I liked this book better than The Light And The Glory. It is true, and must be admitted by those who look at history objrctively, that the Christian religion has had an enormous impact on the course of events in the United States . . . much more so than secular historians would have us believe. My favorite part was the minute account of the Second Great Awakening - particuarly the revival meetings in Kentucky. But these books, in and of themselves, are not going to give an individual a balenced view of U.S. history. It is just too biased. The authors have attempted to put a religous construction on all key events, and on all key men behind those events. Too much gloss. But you won't regret reading it. It's good reading, and I learned a lot from it.

Texts like these are best kept in the religious tract section of the bookstore. The authors did indeed do a good job researching trivial details, which makes the text read like a novel and gives it an air of authority.

As a high school AP American history teacher, I'd like to use this book in my class to show my students an example of the kind of mythologizing that can lead to international misunderstanding and war... but I'm afraid of helping the authors earn their royalties. A cursory examination of the sample pages alone reveals at least 3 historical errors.

The authors unapologetically subscribe to an "American exceptionalist" school of thought. Students should be taught the danger of believing that God is on the side of your coutry, of equating Deuteronomy-era Israel with modern-day America (or any other country). Do we want to teach our children to attack people who don't agree with our beliefs, or do we want them to explore a diversity of opinions and grow up into sympathetic, adults who embrace the values of agape love? (My favorite teachings of the Founding Fathers and Jesus, respectively)

I teach my students to be aware of different approaches to history and to be wary of both historical myth and revisionism - this text might best be described as Christian revisionist history. Most responsible historians learn the flaws of whiggish, Providential models of history early in their careers. These authors, apparently, did not.

For the curious, those 3 errors I noticed are:
-The suggestion that Franklin wavered in his faith, that he had "failed to accept Christ," is unfounded. Franklin was always a profoundly spiritual man, a Freemason, and a self-described deist. As the text's quote later shows (and the Lutheran university he lent his name to), Franklin fully recognized the pragmatic value of the Christian religion.
-To say "[In 1776] the states supported each other totally and without thinking," (p. 17) undermines the fact that there was a great deal of ambivalence about whether to accept the Declaration, and there was a sizable Tory minority (some historians say up to 30% of the colonial population) immediately prior to and during the Revolution.
-If concealing the problem of slavery in metaphors wasn't enough (p. 20), the authors suggest that the Pilgrims of New England had from the start rejected slavery, that the Puritans were somehow critical of the practice. Indeed, much of America's white supremacist past was justified by Puritan ideology. The first colony to legalize slavery (in 1641) was Massachusetts!

This is an example of Christian "scholarship" at close to its worst. In fact, there are so many problems with this book that it is hard to know where to start. The authors presume to know God's will for America -- a pretty big assumption in itself -- and try to use evidence to support it. The problem is, they disregard anything that can't fit into their nice New England Calvinist box. For example, there is little or no discussion of the slavery question and the Constitutional Convention, even from a Christian perspective. In addition, the ramifications of Manifest Destiny to the Native Americans and the future of America are ignored.

Even worse, the authors try to squeeze in their own political views by trying to draw a straight line from the Federalists of Washington's era to the Republicans of today and Jefferson's Democrat-Republicans to the modern Democratic Party. This especially came out when they described the Federalists as "pious." Unfortunately, from a historical standpoint no such straight line exists.

On top of that, the book has way too many factual errors and the writing is uneven at best. They spend only three pages on ratification of the Constitution and five on the pork-eating habits of settlers on the frontier.

Unfortunately, this book has been and will be used in many Christian schools and with many Christian homeschool parents. However, I would say skip it. Read Mark Noll instead.

"The Light and the Glory" is a beautifully written, well-researched book -- which I cannot recommend, especially as a primary homeschooling text, without serious caveats.

The positives: The authors, Peter Marshall and David Manuel have done enormous research. They have demonstrated that what is taught in the typical history book doesn't necessarily tell the entire story. They have acknowledged the role of faith, and religion have played in our nation's early history. They have the gift of making characters "come alive" in a way that would interest a student -- even one who didn't care much for history.

HOWEVER: The authors have a fixed thesis firmly in mind and head toward that thesis without swerving -- and that thesis is one with which even most persons of faith would struggle. The thesis? A staunch Calvinist view of the role of America in the mind of God. As a believer -- who is adamantly NOT a Calvinist -- I cannot accept the particular (and peculiar) methods of exegesis which somehow create America as the new "Promised Land". Neither can most other Christians.

I'm also a bit concerned that the authors attempt (on the one hand) to analyze the state of the soul of Andrew Jackson (no "benefit of the doubt there!") while labeling John Quincy Adams -- a member of the Unitarians -- as "the last Puritan".

I fear that in their struggle to demonstrate their thesis, certain elements are glossed over; certain facts are whitewashed, etc. While it could certainly be argued that Calvinism played a major role in the establishment of the Colonies and in early America, it can also be argued that such did not have the salutory benefits which the authors suggest are there.

My advice to homeschooling parents, especially those who are not Calvinists, is to use this book with care, as a secondary source -- or not at all. The presentation given is far too biased to be reliable.

A very cautious three stars.

Like my review of Marshall and Manuel's earlier book "The Light and the Glory", I admire the clarity of the authors' thesis, and the forthright way with which they attempt to demonstrate that thesis.

Unfortunately, to accept their thesis, one must adhere to a very particular view of philosophy, theology and history -- a view held largely by Calvinist Christians. Thus, other Protestants, as well as Catholics (to say nothing of members of other religions) will find some of the authors' presuppositions very difficult to accept.

The greatest use for this book would be to be used in conjunction with another text written from a different perspective.