[LiteKeeper]

Mr. Barton is not the most reliable of sources.

David Barton is a very careful historian. Just because he is a Christian does not disqualify him.

Can you document your assertions?

[conservative in nyc]

I have no idea whether David Barton is a reliable historian, but he certainly has his critics. For example, the liberal Baptist Joint Committee on Public Affairs has put forth a detailed critique of Barton's "America's Godly Heritage". His source for the assertion that John Randolph of Roanoke was a Muslim also appears to be a biography of Randolph that is less reliable than Henry Adams' biography (although Barton seems to cite letters included in that autobiography instead of the tome itself - without looking at a copy, it would be impossible to know).

[lqclamar]

David Barton is a very careful historian. Just because he is a Christian does not disqualify him.

He was very sloppy in this particular article. There is ZERO evidence that Randolph was ever a muslim.

Everyone here should read Russell Kirk's outstanding biography of Randolph. Kirk was a devoutly Christian conservative historian, and knew what he was talking about. Kirk also had scholarly credentials and degrees by his name, which Barton does not have.