Posted on 06/21/2005 10:35:47 AM PDT by tenn2005
Thomas Jefferson wasn't a deist? What, praytell, do you think he was?
Take time to read this and you will know what I think of Jefferson and all the others.
http://www.nationalmorality.com/index_files/Page793.htm
History revisionist and professor of constitutional law at Faulkner University, John Eidsmoe, of Alabama, recently submitted a letter to the editor of the Montgomery Advertiser [Aug. 30, 1998] and challenged readers to produce an authentic statement from Thomas Jefferson in which he claimed to be a Deist.
While it must be admitted that the words "I am a Deist" are not recorded, the allegation is: "it was mentioned that you was a Deist" (Papers of Thomas Jefferson, 27:39).
Dumas Malone says the charge most often made against Jefferson was atheist: "it was not only made in the public press, it was hurled from pulpits in various places, most of all probably in Connecticut. ... Actually, he was a deist" (Jefferson and His Time, 3:481).
Funk & Wagnalls New Standard Dictionary (1952) includes in the definition of Deist: "One who believes in God but denies supernatural revelation." There is no question Jefferson rejected the Bible as divine revelation and rejected the divinity of Jesus. In the Declaration of Independence Jefferson's appeal was to the God of the Deist, "Nature's God," not specifically to the God of Christianity (see letter dated Sep. 14, 1813, to Jefferson from John Adams equating "Nature's God" with "the revelation from nature").
As President, Jefferson occasionally attended church services; but, he was not a communing member of any Christian church. Further, he refused to proclaim any national days of prayer or thanksgiving.
Jefferson says he was a "Materialist" (letter to Short, Apr. 13, 1820) and a "Unitarian" (letter to Waterhouse, Jan. 8, 1825). Jefferson rejected the Christian doctrine of the "Trinity" (letter to Derieux, Jul. 25, 1788), as well as the doctrine of an eternal Hell (letter to Van der Kemp, May 1, 1817). Further, Jefferson specifically named Joseph Priestly (English Unitarian who moved to America) and Conyers Middleton (English Deist) and said: "I rest on them ... as the basis of my own faith" (letter to Adams, Aug. 22, 1813). Therefore, without using the actual words, Jefferson issued an authentic statement claiming Deism as his faith. The 1971 (ninth edition) Encyclopedia Britannica, 7:183, states the following: "By the end of the 18th century deism had become a dominant religious attitude among upper-class Americans, and the first three presidents of the United States held this conviction, as is amply evidenced in their correspondence." Therefore, it is appropriate to quote the two following paragraphs from the correspondence of President Thomas Jefferson wherein he wrote specifically about deism, as taught by Jesus.
"In consequence of some conversation with Dr. Rush, in the year 1798-99, I had promised some day to write him a letter giving him my view of the Christian system. I have reflected often on it since, & even sketched the outlines in my own mind. I should first take a general view of the moral doctrines of the most remarkable of the antient [ancient] philosophers, of whose ethics we have sufficient information to make an estimate, . . . . I should then take a view of the deism and ethics of the Jews, and show in what a degraded state they were, and the necessity they presented of a reformation. I should proceed to a view of the life, character, & doctrines of Jesus, who sensible of incorrectness of their ideas of the Deity, and of morality, endeavored to bring them to the principles of a pure deism, and juster notions of the attributes of God, to reform their moral doctrines to the standard of reason, justice & philanthropy, and to inculcate the belief of a future state. This view would purposely omit the question of his divinity, & even his inspiration. To do him justice, it would be necessary to remark . . . that his system of morality was the most benevolent & sublime probably that has been ever taught, and consequently more perfect than those of any of the antient philosophers." (Ltr. to Joseph Priestly, Apr. 9, 1803.)
"I had believed that [Connecticut was] the last retreat of monkish darkness, bigotry, and abhorrence of those advances of the mind which had carried the other States a century ahead of them. ... I join you, therefore, in sincere congratulations that this den of the priesthood is at length broken up, and that a Protestant Popedom is no longer to disgrace the American history and character. If by religion we are to understand [i.e., to mean] sectarian dogmas, in which no two of them agree, then your exclamation on that hypothesis is just, 'that this would be the best of all possible worlds, if there were no religion in it.' But if the moral precepts, innate in man, and made a part of his physical constitution, as necessary for a social being, if the sublime doctrines of philanthropism and deism taught us by Jesus of Nazareth, in which all agree, constitute true religion, then, without it, this would be, as you again say, 'something not fit to be named even, indeed, a hell.'" (Ltr. to Adams, May 5, 1817,Writings,A.A.Lipscomb,15:108-109.)
Copyright 2001 Gene Garman
So basically you don't really "believe" anything - sad really.
You obviously did not read all of my link
When a person is defeated mentally they resort to personal attacks. This should be benieth you.
Oh, so you saying my belief is sad is OK. But me saying your dense if you think that belief is something is belief in nothing and saying that YOU are sad is a personal attack?
And if your link said something about how Jefferson was or wasn't a Deist why don't you cut and paste it. I read it and saw nothing there.
You need ro read the above post. I was not the one who said that. You still havent read my article as I have the ability to know when someone logs onto my website and stays there long enough to read the article.
I see. It's not really a duck. It just looks, quacks, and waddles like a duck.
It is mendacity of the highest order to claim that the language from the linked website is somehow, in some indecipherable way, not a call for the imposition of a theocracy.
What is curious to me is that patently obvious calls for imposition of a theocracy are invariably followed up by vehement declarations that no such thing is being asked for. Of course it is. Own up to it, or stop calling for it.
Why is it that in your mind a plea for national morality is womehow a plea for a theoracy? Are you saying that morality has no place in a nation with a secular government. If so, you set yourself in oposition to the stated intentions of the founders.
Oh brother. Why the two-step? It's not a simple plea for "national morality." That's easy enough to say if that's what you really mean. And of course, you'll hear no objection to such a plea. Not from me, and likely not from anyone else.
What your linked web site says is: "We believe that the principles set forth in the Holy Scriptures should determine the decisions to be made and the course to be followed by those who would seek to lead this nation."
What Holy Scriptures? Scientology? Wiccan? Muslim? Confucian? And if the implication is that "decisions" made by our leaders are simply to be in accordance with some generic "national morality," why the reference to Holy Scriptures at all?
And to what extent are the "principals" of those Holy Scriptures to be followed by our leaders? Are our leaders just to apply a watered down principal of "be nice and moral?" Sure doesn't look that way. It sounds like and looks like a call for imposition of Biblical law.
As is made clear by the following sentence from your web site: "We believe that obedience to the commandments of God is the best and greatest hope for our continuation as a Divinely blessed and protected people."
Whose God? Just an innocuous and generic "casper the friendly god?" Or the God of Leviticus?
Your article also states: "The battle must be won and the key to victory is the appointment of judges who both respect The God of Heaven and correctly understand the intent of our founders when they penned the Declaration of Independence and the Constitution of the United States of America."
If your intention is to appoint generically moral judges, why the reference to "The God of Heaven?" Or is that, again, just a watered down, lower case, god of the friendly neighborhood ice cream shop? If it is, why the capitalization?
Why so coy about it? And why the silly accusation that those who point out the patent hypocrisy of demanding theocratic government on the one hand, and denying the demand on the other, are somehow in favor of "immorality?"
That should be "you're", not "your".
Jefferson specifically named Joseph Priestly (English Unitarian who moved to America) and Conyers Middleton (English Deist) and said: "I rest on them ... as the basis of my own faith" (letter to Adams, Aug. 22, 1813). Therefore, without using the actual words, Jefferson issued an authentic statement claiming Deism as his faith.
Correcting someone's English is the last refuge of a scoundrel! ;) Just kidding. Thanks!
Sorry - pet peeve. And of course you are free to believe or disbelieve as you choose. But I still say America was founded on Christian ideals. But how far we've fallen. Have a good evening.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.