If Benjamin Franklin's (who we might charitably call one of the more, ah, libertarian of the Founders) letter to Thomas Paine is any indication, even the more liberal of the Founders didn't care for Paine anti-religious diatribes. Here is Franklin's summation to Paine in a letter, responding to a manuscript Paine (whom Franklin counted as a friend) had sent him challenging the idea of a providential God,
I would advise you, therefore, not to attempt unchaining the tiger, but to burn this piece before it is seen by any other person; whereby you will save yourself a great deal of mortification by the enemies it may raise against you, and perhaps a good deal of regret and repentance. If men are so wicked with religion, what would they be if without it.
The further discussion and footnotes at the page are intriguing, too. Directly from them, we can ascertain that in addition to Franklin's opposition, there was also that of Charles Carroll, Benjamin Rush, John Adams, Samuel Adams, Patrick Henry, William Paterson, and John Jay, just to name some of the more well-known Founders.
You might say that Thomas Paine was sort of an 18th century version of Richard Dawkins - a single-minded ideologue who was an embarrassment to fellow-travellers who might otherwise incline towards him, if it weren't for his ridiculous peculiarities.
snip: You might say that Thomas Paine was sort of an 18th century version of Richard Dawkins - a single-minded ideologue who was an embarrassment to fellow-travellers who might otherwise incline towards him, if it weren’t for his ridiculous peculiarities.
Additionally, there are strong indications that Paine fell into occultism. Note however, that modern history revisers report none of this to their readers, most of whom take this deceptive ‘history’ on faith——trust in the ‘sinlessness’ of man.
Again, we're talking about personal diagreements over religion vs political philosophy.
That they had held varying religious views, and had personal disagreements over them is not in question. What is in question is the assertion that thier religious beliefs were basis of their political philosophy (and implicitly, that the author's religious beliefs convey to them and others of similar belief some authenticity that people who do not share those beliefs cannot claim).