Originally Posted by Chris F
When doing historiography it is very easy to read the sources that fit your views and ignore the one that do not. Both of them did that. I got to read the works of just about every player in the founding of America and I learned a lot of what I thought was true was not so much.
I'm often skeptical of things I hear from Pinto when I first hear them from him. When he exposes Barton's deceptions, it's hard to see where he'd be doing the same on those specific examples. See the part about Adams & the holy spirit. Reading the rest of Adam's letter, it's hard to see where Pinto would be doing the same, in THIS case. He has sketchy stuff elsewhere (earlier work) but is getting better at his work. I've seen other Pinto work where he misses things for missing a source, but not for cutting a source in half. That's the only reason I gave him a second chance. He has an agenda in this film; it's stated after the opening title.
On your reading: Dude, that's awesome. Anymore, I'm more interested in the less-often-discussed guys. I'm kinda tired of hearing about Jefferson's faith(s). It's almost like the non-Christians got all the notoriety. You gotta think that might just fit with humility.
Ok, break time is almost over. I hopped on here for the training threads. :P