Tag: thomas jefferson

David Barton Takes Aim at His Critics in Part Two of The Blaze Series

Part one is here; part two of The Blaze series where Barton answers his critics is more of the same from David Barton’s first response on his Wallbuilders’ website.

The article does not mention that Coulter and I are conservative Christians, both being active in our churches, we are not afraid of religion. We did not write our book to attack Christianity but to be faithful to it. In light of that fact, a reasonable question would have been: why are conservative Christians are also critiquing your work?

Seemingly oblivious to the irony, Barton criticizes me for writing about history since I am a psychologist.

“They don’t attack the facts — they attack the education – and that’s a way to change the topic,” Barton said. “If education really matters, there’s a lot I can point out. Ben Franklin didn’t have an education at all. George Washington didn’t have a military education.”

The historian explained that Americans have traditionally prided themselves “not on the labors you wear, but the fruit you produce.” He took specific aim at Warren Throckmorton, an associate professor of psychology at Grove City College (we mentioned Throckmorton in our original piece).

“The case of Throckmorton is a great example. He’s a psychology guy. Tell me what history experience he has — he has no training in that area at all,” he said, going on to wonder why Throckmorton is permitted to critique him with little scrutiny when he, too, purportedly has little formal history education.

We did attack “the facts.”

Furthermore, do you see what he did there? He said his critics don’t attack the facts but rather his education and then he did the same thing to me (ignoring my co-author, Michael Coulter)  in the next paragraph.  He didn’t answer our facts (even the ones raised in Part one of the Blaze series), he just criticized my profession and his perception of my training.

The primary question of fact Barton addresses is Jefferson’s faith. He says Jefferson was unorthodox in the last 15 years of his life. Jefferson was unorthodox as an older man but he began his skepticism of the Trinity before 1788 (he died in 1826), if we can believe his letter to J. P. Derieux — a letter that Barton does not cite in The Jefferson Lies.

To be continued, I am sure…

 

Monday Night Live with Jerry Newcombe

Last night I was on Jerry Newcombe’s Monday Night Live talk show which is aired on WAFG-FM, Ft. Lauderdale, FL.  Newcombe’s views lean toward the Christian nationalist side of things, having co-authored, What if America was a Christian Nation Again? with D. James Kennedy as well as George Washington’s Sacred Fire with Peter Lillback. I was on the show to discuss Getting Jefferson Right, and more specifically aspects of Jefferson’s life and views. The point of the show was not to focus on the mistakes made by David Barton in The Jefferson Lies, but rather to discuss our perspective on some of the same issues Barton’s covers in his book.

The first half of the 30 minute segment was devoted to Jefferson and slavery and the second half to Jefferson’s religious beliefs with some time spent on Jefferson’s extractions from the Gospels. Newcombe is a gracious host and allowed me time to develop Jefferson’s contradictions.  I experienced the segment as a point-counterpoint exchange. Newcombe brought up various anti-slavery statements made by Jefferson and I acknowledged those but noted Jefferson’s actions which were inconsistent with his lofty ideals. For instance, Jefferson spoke against the slave trade, however, he engaged in buying and selling of human beings throughout his life. Without challenge, I drove home the point that Jefferson was legally able to free his slaves but did not do it.

The second half of the show revolved around Jefferson’s religious beliefs. Newcombe was particularly bothered by Jefferson’s statements that finding Jesus’ actual teachings in the Gospels was as easy as picking diamonds from a dunghill. Jefferson’s extractions of Jesus’ teaching for what is often called the Jefferson Bible was guided by his confidence that he could easily tell what came from Jesus of Nazareth (diamonds) and what was added by his followers (dunghill). Newcombe rightly observed that Jefferson set himself up as a judge over the Bible. Newcombe seemed genuinely troubled that Jefferson believed that the Gospel writers were responsible for obscuring the real Jesus.  He had been led to believe it was the church in the middle ages which did so. I wish I would have driven this point home more strongly. After the broadcast and while Newcombe was talking to the next guest Mark Beliles (more about him in a bit), I recalled Jefferson’s assessment of the New Testament writers. In a 1820 letter to William Short, Jefferson said:

Among the sayings & discourses imputed to him [Jesus] by his biographers, I find many passages of fine imagination, correct morality, and of the most lovely benevolence: and others again of so much ignorance, so much absurdity, so much untruth, charlatanism, and imposture, as to pronounce it impossible that such contradictions should have proceeded from the same being. I seperate therefore the gold from the dross; restore to him the former & leave the latter to the stupidity of some, and roguery of others of his disciples. Of this band of dupes and impostors, Paul was the great Coryphaeus, and firm corrupter of the doctrines of Jesus. These palpable interpolations and falsifications of his doctrines led me to try to sift them apart. I found the work obvious and easy, and that his part composed the most beautiful morsel of morality which has been given to us by man. The Syllabus is therefore of his doctrines, not all of mine. I read them as I do those of other antient and modern moralists, with a mixture of approbation and disent.

Jefferson believed that the corrupting of the New Testament began with His biographers and then became further corrupted by Paul, the author of most of the New Testament. This clearly bothered Newcombe which he carried into the next segment with Mark Beliles.

Beliles is a minister in the Charlottesville, VA area and co-founder, with Stephen McDowell, of the Providence Foundation. David Barton is on the board of that group. On their website, they describe one objective of their organization:

Jesus commissioned believers to “make disciples of all nations,” which, according to Matthew Henry, means to “do your utmost to make the nations Christian nations.”

The nations need an understanding of how to build a Godly society. We need personal revival, for all change begins in the heart of man, but Biblical revivals have historically transformed society as well as individuals. Without Biblical reformation, tyranny and oppression will increase. God has called His people to serve in civil government, education, the media, politics, and business, as well as the family and church. Everyone must know how to apply Biblical principles in their calling. Many are called to equip others in a Biblical worldview.

Listening carefully to Beliles, I could hear David Barton’s talking points about Jefferson’s religious faith. Belilies said Jefferson abridged the Gospels for missions to the Indians and downplayed the diamonds from a dunghill imagery. He tried to locate all of Jefferson’s skepticism to near the end of his life and advanced the dubious notion that Jefferson was influenced by the Primitivist and Restoration movements to change orthodox views into heresy. In our book, we examine that idea and find it to be without merit. If anything, the Restoration preachers were inspired by Jefferson and his republican ideals more than the other way around.  As far as we can discern, Jefferson never mentioned the Restoration movement but he did talk much about Unitarianism and his affiliation with that viewpoint. Beliles said people in Virginia did not question Jefferson’s orthodoxy which is just not right. For instance, opposition in Virginia to the University of Virginia often referenced Jefferson perceived infidelity.

It would have been good for us to be on together so I could have asked Beliles about his evidence, but it is Newcombe’s decision to set it up how he wants. In all, I appreciate the opportunity to present some of our work in that forum.

I will be on the Jerry Newcombe Show tonight to discuss Getting Jefferson Right

Tonight, from 9:00-9:30pm, I will be on the Jerry Newcombe Show. The program can be heard live on the station’s website (look for the listen live icon in the upper right hand corner or try this link).

Newcombe is author of The Book That Made America: How the Bible Formed Our Nation and co-author with Peter Lillback of George Washington’s Sacred Fire.

The plan is to discuss Getting Jefferson Right.

More Evidence David Barton is Wrong About Jefferson and Slavery: Robert Carter’s Emancipation Deed

I talked about Robert Carter in a prior post. Carter set in motion a plan to free his slaves beginning on August 1, 1791. Fresh from the Northumberland District Court in Heathsville, Virginia, I have copies of the Deed of Gift which Carter filed on August 1, 1791. I will pull out a couple of pieces of it and then provide links to all the pages which you can click through to review.

David Barton wrote in The Jefferson Lies that Thomas Jefferson was unable to free his slaves due to Virginia law. However, in Getting Jefferson Right, we demonstrate that Virginia law changed in 1782 to allow emancipation both during an owner’s life and at his death. The law was in effect for 24 years until it was modified in 1806 to make manumission more complicated for the slaves.

It is one thing to examine the law, but it is another thing to see the law in application. Robert Carter, a wealthy plantation owner who also sat on the Governor’s Council, submitted a deed, in accord with the law, on September 5, 1791. The process would take years and involve other people Carter appointed when he left Virginia.

Carter wrote the Deed of Gift on August 1, 1791 and included a list of 452 of his slaves covering all or part of five pages. Slaves over age 45 would be handled in another manner. Page one is here so you can see the format of the deed:

First, Carter introduced the list, then provided a listing of his plantations and finally a list of his slaves by name, age and location.

The next three pages contained an inventory of human beings and then on the fifth page of the deed, Carter provided his rationale and legal basis for the emancipation.

This section is quite important so I type it out here for easier reading (start at the red slash at the end of the first line):

And whereas I have for some time past been convinced that to retain them [slaves] in slavery is contrary to the true principles of Religion & Justice, that therefore it was my Duty to manumit them, if it could be accomplished without infringing the laws of my Country, without being of disadvantage to my neighbors & the Community at large: And whereas the General Assembly for the Commonwealth of Virginia did in the year seventeen hundred eighty two enact a Law entitled “an Act to authorize the manumission of slaves” now be it remembered that the said Robert do under the said Act for myself my heirs my Executors & administrators emancipate from slavery all such my slaves in the aforesaid Schedule (as are under the age of forty-six years) but in a manner & form as hereafter particularly mentioned & set forth.

Virginia law set age restrictions on manumissions and the older slaves would be handled differently. However, this document provides clear reference to the Virginia law passed in 1782 which allowed Carter to do what he listed here.

As recently as last week, David Barton told a radio audience that Jefferson could not free his slaves due to Virginia law. I don’t know how long it will take for someone in the Christian community to hold him accountable for this but the evidence is here that he is wrong.

Some have asked me why this matters. First of all, I would like to think that Christian leaders would not want to put out falsehoods. Second, I recently spoke to an African American pastor who told me that Barton’s whitewash of Jefferson’s record is offensive to him and his colleagues. According to this pastor, lifting up Jefferson as an abolitionist and civil rights champion hinders racial reconciliation within the greater Christian community.

Robert Carter’s entire Deed of Gift (click the links)

Page one, two, three, four, five, & six.

 

For more on Jefferson and slavery as well as other matters covered in David Barton’s recent book, see Getting Jefferson Right.

ForAmerica promotes spurious Jefferson quote

Brent Bozell runs Media Research Center and founded ForAmerica but is promoting a quote falsely attributed to Thomas Jefferson. See the picture below exploding all over Facebook.

The problem is that Jefferson did not make this assertion. The folks at Monticello have the whole story on the quote:

Quotation: “My reading of history convinces me that most bad government results from too much government.”

Variations:

“My reading of history convinces me that most bad government has grown out of too much government.”

Sources consulted: Searching on the phrase “bad government” and “too much government”

Papers of Thomas Jefferson Digital Edition

Thomas Jefferson Retirement Papers

Thomas Jefferson: Papers and Biographies collections in Hathi Trust Digital Library

Earliest known appearance in print: 1913

Earliest known appearance in print, attributed to Jefferson: 1950

Other attributions: John Sharp Williams

Comments: This exact quotation has not been found in any of the writings of Thomas Jefferson. It bears some slight resemblance to a statement he made in a letter to John Norvell of June 14, 1807: “History, in general, only informs us what bad government is.” However, the quotation as it appears above can definitely be attributed to John Sharp Williams in a speech about Jefferson, which has most likely been mistaken at some point for a direct quotation of Jefferson.

Click the link to get the sources for this note on the fake quote. Over at the Facebook page where this image is listed, over 85,000 people like the false attribution and over 2700 people have commented on it. Some, including me, have posted the Monticello link. The picture and the quote remains.

ForAmerica describes itself as follows:

ForAmerica’s mission is to reinvigorate the American people with the principles of American exceptionalism: personal freedom, personal responsibility, a commitment to Judeo-Christian values, and a strong national defense. We believe in limited government with Constitutionally-enumerated powers only. We believe that the size of the federal government should be dramatically reduced and that government’s regulatory stranglehold on the free enterprise system should be lifted. We believe in freedom.

I suppose that one of those Judeo-Christian values is honesty. I hope this means that the reinvigoration of the people can happen with honesty. As far as I can tell, Jefferson was pragmatic about the role of government. He saw a limited role for government in reinvigorating citizens with religious values but did want the government of Virginia to generously fund the University of Virginia, and public education in general.

Here is the earliest use of the quote found by the Monticello researchers and it was not by Jefferson but by Mississippi Senator John Sharp Williams who delivered lectures about Jefferson at Columbia University, published in 1913. Williams was a democrat and supported Woodrow Wilson’s call for an income tax.

Last year when an atheist group got caught in a spurious quote snafu, they acknowledged their error. Will ForAmerica?