Pseudo-historian David Barton Will Re-release His Factually Inaccurate Book Through Glenn Beck’s Publishing Company

Christian pseudo-historian David Barton, whose book about Thomas Jefferson was pulled from the shelves by his Christian publishers for all the lies it contained, has announced Plan B:

[Barton] is in negotiations to publish a new edition of the book with Mercury Ink, Glenn Beck’s publishing arm

Barton said the new edition “will not include any substantive changes, but I will rephrase some things to remove any potential confusion.” He also plans to add back some of the content Nelson cut in their editing process, and that in the process of reviewing the accusations made by his critics, “I have actually run across more supporting documents that strengthen my case, not weaken it.”

Just to be clear, there was no “confusion” in the initial book that a word-change or two would fix. There were only wholesale lies — debunked by the likes of Warren Throckmorton and Chris Rodda (PDF), among others.

If Barton isn’t making any substantive changes, it means he’s just doubling down on his factual inaccuracies and hoping Christians aren’t smart enough to question what he says.

Glenn Beck obviously isn’t going to question it. He’s already built a career out of peddling lies and mock outrage.

About Hemant Mehta

Hemant Mehta is the chair of Foundation Beyond Belief and a high school math teacher in the suburbs of Chicago. He began writing the Friendly Atheist blog in 2006. His latest book is called The Young Atheist's Survival Guide.

  • SwedishSJ

    Barton’s inability to see how anyone could take issue with his work is cute.  According to him, he wasn’t wrong at all, it was just that some of the arguments needed to be slightly rephrased.  Of course, as soon as this happens, you can be sure the man will use it as a defense against criticism:  “Oh, those atheist critics were tolerable at first, but now that I’ve changed some words around only a fool would try to argue with me…they’re just arguing to hear themselves talk.”  Because what we took issue with were a few minor inaccuracies here and there, not the entire book.

  • Conspirator

    I’m sure the cover will be updated with things like “Banned!” and “The book *they* don’t want you to see!” and other such nonsensical rants.  And as I said when this book was initially pulled by his publisher I’m sure he’ll be playing the martyr card when making the rounds pimping the new edition.  

    • SwedishSJ

      It undoubtedly will come up at some point, asked by a sympathetic supporter of Barton who is lightly tossing softball interview questions his way, and Barton will undoubtedly play the martyr card.  It’s only a matter of when and where.

  • Glasofruix

    Surprisingly unsurprising…

  • Ouigui

     “Mercury Ink”?  What a fitting name for a toxic publishing company.

  • David Starner

    I’ve read Throckmorton’s book. Throckmorton gives the sound academic smackdown, crushing the fools with the power of facts and pure reason without dragging in polemic and politics. The Liars for Jesus PDF comes off a lot more polemic.

  • LesterBallard

    I feel physically ill.

  • OregoniAn

     Re-title it “The David Barton Lies” and I’ll be cool with it..

    • allein

      Oh, I thought the original title was quite apt. (It’s all in how you read it, of course.)

  • http://www.facebook.com/people/Mike-De-Fleuriot/611844223 Mike De Fleuriot

    Now the important thing you folk need to get out, is keep the information that this book was removed from publication, and provide the reasons why it was removed. That is the core issue of this thing. Keep the facts in the front of the public mind. 

  • Jwmchristie

    Slanting history is the name of the game in religions.

    • Non-religious Non-atheist

      ….and in atheism.

      • JohnChristie

        It is one of the many religions.

  • http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=100000646074664 Michael Rollins

    Out of all the criticisms and ad hominen directed to Barton on his FB page. He urgently deletes post like the one below.

    “Barton noted that if Jefferson cannot be upheld as a”racist” and “anti-Christian secularist,” then liberals have noother 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.

  • Tom Henderson77

    WHAT IS YOUR PROOF THAT HE IS LYING?

    • http://twitter.com/AronL Aron Levy

      WHAT IS YOUR PROOF THAT HE ISN’T?


CLOSE | X

HIDE | X