Customer Reviews

Original Intent: The Courts, the Constitution, & Religion

5 star:		(94)
4 star:		(6)
3 star:		(6)
2 star:		(1)
1 star:		(37)

 

 

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....

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.

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.

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.

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! This should be part of the curriculum for every college and high school history course!

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)

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. He also shows that the revisionists tend to cite very little primary source material themselves, and when they do they frequently take quotes out of context.

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.

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.

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. .