[Diamond]

Nor was that my purpose, only to expose as a naked lie the very idea that someone who REWROTE the Bible was a Biblical literalist in regards to Genesis; i.e. a Creationist.

No one has ever said here that TJ was a Biblical literalist, so where is the lie? You think it is a lie because when you see "creationist" you think, "Biblical literalist". (Have you ever thought about why when you see the word, "creationist", you think, "Biblical literalist"?) The nub of our disagreement here is our respective uses of the term "creationist". You insist on using the term with its much more recently contrived connotations, which is your prerogative, and I prefer the older, primary meaning, according to the etymology of the words. I think that's all there is to it. Wouldn't you agree?

Cordially,

[USConstitutionBuff]

It was said that Thomas Jefferson was a Creationist, and this is a lie.

And I wouldn't agree in the slightest. Several modern definitions, and certainly the one that describes almost all Creationists; is that they believe that the account in Genesis can be taken literally. Your definition, unique to yourself, is so imprecise that it embraces everyone except atheists, including myself. Now I know that I am most certainly not a Creationist, so your definition is obviously in error; along with the asinine contention that the Founding Fathers were Creationists.