Glenn Beck, Guardian of Historical Truth, To Rescue David Barton's Book From Garbage Bin

Categories: Politics

GlennBeckDavidBarton.jpg
When he had David Barton on his show Thursday, Glenn Beck asked the discredited historian the hard questions.
In case you missed it last week, Glenn Beck invited oft-discredited historian David Barton onto his show to discuss his latest pantsing.

Christian publishing house Thomas Nelson had recently announced that it would pull his latest work, The Jefferson Lies, from the shelves after it "lost confidence in the book's details".

Glenn Beck, in case you had any doubt, has not. He launches into the interview by referring to the criticisms leveled at the book. "One of them is you don't provide enough facts, there's not enough, uh, facts here," Beck says, begging Barton to disabuse whoever would say such things of their ignorant and wrong-headed notions. He may have been saving his hard-hitting questions for later in the interview, after he'd softened Barton up, but I didn't watch long enough to find out.

We learn today that Beck isn't just going to bat for Barton on his TV show, but has also agreed to publish The Jefferson Liies through Mercury Ink.

According to Publisher's Weekly, Barton had purchased 17,000 copies of his book from Thomas Nelson and that the new version "will not include any substantive changes, but I will rephrase some things to remove any potential confusion." Also, "I have actually run across more supporting documents that strengthen my case, not weaken it," he told the magazine.

My Voice Nation Help
11 comments
thewholetruth
thewholetruth

You cannot begin to make a FAIR decision about David Barton unless you listen to the COMPLETE interview with Glenn Beck where Beck was clearly not "begging" David Barton. His defense is compelling and will restore your faith in his accuracy. Very interesting to learn that SO many of Barton's documentations were removed by the publisher. Their inclusion would have avoided this controversy! 

myrollins
myrollins

"Barton noted that if Jefferson cannot be upheld as a "racist" and "anti-Christian secularist," then liberals have no other Founding Father on which to lean."

The problem is how David is trying so hard to discredit the secular government by claiming that some of the deists architects of the constitution are professed Christians. Next He attempts to combat the idea of secularized government with Religious syncretism. Which is ironic and hypocritical.

David uses omissions and blatant lies in order to turn deists into theists, while completely ignoring earlier founders of this country, who unlike the founding fathers, were professed Christians. David knows who these men were, but refuses to share their part in his version of history, which doesn't meet his agenda, forcing his morality on others. Who were these men? They were the founders of Rhode Island and Baptist Churches all over the Colony. The men Barton refuses to acknowledge are men like Roger Williams and John Leland.

A term used in the political brainwashing of Christians is known as "Individual Liberty". This term was used by the founders and most Baptist in the 18th Century, but Barton and many others have taken this term completely out of context by defining it as the liberty for free market to operate without government intervention, to perpetuate greed. This is how the term was intended to look in its entirety, "Individual Liberty of Conscience".

Individual Liberty of Conscience was the hallmark of the Baptist Mission of Faith for over 300 years. During much of the Baptist Faith is was believed that all men had the right to worship as they please. It did not matter the gods name, or if there was more than one god, or no god. They just believed it was the right of everyone to believe in whatever they wanted without the intervention of any institution, be it Church or State. A lovely idea that is rarely mentioned in Baptist Churches today.

To say the real christians did not support the idea of a secular government, and the omission of God and religion from the constitution is historical and theological fallacy. The Baptist were strong proponents of a secular Government. John Leland would not ratify the Constitution without an amendment to separate church and state.

It is time to put an end to turning deists into theist, it is time to look to the Christians who weren't ashamed to profess their faith, the ones who were mutilated, and murdered for their faith. The early Baptist of America.

I am liberal and the founding fathers I lean on are men like Roger Williams and John Leland.

MisterMean
MisterMean

Noted a picture of a bunch of Sarah Palen's books on sale-more than half off.   Could not use them as toilet paper.   Same with this author too.    A fitting use.

 

EastDallasDad
EastDallasDad

David Barton doesn't have the critical thinking and historical analysis skills to pass a high school history class much less a college course. He has been repudiated by every historian that has reviewed his work, even conservative Christian historians.

Sotiredofitall
Sotiredofitall topcommenter

Hasn't Mr Barton been discredited by basically every recognized historian in the country.  The Jefferson Bible was an attempt to simplify the Bible for the Indians? 

Brian Nesbitt
Brian Nesbitt

>>He may have been saving his hard-hitting questions for later in the interview, after he'd softened Barton up, but I didn't watch long enough to find out.<<

 

Perhaps the person that shot you with paintballs the other day was your journalism professor.  

 

>>...but has also agreed to publish The Jefferson Liies...<< 

 

Or perhaps your junior high english teacher.  Seriously, your dreadful reporting and lack of basic editing skills annoy the bejeezus out of me.

Americano
Americano

Gee, I'm out of ideas and we've worn out the Mosquito spraying topic.  Why don't we just bash a Conservative?  Whose turn is it?  Glenn Beck?  Perfect!

bmarvel
bmarvel topcommenter

I think Beck has put his finger on a useful distinction:

Facts are not at all the same thing as "uh, facts." The former are not at all useful in conducting a political argument. On the contrary, they can be quite lethal.

"Uh, facts," on the other hand, are friendly, pliable, and can be marshaled in support of truthiess.

Beck has based his entire career upon just this distinction. So he can speak with some authority on the subject.  

oakclifftownie
oakclifftownie

First with the White Libtard  guilt Accusation !.

 

monstruss
monstruss

 @Americano Is that why Glenn Beck's fat face always looks so swollen? from the bashing?

Now Trending

Dallas Concert Tickets

From the Vault

 

Loading...