iPhone app iPad app Android phone app Android tablet app More

Featuring fresh takes and real-time analysis from HuffPost's signature lineup of contributors
Chris Rodda

Chris Rodda

Posted: March 9, 2009 02:49 PM

David Barton Admits that Forbes is "capitalizing on Obama's use of the Lincoln Bible"

On January 28, Rep. Randy Forbes (R-VA), founder of the Congressional Prayer Caucus, introduced H. Con. Res. 34, a resolution "Calling upon the Capitol Preservation Commission and the Office of the Architect of the Capitol to place the Lincoln-Obama Bible on permanent display upon the Lincoln table at the Capitol Visitor Center for the benefit of all its visitors to fully understand and appreciate America's history and Godly heritage."

Now, I have no objection whatsoever to this Bible being displayed in the Capitol Visitors Center. It is an historical fact that this was the Bible that Abraham Lincoln used at his second inauguration, and an historical fact that Barack Obama chose to use this same Bible at his inauguration, so displaying it on the table used to hold it at Lincoln's inauguration, which is already in the exhibit, and adding a sign saying that Obama also used it, is absolutely appropriate. I don't think anyone could reasonably disagree that our first black president incorporating in his inauguration this connection to the president who freed the slaves is something that should be seen by future generations visiting the Capitol, and putting the Bible on the table used to hold it at Lincoln's inauguration would simply add to the accuracy of the exhibit's recreation of that event.

What I do object to in H. Con. Res. 34 are some of the reasons given by Forbes for displaying the Bible, in both the resolution's title and its "Whereas" clauses, the most objectionable of which is:

"Whereas the Holy Bible is God's Word"

This is nothing but a sneaky way of getting the Congress of the United States to declare that the Christian Bible is the word of God, which, of course, for many Americans, it is not. This "Whereas" should be struck from the resolution entirely.

Some of the resolution's other "Whereas" clauses would be fine if slightly amended. For example, Congress cannot, in speaking for "we" the American people, declare that "we" all would find it necessary to invoke "God's help" to rededicate ourselves to the principles espoused by Lincoln in his Gettysburg Address. So, the following clause should be amended to remove the words "with God's help."

"Whereas with the Obama inauguration on January 20, 2009, we, with God's help, rededicate ourselves anew to the eternal tasks before us necessary to ensure for generations to come that our 'government of the people, by the people, for the people shall not perish from the earth'"

There are also a number of this resolution's clauses that should be amended for the sake of historical accuracy, something that Mr. Forbes has never been one to concern himself with, as became abundantly clear with his introduction in the last Congress of H. Res. 888.

"Whereas each one of the 43 presidents of the United States since George Washington on April 30, 1789, has commenced his term of office by placing his hand upon the Holy Bible and solemnly swearing the Constitutional oath..."

This statement is simply not true. Not all of our presidents have been sworn in on a Bible. Theodore Roosevelt didn't use a Bible when he took the oath in 1901. Franklin Pierce chose the affirmation option rather than swearing an oath. John Quincy Adams took the oath on a law book containing the Constitution. Adams, although personally quite religious, and maybe because he was so religious, didn't think the Bible should be used for the non-religious purpose of taking an oath to uphold the Constitution. So, this "Whereas" should either be amended to say "most" presidents, or, better yet, be struck from the resolution entirely because what other presidents have done at their inaugurations is completely irrelevant to the question of whether or not the Lincoln Bible should be added to the Capitol Visitors Center exhibit. Similarly, the "Whereas" stating that all of our presidents have added "So help me God" to the oath should be struck out. These words have not always been added, and there is significant evidence that even George Washington, the man who is claimed to have started the tradition of adding these words, didn't actually add them.

The parts of this resolution tracing our nation's struggle for civil rights from the Declaration of Independence's "proposition that all men are created equal," to Lincoln's Emancipation Proclamation and the Thirteenth Amendment, to the election of Barack Obama -- and even the "Whereas" clauses about the Lincoln table currently being displayed sans Bible -- are all that is necessary or relevant to the resolution's object of displaying the Lincoln Bible in the Capitol Visitors Center. So why did Randy Forbes add all this stuff about the Bible being the word of God, or how many times Lincoln referenced God in his inaugural address, or anything else? Well, because this resolution has far less to do with the legitimate reason for displaying the Lincoln Bible than it has to do with the ongoing battle over the Capitol Visitors Center.

Accusations of a "secularist" conspiracy to keep God out of the new Capitol Visitors Center were flying from the religious right throughout its construction, and have continued since its opening in December. Newt Gingrich started a petition and posted a video on YouTube. Noted Christian nationalist historical revisionist David Barton sent out an email to his minions quoting an unnamed congressman calling the Visitors Center a "$600 million godless pit." Barton, the go-to guy for Christian nationalist members of Congress who need to concoct an historical basis for something on their agenda, was actually involved in this battle against "political correctness" from the beginning, writing a report distributed by former House Majority Leader Tom DeLay on the "errors both of Omission and of Fact" in the exhibit design approved by the Capitol Preservation Commission in 2005. In Congress, the fight has been led by Randy Forbes and Congressional Prayer Caucus, along with Sen. Jim DeMint (R-SC).

There were actually three Bibles that Forbes and DeMint wanted added to the Capitol Visitors Center exhibit -- the Lincoln Bible, an exhibit about the Geneva Bible used by the Pilgrims, and the 1782 Aitken Bible -- all of which were among the many religious items and changes requested prior to the election of Barack Obama.

In an October 1, 2008 memorandum from Randy Forbes to the House Administration Staff, Forbes described the Aitken Bible of 1782 as the "Bible of the Revolution," and further requested that it be displayed "with an informational placard explaining that it is the first English Bible printed in America and the first Bible ever to be printed as an Act of Congress." Sen. DeMint also complained in a list he came up with that the Aitken Bible was absent from the Visitors Center, claiming that it "was the only Bible ever printed by an act of the United States Congress."

The Aitken Bible was not called the "Bible of the Revolution" at the time it was printed. That was just a name given to it in the 1930s by some entrepreneurs who were trying to sell the individual leaves of a dismembered copy of this extremely rare Bible. But, more importantly, this Bible was not printed by an act of Congress. This is just one of the many lies popularized by David Barton and used by people like Randy Forbes and Jim DeMint. But that's not why I'm bringing it up. The point is that out of the three different Bibles listed among the items that Forbes and DeMint wanted added to the exhibit, they are now focusing on only one -- the Lincoln Bible. Why? Because they have a new reason that might get this one in -- our new, black president used it at his inauguration. It's a symbol of the struggle for civil rights. Funny they never brought up Lincoln's role in this struggle before. Prior to Obama's inauguration, their only reason for adding this Bible was the table used to hold it at Lincoln's inauguration was in the exhibit, but the Bible wasn't. But now Randy Forbes, in a recent statement about the reason this Bible is so important, and why he wants it in the Capitol Visitors Center is suddenly:

"President Barack Obama chose to swear his oath of office on the same Bible that Abraham Lincoln used at his inauguration in 1861. As our 16th President, Abraham Lincoln led us out of the dark period of slavery in the United States so that African Americans could be given the freedom they deserved, and the Lincoln Bible has come to represent a 148-year epoch in civil rights, from the freeing of slaves, to desegregation, and now to the swearing in of the first African American president of the United States."

In an email sent out by his WallBuilders organization urging his minions to contact their representatives in support of H. Con. Res. 34, Forbes's buddy David Barton actually comes right out and admits that Forbes is "capitalizing" on Obama's use of this Bible to advance his pre-Obama agenda of using the new Capitol Visitors Center to promote religion.

"To that end -- and capitalizing on Obama's use of the Lincoln Bible during his own inauguration -- Congressman Randy Forbes of Virginia (head of the Congressional Prayer Caucus) has introduced a resolution urging the display of the Lincoln Bible in the Capitol Visitor Center.

"That resolution -- H.Con.Res. 34 -- is an excellent way to place more of America's Godly heritage on display for all Americans. ..."

So, be honest, Rep. Forbes. You've been trying to get more Bibles -- any Bibles -- as many Bibles as possible -- into this exhibit for years. Obama just gave you a new reason you can exploit to advance an old objective, and you're taking advantage of it.

But, like I said at the beginning of this piece, I have no objection to the Lincoln Bible being added to the Capitol Visitors Center exhibit. I'd just like to see it added for the right reason -- as a symbol of the continuity of the struggle for civil rights from Lincoln to Obama, a symbol that all Americans, whether they believe the Bible is God's word or not, can appreciate -- and not as a government promotion of Christianity.

 
 
 
David Barton Admits that Forbes is "capitalizing on Obama's use of the Lincoln Bible" On January 28, Rep. Randy Forbes (R-VA), founder of the Congressional Prayer Caucus, introduced H. Con. Res. 34, ...
David Barton Admits that Forbes is "capitalizing on Obama's use of the Lincoln Bible" On January 28, Rep. Randy Forbes (R-VA), founder of the Congressional Prayer Caucus, introduced H. Con. Res. 34, ...
 
 
  • Comments
  • 72
  • Pending Comments
  • 0
  • View FAQ
Comments are closed for this entry
View All
Favorites
Recency  | 
Popularity
Page: 1 2  Next ›  Last »  (2 total)
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Cacaoatl
06:49 PM on 03/15/2009
As an American I am appalled by the idea that anyone would ask Congress for such a declaration. "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof..." What part of the first clause of the First Amendment to the US Constitution is unclear?
photo
Dave24
Without God, life is everything.
02:33 AM on 03/13/2009
"Where the preamble declares that coercion is a departure from the plan of the holy author of our religion, an amendment was proposed by inserting 'Jesus Christ,' so that it would read 'A departure from the plan of Jesus Christ, the holy author of our religion;' the insertion was rejected by the great majority, in proof that they meant to comprehend within the mantle of its protection, the Jew and the Gentile, the Christian and Mohammedan, the Hindoo and Infidel of every denomination."

-Thomas Jefferson, Autobiography, in reference to the Virginia Act for Religious Freedom
07:57 PM on 03/15/2009
Very good.
photo
Whinger
I'm Just Me!
07:10 PM on 03/10/2009
So what if Congress declare the Bible as being God's Word, it's only applicable to believers!

The Bible as we know it, has been edited by men, much of it has been kept unpublished because it did not suit the wishes of men, what we're left with is a cherry picked version which contains edits that have not been sanctioned by the original author!
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
ProgressiveVoice
06:00 PM on 03/10/2009
One of the biggest misconceptions held by the Christian Right is the idea that there is only one god. If one reads the Torah, in Hebrew (although it was written in Aramaic, already a "dead" language at the time) one will discover that "He" never claims to be the ONLY god. What "He" said was, "I am the only god YOU (meaning the Hebrews) will obey and revere". Not the same thing as saying he was the only one, at all!

Furthermore, any part of the Bible (or Torah) before Abraham is just back story, an introduction as it were, that no one knows who authored. It isn't until Abraham that there is any suggestion of laws or rules or even worship.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
tbone99
cruisin' duality
04:10 PM on 03/10/2009
I would only swear on one book "The Joy of Cooking""

Why ?

because you can test its truths, you don't have to believe it to eat it.
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
doctorkosan
PhD Chem E, HBS
12:53 PM on 03/10/2009
Bill Maher has it right : the bible - ancient Jewish book of fairy tales.
HUFFPOST COMMUNITY MODERATOR
montecarlo408
10:18 AM on 03/10/2009
I believe the Bible is God's word. I also believe that this has nothing to do with politics, and should be left out of politics. Jesus is a gentleman-he stands at the door and knocks. He doesn't barge his way in, and no one else should, either.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Rogan
11:44 AM on 03/10/2009
Sadly - because there are so many of you - you're wrong. The Bible is NOT God's word. God was never a writer. Nor did God ever dictate aloud and clearly in front of multiple note-taking witnesses. Very few of the fifty-odd authors of the texts gathered together into what is today known as "the Bible" even have legitimate claim on being the kind of visionaries who supposedly COULD transcribe God's words accurately, or were even socially or physically close to such figures - if you even believe that we ever ought to take someone's assertion of hearing God's voice at face value, which is, at best, arguable. Parts of the Bible are admittedly not even religious texts; for instance, any Bible historian, even those who are religious, will tell you the Book of Revelations is nothing but anti-Nero political propaganda cast as allegory.
08:26 AM on 03/10/2009
As reported elsewhere on HuffPo, Americans are gradually discarding the intellectual sludge that is religion.

The Bible, like the Koran, Hindu religious texts and all the rest are intellectual fossils, no more useful to us in the 21st century than a trilobite skeleton is to a cat. They should be the subject of historical archaeology, not taken any more seriously than Bronze Age shamanism.

This idiotic proposal needs to be greeting with the kind of scorn it deserves.

We need an American Voltaire.
09:03 AM on 03/10/2009
In a nation where the highest intellectual activities are American Idol and following the exploits of Brangelina, Paris and Britney, obsessing over the First Lady's biceps, I believe you already have an abundant cadre of American "Voltaires" -- Rush, Sister Sarah, Joe the Almost a Plumber to name just three.
09:16 AM on 03/10/2009
I have a bit more confidence that there are many, many really intelligent and informed people out there. Take a look at who's president. Rush and the others are to Voltaire as Betty Boop is to Athena.
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
mendelcrosses
07:12 AM on 03/10/2009
The way to counter this kind of BS is
to have the Budhists public asking congree to declare Budha's teaching as the only true God's words
TO have the Muslims ask congress to declare the Korans the only true God's word.
To have Hindus and every other religion do the same.
09:05 AM on 03/10/2009
I believe you've hit on a fundamental truth here.
10:34 AM on 03/10/2009
I agree with teh premise of teh article, but be clear:

none of the Founding Fathers were Budhists, Muslims or Hindus. The above argument is a strawman.
04:52 AM on 03/10/2009
It's funny how Republicans can condone violating the Constitution and the establishment clause when it suits their interests, but when it comes to the Second Amendment they froth at the mouth if anyone so much as mentions tighter gun control.
07:12 AM on 03/10/2009
Amen, I mean Exactly! :)
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
FogBelter
Illegitimis non carborundum
02:14 AM on 03/10/2009
"Whereas the Holy Bible is God's Word"

Which god?
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Rogan
11:58 AM on 03/10/2009
The Jealous One Who Must Not Be Named Aloud.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
AbrahamSadegh
02:13 AM on 03/10/2009
Most Republicans will perhaps be willing to undermine what the First Amendment stands for when it does not suit their vision of what this country should be about and they would also willingly do away with the vital tenet of the separation of the church and state in favor of using God for their own purposes at the expense of all others who do not share the same vision of America and its future.
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
zanzig
01:59 AM on 03/10/2009
Why are Forbes and DeMint in government and not in a Church heirarchy? Do they understand the function of government?
01:12 AM on 03/10/2009
Yeah, it's all BS. I'm Native American, so how about we drop the sanctimony? Thomas Jefferson knew the evils of Church blending with State. A bust of Voltaire still sits in Monticello and a axiom of his was "No man will ever be free until the last king is strangled with the entrails of the last priest." Works for me.
06:08 AM on 03/10/2009
Exactly!
10:54 PM on 03/09/2009
I am embarrassed to be from VA for 2 reasons:
1 Eric Cantor is my House Representative and
2 Randy Forbes serves there too.