A Quote from Thomas Jefferson.

[BoyntonStu]

The Jefferson Memorial in Washington D.C. is a monument to one of the greatest American heroes and the 3rd President of the United States. Jefferson's words, deeds, and ideas were inspirational and he was considered one of the great, if not the greatest founding fathers.

This is what Jefferson wrote to John Adams about the great words of the man Jesus. Imagine if President Bush wrote the same to President Reagan.

" The whole history of these books [the Gospels] is so defective and doubtful that it seems vain to attempt minute enquiry into it: and such tricks have been played with their text, and with the texts of other books relating to them, that we have a right, from that cause, to entertain much doubt what parts of them are genuine. In the New Testament there is internal evidence that parts of it have proceeded from an extraordinary man; and that other parts are of the fabric of very inferior minds. It is as easy to separate those parts, as to pick out diamonds from dunghills.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------



-Thomas Jefferson, letter to John Adams, January 24, 1814


stU

StU quoted Thomas Jefferson:

"The whole history of these books [the Gospels] is so defective and doubtful that it seems vain to attempt minute enquiry into it: and such tricks have been played with their text, and with the texts of other books relating to them, that we have a right, from that cause, to entertain much doubt what parts of them are genuine. In the New Testament there is internal evidence that parts of it have proceeded from an extraordinary man; and that other parts are of the fabric of very inferior minds. It is as easy to separate those parts, as to pick out diamonds from dunghills.

Don't sugar coat it, Tom!!! LOL

I must say that Jefferson well-summarized the basic reasons behind my own reluctance to believe that the Bible was divinely inspired. It's interesting that he mentioned nothing about the bizarre contents of the OT - (i.e. Genesis, or Leviticus) though. How could he swallow that creation of the world mythology or the pagan blood sacrifice practices or the silly talking snake story or the nonsensical stopping the sun in the middle of the sky story? He only blasted the NT. Odd...

*

[idknow]

Originally Posted by BoyntonStu

The Jefferson Memorial in Washington D.C. is a monument to one of the greatest American heroes and the 3rd President of the United States. Jefferson's words, deeds, and ideas were inspirational and he was considered one of the great, if not the greatest founding fathers.

This is what Jefferson wrote to John Adams about the great words of the man Jesus. Imagine if President Bush wrote the same to President Reagan.

" The whole history of these books [the Gospels] is so defective and doubtful that it seems vain to attempt minute enquiry into it: and such tricks have been played with their text, and with the texts of other books relating to them, that we have a right, from that cause, to entertain much doubt what parts of them are genuine. In the New Testament there is internal evidence that parts of it have proceeded from an extraordinary man; and that other parts are of the fabric of very inferior minds. It is as easy to separate those parts, as to pick out diamonds from dunghills.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------



-Thomas Jefferson, letter to John Adams, January 24, 1814


stU

--

"the words of the Lord are pure words as silver tried in a furnace of earth dipped seven times" -- psalms.

"without the anointing of God no man can understand God's word." -- me.

idknow wrote:

"the words of the Lord are pure words as silver tried in a furnace of earth dipped seven times" -- psalms.

"without the anointing of God no man can understand God's word." -- me.

Please do us all a favor and translate that psalm with the help of the Holy Spirit, OK?

What is a "furnace of earth"? And how is silver "tried"? What is the significance of "dipping seven times"? Is it the "furnace of earth" that is dipped seven times?

*

[1tim610]

Originally Posted by Heidi Guedel

idknow wrote:


Please do us all a favor and translate that psalm with the help of the Holy Spirit, OK?

What is a "furnace of earth"? And how is silver "tried"? What is the significance of "dipping seven times"? Is it the "furnace of earth" that is dipped seven times?

*

The psalm in question is likening the Word of God to a pure, precious metal. "Trying" silver is the same as "refining" silver. The furnace of earth is where the silver would be fired and melted. Having the silver isolated from open air allows for a purer product. Then the dross (impuritites) is skimmed off (dipped) and a more pure product is had. Seven is a spiritually significant number - it represents completion.

The Bible is pure, complete and of great value. That's what the psalm is saying.

The psalm in question is likening the Word of God to a pure, precious metal. "Trying" silver is the same as "refining" silver. The furnace of earth is where the silver would be fired and melted. Having the silver isolated from open air allows for a purer product. Then the dross (impuritites) is skimmed off (dipped) and a more pure product is had. Seven is a spiritually significant number - it represents completion.

The Bible is pure, complete and of great value. That's what the psalm is saying.

Thank you for interpreting this metaphore for us. Very interesting, and rather poetic. The man who wrote it was talented and the other man who translated it apparently managed to maintain its inherent poetry and symbolism.

However, if this metaphore were as accurate as it is picturesque, the Bible would actually BE pure, complete and of great value. Instead, it is often contradictory, it frequently recommends cruel and inhumane treatment of both human beings and animals, it describes a mode of creation which has already been proven irrational, and its value seems to be limited to serving as an object of superstition by declaring itself the "word of god".

*

Contradictions?? in the bible?? Where?

http://www.prophetofdoom.net/101form...adictions.html

Thomas Jefferson was indeed a believer in a Creator, and in fact God. You have to look no further that his letter to the Danbury Baptist Ministers of Jan 1st, 1802. Found with the the enacting letter at...

http://www.wallbuilders.com/resource...?ResourceID=16

Keep in mind that at that time- the definition of "faith" was applied to Jewish, Christian, Muslim, Buddhist, ect

Religion was applied to the sub- catagories of each. Luthern, Catholic,Baptist, Angleic, ect

This letter is also the origin of the often mis-used quote of "Separation of Church and State". It is clear by his letter the "wall" was intended to protect the Church from the State. Not the twisted misuse so common today.

While he may have had doubts about the text of the gospel(s) that sure didn't seem to stop him from signing a document with the words, "Year of our Lord 1787" Hmmm- now you would think if he was a staunch deist,he would have issue with that. I mean really- who would sign such an important document with that flagrant use of the Christian Faith right there on the U.S. Constitution. Especially when it was his hard work that framed the document in the first place.

I'll bet he didn't stand outside for the opening prayers,( some of which lasted 3 HOURS), that preceded each gathering of the debates that produced the U.S. Constitution.

Not to mention him continuing to let the US Capitol building be used for church during his presidency- for Christian services no less. Doesn't seem like that current "Definition" of separation of church and state was the one TJ had in mind.

Better yet- his authorization of missionaries to be sent to the territories to preach Christianity to the Natives- ON GOV"T FUNDS!!!!. Whew- bad use of gov't funds there huh. Wheres that damned separation?

He may have had his doubts about portions of the text-but notice whats not there? Being suspect of certain portions of text is a long way from saying he doesn't believe the message they carry. His actions speak to his true beliefs.

As for the rest of it. Well if you created it- you control it- thems just the facts. SUIJURIS at its conception.

Anyone willing to let the facts determine the conclusion already knows that the only real scientific option to explain the existance of this world/life/universe is intelligent design. Since the planet bears witness to a worldwide flood, and archeology is finding more and more facts that jive with the bibles account of history only the willfully blind are going to be holding on to that statistically( and scientifically) impossible other explanation. If anyone can get past the first two laws of thermodynamics- let me know. Much less the atmosheric concentration of Carbon 14, rotation speed of the earth, the decay rate of the moons orbit, ect,ect,ect.. Microbiology is just crushing the evolution theory right into the ground. There is no way an rational person could see the inner workings of a cell and think evolution could have done that. Might as well be walking down the beach and see a Rolex in the sand and figure it evolved too. It just doesn't wash when you come face to face with the facts.

Besides, if Darwin was right- so was Hilter, Stalin and Mussolini.

I used to be an Atheist- thanks in no small part to growing up in the Catholic religion. I HATED that, and couldn't believe that a GOD would act like that. Once I separated the actions of the people from the Christian faith, and took the bible on it's own merits, That atheistic belief didn't hold any water upon close examination. Unless I was willing to throw out what 15 years of working Research and Development had taught me.

It was also a great help to understand that while the Bible is a historical record of events, not everything that went on in the bible was Gods doing. the last thing he wanted to see was his creation(s) go the way it did. However, if he stopped it, we would not be free to choose our path and, effectively, we would be robots.

Some was like blood sacrifies, but there was a reason for them. They also stopped once the ultimate blood sacrifice was given ( Jesus). Thats a whole nuther subject.

Were you Created or were you a side effect of cosmic puke. It is THE most important question a human must answer. For everything you do pivots upon that conclusion. That alone should be reason enough to give the issue a look without a pre-determined outcome in mind.

[Ice]

Originally Posted by BoyntonStu

This is what Jefferson wrote to John Adams about the great words of the man Jesus.
" The whole history of these books [the Gospels] is so defective and doubtful that it seems vain to attempt minute enquiry into it: and such tricks have been played with their text, and with the texts of other books relating to them, that we have a right, from that cause, to entertain much doubt what parts of them are genuine. In the New Testament there is internal evidence that parts of it have proceeded from an extraordinary man; and that other parts are of the fabric of very inferior minds. It is as easy to separate those parts, as to pick out diamonds from dunghills.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------

stU

Read it again stU. He was not writing about the great words of the man "Jesus". He was commenting upon how the Bible had been translated, had passages added to and taken from it (in order for the church to promote their ideology) and how MAN had interferred with the original text so much that there is doubt as to what parts are genuine.

The quote you give is not any sort of commentary upon the "great words of the man Jesus." It is, however, a commentary upon the "church" and its trustworthyness.

And for those of you that have such great doubts in regards to religion I would suggest reading "The Origin of Species Revisited". Within this two volume set Mr. Bird (an esquire) provides the FACTS for every concievable subject in relation to "faith". There are chapters on geology, cosmology, biology, ect. He breaks it all down and lays out the FACTS. It is then left to the logical mind to use that information to draw its own conclusion.

And if the public school system has done its job then anyone should be able to weigh the facts and draw a "logical" conclusion.

Ice

[2tim215]

Some other quotes attributable to Jefferson:

http://www.quotationspage.com/quotes/Thomas_Jefferson
Shake off all the fears of servile prejudices, under which weak minds are servilely crouched. Fix reason firmly in her seat, and call on her tribunal for every fact, every opinion. Question with boldness even the existence of a God; because, if there be one, he must more approve of the homage of reason than that of blindfolded fear.
Doesn't say there is no God, alright to question it.

They [the clergy] believe that any portion of power confided to me, will be exerted in opposition to their schemes. I have sworn upon the alter of God, eternal hostility against every form of tyranny over the mind of man. But this is all they have to fear from me: and enough, too, in their opinion.
It seems Jefferson's biggest problem was not with God, but with the clergy. Here we see him "swearing upon the altar of God" which indicates he believed in one.

I tremble for my country when I reflect that God is just; that his justice cannot sleep forever.
Here he warns his country of God's judgment. He also believes that God is a just God. Interesting.

I have recently been examining all the known superstitions of the world, and do not find in our particular superstition (Christianity) one redeeming feature. They are all alike founded on fables and mythology.
Yet he makes all these other statements we will see. Jefferson sounds a bit conflicted to me.

In every country and every age, the priest had been hostile to Liberty.
Here again, we see Jefferson's hostility towards the clergy. I can't really fault him for that. There are many believers who feel the same way (see previous post from ICE and others).

The God who gave us life, gave us liberty at the same time.
I guess he wasn't an evolutionist after all since he states here that it was "God who gave us life". Hmm.

Millions of innocent men, women and children, since the introduction of Christianity, have been burnt, tortured, fined and imprisoned; yet we have not advanced one inch towards uniformity.
Obviously he had an issue with Christianity. This does not mean however, he had an issue with Jesus Christ.

Believing with you that religion is a matter which lies solely between man and his God, that he owes account to none other for his faith or his worship, that the legislative powers of government reach actions only, and not opinions, I contemplate with sovereign reverence that act of the whole American people which declared that their legislature should 'make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof,' thus building a wall of separation between church and State.
He obviously was a proponent of separation of church and state. Keep in mind that Jefferson was only one of the founding fathers. He clearly states that man has the right to determine who he worships.

History, I believe, furnishes no example of a priest-ridden people maintaining a free civil government. This marks the lowest grade of ignorance of which their civil as well as religious leaders will always avail themselves for their own purposes.
Here again an attack on the clergy. His point I believe is that men in position of authority in the church have a tendency to take advantage of their position and I think that many believers would agree. Keep in mind that men in government do the same. Personally, I would rather have a man in office who has strong Biblical values than to have an ungodly man with little or no moral values.

The whole history of these books [the Gospels] is so defective and doubtful that it seems vain to attempt minute enquiry into it: and such tricks have been played with their text, and with the texts of other books relating to them, that we have a right, from that cause, to entertain much doubt what parts of them are genuine. In the New Testament there is internal evidence that parts of it have proceeded from an extraordinary man; and that other parts are of the fabric of very inferior minds. It is as easy to separate those parts, as to pick out diamonds from dunghills.
This a strong statement, however the same can be said (and perhaps even more so) for just about every other ancient document written, both historical or otherwise.

Christianity neither is, nor ever was a part of the common law.
There seems to be many who disagree with this statement. I believe (if I'm not mistaken) that much of common law was taken from God's laws given in the Bible.

In every country and in every age, the priest has been hostile to liberty. He is always in alliance with the despot, abetting his abuses in return for protection to his own.
I imagine he is referring to the Anglican church who essentially ran England which he had escaped from.

Among the sayings and discourses imputed to him [Jesus] by his biographers, I find many passages of fine imagination, correct morality, and of the most lovely benevolence; and others again of so much ignorance, so much absurdity, so much untruth, charlatanism, and imposture, as to pronounce it impossible that such contradictions should have proceeded from the same being.
I'd like to see what he is specifically referring to. This is just a general statement and it is difficult to comment on without knowing specifics. This is the same rhetoric we hear from so many who want to put down Christianity. I would like to seem them point by point.

To talk of immaterial existences is to talk of nothings. To say that the human soul, angels, god, are immaterial, is to say they are nothings, or that there is no god, no angels, no soul. I cannot reason otherwise: but I believe I am supported in my creed of materialism by Locke, Tracy, and Stewart. At what age of the Christian church this heresy of immaterialism, this masked atheism, crept in, I do not know. But heresy it certainly is.
I'm not sure what his point is here. This does not make sense to me.

I can never join Calvin in addressing his god. He was indeed an Atheist, which I can never be; or rather his religion was Daemonism. If ever man worshipped a false god, he did.
Interesting comment. He calls Calvin an "atheist" Being an "atheist" seems to be a bad thing according to Jefferson. I wonder what the "so-called" atheists who like to quote him have to say about that?

And the day will come when the mystical generation of Jesus, by the supreme being as his father in the womb of a virgin will be classed with the fable of the generation of Minerve in the brain of Jupiter. But may we hope that the dawn of reason and freedom of thought in these United States will do away with this artificial scaffolding, and restore to us the primitive and genuine doctrines of this most venerated reformer of human errors.
"Reformer of human errors"? I guess Jesus must have existed (previous post claimed that he didn't). Restore us to "the primitive and genuine doctrines". Must have been pretty good stuff that Jesus taught as far as Jefferson was concerned.

It is between fifty and sixty years since I read it [the Apocalypse], and I then considered it merely the ravings of a maniac, no more worthy nor capable of explanation than the incoherences of our own nightly dreams.
I wonder if he would feel the same if he read it today, with the nuclear situation we currently have. The Winchester rifle hadn't even been invented until about a century later. No nukes back then. With the Weapons of Mass Destruction which exist today, the potential for an apocalypse is certainly a reality.

All eyes are opened, or opening, to the rights of man. The general spread of the light of science has already laid open to every view the palpable truth, that the mass of mankind has not been born with saddles on their backs, nor a favored few booted and spurred, ready to ride them legitimately, by the grace of God.
Even in mentioning science , he notes the grace of God.

Personally, after reading these other quotes, it seems to me that Jefferson was a conflicted individual regarding his faith, apparently disgusted with the religious authorities who called themselves Christians who did many horrible things in the name of God. This did not affect his opinion of Jesus Christ and (more importantly) His teachings. Regarding the Bible, probably because he didn't fully understand it (we tend to discount things we do not understand) and because many men through their own private interpretations twist and contort the meanings to their own personal advantage he could not fully accept it. This is what I think may have troubled him the most. It is interesting, with all that's been said in contradiction to the Bible by Mr. Jefferson, Jefferson took it upon himself to write his "own" version (which so many others have done and continue to do), I suppose modifying it to support his own views. Quite interesting.

Jefferson's Bible - written in original King James, later revised in more modern times by scholars.
http://www.angelfire.com/co/JeffersonBible/
". Thomas Jefferson believed that the ethical system of Jesus was the finest the world has ever seen. In compiling what has come to be called "The Jefferson Bible," he sought to separate those ethical teachings from the religious dogma and other supernatural elements that are intermixed in the account provided by the four Gospels. He presented these teachings, along with the essential events of the life of Jesus, in one continuous narrative."

Be blessed.

2tim215

quoting Jefferson: ...have recently been examining all the known superstitions of the world, and do not find in our particular superstition (Christianity) one redeeming feature. They are all alike founded on fables and mythology.

2ndTim215 wrote:Yet he makes all these other statements we will see. Jefferson sounds a bit conflicted to me.

Thomas Jefferson and many other Founding Fathers were Deists, not Christians.

http://www.deism.org/frames.htm