Christian Heritage | US Capitol Tour with David Barton
Did you know the first Bible printed in the United States was actually printed by the US Congress? For what purpose, you ask. For use in public schools. Check out the video!
httpv://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dlfEdJNn15E
Tags: church, history, politics
This entry was posted on Thursday, September 16th, 2010 at 8:08 am and is filed under National Politics. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site.
3 Responses to “Christian Heritage | US Capitol Tour with David Barton”
Leave a Reply
September 21st, 2010 at 9:32 pm
David Barton’s work is riddled with falsehood and this is an example. His dates are re-arranged to suit his narratives. The Bible in question was printed in 1780, not after a resolution of Congress in 1782. In Jan. 1781 Robert Aitken petitioned the Continental Congress to endorse his already printed Bible as “accurate.” American printing had a reputation at the time for being not as accurate as imported books. The C.Congress endorsed his work as “accurate” but declined his request to publish it under the authority of congress. Barton tells the audience that after Yorktown we could publish freely since we were no longer under British laws. We were no longer obeying British law after the Declaration of Independence. That, among other things, is what it meant to declare independence.
I will stop here but the deceptions in this piece are legion.
September 21st, 2010 at 9:41 pm
The “Yorktown” bit is in other YouTubes of Barton giving
the same Bible of Congress talk. It is interesting to watch him
give the same talk to different audiences.
May 11th, 2011 at 12:05 pm
Kudos to Shireley for arguing over what the speedometer says while driving the car off the cliff…typical.
Does it matter in the scheme of things whether the Bible was printed by Congress in 1780 or 1782? Is the important part the fact that THE BIBLE WAS PRINTED BY CONGRESS OR ENDORSED BY CONGRESS?
I think it is. I think you missed the major thrust of the issue.
If the work “is riddled with falsehood” and “the deceptions are legion”…why stop there? Perhaps continued assertions of disagreement would hinge on such gripping insights as; “Barton wasn’t speaking with the correct accent”…or “he drives a Hyundai instead of a Ford!”?
Personally….I think your two little ‘off the mark’ comments are all you have. Nothing substantive, simple whining, I’d bet you’re progreeeeesive.