefferson was merely a subscriber to receive a copy of this Bible but makes a point to define a subscriber as an investor. Barton defines subscription for Beck and they agree that Jefferson’s subscription to the Bible was analogous to the website Kickstarter, which is a means to fund start up projects.  Watch (between 7:24-11:00):

A very significant problem with this response is that Barton did not say in his book or Monumental that Jefferson subscribed to receive one copy of the Bible. Barton cited the subscriber’s list in a footnote but did not provide an image of the list or describe it any further. He is only now talking about subscription because we provided the details about the Thompson Bible in our book. Barton’s fall back position seems to be that he is technically correct because subscriber really meant investor.

Even in his description of subscription on the Beck show, he does not get the circumstances of the Thompson Hot-Pressed Bible correct. Barton told Beck that the printers “wouldn’t print the book if they couldn’t pay for it all up front” (8:28). That is not true in this case. Printers Thompson and Small printed the first section of the Bible before they advertised it in 1796. There is no question that subscription was a means for printers to anticipate the number of items to print but in this case they did not need all the money up front before they began.

What is even more troubling for Barton’s theory is the way Jefferson paid for his copy. The two ledger entries we can find for this Bible came near the end of the project. He paid $5 in February, 1798 and then $10 in January 1799, several months after the Bible was complete. Recall that the first notice of the project was in 1796.

These facts make the Kickstarter analogy a non-starter. With Kickstarter, all funds requested for a project must come in by a date established by the project designer. If they do not come in, all money is refunded and the project is not started. Take this project by a Grove City College student as an example. If all of the money is not raised by September 15th to fund Asleep in a Storm, then the project will not be funded via this approach. All the money donated will be refunded. Also note that those who give more money get more than just a copy of a product. In the case of the subscriber to the Thompson Bible, subscribers spent their money and got their sections of the Bible. If for some reason, the project was not completed, those who spent their money would still have their sections of the Bible. The analogy to Kickstarter simply doesn’t work.

If Barton had made the argument he is now making in his book or in Monumental, we would still disagree that Jefferson did anything more than buy a Bible. However, what is glossed over in this Beck segment is that Barton did not make that argument or present that information. Rather, the narrative presented was misleading and that point still has not been addressed by Beck or Barton.

Next, we deal with Barton’s claims regarding the Jefferson Bible.

Earlier posts in this series:

Jefferson and Slavery: A Response to David Barton on the Glenn Beck Show, Part One

Jefferson and Slavery: A Response to David Barton on the Glenn Beck Show, Part Two

Jefferson and Slavery: A Response to David Barton on the Glenn Beck Show, Part Three

World Magazine Gets Specific on the David Barton Controversy: Jefferson’s Religious Beliefs

World Magazine has been leading the way on reporting news about David Barton’s controversial book, The Jefferson Lies. This morning Thomas Kidd takes the coverage to one specific question raised in The Jefferson Lies: Was Jefferson an orthodox Christian believer?

The bottom line is that the experts Kidd consulted to weigh the evidence sided with the position we took in Getting Jefferson Right. What is striking about the experts is that they all have significant conservative credibility. Kidd asked Daniel Driesbach, James Stoner, and Kevin Gutzman for their assessments. They all were skeptical that Jefferson’s rejection of orthodoxy began near the end of his life as Barton claims in The Jefferson Lies.

While this is a brief article, it may help to address the concerns of some that our critique of Barton related to semantics. The issues run much deeper and I’m glad this is becoming clearer with each report.


Jefferson and Slavery: A Response to David Barton on the Glenn Beck Show, Part Three

In parts one and two of this response to David Barton’s appearance on Glenn Beck’s show, we looked at Barton’s defense of The Jefferson Lies on the subject of Jefferson’s record on slavery. In this post, we look at the remaining claims regarding slavery made by Barton last week. Here again is the video:

Barton claimed that Jefferson inherited 187 slaves when he was 14 years. On the clip at about 4:37, Barton says:

He [Jefferson] inherited 187 slaves when he’s 14 years old. So why didn’t he just release them? Because Virginia law says if you’re an adolescent, you cannot free any slave you’ve been given, you cannot emancipate any slave. So now he’s got 187 slaves he’s not been allowed to free.

It is true that Jefferson inherited slaves at age 14, but Barton gets the number of slaves wrong. Jefferson inherited 20 slaves at that time. In Getting Jefferson Right, we address this matter and get our information right from Jefferson’s Farm Book.

To get the proper accounting, we turn to the primary source of Jefferson’s notes in his Farm Book. In it, Jefferson delineated three categories of slaves he owned as of January 14, 1774. Jefferson titled the entire section, “A Roll of the proper slaves of Thomas Jefferson. Jan. 14. 1774” and then listed forty-one slaves that came through inheritance from his father along with those slaves who were purchased or born before his inheritance from his mother [20 slaves plus 21 who were added via birth and purchase]. He then listed eleven “slaves conveyed by my mother to me under the power given her in my father’s will as an indemnification for the debts I had paid for her.”  Finally, he listed the “roll of the slaves of John Wayles which were allotted to T. J. in right of his wife on a division or the estate. Jan. 14. 1774.” Here Jefferson listed the 135 slaves he received by inheritance from his father-in-law, John Wayles.* Adding these lists together, Jefferson owned 187 slaves by age thirty.

It may seem like a small point but for some reason Barton persists in saying Jefferson inherited the 187 when he was 14. Jefferson’s Farm Book (which you can see here; the total of 187 in 1774 is on page 18 at the bottom) says otherwise. While it is true that Jefferson was unable to free slaves when his father died in 1757, this was in part due to the fact that the only reason at that time allowed for emancipation was meritorious service on the part of a slave. The law allowing owners to emancipate slaves was not passed until 1782 (click here to see the text of the act to authorize the manumission of slaves).Barton then says on Beck’s show that someone told him that Jefferson could not free his slaves because they were collateral for his debts. While it is true that the Virginia legislature added a specific requirement in 1792 that freed slaves were required to work off any debts of the emancipator, this requirement actually could have made it an advantage for Jefferson to free his slaves. While the slaves would have had emancipation postponed until Jefferson’s debts were paid, they would have been free afterwards with Jefferson’s debt paid.  In other words, Virginia law allowed such emancipations but with rules in place to protect creditors.

Also, on the program, Barton states that we failed to discuss other laws that  were related to slavery. On the program, he said that there were a “whole bunch of laws that Jefferson had to deal with.” He then speaks of laws passed in 1778, 1791, 1793, 1795, 1798 and 1802. We are not the only ones not to refer to all of those laws. In The Jefferson Lies, Barton only cites the 1782 and 1806 laws regarding emancipation. We cite the 1782, 1806 and 1816 laws in Getting Jefferson Right.

On the program, Barton didn’t identify what the particular content of those laws were and how they related to slavery, or in what way that those laws might have prevented Jefferson him from freeing even some of his slaves. Our review of those laws do not support Barton’s contention. Male slaves younger than 21, female slaves younger than 18, all slaves older than 45 and slaves not of sound mind and body needed the financial support of their emancipator. All others did not. These parameters were still in place when Virginia amended slave laws in 1819. The bottom line is that we would like to see the Virginia statute or court case that Mr. Barton relies on to make his claim. In his book, the reference he cites concerns Massachusetts law, not Virginia.

Manumission deeds are available for review online. A review of these finds that some emancipators provided deeds for minor children with a promise of freedom at adulthood. Some slaves purchased their freedom. We encourage readers to read through some of the deeds of manumission. See the end of this post for links.

A couple of final points: When Glenn Beck introduced the segment, he said, “They say Jefferson was not against slavery.” I don’t know who “they” are, but we do not make that claim. Jefferson clearly did oppose slavery in principle and he took steps to eliminate the slave trade. However, his personal slave trade continued. In principle, Jefferson favored emancipation connected to deportation away from white society, rather than immediate abolition of the practice.

Last, those reviewing the evidence should ask why Barton omitted a section of Virginia law which would have undercut his basic argument. He mentioned it on the Beck show but did not give any explanation for the omission. Simply listing dates without specifics does nothing to address why Barton did not tell listeners that emancipation of slaves was legal, was done by many slave holders in the period between 1782 and 1806, and that Jefferson emancipated two slaves while he was alive.

Next we move to the segment on the Jefferson Bible.

Links to deeds of manumission:

Lists of slaves freed after 1782 in eight Virginia counties

Searchable links to those same eight counties

Manumissions in Isle of Wight County, VA

James Hemings manumission papers signed by Thomas Jefferson

Francis Drake deed of manumission

Deed of manumission drawn up by Robert Carter for his 452 slaves

Farm Book, 1774-1824, pages 9-13, by Thomas Jefferson [electronic edition]. Thomas Jefferson Papers: An Electronic Archive. Boston: Massachusetts Historical Society, 2003.


Breakpoint: David Barton Gave Us What We Wanted

The first article on the front page of the Breakpoint website is an article by Tom Gilson, titled, “He Gave Us What We Wanted.” In this article, Gilson lays responsibility at the feet of the evangelical community for failure to examine the claims of David Barton because “he gave us what we wanted.” Gilson writes:

I am no historian, so I am in no position to form an independent judgment of his [Barton’s] veracity. Few of us are. But that doesn’t excuse our eager acceptance of his inaccuracies. With a bit of care, any of us could have known of the serious questions that have surrounded Barton’s work for a long time. These recent revelations are nothing new, except in the degree to which conservative Christian scholars are involved in calling him to account.

Nevertheless we became for him a devoted cadre of disciples. We knew our country’s founding principles were vitally important. However, so is historical accuracy. It looks as if Barton compromised one to make a case for the other.

If the signs have been there for some time, why then did we love Barton so? And is it possible that we share the blame?

Gilson concludes:

To accept any human teacher without checking on his message with due diligence is to abandon our responsibility to the truth. David Barton’s errors are not only his. They also belong to those of us who bought his message carelessly, unquestioningly, too eagerly, and too comfortably.

These are stunning and important admissions from one of the evangelical world’s flagship ministries. While I expect that Barton will continue with ad hominem attacks, there is now no doubt that his accusations are false.

Scott Lively on Wallbuilders Live

You read that right. Scott Lively, author of The Pink Swastika, was on David Barton’s radio show today complaining about me. If you want to listen, go to the August 21 show and click on the link.

Barton, Green and Lively would love to make the controversy over The Jefferson Lies about me. Lively’s presence on the show can only serve as an attempt to change the subject from Barton’s work to something, anything else. Green and Lively doubled down on the accusation that Christian scholars are using tactics of Alinsky to attack Barton. The Chuck Colson Center is using Alinsky tactics? Jay Richards of the Discovery Center is channeling Alinsky?

For those who want to examine the historical issues relating to The Pink Swastika, see this link.

In any case, the issues being raised now by numerous Christian scholars and observers are not about me or my views on unrelated matters. I call on Mr. Barton and Green to stick to the historical issues and cease the ad hominem attacks.

The Point on The Jefferson Lies: We don’t need to change the facts

John Stonestreet, speaking on The Point, a radio minute affiliated with The Chuck Colson Center for Christian Worldview, came out in a negative manner toward The Jefferson Lies last week.  Here is the brief segment:

The facts are always important — even when we don’t like them. For the Chuck Colson Center for Christian Worldview, I’m John Stonestreet with The Point.

A few weeks ago, David Barton of Wall Builders and frequent guest of the Glenn Beck Show, published a book called “The Jefferson Lies: Exposing Myths You’ve Always Believed About Thomas Jefferson.” But many historians think that it’s Barton’s book that is full of myths and inaccuracies about our third president.

In fact, Dr. Jay Richards, a recent guest with me on BreakPoint This Week, asked ten Christian historians to assess Barton’s work. Their responses were pretty negative. And now Barton’s publisher has taken the book out of print and apologized.

We may be eager to portray the founding fathers — and especially Jefferson — as orthodox, evangelical Christians and gloss over any evidence to the contrary. But as Dr. Richards argues in World and Os Guinness presents in his new book A Free People’s Suicide, the American experiment was exceptional enough that we don’t need to change the facts to prove it. Come to to hear my interview with Os Guinness about this new book. For the Point, I’m John Stonestreet.

Last week, I noted that the Institute for Religion and Democracy had posted a column pointing out the “unfortunate, unnecessary exaggerations” in Barton’s work. Now another conservative Christian organization comes forward with recognition of the serious critique offered by Christian scholars.

Wallbuilders leaders David Barton and Rick Green continue to paint those who fact check Barton’s work as liberals and worse. The Point’s broadcast is another crack in that wall. About The Point:

In association with and the Chuck Colson Center for Christian Worldview, The Point’s primary mission is to “engage real life in real time from a Christian worldview.” But we won’t just tell you how to think. By tackling the tough questions of our time on a daily basis, we plan to start discussion here that will translate directly to your home, workplace and church. We’re challenging Christians from all walks of life to reject the boundaries between secular and sacred and to realize that the world and everything in it is under God’s jurisdiction.