Yet again John Fea and Warren Throckmorton have posts criticizing Eric Metaxas' new book, but this time connecting him to, you guessed it, David Barton. From Fea's:
- Metaxas’s view of Winthrop’s use of the phrase “city on a hill” IS taken out of context. I encourage you to take David Barton’s advice and read the original source– “A Modell on Christian Charity.” You should also read Hillsdale College professor David Gamble’s In Search of the City on a Hill: The Making and Unmaking of an American Myth. And don’t forget the post by Tracy McKenzie, chair of the history department at evangelical Wheaton College.
- I am sure I have addressed this before, but it needs to be said again. For years Barton has been telling the ordinary evangelicals who follow him that he is right about American history because he owns a lot of documents. He claims that he reads the original documents and suggests that professional historians do not. This is a completely absurd claim. ALL professional historians read and interpret primary sources. This is what we do. Doing history–especially the history of political ideas– has very little to do with whether or not someone one can hold an original document in their hands. For example, if Barton had a copy of the Declaration of Independence would he be in a better position to interpret the ideas in the document than someone who was merely reading the Declaration of Independence online or in a textbook? I have never been to Wallbuilders or seen David Barton’s collection of documents, but I am pretty certain that most of the documents he possesses are easily accessible for historians in online and print collections. Unless one is writing a history about these books, letter, and manuscripts as physical objects or pieces of material culture (which is not how Barton uses the documents–he peddles in ideas), the fact that Barton owns these documents ... does not make his interpretations of history any more right or wrong.
In the modern age, almost any historical document a party physically owns can be viewed in some kind of copy. The same isn't true of antiquity.
While Fea and Throckmorton may be (?) Left leaning, I don't see either of them as hard Left. And another critic, Dr. Gregg Frazer is not a man of the Left in any sense. Likewise a number of other prominent Right leaning Christian intellectuals have criticized Barton.
I am a libertarian and will be voting for Gary Johnson this term. I don't consider myself either a man of the Left or the Right. And this may surprise some folks: I actually like both Glenn Beck and Eric Metaxas. Beck is going to be voting for Gary Johnson just like I am. Beck is not a scholar. He is an entertaining media presence. But when he picks scholars to endorse, he should pick good ones.
Metaxas has more intellectual credibility than Beck. And likewise he should throw his hat in with scholars with more credibility than David Barton. (And arguably, because of his intellectual background, should know better than Beck).