Category: history

Liberty University and Glenn Beck Respond to Controversy Over His Sermon

Liberty University and Glenn Beck have spoken out about critics of Beck’s speech at Liberty U’s Convocation  last month and neither party is backing down.
Jonathan Merritt at Religion News Service reports on an email from senior vice-president and Liberty spokesman  Johnnie Moore. Moore countered critics by saying the Convocation service was not a chapel. According to Moore:

We have explained over the decades repeatedly that convocation is an opportunity for students to hear from people of all faiths and from all walks of life.  Liberty has also made it clear repeatedly that it does not endorse any statements made by any convocation speaker.

As pointed out at Pajama Pages, the situation is not quite an “opportunity,” it is a requirement, with a fine for lack of attendance.
For his part, Beck today blasted those who criticized his presence at Liberty. Right Wing Watch has the video. Predictably, Beck is bombastic in his response, saying Liberty University is “one of the greatest Universities in the world.”  When Beck decides to attack his opponents, he really goes for it, saying one would have to be stupid to disagree with Liberty’s discernment. He then said, just minutes later, that he looks at his enemies as his brothers. Stupid brothers, I guess.
While I still think Liberty was wrong to give Beck the platform, my objection is not exclusively related to religious matters. As I pointed out in previous posts, Beck’s statements about history are badly flawed and serve no purpose other than to confuse and misinform. How that serves an educational institution, I can’t understand.

Alabama Chief Justice Roy Moore Says First Amendment Only Protects Christians

This is a few days old but still worth talking about.
Alabama Chief Justice Roy Moore preached a sermon recently in which he said the First Amendment only applies to people who believe in the God of the Bible.
Here is the video:
[youtube]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZY8xf1uJOqI[/youtube]
At 1:15, Moore said:

Everybody, to include the Supreme Court, in the United States has been deceived as to one little word in the First Amendment called religion. They can’t define it. That’s what the 10 Commandments’ case was about, I wanted to define it but they backed off just decided not to take the case because they can’t, can’t define it the way Mason, Madison and even the United States supreme court defined it, “The duties we owe to the Creator and the manner of discharging it.” They don’t wanna do that, that acknowledges the Creator God. Buddha didn’t create us. Muhammad didn’t create us. It’s the God of the Holy Scriptures. They didn’t bring the Koran over on the pilgrim ship. Let’s get real, let’s go back and learn our history. Let’s stop playing games.

I’ve been over this before. The Founders used the word religion to signify a person’s conscience and beliefs about God, however conceived. Some, such as early Supreme Court Justice Joseph Story, claimed that the framers meant “sects of Christianity” but those who debated the Constitution in the states and some of the Founders took a different point of view. There is no religious test for public service in the Constitution. See the links below for more on why the First Amendment does apply to all religions.
Moore has been supported by the Institute on the Constitution and aligns with the Christian reconstructionist movement. I feel sorry for the citizens of Alabama.
For further reading on this topic, see:
Did the First Amendment Create a Christian Nation?
Politifact Debunks Bryan Fischer’s Christianity Only View of the First Amendment
Does Ted Cruz Believe the First Amendment is Only for Christians?
Answering Matt Barber on Jefferson and the First Amendment
Dean of Liberty Law School Says Islam Not Protected by the First Amendment
AFA takes a stand on religious freedom
David Barton: Pluralism not the goal of the First Amendment

More Fractured History Lessons in Glenn Beck's Sermon to Liberty University: The Bible, Cake and Witches

In two prior posts (here and here), I addressed Glenn Beck’s faulty reference to the purple triangle worn by Jehovah’s Witnesses while imprisoned in Nazi concentration camps during WWII.  Beck said Bible scholars were made to wear the triangle without telling the audience that Jehovah’s Witnesses were known as Bible students in Germany at the time. Very few  people (some say less than one percent) from other religions wore the purple triangle.
After he held up the purple triangle, Beck then held up a Bible he said belonged to Louis the 15th and a prayer book he said belonged to British King George III. He remarked that the books were hardly used and proposed the lack of Bible usage led to various problems for the French and British.  He then held up a Bible he said stopped the Salem witch trials. Finally, he told a story about the death of Joseph Smith, founder of the Latter Day Saint church. Because I anticipate the Joseph Smith story will raise different issues than the Bible stories, I will take it in a separate post. For now, I want to examine Beck’s claims line by line. Prepare for whiplash.
Here again is the sermon:
[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TYNjZ55nctE[/youtube]
At about 10 minutes into the video, after identifying several colored triangles the Nazis used to identify prisoners, Beck said:

…what got you sent to the concentration camps for the purple triangle? You were a Bible scholar. The Bible is the enemy to fascists.
Why?
When we went to war as a country there were two other great powers on earth one of them was England and the other was France. At the time King Louis was the King of France. This is King Louis the 15th’s Scriptures. If you look at the gilding, it’s perfect, it’s perfect. It’s never been read! How could you live in that society and say let them eat cake? What led to the revolution where the guillotines were the answer? He never read his Scriptures. The other great power that we broke away from was King George. This is King George his book of morning prayer. If you look through this, it is absolutely perfect. I don’t think the pages were ever turned.
What do your Scriptures look like? Will someday somebody say this is my mom, this is my dad, this is my brother, this is my sister’s Scriptures. Look at they’re in perfect condition, or will they have been poured over, dog-eared, written in that tells the story of your life and your path. This [holding up a Bible] is what freed the world and this came at a great price. This is an original William Tyndale Bible, and if you see, it was owned by a Puritan because every time there’s the face of price it’s been blotted out. This was smuggled page by page in bags of rice smuggled in. When they tied him to the stake, he said my only crime is that I believe that you should be able to read God’s Word in your own tongue. Now we have God’s Word in our pocket. We can access it anywhere, in any language. Does it mean anything to us anymore? Is it just a series of words put together?
This is the Bible that’s stopped the Salem witch trials. People will say that the Salem witch trials were caused by Christians, but how come the witch trials happened for decades in Europe but lasted very short period of time here? Why? Because of preachers, preachers that knew their Scriptures and took this Bible and said your misreading the Scriptures, and that Sunday the governor got up and stood in front of the congregation weeping, “I am sorry, I misread.”

There are several problems here. Let’s start with:

When we went to war as a country there were two other great powers on Earth one of them was England and the other was France.

Not so. Another possibly greater power on Earth at the time was China. According to the British Museum, the Chinese empire of Qianlong “was the wealthiest and most populous country in the world. By the end of the eighteenth century, there were 200 million Chinese.” This is an important point because Beck wants to make a case that the Bible is somehow involved in a nation’s political fortunes. Obviously, the Chinese did not seek to base their culture on the Bible.
Beck continued:

This is King Louis the 15th’s Scriptures. If you look at the gilding, it’s perfect, it’s perfect. It’s never been read! How could you live in that society and say let them eat cake? What led to the revolution where the guillotines were the answer? He never read his Scriptures.

I looked for information regarding King Louis’ Bible and have not yet found anything. However, I assume King Louis had more than one Bible and it seems presumptuous to make much out of the condition of this item unless one has additional primary source confirmation that the King never read any Bible.
Beck then leaps wildly through French history to link Louis’ purported lack of Bible reading with the phrase, “let them eat cake” and the French Revolution. The phrase “let them eat cake” is widely attributed to Marie Antoinette, the wife of Louis XVI, the grandson of Louis XV. However, historians believe she never said the phrase. Instead, the phrase has been attributed to a Spanish princess before Louis the 15th was born. The phrase was also used by Rousseau in the book, Les Confessions, who said an unnamed princess uttered the words. Regarding the French Revolution, Louis XV died in 1774, 15 years before the revolution started. In short, Beck links Louis XV’s alleged lack of Bible reading to events that happened before he was born and after he died.
About King George, Beck said:

This is King George his book of morning prayer. If you look through this, it is absolutely perfect. I don’t think the pages were ever turned.

Again, I have found little on this. Was this King George’s only copy? According to this British Royal Collection website, a Bible, psalter and prayer book used by King George is safely in the Royal Collection. A rare book house has a description of one of King George’s prayer books. In fact, the description says that “George III was deeply devout and spent hours in prayer, making this volume emblematic of his rule at that time.” We do know that King George called for prayer against the colonists and issued a book of prayers beseeching God to turn back the rebellion. King George also may have suffered from an illness which caused mental instability. In any case, without examining the evidence for this item, and given Beck’s other misleading statements, it is possible that the condition of the book he has means nothing about King George’s beliefs and practices.
Beck then claimed he has the Bible that stopped the Salem witch trials:

This is the Bible that’s stopped the Salem witch trials.

I have asked several historians about this with no one knowing what he means. I can’t tell if he means the actual Bible or if he is referring to the version of the Bible which was in common use at the time. Beck continued:

People will say that the Salem witch trials were caused by Christians, but how come the witch trials happened for decades in Europe but lasted very short period of time here? Why? Because of preachers, preachers that knew their Scriptures and took this Bible and said your misreading the Scriptures, and that Sunday the governor got up and stood in front of the congregation weeping, “I am sorry, I misread.”

There is no dispute that the witch trials were conducted by people who claimed to be Christian. Indeed, there were periods of hysteria in Europe, just as there was here. Salem was not the only town in the colonies to experience witchcraft hysteria. Connecticut did as well on at least two occasions. Both were related to Christians who believed witches were responsible for various problems in the community and should be handled in the manner taught by Old Testament law. Marc Carlson has compiled a comprehensive list of nearly 300 people tried as witches in trials in America from 1622 through 1878. There were more incidents in Europe but there were more people in Europe and the duration of the count was over a longer period of time.
The religious leaders in MA initially believed they were in the right. It was when allegations of witchcraft were directed toward prominent members of the community that caution came into play. An appeal to the Bible may have helped support that caution but there can be no mistake that an appeal to the Bible was the foundation for the hysteria in the first place.
All in all, the significant historical problems in this sermon raise questions about the accuracy of the rest of it, including his story of Joseph Smith’s last days. I will take that up in a future post.

David Barton Continues to Spin The Jefferson Lies in Florida and Ohio

According to this Florida Today report, David Barton is slated to speak at the Space Coast Prayer Breakfast in Melbourne, FL this Thursday.
The reporter provided the details of the event and noted that Thomas Nelson pulled from publication Barton’s book The Jefferson Lies. Barton continues to spin the situation as being the result of “two professors.”

Barton’s most recent book, “The Jefferson Lie, Exposing the Myths You’ve Always Believed,” was withdrawn by publisher Thomas Nelson because of factual errors, but will return.
“Thomas Nelson withdrew the book after two professors criticized it. But it’s coming back out at some point. You can’t just get rid of history simply because you don’t like it.”

While Getting Jefferson Right: Fact Checking Claims about Our Third President was used by Thomas Nelson as a resource, it is beyond dispute that The Jefferson Lies was widely criticized by academic historians, both Christian and otherwise.  The book was voted Least Credible History Book in Print by the readers of the History News Network and garnered many critical reviews from real historians. In prior posts, I debunked Barton’s “two professors” claim.
The real story is why Barton continues to be invited to speak about the founding era when he has been so widely discredited as an authority on the subject.
Tonight, Barton speaks at Urbana University in Ohio.
 

Should Christian Scholars be Watchdogs? My Interview with The Pietist Schoolman on David Barton

Grace College history professor Jared Burkholder today published an interview with me on fact checking David Barton’s claims.
Go check it out. Being an historian, Burkholder’s questions were thoughtful and included some analysis of his own. For instance:

Jared: In my mind, Barton’s problem is a methodological one rather than simply getting things wrong. And often the issue is that his faulty approach leads to misguided interpretive conclusions. Simply put, Barton does not engage in the critical study of history. Historians are trained to be critical, which means they must be ruthless questioners and skeptics – especially of themselves. They seek to maintain a certain amount of distance between themselves and the events they narrate so the conclusions are as objective as possible. Historians are expected to make arguments, or course, but one’s judgment is supposed to be free from bias. This is not to say that this is a perfect process; perceptive readers can usually detect at least some bias in all sorts of historical writing. Sometimes we even categorize historians in one school of thought or another based on their bias. But sometimes it becomes apparent that a writer’s presuppositions or a particular political or religious agenda is overtaking the careful process of questioning that makes for solid and useful historical writing. This is certainly the case with Barton. Warren, would you agree?  If you could boil it down to a few sentences, what is the crux of the matter regarding Barton’s historical work? In other words, is there a root issue, which in your opinion, leads to “bad history?”

You can read my answer and the rest of our exchange at the Pietist Schoolman.