The first clue that Mr. Barton is telling the truth is the torrent of scathing reviews from the Secularists. I have personally reviewed the facts presented in Barton's books, and have found them to be not just factually accurate, but intellectually honest.

The first thing to remember about secular historicism, is that the facts don't matter, just the political agenda.

We Americans write our own history. And the chapters of which we're proudest are the ones where we had the courage to change. - Al Gore, Speech at the Democratic National Convention (28 August 1996)

Original Intent By David Barton

This book has meticulous foot notes and references to it's sources. Barton uses the words of the founding fathers themselves to make his points. He uses actual court cases, and even puts the Constitution and the Declaration of Independence in the back of the book for your reference. The author presents the material in a clear and precise manner, and the reader can easily look up, reference, and test his conclusions themselves (his footnotes and index make it that easy) ..... Better yet, Barton actually invites the reader to read the federalist and anti-federalist (the words of the founding fathers themselves) papers after reading this book . If Barton's conclusions are false as some have concluded he's definitely a horrible revisionist since he gives the reader all the ammunition in the world to check his sources and refute him.

This book has done more for my understanding our founding fathers than the many secular based history texts I've pawned through. The author is thorough, complete, and as I said earlier he gives the reader all the power by giving him/her the power to reference the original documents. The truth is many of our founding fathers were Christians, did read the bible, and most wouldn't approve of the course of action taken against religious expression in our country today. This is a worthy read for the Christian and secular skeptic alike. Truly, this is a must read!!!!

Postscript: There have been many attacks on this book and those who give favorable reviews to it (as of this date the reviews are 44 five star reviews and 30 some one star reviews). Instead of believing what any man says I urge the reader to do what I'm doing.... Look up the material yourself... Read the book, check it's sources, and make your own conclusion... Don't let the many individuals who leave nasty comments under these reviews steal from you your right to make your own conclusion....

After seeing Rick Green present at our church in Cedar Park, TX, I had to get this book. I am very glad I did. David Barton did a fantastic job of including references for everything. I don't believe there is anyone who can claim that the statements or conclusions made in this book are false or opinion. Only those who don't read the book can be told that it contains false claims and believe that.

Read the negative comments posted here. The people posting them have clearly either (a) not read the book, or (b) are so left-wing that they will say anything to try to keep you from purchasing and reading this book. Don't listen to their opinions, read the facts presented in this book for yourself.

The book is written in the fashion "for a layman, by a layman". It should be renamed "The Idiots Guide to the Supreme Court--Christian Style", placed on the mantel for all the dry bible thumpers who believe the world is 6000 years old and also that Josh McDowell is an actual historian. Wikipedia is undoubtedly a better source.

Jeremiah Dyke
http://radical--thought.blogspot.com/

I guess it is not surprising to find so many one-star reviews about a book that dispels so many myths about the original intent of the founding fathers' who wrote the Constitution. Of course there can be some fault found with some of the citations used by Barton in this wonderful book, but those who find fault with the citations cannot really overcome the overwhelming evidence in this book that the current courts have far overstepped anything that the founders intended in not recognizing and establishing a single church vs. their views that religion is a fundamental foundation for the Declaration of Independence as well as the Constitution.
If you read this book, you should also read the Federalist Papers, the words and works of the founders, including Washington's first inaugural address to understand that the current courts have radically departed from the intentions of the founders when it came to the role of religion, vs. established churches in the USA. For many generations, the original intent of the founders was well understood, but it was only until the 20th century that judges decided to re-write the Constitution and take on the role of "a national theology board" that makes earlier debates about how many angels fit on the head of a pin look enlightened.
A must-read for anyone wondering where our nation has gone wrong.

Newspeak for the ditto heads. The founding fathers never could have believed how the David Barton's of today would twist history in an attempt to convert our great country from a secular state with freedom of religion and freedom from religion to a theocracy.

The authors purport to show something about our history and end up showing a more general truth: if you look at the world through green-tinted glasses, the world is green!

This is the story of how the judges in America, smoothly but surely, came to power and overthrew the legislative and executive powers, making them their puppets. Of how liberal judges speak Newspeak in our courts, and we play allong willingly. Of how American democracy went down the drain as this new plutocracy came to power. Sic transit George Washington.

The book in a nutshell: "it was acknowledged that the state had the legitimate power to prescribe state religious establishments. Therefore, the sole purpose of the First Amendment was to prevent the federal government from usurping this specific State power."

A categorical quote: "Even Jefferson and Madison ... enacted the death penalty for bigamy and poligamy and that Jefferson himself proposed "castration" as the penalty for sodomy."

"The Christianity practiced in America was described by John Jay as enlightened, by John Q. Adams as civilized, and by John Adams as rational. A clear distinction was drawn between American Christianity and that of Europe in earlier centuries. As Noah Webster explained: "the ecclesiastical establishments of Europe which serve to support tyrannical governments are not the Christian religion but abuses and corruptions of it."

And finally: "The First Amendment is explicit: "Congress shall make no law respecting the establishment of religion." Yet, amazingly, most of the contemporary rulings ... involve neither "Congress" nor the "making of a law". ... the free exercise of religion is no longer the inalienable right recognized by our Founding Fathers ... thus the First Amendment violates itself."

Mr. Barton wrote here a clear and precise analyses of the original texts, public and private, of America's Founding Fathers, and put them side by side with the liberals' new interpretation (rather prostitution). It can't get any clearer than this.

If Jesus predicted that there would be false teachers and prophets, the American Founders should have also predicted -and warned us- of these false judges who use their Newspeak language (reading exactly the opposite of what it says) to bring old Europe into America. Jesus was not naive, we are naive.

The reading gets some times exhausting due to the numerous quotes and exact analyses, so I was going to give it 4 stars, but after seeing that the reviewing of this book has become a duel of irreconcilable sides between 5-starrers and 1-starrers, I guess I'll have to take sides too.

David Barton has assembled a very impressive amount of original source material here. He makes a very compelling case that the Founding Fathers were largely orthodox Christians (not deists, as revisionist historians are so fond of claiming) and that the current Supreme Court dogma on the role of religion in government is a far cry from what the Founding Fathers actually intended.

With regards to the negative reviews, I rather suspect that their issue was more that they didn't like Barton's conclusions than that his original source material is bad. They know they can't back up their nonsense about the Founding Fathers being deists and atheists. David Barton has really shown that the emperor has no clothes.

In an age of falsehoods, I'm glad that someone has the courage to stand up to the revisionists and tell the truth about the Founding Fathers. Barton has done some very good work here, and quotes primary source material extensively. Although not everyone will agree with every word (those who went to public school may find it particularly troubling, since the public schools generally teach history in a highly inaccurate way), this book is thought-provoking, well-researched, and well-written. I recommend it without reservation.

This is an excellent work, just for the biographical information it contains. There may be some minor errors and heterodox opinions in the book, but it's claim that the Christian Framers framed a Nation of Christian States has sufficient evidence.

Other reviewers attack Barton's work on secondary issues, with a fine tooth comb I might add, that some would think absurd, but the evidence is clear, religion was left to the states, with the states choosing Christianity as their religion. How far have we fallen:

In matters of religion, I have considered that its free exercise is placed by the Constitution independent of the powers of the general [federal] government.
Thomas Jefferson
Second Inaugural Address, 1805

Based on this quote, let's see what religion the people of the states established.

Constitution of the State of North Carolina (1776), (until 1876) stated: There shall be no establishment of any one religious church or denomination in this State in preference to any other. Article XXXII That no person who shall deny the being of God, or the truth of the Protestant religion, or the divine authority of the Old or New Testaments, or who shall hold religious principles incompatible with the freedom and safety of the State, shall be capable of holding any office or place of trust or profit in the civil department within this State.

Constitution of the State of Maryland (August 14, 1776), (until 1851) stated: Article XXXV That no other test or qualification ought to be required, on admission to any office of trust or profit, than such oath of support and fidelity to this State and such oath of office, as shall be directed by this Convention, or the Legislature of this State, and a declaration of a belief in the Christian religion." That, as it is the duty of every man to worship God is such a manner as he thinks most acceptable to him; all persons professing the Christian religion, are equally entitled to protection in their religious liberty; wherefore no person ought by any law to be molested... on account of his religious practice; unless, under the color [pretense] of religion, any man shall disturb the good order, peace or safety of the State, or shall infringe the laws of morality... yet the Legislature may, in their discretion, lay a general and equal tax, for the support of the Christian religion. [pp.420-421]

Constitution of the State of New Hampshire (1784,1792),(in force until 1877) required senators and representatives to be of the: Protestant religion. The Constitution stipulated: Article I, Section VI. And every denomination of Christians demeaning themselves quietly, and as good citizens of the state, shall be equally under the protection of the laws. And no subordination of any one sect of denomination to another, shall ever be established by law. [p.469]

The Constitution of the State of Delaware (until 1792) stated: Article XXII Every person who shall be chosen a member of either house, or appointed to any office or place of trust... shall... make and subscribe the following declaration, to wit:"I, ___, do profess faith in God the Father, and in Jesus Christ His only Son, and in the Holy Ghost, one God, blessed forevermore; I do acknowledge the holy scriptures of the Old and New Testament to be given by divine inspiration." [p.203]

Besides Georgia, the other states believed the same. That these constitutions are inherently Christian can easily be deduced from its words:

Virginia
Virginia Statute for Religious Freedom (1786)
Whereas Almighty God hath created the mind free...the plan of the Holy author of our religion, who being Lord both of body and mind...his Almighty power to do...That no man shall be compelled to frequent or support any religious worship, place, or ministry whatsoever...

This makes sense because Jefferson believed he was a Christian.

Jefferson uses encompasses all religions but the right comes from the Lord. Madison uses the same words "Holy author of our religion" in 1812, showing our religion was a form of Christianity, not every religion. This also proves Madison's recommendation for the First Amendment(National Religion) is referring only to a form of Christianity.

Penn Const. of 1790
Sec. 3. That all men have a natural and indefeasible right to worship Almighty god according to the dictates of their own consciences; that no man can of right be compelled to attend, erect, or support any place of worship, or to maintain any ministry, against his consent;

The key word being "ministry" this word at that time only referring to Christianity, as Webster's 1828 shows:

MIN''ISTRY, n. [L. ministerium.] The office, duties or functions of a subordinate agent of any kind.
1. Agency; service; aid; interposition; instrumentality.
He directs the affairs of this world by the ordinary ministry of second causes.


2. Ecclesiastical function; agency or service of a minister of the gospel or clergyman in the modern church, or of priests, apostles and evangelists in the ancient. Acts 1. Rom.12. 2 Tim.4. Num.4.

3. Time of ministration; duration of the office of a minister, civil or ecclesiastical.

This book has 55 pages of footnotes that reference original documents referred to in this book. The book only has 533 pages which means over ten percent of it is footnotes.

The people who accuse this book of revisionist history have clearly never checked out any of the original documents. And do not supply more than one or two footnotes.
I haven't checked them all out myself but I have checked out many, and I trust the man who refers to the original material more than I trust people who think name calling is a valid argument. This book is for real, the negative reviewers are just blowing bias a smokescreen in your faces.

I am not a voracious reader, but I devoured this book. I found it to be almost hypnotic while at the same time enraging. As a casual observer of politics from right of center, I have long been aware of the abuses of the judiciary toward our religious freedoms, but I had no idea how far we had fallen. David Barton has not only opened my eyes to the true "Original Intent" of the founders of this great nation, he has equipped me with the truth so that I can beat down the lies that continually and relentlessly emerge from the left. (Just read a few of the 1-star reviews of this book for some examples.) This book should be the required textbook of every history class in the nation. Read it and judge for yourself.

It appears that Barton has decided that lying is OK as long as it is for Jesus. No matter how often he is confronted with his errors and blatant fabrications, he continues to print them in new books as if they have never been proven wrong.

I invite any of you to check his sources. You see, he has figured out that his target audience are intellectually lazy. He puts an extensive bibliography knowing full well not a one of you will bother to check it. Those of us that do check it find his quotes distorted beyond recognition, his sources misrepresented, and many of the citations completely nonexistent in the sources he references!

So, all I can say is see for yourself. Dig out some of his past books, go to the library and find those cited references, and read them for yourself. You are in for a great surprise! The man you laud as brave and honest, is actually a charlatan that you are making rich.
judging from his income at Wallbuilders, the gullible can make you exceedingly wealthy. I wish I were dishonest enough to take advantage of you as well.

I'm checking out the reviews to see if I want to buy this book as a gift and I HAVE to make an observation. Do you folks realize that 22 of the 33 one-star reviews came between August 17, 2007 and August 27, 2007, with 19 hitting on August 20th? What in the world happened here? Did somebody call all their friends and tell them to write in on the same day? Did any of you actually read this book? It really makes me wonder about these reviews. (Altho I've got to say that the one-star reviewers all sound more than a bit nuts....sorry....). I have to give it a rating to get this in, so I'm giving it a FIVE, just to offset all the ridiculous ONES.

It's comical to hear the review comments from those who have based their education on apostasy, half truths and discarded facts. Those opposed to our true history have been lied to their whole lives that now the truth sounds like a lie. Barton does a splendid job once again to many people's disdain. There is so much evidence to support the Judeo Christian foundation of this nation that only the blind and dumb would choose a different view. Opponents of Barton's book, I would place in the "half wit" category of deceived people who have believed the text books from their secular based education system. In fact if you're 55 years old or younger, and you're commenting on this book, you might want to re-visit your sources as those who have been taught in the US public school system since the mid sixties are most certainly in the "deceived" category. The truth is always vehemently opposed, and by evidence of the numerous "one star ratings" on this book, the ungodly certainly are strongly opposed to this one. To say that this book disgraces the non Christian soldiers who died for the US is also comical. If we fought for India, we would be fighting for a Hindu nation, for China a Buddhist nation and so on and those nations are proud of their heritage. We however are not, why? Because Christendom is the only religion that confronts the sin nature of man and because of this, people will always be "ticked off" with Christians and their seemingly pious worldview, the trouble is, what you're getting ticked off at is the very sin nature that Christ is trying to confront in you. Christians are an irritation to men who have not come to repentance, that's why there is so much hate directed towards Christianity, because it makes you aware of your evil nature that desperately needs redemption. No other religion confronts this issue head on, in fact there is no other religion, everything else is lies, half lies and dammed lies. Hindus, Islam, etc are all deceived and are headed for eternal damnation, sorry it's that real (John 14:6). If people from ungodly nations chose to immigrate and fight for the US, a Christian nation, good for them, God bless them. The only reason that non believers thrive in the US is because they are commingled with a remnant of the blessed righteous that the Lord Jesus has covenant with and they are fortunate enough to reside with the blessed and partake in a nation where God honors his covenant to protect and prosper, it's certainly not because of their own strength or intelligence.

A great read, check out the prayer statistics if you have a moment, when prayer was banned in public schools since the early sixties, levels of promiscuity, truancy, violence etc have escalated in our children, more reasons why the US morality compass has sunken into the toilet and then some, another "no brainer "for the not so half witted, but then again deception by it's definition is in cohorts with denial.

If the Anti-God crowd could find a God who would let them do whatever they wanted to do, they might be persuaded that there is a God. But any God who holds them accountable? Nope. Does not exist. Listen to the anger in the reviews as they seeth in indignation against the very idea that our forefathers were believers in God. Can't change that part of history, can they? So they do their best to criticize those who SAY that our forefathers were believers! Pretty clever, eh? But alas, it still does not change history. Oh well. Great book. Might get some atheists and skeptics rolling on the way to common sense. Stranger things have happened.

What a fantastic read. This is one book that you will find hard to put down. It not only presents a compelling argument for the original thoughts and intent behind our civil government, but it is written with a style and class that makes it very enjoyable; that is, if your blood pressure doesn't go up when you realize the enormity of the fraud that has been perpetrated by true `revisionists' and 'God-haters' over the last half century.

The number and voracity of negative reviews should make it clear to anyone looking into purchasing this book that some people are quite scared that others will actually READ IT! O my, some people may actually become exposed to the truth of this nation's beginning and its growth into the most powerful nation in the world. I guess for those attempting to rewrite history and remove the Almighty from the public square, where His presence alone convicts the most arrogant soul, this book must be prevented from getting into the hands of those who may someday wake up and revolt against the tyranny of the godless and reset this nation on the course it originally intended.

Sadly, as you can see, those who are vehemently against Christianity and "religion in America" are more aggressive in their attacks than those who would try to defend it. I must therefore applaud David Barton for putting together such a well constructed and thoughtful treatise on the subject.

Kudos as well to Mark Baxter for shining some light on those who prefer darkness and would try to prevent the light from being shown. .

This book brings to light what many wish to suppress. The name calling and ridicule of other reviews only shows that this book has truth. When people feel they have to slander instead of argue or let people discover the truth for themselves, you know a book must have something to offer. It doesn't take much time to see the faith of the founders. If those who dislike this book would read the second Federalist, any of John Wither-spoon's writings, George Washington's farewell address and on and on. When people disregard what is argued in this book, they show that they are not students of the Founders writings. Every Prof of American history I have had acknowledges their faith.

I have researched this subject quite extensively as a PHD of History. David Barton is right on track here. As I look at the other insulting reviews of this book, I can only shake my head at modern polictics attacking the truth of history. Yes, Mr. Barton is a christian. And, yes, people attack him for telling history as it actually was simply to further their modern political views. Stop fighting over today's politics and open your mind to the actual past...an actual past that Mr. Barton tells with candor and honestly from PRIMARY sources. Recommended for historians and people looking for the truth...not for modern political hacks.

It's great political fiction but, like most, it is designed only to energize the true believer. Nothing new here but craftily written. Scholarship is suspect and cherry-picking quotes won't help his cause. Little short on primary sources and clumsy interpretation of the ones listed. For the particulars of the scholarship deficits see Chris Rodda's review below. Barton's scholarship has been questioned before, most acutely in his book "The Myth of Separation." His premise that "religion is the basis and foundation of government" relies on a distorted interpretation of a passage from James Madison's "Memorial and Remonstrance." What Madison really said was that individual freedoms, like the free exercise of religion, are the basis and foundation of government- not religion itself. These distortions serve no one well, least of all those trying to discover the philosophical underpinnings of the American Revolution which was, of course, decidely secular. All in all, fine for the person looking to validate his/her own religiosity but more smoke than light for those genuinely interested in the truth.

It's great political fiction but, like most, it is designed to energize the true believer. Nothing new here but craftily written. Scholarship is suspect and cherry-picking quotes won't help his cause. Little short on primary sources and clumsy interpretation of the ones listed. For the particulars of the scholarship deficits see Chris Rodda's review below. All in all, fine for the person looking to reinforce his views but more smoke than light for those genuinely interested in the truth.

We shouldn't be surprised, that a luminary of the Christian Right engages in such blatant hypocrisy. He has to revise history in order to support his claims of historical revisionism.

How many times have we seen this kind of hypocrisy from the Christian Right? How many times have we seen their leaders preach one thing and then practice the exact opposite?

The Christian Right is a movement that rejects mainstream science (evolutionary biology, geology, cosmology and environmental science). If they feel comfortable denying the most fundamental laws of physics and biology, they won't have any problem denying the most fundamental principles of Constitutional History and Law.

The foundation for ALL law in the US is the Constitution. That is the contract between the US Government and We The People.

"We the People of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defence, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America."

The ONLY word with ANY POSSIBLE religious connotation in the ORIGINAL US Constitution is the word "ordain". And that refers to the power of The People to ORDAIN the Government they have formed. There is not one, single mention of the word "God", nor is the there any reference to it in the ENTIRE Constitution.

The Founding Fathers were well educated and worldly men. They were quite aware of the fact that their's was not the only religion practiced in the world or even in the United States, If they had intended the US to be a Christian Nation, they would have mentioned it at least once in the founding documents of the nation.

The closest they came to ANY invocation of a deity is in the Declaration of Independence....and even then, they REFUSED to call it "God". But, even that weak reference is irrelevant, because the Declaration of Independence merely declares that the Colonies are independent of Great Britain. It wasn't intended to create a basis for the laws of the new nation.

Their first attempt to create a basis for law were the Articles of Confederation. These Articles did not make a single, solitary mention of a deity or of a Christ. When the Articles were found to be insufficient, it wasn't because they made no mention of gods or their children. When the Founding Fathers discarded the Articles in favor of the Constitution, they continued to leave gods and their children out of the document.

The only mention of religion in the documents that the Founding Fathers all agreed upon is in the 1st Amendment:

"Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances"

To claim that the US is a Christian Nation is to claim that the Founding Fathers intended the law to respect that establishment of religion. It's pure nonsense.....the exact kind of nonsense that permits one to believe that the Universe is only 6000 years old....or the kind of nonsense that permits one to believe that, if they are martyred while killing Infidels in the name of Allah, they will go to Paradise.

Yes, the only difference between the Islamic and Christian Fundies are the books they read. We should be fearful of nuclear armed Islamic Fundamentalists....but we should be terrified of nuclear armed Christian Fundamentalists. The Islamic Fundies would never be able to get their hands on more than a handful of nuclear weapons, but if the Christian Fundies get their man in the White House, then they'd have control of the ENTIRE US nuclear arsenal. How long would it take for them to convinced themselves, that their "God" had given them that power to "cleanse the world" and bring about their 'prophesied' "End Times", so they could have their "Rapture"?

The greatest threat to Western Civilization isn't Islamic fascism, the greatest threat to Western Civilization is Christian fascism. Christian fascism is at the root of all the outrages that the Bush Administration has perpetrated against the landmarks of Western Civilization. Christian fascism PROUDLY stands opposed to the ideals of secular law embodied by the US Constitution and the ideals of international law that are embodied by the UN and the Geneva Conventions.

Like their Islamic brethren, Christian fascists believe that they are above human laws. They believe that they can lie, cheat, steal and even kill: just as long as it is done in service to their gods. This book proves that they won't hesitate to revise US history to further their CRUSADE to turn the US into a Christian Republic.

Anyone who has read even a little history of Thomas Jefferson would know that he cut the Bible up to make his own Bible. He left out the Old Testment as irrelevant mythology. He left out the New Testament, which he saw as a perversion of Jesus's message. He then combed through the four gospels, eliminating any story that had to do with miracles, resurrection, virgin births, angels, etc. and came to what he described as the "diamonds" in the "dunghill"-the basic teachings of Jesus. Despite that evidence (you can buy a copy of Jefferson's Bible), David Barton is the type of "historian" who will still insist that Jefferson wanted the Bible to be used as a text for public schools. Just a little reason would tell you that claim makes no sense. However, if you don't know your history, Barton will get away with this and much more. If you are a serious history reader who likes their facts presented without an agenda driving their presentation, then please avoid this book. Or, buy a copy and do your own research on every issue he writes about. It doesn't take long to find the errors and you'll learn a lot in the process.

LOOK WHAT THIS TYPE OF GARBAGE HAS GOTTEN THIS COUNTRY OVER THE LAST 6 YEARS.

THESE PEOPLE WILL LEARN THAT EVERYONE IS NOT GOING TO BE FOOLED ANYMORE BY THERE LIES AND DECEIT. THE WHOLE WORLD IS WAKING UP TO THIS CRAP. THE WAR IN IRAG IS ABOUT TRYING TO SPREAD SO CALLED CHRISTIANITY TO THE REST OF THE WORLD AND THERE NOT GOING TO PUT UP WITH IT.

Are they just too lazy to fact check and, instead, just pass along the myths they hear? Or do they knowingly mislead their readers to further an agenda?

This is utter garbage from start to finish and unworthy of anybody's time or money.

The founding fathers are rolling in their graves in response to this right wing kook driven fairy tale.

Why do republicans try to copy Nazi and Soviet revisionist styles while using those labels to bludgeon everyone who does not share their world view?

Barton defends the idea that the government should be able to erect war memorials in the shape of a cross. He simply does not acknowledge the implications this has for soldiers who are Jewish, Muslin, Buddhist or areligious who fought and died for our nation, or the implications for all of us, Christian as well, who want to ensure that the government will always respect the free practice of our religions. It is contrary to the basic principles of our Constitution to spend tax dollars that promote and preference one particular religion over others, no matter what Mr. Barton would like to pretend. That is what the Founders had in mind when they barred the government from establishing religion in the 1st Amendment, and the courts have been solid in developing this principle into a workable body of law that protects the unassaultable rights for all people to practice their religion freely in private, but sets reasonable restrictions on religion in the public sphere so that government does not get into the business of promoting one particular religious ideology whether intentionally or unintentionally.

Barton is an ideologue and polemicist and his ideas are wildly out of step with long-established mainstream legal analysis that is critical to protecting ALL Americans' freedom of worship. And the personal religious practices of the Founders are irrelevant to the freedoms that they sought to guarantee to all succeeding generations. I am quite sure the Founders would strongly disapprove the arguments put forth in this book.

this should go in the library at the creationism museum, right behind the flintsone-like dinosaur garbage disposal. i am tired of being sermonized to by people who won't ever admit that they could be wrong about something, people who judge the world, but have never visited it, people who believe that God is on their side, no matter what horrible acts are committed in his name. true crap. should do well with the 26 percentile...

Mr. Barton's newest book is nothing more than another chapter in his career of falsifying US history to fit his theocratic political agenda. Mr. Barton's works have been soundly discredited in the past, and this latest offering will fare no better.

For those of us who think the facts actually matter, and who do not want to see the US turned into a right wing theocracy, this book isn't worth the paper it's printed on.

It would be hilarious if it weren't so dangerous. The right-wingers have no shame, and are content to attempt to rewrite history in order to further their political agenda. Truly pathetic that something this transparently fictitious and misleading could be taken seriously at any level by anybody who understands history.

I perused this in the library and am astounded at the brazen hypocrisy of an individual such as Barton. I am even more amazed at the gullibility of people who continue to give him an audience. Having engaged in continuous attempts to beat down the lies of a christian republic for the better part of 20 years, I have seen the rewriting of history, the quoting by fans of such wishful claptrap, the fact that so many of the arguments utilize bogus support (quoting Reagan?! the minority opinions of court decisions?! arguments from people who lost their arguments as to what should constitute the Constitution?! not to mention invented quotes and 'facts' found nowhere in the historical record except that of other falsifiers) and I continue to be amazed that people still buy into it.

This author belongs on the fiction shelf along with others such as Strobel and Federer who both use painfully weak logic, discount counterarguments by simply ignoring them, and never deign to provide readers with scholarly explications or references lest the reader actually do the homework.

Want to know what the founders really thought? Want to know which arguments won and which arguments lost? Want to know who and what influenced the Founding Fathers? Want to know the outcome and why there was such fervent outcry over the exclusion of god in the Constitution at the state ratification level? Read elsewhere, such as:

The Godless Constitution: The Case Against Religious Correctness (utilizing extensive original sources from the time)

Liberty of Conscience: Roger Williams in America (for a look at one of the first to propose and implement that radical (for the time) notion of separation of church & state

Thomas Paine : Collected Writings : Common Sense / The Crisis / Rights of Man / The Age of Reason / Pamphlets, Articles, and Letters (Library of America) (his own words)

Rousseau: 'The Social Contract' and Other Later Political Writings (Cambridge Texts in the History of Political Thought) (his own words)

Freethinkers: A History of American Secularism (extensive detail)

Moral Minority: Our Skeptical Founding Fathers (for yet more detail and a focus on specific individuals with great influence over the original process - maybe they have some insight to shed that carries a bit more heft than Mssrs. Reagan and Bush 200+ years after the fact?)

And, for anyone who thinks there is too much alarmism about the damaging influence of the religious right in American politics, have a look at Kingdom Coming: The Rise of Christian Nationalism, and realize that the past 4-5 years, at least, marks the third resurgence in my time of this whack-a-mole movement.

The Christian Right should be ashamed that they are making up lies about American history. Our founders believed in a strong separation of church and state. They purposely designed the constitution to prohibit an official state religion. It's clear why they did this as many of them came from nations where people were persecuted for their religious beliefs.

The book is filled with nothing but invented "facts". Others have listed the many ways that history has been distorted and falsified. The book is nothing more than a propaganda piece for a political agenda that seems to be quite opposed to the idea of true democracy where freedom of thought, speech and action are the basis of government.

This inaccurate 'vision' of the founding documents is a distorted attempt to tie religion and state ever closer.

This book, and I use the term loosly, is lies and more lies. Nothing but REVISIONIST history. We are a secular nation. Barton had better get used to it instead of shoving this crap down our throats.

IF I had to sum up this book in two words it would have to be:

"Outright Lies"

It's amazing how some people choose to make things up and attempt to change history to suit their argument

I put this book down halfway through as I felt a discernible lowering of my IQ just by reading this nonsense.
I am quite positive had I finished this trash I would be full on stupid by now. Save your money, save your brain.

If you think so, then don't bother buying this book. From top to bottom, front to back, this is full of bunk.

The simple, oft ignored truth is that Christians can - and have (!) - written superb books on American history. This just isn't one of them. It's a thinly veiled justification of all that is wrong in right wing American Christianism.

This book is totally revisionist history. It is fabricated to make history fit what Barton wanted it to.

"Because the portrayal of history so affects current policy, some groups have found it advantageous to their political agenda to distort historical facts intentionally. Those particularly adept at this are termed 'revisionists.'"

Who wrote these words? David Barton, in the foreword to Original Intent. And, Barton has certainly proved this statement to be true. No group has found it more advantageous to their political agenda to have "revisionists" as adept as himself on their side than the religious right.

In Chapter 16 of Original Intent, "Revisionism: A Willing Accomplice," Barton, after defining "historical revisionism" as "a process by which historical fact is intentionally ignored, distorted, or misportrayed in order to maneuver public opinion toward a specific political agenda or philosophy," goes on to present and provide examples of nine methods employed by those who he accuses of being the "revisionists."

1. The Use of Patent Untruths
2. The Use of Overly Broad Generalizations
3. The Use of Omission
4. The Use of Insinuations and Innuendos
5. Impugning Morality
6. The Use of "Faction"
7. The Use of "Psychohistory" and "Psychobabble"
8. A Failure to Account for Etymology
9. A Lack of Primary Source References

But, in order to conjure up examples of the use of these methods by others, Barton, as he does throughout his book, uses most of them himself. For his examples of "The Use of Patent Untruths," he uses three of them -- "A Lack of Primary Source References," "The Use of Omission," and...well..."The Use of Patent Untruths."

From "Revisionism: A Willing Accomplice," Chapter 16 of Original Intent:

..........................................

"1. The Use of Patent Untruths

The use of untruths was one of the earliest tools effectively employed by revisionists. For example, Robert Ingersoll, a well known political lecturer of the 1880s and 1890s, falsely declared:

'[O]ur forefathers retired God from politics....The Declaration of Independence announces the sublime truth that all power comes from the people. This was a denial, and the first denial of a nation, of the infamous dogma that God confers the right upon one man to govern others....Our fathers founded the first secular government that was ever founded in this world.'"

..........................................

Barton's Ingersoll "quote" is created by starting with the opening statement of Ingersoll's Centennial Oration, a speech about the Declaration of Independence, delivered in Peoria, Illinois on July 4, 1876:

"One hundred years ago, our fathers retired the gods from politics.."(1)

Then taking this sentence from a lecture on Individuality, presented by Ingersoll in 1873, three years before his Centennial Oration:

"The Declaration of Independence announces the sublime truth, that all power comes from the people. This was a denial, and the first denial of a nation, of the infamous dogma that God confers the right upon one man to govern others. It was the first grand assertion of the dignity of the human race. It declared the governed to be the source of power, and in fact denied the authority of any and all gods. Through the ages of slavery -- through the weary centuries of the lash and chain, God was the acknowledged ruler of the world. To enthrone man, was to dethrone God."(2)

And, finally, going back to the 1876 Centennial Oration for the last sentence:

"Our fathers founded the first secular government that was ever founded in this world. Recollect that. The first secular government; the first government that said every church has exactly the same rights, and no more; every religion has the same rights, and no more. In other words, our fathers were the first men who had the sense, who had the genius, to know that no church should be allowed to have a sword; that it should be allowed only to exert its moral influence."(3)

And what was it that Ingersoll, according to Barton, "falsely declared" in the sections of his writings from which the words are plucked to create the misquote in Original Intent? That the founders of the United States denied the "divine right of kings" by creating a government "by the people and for the people," and a country in which there was religious freedom. Ingersoll's statement that "our fathers retired the gods from politics," (misquoted in Barton's version as "[O]ur forefathers retired God from politics"), referred to the words "all men are created equal" in the Declaration of Independence, which gave the political power to the people rather than the aristocracy, the clergy, or a monarch.

Barton, using the 9th method on his list, "A Lack of Primary Source References," does not provide a primary source for his Ingersoll misquote. Barton's source is "Ingersollia: Gems of Thought," a collection of Ingersoll quotes arranged by topic -- a book that Ingersoll himself said was unauthorized and inaccurate. The following letter to the editor of a newspaper, written by Ingersoll just a few months before his death in 1899, appears on the title page of the "Dresden Edition" of Ingersoll's writings, the twelve volume edition published by Clinton P. Farrell, Ingersoll's brother-in-law, and the only authorized publisher of his writings.

"I see that you advertise in your paper "Ingersoll's 44 Lectures--cloth" also "Ingersollia, or Gems of Thought." I write this to let you know that the 44 Lectures are a fraud. They were made up from newspaper reports, filled with blunders and things I never said. The same is true of "Ingersollia" also of "Great Political Speeches." The publishers are pirates. They wrong me, and deceive and defraud the public. The only correct, complete, and authorized editions of my writings are published by Mr. C.P. Farrell. I hope that you will refuse to deal in these frauds."(4)

1. Political Speeches of Robert G. Ingersoll, (New York: C.P. Farrell, 1914), 63.
2. The Works of Robert G. Ingersoll, vol. 1, (New York: C.P. Farrell, 1900), 200-201.
3. Political Speeches of Robert G. Ingersoll, (New York: C.P. Farrell, 1914), 74.
4. ibid., title page.

(Due to the word count limit for customer reviews, this review is continued in the Amapedia section below.)

This is a most thoutough review of the original intent of the framers of the constitution. I believe a must read for anyone interested in constitutional law on either side of the debate.

To borrow a quote from the author "insinuations and innuendos distort a message and are very effective when applied to historical figures." While Mr. Barton used this phrase to refute the findings of a collection of authors who described the founding fathers as a group of "selfish, geedy men seeking wealth at any cost," I found it interesting that he fell into the same trap in defending them.

It should be noted that history as an event is absolute occurring only once but our understanding of history is a process arrived at through investigation, study and interpretation. All to often our view of history is clouded by our own understanding and or desire to view events in a pure state. The results of such inquiry are subject to contamination by our cultural views, prejudices and mis-conception of things as they may or may not be.

Mr. Barton illustrates this when he states that the founders "vigorously complained against the fact that Great Britain had forcefully imposed upon the Colonies the evil of slavery." As if George Washington and Thomas Jefferson's ownership of slaves should or could be dismissed as the result of British rule and law over the colonies, the author completely ignores the failure of these "as well of any of the other freedom loving founders," to abolish slavery after they had won their independence from Britain. Coupled with the aborant attitudes of both men in regard to blacks in general, Mr. Barton's feeble defense theory rings hollow under the gaze of weighted inquiry.

Indeed it was Washington who five days after taking control of the Patriot army ordered his recuiting officers not enroll "any deserter...stroller, negro or vagabond." The strategist in the commander and chief later led Washington to retract the order permitting the enlistment of freemen regardless of color.

Jefferson on the other hand is a completely different matter. Defending the man is alot tougher when you take an honest look at him via his own words. The general consensus is that Jefferson was a great thinker, a liberal minded man of the people but his own writings indicate his verbal retoric was in contrast to the reality of his views. Jefferson was plain and simply a good old fashion racist. In his Notes on the State of Virginia Jefferson strongly denounced slavery but added "the degraded, inferior Negro could never be incorporated into a white society and head to be removed from this country through colonization."

The point being the constitution is far from a saving grace to humanity in terms of upholding moral standards previously unseen in human government but is instead the fantastic ramblings of a flawed collection of demi-gouges interested in their own self interests. Christianity like the bodies of those poor unfortunate souls who toiled the soil was a tool to be used and disguarded when it was no longer useful in pursuit of profit. Religious freedom was reserved for those who understood their right to worship extended only so far as their ability to avoid embracing doctrines which were "incompatible with the freedom and security of the state."

We must excercise caution and restraint when viewing history and historical figures from the distance of several hundred years. This is especially true when we seek to promote, defend or establish tenants which are then attributed to a higher power.

An absolute must read. Methodically researched and referenced. This book will leave you with no doubt as to what inspired the founding fathers, what made our country execptional and what is working to destroy that exceptionalism.

I've been looking for this type of book for over 30 years, it has all the original documentation and reference that allows the reader to draw their own conclusion. It also list a brief overview of each of the founders lives and truly delivers an objective view of how our constitution was developed and meant to be implemented. References and text are not taken out of context like many of the history textbooks today in our education system. The facts of this book could stand up to any scrutiny since it uses a comprehensive and exhaustive review of all historical documents capturing the intent of our founding fathers, absolutely awsome!

David Barton has twisted history in such a way that it is completely false, making it a fairy tale. Barton has authored numerous books on the relationship between church and state in America and all have been proven false by real church state scholars and constitutional historians. To expose the truth about Barton, he has a Bachelor of Arts in Math Education degree from Oral Roberts University and he received an Honorary Doctorate from Pensacola Christian College. His writings on church and state reflect his theological stance only and hold no historical truth.

Barton shows how the Supreme Court reinterpreted the US Constitution, diluting the Biblical foundations upon which it was based. He includes quotes from the Founding Fathers showing their beliefs on the role of religion in the public square, the limited role of the courts, and the intended limits on federal powers. An excellent and well documented reference!

I have not before read material with such distortion. Barton ignores the obvious viewpoints of Madison and Jefferson and throws his net wide to quote obscurity. Then he proceeds to misquote, by adding "he said" or "they said" and then filling in his own words. His techniques are sorry, but effective, as long as bearing false witness is acceptable.

I completely enjoyed the book, and found it to be accurate. It is very interesting to note that a number of the reviewers were not so much reviewing the book, but expressing their opinions, hence, the disparity in the ratings. While reading the book, it made me understand what Professors in college were actually practicing, revisionism, and disparaging founders reputations. It is too bad that in this life, the founders do not get to defend themselves against the neverending attacks on their character. Prior to reading the book, any engaged political person knows that the Judicial branch is destroying America with their partisan activism. Eventually, changes will happen to our system, or it will be broken. Barton does a good job exposing these justices that are looking to mark their own mark at our expense.
If you enjoy Constitutional law, the political process, whether or not your opinions on Seperation of Church and State support or deny, you will enjoy this book.