david Barton – Page 67 – Warren Throckmorton

David Barton Says 4 Professors Criticized The Jefferson Lies; He Forgot Some

Facts are pesky.
On July 19, Steve Deace interviewed David Barton (at 24:12 in hour 3) in Iowa after the big political confab there with Ted Cruz and Rand Paul. Deace asked Barton to describe the controversy over The Jefferson Lies (now approaching a year ago). He also asked if there was any substance to the criticism.
Barton said a bunch of stuff he usually says about it (e.g., publisher Thomas Nelson got scared of the scary professors, etc.). Then he said:

You’ve got about 6,000 universities in America and they found four professors who criticized what I did. Well, 6,000 universities, you probably have 60,000 professors and they found four who didn’t like it.

Well, we all know who two of them are. But just four? I think he forgot some. Last August, World Magazine reported that Jay Richards assembled 10 Christian professors who expressed a negative response to the book. Then there was Clay Jenkinson, and Martin Marty, and John Fea, and Paul Harvey, and Regent University’s Chuck Dunn, and Greg Forster, and Gregg Frazer and Steven Green. And then there were the 650 voters in the History News Network poll who helped Barton squeak out the Least Credible History Book in Print designation, just beating out Howard Zinn’s “A People’s History of the United States.” Then more recently, 34 Christian history and social science professors approached Family Research Council about the Capitol Tour video (which FRC removed from view due to the errors).
Please note that most of the people referred to in this post are evangelical Christians.
Christian publisher Thomas Nelson’s reasons for pulling the book were expressed in World’s report:

The publisher “was contacted by a number of people expressing concerns about [The Jefferson Lies].” The company began to evaluate the criticisms, Harrell said, and “in the course of our review learned that there were some historical details included in the book that were not adequately supported. Because of these deficiencies we decided that it was in the best interest of our readers to stop the publication and distribution.”

Need to refresh your memory? See the World coverage here and here
UPDATE: Readers have reminded me of some additional historian/professors who have had negative things to say about The Jefferson Lies. Let’s add Daniel Dreisbach, Kevin Gutzman, and James Stoner, and Miles Mullin and John David Wilsey and Randall J. Stephens and Karl W. Giberson.

P.S. He still is completely botching the Jefferson Bible…
P.P.S. Are you a professor? Email or tweet to add your name, or leave your name in the comments.
English prof Jeff Sharlet and Religious Studies prof Julie Ingersoll have added their names to the “four.”
Add History professors Jared Burkholder, Jay Case, Brenda Schoolfield, Keith Beutler, Joseph Moore, Scott Culpepper, Bobby Griffith, Paul Fessler, Jason Dikes, Chris Gehrz, Chris Cantwell, Jonathan Wilson, Alan Snyder, Glenn Sunshine, Philip Perdue, and Rachel Larson, and also Religious Studies profs Michael J. Altman and P.C. Kemeny to the list of profs. Independent historian Michael Miles concurs.
Glad to add Yoni Appelbaum, GCC colleague Dan Brown (the entire GCC history dept is included in the 34 profs who wrote to FRC), math prof Sharon McCathern, Environmental Ethics prof Bron Taylor and English prof Steve Roberts.
UPDATE: Steve Deace posted my rebuttal to Barton.

What's Right with Common Core?

The latest educational initiative to rile up some social conservatives is Common Core educational standards. At Glenn Beck’s Man in the Moon this past weekend, Michelle Malkin bashed Common Core as being “a progressive education scheme.” Her objective is to halt the implementation of the standards, according to the Blaze. David Barton was already on record as opposing Common Core. Some of the conceptions and misconceptions are displayed in this video.
Listening to Malkin and Barton, one might think that conservatives are unified in their opposition to Common Core. Not so. In this post, I want to list several links to articles by conservatives who favor the implementation of Common Core.
Common Core a conservative win for Oklahoma – This op-ed by Chester Finn and Michael Petrilli of the Thomas B. Fordham Institute, a right-of-center education policy think tank lay out their conservative reasons for supporting Common Core. Both authors are also affiliated with the Hoover Institution.
The Good News of Common Core – An article from Christianity Today which addresses misconceptions of those opposed to the standards. The article was written by Karen Swallow Prior, a professor at Liberty University.
Mike Huckabee – Huckabee sets the record straight about the source of the standards and praises the idea that there is some benchmark for what students should know throughout their school years. According to Malkin, conservatives like Huckabee have “sold out” to progressives. Really?
The Truth about Common Core – In National Review Online, conservative scholars Kathleen Porter-McGee and Sol Stern take apart misconceptions about Common Core.
Escaping Ourselves – Former CT editor, David Neff, sees the Common Core standards as aiding common understandings of important historical texts.
Frequently Asked Questions about Common Core – Clarifies that the program is not a federal initiative but was developed by the National Governors Association along with school officials around the nation. Other misconceptions are addressed here.
Most of the criticisms of the Common Core standards I have seen make me wonder if the critics have read them. Given that the standards were developed by Governors and school officials, the worries over federal intrusion seem more related to opposition to the current president than the standards themselves.
There is nothing new about standards for students. Thomas Jefferson and his fellow Visitors of the University of Virginia provided a general outline about what students should know before entering university level. Jefferson hoped Virginia would develop a public education system to help prepare students in this manner:

To give every citizen the information he needs for the transaction of his own business;
To enable him to calculate for himself, and to express and preserve his ideas, his contracts, and accounts, in writing;
To improve, by reading, his morals and faculties;
To understand his duties to his neighbors and country, and to discharge with competence the functions confided to him by either;
To know his rights; to exercize with order and justice those he retains; to choose with discretion the fiduciary of those he delegates; and to notice their conduct with diligence, with candor, and judgment;
And, in general, to observe with intelligence and faithfulness all the social relations under which he shall be placed.
To instruct the mass of our citizens in these, their rights, interests and duties, as men and citizens, being then the objects of education in the primary schools, whether private or public, in them should be taught reading, writing and numerical arithmetic, the elements of mensuration, (useful in so many callings,) and the outlines of geography and history. (From Rockfish Gap Report (Report of the Commissioners Appointed to Fix the Site of the University of Virginia, 1818, p. 4).

Answering the Claim that the Repeal of DOMA Will Force Military Chaplains to Perform Gay Marriages

In response to claims that the repeal of the Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA) will force military chaplains to perform gay marriages, a defense official told me today that chaplains are not required to perform marriages which violate the tenets of their religion.
The day DOMA was repealed, David Barton opined to Glenn Beck that military chaplains will now have to perform weddings for gay service members. Barton said DOMA had protected “the rights of chaplains not to have to perform gay marriage against their will.” He then predicted that chaplains would be under renewed pressure to perform these ceremonies.
However, according to a defense official, nothing has changed because of the repeal of DOMA. The official told me “a chaplain is not required to participate in or officiate a private ceremony if doing so would be in variance with the tenets of his or her religion or personal beliefs.”
Given this stance, it seems quite unlikely that gay people will join the military just to get married, as Barton predicted Monday. A more efficient route for someone who lives in a state which does not recognize gay couples would be to go to a state without a residency requirement (e.g., Massachusetts). In any case for now, DOD is on record as saying chaplains can refuse to perform private ceremonies if those activities violate the tenets of their religion.

Springboro School District to Allow Course in Constitution Featuring David Barton

Speaking of David Barton and the Constitution, I learned yesterday that the Springboro School District plans to offer a summer course on the Constitution taught in part by Barton via video.
Here is the brochure advertising the course:

John Eidsmoe was Michelle Bachmann’s mentor* at Oral Roberts University and Ricki Pepin runs something called the Institute on the Constitution. Pepin’s website leaves no doubt about the type of course being offered. She says she provides “educational opportunities for learning about your American and Christian heritage.” Here course is different from other courses, which just teach the Constitution. Her course teaches kids how to think biblically.

GROUP CLASS DISTINCTIVES – Why are we different from other Constitution courses?
Restoration begins with education. The root meaning of the word “education” is to “pour in and draw out.” We pour information and knowledge in, but unless we understand and know how to practically apply it (draw it out), true education has not occurred.  Educated activism, therefore, is the key to restoration of America to her principled roots. For this reason, our Constitution course teaches you how to USE this document, not just learn its contents.
Other Constitution classes – Hillsdale College, National Center for Constitutional Studies, Heritage Foundation – are good entry level classes to learn the basics of the Constitution, to set the foundation. But, when we build a house, the foundation is just the beginning. If we build no house on top of it, the foundation is unused and will never fulfill its intended purpose – to provide a home and shelter for a family. Likewise, if we are to restore Constitutional law to this country, we DO have to lay the foundation, but then we have to BUILD upon it until we learn to USE it for its intended purpose – to protect and defend individual’s right to life, liberty and property.
The IOTC class is a 12-week course on the Constitution, with three important distinctions from other Constitution classes:
First distinction – We begin with history. It has been said that history is to a nation what memory is to a person. If a person has amnesia, they are living in absolute confusion. They don’t know who they are, where they came from, what they believe in, what’s important to them, what their hopes and dreams are for the future.   The same confusion reigns in a nation where citizens don’t know their history. It’s where we are today as a nation, lost and confused, not knowing where we came from, or where we’re going or what vehicle to use to get there. Our Constitution classes will show you. We teach the history of law and government as it originated from God as recorded in the Bible. Going forward, we trace the progression of this foundation through Columbus, the Pilgrims, our founding fathers and we study their belief systems.  As students learn these foundations, they begin to see our nation’s history as part of who they are. They begin to see it as their HERITAGE, their inheritance. It’s truth. It’s powerful. It’s motivating. It gives individuals a sense of their purpose and destiny as Americans.
Second distinction – We teach how to USE the Constitution.  After laying the historical foundation, we do teach the Constitution, but we don’t just teach about it. We relate its principles to current events during class discussions. There is much interaction and many, many opportunities given for application of what the students are learning. Because of the first distinction – their knowledge of their heritage and ownership of this nation – many, many of our graduates get very involved in their local communities. Some of them are running for offices we didn’t even know existed before like Precinct Committee Chairmen. Others are attending various city, county, state board meetings, and offering Constitutional solutions to the problems discussed at these meetings, not just venting another opinion. Still others are starting up citizen action groups to hold their elected officials accountable.
Third distinction – We teach students HOW TO THINK.  While teaching the Constitution, we help the students turn on their brains. We show them how to reason through current events from a Biblical and principled foundation, so they will not be deceived by the media or anyone else. How do we do this? By introducing them to the Principle Approach to education (the method used by our Founding Fathers). Defining our terms from Noah Webster’s original 1828 Dictionary, asking leading questions, using primary source documents, what the founders themselves wrote, not what somebody wrote about them. This method of learning is incredibly thought-provoking and exposes principles and truths that are then applied to our modern-day government situations.
Won’t you join us in this movement of educated activism? – The Constitution cannot defend itself. We the people must do it. No matter who we elect, educated patriots must hold our leaders at every level of government accountable to the Constitution. We can’t do that if we don’t know what it says. Join me and other IOTC graduates in the cause of preserving our God-given liberty and restoring our Constitutional Republic. If you don’t, who will?

When the state of Ohio passed a law requiring schools to teach about the founding documents, I wondered if the stage was being set for the introduction of Barton’s materials into the classroom. These summer courses are supposed to be evaluated for use in the school system to help meet the requirements of the law. There is another one day course apparently written by Cleon Skousen (one of Glenn Beck’s favorites) which will also be evaluated.
It is clear from the promo material and the teacher’s website that the course establishes one particular religious view under the guise of the public school. Furthermore, as regular readers know, the accuracy of the content is questionable given Barton’s video sequences used to reinforce the Christian nationalist teaching.
*Eidsmoe says he deplores racism but has spoken to white supremacist groups. See this article for more…

David Barton and the Biblical Constitution

In his speeches to churches, David Barton asserts that there are Bible verses throughout the Constitution. On past occasions, he has said that the Constitution quotes the Bible verbatim. In his recent appearance before Crossroads Church in Oklahoma City, OK, Barton said people today don’t recognize these verses in the Constitution because they are ignorant about the Bible. He begins his discussion of the Bible and the Constitution at about 12 minutes into the following sermon:

Barton said:

It’s significant that if you know the Bible and if you read the Constitution, you see Bible verses throughout the Constitution. You see Bible verse after Bible verse that is noted in the Constitution. Now today, we have a lot of people who say, no, no, the Constitution is a secular arena, the Constitution is a secular document. When somebody tells me the Constitution’s a godless document, that simply tells me, they wouldn’t know a Bible verse if they saw one; if it bit them on the ankle they wouldn’t know what a Bible verse was. See what happened is the Constitution is filled with Bible verses, Bible references, Bible phrases, and Bible terminology cause back then, they didn’t see any reason to tell you it came out of the Bible because back then everybody knew that. They didn’t put it, but we’re so biblically illiterate today, we don’t recognize that.

Timothy Dwight must have been biblically illiterate. Dwight was a prominent Congregationalist minister and the president of Yale from 1795 to 1817. On July 23, 1812, Dwight preached a sermon before his students and faculty where he lamented the low spiritual status of the day. The occasion was a public fast called by the Connecticut governor in opposition to the War of 1812. Saying the nation had three reasons to fear the future, Dwight had strong words to say about the Constitution.

The second of these reasons is, the sinful character of our nation. Notwithstanding the prevalence of Religion, which I have described, the irreligion, and the wickedness, of our land are such, as to furnish a most painful and melancholy prospect to a serious mind. We formed our Constitution without any acknowledgment of God ; without any recognition of his mercies to us, as a people, of his government, or even of his existence. The Convention, by which it was formed, never asked, even once, his direction, or his blessing upon their labours. Thus we commenced our national existence under the present system, without God. I wish I could say, that a disposition to render him the reverence, due to his great Name, and the gratitude, demanded by his innumerable mercies, had been more public, visible, uniform, and fervent.

Dwight was adverse to heresy and was considered to be a champion of orthodoxy. He defended the Apostolic writings as inspired when the Unitarians and others rejected them. Dwight did not see Bible verse after Bible verse in the Constitution. Should we say he was biblically illiterate?
See below for the verses Barton claims to quoted in the Constitution: