Support that. Your statement is a complete lie. Support it with verifiable facts please. David and Wallbuilders has done much to speak truth into the lies of this and previous generations.
My comment was not about what does or does not bother me. The comment was about the broad sweeping accusations about David Barton that are simply taking immature, anonymous shots from afar. Based on what was stated, which I have not verified as true, yes that does bother me. But, I would also say that - based on the information given - it would seem to me that the situation on the "degree" is a far different scenario than the honarary degrees that are given to many pastors and politicians. Mr. Barton has done more actual deep history study and presentation of that study than 99% of academia. I would not find it unreasonable for hm to be given "credit" for that that study and given a degree. Again, not the normal "honorary" degree stituation.
"Mr. Barton has done more actual deep history study and presentation of that study than 99% of academia." While most academic historians would strongly disagree with you, that isn't the main point here. The point is he intended to deceive his audience as indicated by hiding the identity of the school. He didn't say the name of it and he hid it in the video. Many people who get honorary degrees know something about their field, but that isn't an earned degree. It doesn't matter what Barton thinks he knows, he did not go through a degree program to earn a degree like all other PhDs who got their degrees through hard work. The point is Barton lied and you are making excuses for him.
I am not. I'm simply not taking the less arrogant stance, not pretending to know every fact, unlike you and the other guy. Here's the thing, Warren: What does scripture require of you? David Barton is not hard to reach. If you cared more about the body and the fact that he is your brother, you would search him out and quietly/lovingly confront what you believe is sin.... not make destructive accusations against a brother in an attempt to make yourself look spiritual. My guess is that if he did exactly as you've claimed, he would humbly repent. Again, he has been a blessing to the body. I'm sure he's not perfect. But, this public accusation is clearly a violation of scriptural conduct, ie sin (as well).
If Mr. Barton has a fraction of the chops in this field that you claim, he might have found a master's degree challenging but certainly doable and necessary to be taken seriously. Instead the only genuine, earned degree he holds is a Bachelor of Arts degree in religious education from Oral Roberts University in 1976. It is perfectly reasonable to ask about his bona fides, including why he skipped any higher education in the field he claims to be expert in.
As it stands, he makes spurious claims about our history that genuine historians have contradicted over and over with solid proof (do you know how rare it is to have a book recalled for inaccuracies?). Barton constantly interjects Christian beliefs into our founding even in cases where the founding fathers took great pains to avoid just that. I think it is his Christian Nationalist bent that allows so many to ignore his error because they like the version of history he serves up.
At this point it is perfectly legitimate to say that Barton lies. But in a society and a Church that no longer holds truth in high esteem, he seems to get away with it just fine. You come at Warren with Matthew 18 without bothering to ask if he had gone through all that already (he has), yet you defend lies and deception because they tickle your ears. Who again is the father of all lies?
Now if you will excuse me, I have a basement to build.
Yes, one could argue that but I thought I would leave that possibility to readers.
I also think the structure of accountability is different. McLaurin operates within a denominational structure, Barton does not. As far as I know, he runs his own church and is chair of the board of his own nonprofit. No one has ever been able to hold him accountable except when Thomas Nelson dropped his Jefferson book.
There's another factor. Barton's main audience doesn't care about the veracity of his academic credentials. They're simply not interested, even when you explain why it's important. He tells them what they want to hear and does it with the veneer of a credible historian, and that's more than enough to give him the benefit of the doubt.
That's all Barton needs. He's popular, he's good for business, so otherwise more accountable organizations continue to court him, knowing that if anything really serious goes south with him, they can drop him and move on as though nothing has happened.
None of this is surprising given how the American right has continuously demonized academics over the last twenty-five years as part of the evil liberal establishment, and it's gotten significantly worse since the start of the pandemic. When was the last time Ted Cruz or Ron DeSantis talked about their ivy league education? They can't do it, because it would mark them as traitors to the cause (MAGA, tea party, patriot movement, whatever...).
We are bearing the rotten fruit of all this more and more. Conspiracy theories and pseudosciences that were limited to the fringes of the Internet twenty-five years ago have become integral parts of Republican Party platforms around the country.
For example, Agenda 21 -- a entirely non-controversial advisory/discussion document published by the UN in 1992 to encourage sustainable development best practices when building local economies, especially in poorer parts of the world -- became the blueprint for a United Nations military takeover of the United States ("blue helmets in the streets of Oklahoma City") in the delusional minds of the conspiracy theorists to the point where explicitly anti-Agenda 21 language made it into the national Republican Party Platform in 2012.
i really don’t think i would be wrong if i called Barton a crook. deception, lies, and half-truths are all part of his bag of tricks.
i take comfort knowing that in this life or the next he will face his maker and answer for how misdeeds.
thank you for continuing to expose charlatans such as barton and his kind.
Support that. Your statement is a complete lie. Support it with verifiable facts please. David and Wallbuilders has done much to speak truth into the lies of this and previous generations.
Did you read the article? Doesn't bother even a little that he lied straight faced about having an earned degree?
My comment was not about what does or does not bother me. The comment was about the broad sweeping accusations about David Barton that are simply taking immature, anonymous shots from afar. Based on what was stated, which I have not verified as true, yes that does bother me. But, I would also say that - based on the information given - it would seem to me that the situation on the "degree" is a far different scenario than the honarary degrees that are given to many pastors and politicians. Mr. Barton has done more actual deep history study and presentation of that study than 99% of academia. I would not find it unreasonable for hm to be given "credit" for that that study and given a degree. Again, not the normal "honorary" degree stituation.
"Mr. Barton has done more actual deep history study and presentation of that study than 99% of academia." While most academic historians would strongly disagree with you, that isn't the main point here. The point is he intended to deceive his audience as indicated by hiding the identity of the school. He didn't say the name of it and he hid it in the video. Many people who get honorary degrees know something about their field, but that isn't an earned degree. It doesn't matter what Barton thinks he knows, he did not go through a degree program to earn a degree like all other PhDs who got their degrees through hard work. The point is Barton lied and you are making excuses for him.
I am not. I'm simply not taking the less arrogant stance, not pretending to know every fact, unlike you and the other guy. Here's the thing, Warren: What does scripture require of you? David Barton is not hard to reach. If you cared more about the body and the fact that he is your brother, you would search him out and quietly/lovingly confront what you believe is sin.... not make destructive accusations against a brother in an attempt to make yourself look spiritual. My guess is that if he did exactly as you've claimed, he would humbly repent. Again, he has been a blessing to the body. I'm sure he's not perfect. But, this public accusation is clearly a violation of scriptural conduct, ie sin (as well).
Now it is you who is doing the assuming. You assume I haven't tried to engage/contact Barton and/or that those kind of confrontations have not been made. You are completely wrong. I have approached him with no response. He has declined to go on various talk shows with me. I know of others who have talked to him. He has had plenty of opportunities to turn things around. The Discovery Institute's Jay Richards confronted Barton along with James Robison in 2012 before his book on Jefferson was pulled from publication. You can read more about Richards' role here: https://wthrockmorton.com/2015/12/28/no-david-barton-i-did-not-recruit-jay-richards/ and https://wthrockmorton.com/2015/02/11/more-of-the-story-behind-the-demise-of-david-bartons-the-jefferson-lies/
Nevermind. I just realized who I was writing to.
If Mr. Barton has a fraction of the chops in this field that you claim, he might have found a master's degree challenging but certainly doable and necessary to be taken seriously. Instead the only genuine, earned degree he holds is a Bachelor of Arts degree in religious education from Oral Roberts University in 1976. It is perfectly reasonable to ask about his bona fides, including why he skipped any higher education in the field he claims to be expert in.
As it stands, he makes spurious claims about our history that genuine historians have contradicted over and over with solid proof (do you know how rare it is to have a book recalled for inaccuracies?). Barton constantly interjects Christian beliefs into our founding even in cases where the founding fathers took great pains to avoid just that. I think it is his Christian Nationalist bent that allows so many to ignore his error because they like the version of history he serves up.
At this point it is perfectly legitimate to say that Barton lies. But in a society and a Church that no longer holds truth in high esteem, he seems to get away with it just fine. You come at Warren with Matthew 18 without bothering to ask if he had gone through all that already (he has), yet you defend lies and deception because they tickle your ears. Who again is the father of all lies?
Now if you will excuse me, I have a basement to build.
here are but a few articles that support my statement…..a simple search will turn up much more.
https://mediabiasfactcheck.com/wallbuilders/
https://wng.org/articles/the-david-barton-controversy-1617306526
https://www.splcenter.org/fighting-hate/extremist-files/individual/david-barton
https://www.thebereancall.org/content/david-barton-controversy
Autograph copy?
One could argue that there is one possible reason, a visual one so to speak...
Yes, one could argue that but I thought I would leave that possibility to readers.
I also think the structure of accountability is different. McLaurin operates within a denominational structure, Barton does not. As far as I know, he runs his own church and is chair of the board of his own nonprofit. No one has ever been able to hold him accountable except when Thomas Nelson dropped his Jefferson book.
Lack of accountability does seem to be a consistent factor in the SBC. And as to the first point, well, I am a reader...😎
There's another factor. Barton's main audience doesn't care about the veracity of his academic credentials. They're simply not interested, even when you explain why it's important. He tells them what they want to hear and does it with the veneer of a credible historian, and that's more than enough to give him the benefit of the doubt.
That's all Barton needs. He's popular, he's good for business, so otherwise more accountable organizations continue to court him, knowing that if anything really serious goes south with him, they can drop him and move on as though nothing has happened.
None of this is surprising given how the American right has continuously demonized academics over the last twenty-five years as part of the evil liberal establishment, and it's gotten significantly worse since the start of the pandemic. When was the last time Ted Cruz or Ron DeSantis talked about their ivy league education? They can't do it, because it would mark them as traitors to the cause (MAGA, tea party, patriot movement, whatever...).
We are bearing the rotten fruit of all this more and more. Conspiracy theories and pseudosciences that were limited to the fringes of the Internet twenty-five years ago have become integral parts of Republican Party platforms around the country.
For example, Agenda 21 -- a entirely non-controversial advisory/discussion document published by the UN in 1992 to encourage sustainable development best practices when building local economies, especially in poorer parts of the world -- became the blueprint for a United Nations military takeover of the United States ("blue helmets in the streets of Oklahoma City") in the delusional minds of the conspiracy theorists to the point where explicitly anti-Agenda 21 language made it into the national Republican Party Platform in 2012.
All setting the stage for you-know-who in 2016...