Thomas Jefferson's admiration and financial support of Christianity

[DOC]

I read most of it and I was wondering whether the original poster was truly talking about the same Thomas Jefferson whom Alexander Hamilton called a "fanatic and an atheist" and who is quoted immediately in Luebke as calling the clergy any or all of the following:

>> Cannibals

>> Mountebanks

>> Charlatans

>> Pious and whining hypocrites

>> Necromancers

>> Mystery-mongers

I value Jefferson's words over Hamilton's:

From Admiral Denton Foundation website:

"Here are some quotes from Thomas Jefferson"

"A more beautiful or precious morsel of ethics I have never seen; it is a document in proof that I am a real Christian; that is to say, a disciple of the doctrines of Jesus."

"Of all the systems of morality, ancient or modern, which have come under my observation, none appears to me so pure as that of Jesus."

"Had the doctrines of Jesus been preached always as pure as they came from his lips, the whole civilized world would now have been Christians."

"I have always said, I always will say, that the studious perusal of the sacred volume will make better citizens, better fathers, and better husbands.

1. The doctrines of Jesus are simple and tend to the happiness of man
2. There is only one God, and He is all perfect.
3. There is a future state of rewards and punishment.
4. To love God with all the heart and thy neighbor as thyself is the sum of all. These are the great points on which to reform the religion of the Jews."

http://dentonfoundation.org/Jefferson_Danbury.html

And Jefferson's dislike of many of the clergy has been mentioned in here, but disliking the clergy certainly didn't effect his admiration of Christianity's teachings. And he did refer to himself as a Christian in a letter to Dr. Benjamin Rush.

Also, Jefferson was the man who penned "we are endowed by our "Creator" with inalienable rights; Life, Liberty, and the pursuit of happiness."

 

[Cleon]

Jesus DOC, it's been explained countless times how those quotations are completely out of context, yet you still bring them up.

Your gall and dishonesty is absolutely mind-boggling.

 

[joobz]

Jesus DOC, it's been explained countless times how those quotations are completely out of context, yet you still bring them up.

Your gall and dishonesty is absolutely mind-boggling.

DOC seems to have stopped attempting to debate most everyone.

 

[Kopji]

Not that I don't admire Jefferson, but it is always a mistake to set ordinary fallible people up as having extraordinary special insight that we ourselves do not.

Among our Indian neighbors also a spirit of peace and friendship generally
prevails, and I am happy to inform you that the continued efforts to
introduce among them the implements and the practice of husbandry and the
household arts have not been without success; that they are becoming more
and more sensible of the superiority of this dependence for clothing and
subsistence over the precarious resources of hunting and fishing, and
already we are able to announce that instead of that constant diminution of
their numbers produced by their wars and their wants, some of them begin to
experience an increase of population...

http://www.gutenberg.org/catalog/world/readfile?fk_files=114602&pageno=2

Thomas Jefferson State of the Union Address 1801

 

[DOC]

Jesus DOC, it's been explained countless times how those quotations are completely out of context, yet you still bring them up.

So your implying "all" the quotes meanings would change? And your saying "those" quotes have been explained to be out of context "countless" times. That says a lot about your honesty.

And if someone one was really interested in the context, they can simply google the quotes and look them up. And if their meanings change in anyway they could come in and explain it, and we just might learn something instead of throwing out generalized over-dramatic insults from which we learn nothing.

Your gall and dishonesty is absolutely mind-boggling.

So, I guess your questioning the honesty of this man, from whose foundation's website I got those quotes:

From the article on Admiral Jeremiah Denton on Wiki:

"The Navy Cross is presented to Jeremiah A. Denton, Rear Admiral, U.S. Navy, for extraordinary heroism while serving as a Prisoner of War in North Vietnam from February 1966 to February 1973. Under constant pressure from North Vietnamese interrogators and guards, Rear Admiral Denton (then Commander) endured years of inhumane treatment including torture, starvation, and constant threat of death in an attempt to procure military information or propaganda material. If a POW could be "broken" they could be forced to write letters or make audio recordings "apologizing for their war crimes". During this prolonged period of physical and mental agony, Denton heroically resisted cruelties and continued to promulgate resistance policy and instructions. Forced to attend a press conference for propaganda with a Japanese correspondent, Denton blinked the word "T-O-R-T-U-R-E" in Morse Code at the television camera which was immediately understood by United States Naval Intelligence. Displaying extraordinary skill, fearless dedication to duty, and resourcefulness, he reflected great credit upon himself, and upheld the highest traditions of the Naval Service and the United States Armed Forces."

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jeremiah_Denton

 

[wollery]

DOC, the quotes you gave, in full context, from this website. The quotes you give are bolded for ease of finding.

... I too have made a wee-little book from the same materials, which I call the Philosophy of Jesus. it is a paradigma of his doctrines, made by cutting the texts out of the book, and arranging them on the pages of a blank book, in a certain order of time or subject. a more beautiful or precious morsel of ethics I have never seen; it is a document in proof that I am a real Christian, that is to say, a disciple of the doctrines of Jesus, very different from the Platonists, who call me infidel and themselves Christians and preachers of the gospel, while they draw all their characteristic dogmas from what its author never said nor saw. they have compounded from the heathen mysteries a system beyond the comprehension of man, of which the great reformer of the vicious ethics of deism of the Jews, were he to return on earth, would not recognize one feature..." --Thomas Jefferson in a letter to Charles Thomson on January 9, 1816 *

He's saying that Christianity (the religion) is a pile of crap, and a completely stupid reinterpretation of stuff that Jesus never actually said. He admires the teachings of Jesus, not any Christian church.

An eloquent preacher of your religious society, Richard Motte, in a discourse of much emotion and pathos, is said to have exclaimed aloud to his congregation, that he did not believe there was a Quaker, Presbyterian, Methodist or Baptist in heaven, having paused to give his hearers time to stare and to wonder. He added, that in heaven, God knew no distinctions, but considered all good men as his children, and as brethren of the same family. I believe, with the Quaker preacher, that he who steadily observes those moral precepts in which all religions concur, will never be questioned at the gates of heaven, as to the dogmas in which they all differ. That on entering there, all these are left behind us, and the Aristides and Gatos, the Penns and Tillotsons, Presbyterians and Baptists, will find themselves united in all principles which are in concert with the reason of the supreme mind. of all systems of morality which antient of modern which have come under my observation, none appear to me so pure as that of Jesus. he who follows this steadily need not, I think, be uneasy, altho' he cannot comprehend the subtleties & mysteries erected on his doctrines by those who, calling themselves his special followers & favorites, would make him come into the world to lay snares for all understandings but theirs. these metaphysical heads, usurping the judgment seat of god, denounce as his enemies all who cannot perceive the Geometrical logic of Euclid in the demonstrations of St. Athanasius that three are one, and one is three; and yet that the one is not three nor the three one..." --Thomas Jefferson in a letter to William Canby on 18 September 1813 * *

Again, Christian dogma is crap, but the moral teachings of Jesus are good. He also adds for good measure that being a good person is all that's required to get into heaven.

Two of your quotes in one here. And just to show how easy quote mining is, I've underlined a bit that quite clearly shows how in favour he was of separation of church and state.

... the doctrines of Jesus are simple, and tend all to the happiness of man.

1. that there is one only God, & he all perfect.
2. that there is a future state of rewards & punishments.
3. that to love God with all thy heart and thy neighbor as thyself, is the sum of religion.

These are the great points on which he endeavored to reform the religion of the Jews. But compare with these the demoralizing dogmas of Calvin.

1. that there are three Gods.
2. that good works, or the love of our neighbor, are nothing.
3. that Faith is every thing, and the more incomprehensible the proposition, the more merit in its faith.
4. that reason in religion is of unlawful use.
5. that God, from the beginning, elected certain individuals to be saved, and certain others to be damned; & that no crimes of the former can damn them; no virtues of the latter save.

Now which of these is the true and charitable Christian? he who believes and acts on the simple doctrines of Jesus? or the impious dogmatists, as Athanasius & Calvin? verily I say these are the false shepherds foretold as to enter not by the door into the sheepfold, but to climb up some other way. they are mere usurpers of the Christian name, teaching a counter-religion made up of the deliria of crazy imaginations, as foreign from Christianity as is that of Mahomet. their blasphemies have driven thinking men into infidelity, who have too hastily rejected the supposed author himself, with the horrors so falsely imputed to him. had the doctrines of Jesus been preached always as pure as they came from his lips, the whole civilized world would now have been Christian. I rejoice that in this blessed country of free inquiry and belief, which has surrendered its creed and conscience to neither kings nor priests, the genuine doctrine of one only God is reviving, and I trust that there is not a young man now living in the United States who will not die an Unitarian.

But much I fear, that when this great truth shall be re-established, its votaries will fall into the fatal error of fabricating formulas of creed and confessions of faith, the engines which so soon destroyed the religion of Jesus, and made of Christendom a mere Aceldama; that they will give up morals for mysteries, and Jesus for Plato. how much wiser are the Quakers, who, agreeing in the fundamental doctrines of the Gospel, schismatize about no mysteries, and, keeping within the pale of common sense, suffer no speculative differences of opinion, any more than of feature, to impair the love of their brethren. be this the wisdom of Unitarians, this the holy mantle which shall cover within its charitable circumference all who believe in one God, and who love their neighbor! I conclude my sermon with sincere assurances of my friendly esteem and respect.

Same again. With bells on. Only the Quakers come out of this one with any dignity still intact.

This one comes under the heading "Questionable 'Quotes'"

I have always said and always will say that the studious perusal of the Sacred Volume will make better citizens, better fathers, better husbands... the Bible makes the best people in the world." --attributed to Thomas Jefferson (Vernon Hampton quotes "I have always said... better husbands" but not "the Bible makes the best people in the world" in his 1932 book Religious Background of the White House *. Hampton's book has a bibliography but does not have footnotes, it's not clear what his source was.)

No source for the quote, which varies depending on where you get it from.

 

[slingblade]

So, I guess your questioning the honesty of this man, from whose foundation's website I got those quotes:

From the article on Admiral Jeremiah Denton on Wiki:

His honesty doesn't enter into it. Your honesty is the only one in question here, and seriously, no one's really questioning it. We've had our answer, over and over and over...


So, you still don't understand that truth is measured in the words and the concepts they represent, not by the mouth that utters them?

You got some quotes off some guy's website, and that fact alone, the identity of the man, is supposed to be convincing, in and of itself? This makes sense to you?

You aren't just missing the point. You're rounding it off and sanding it down. Way to go.

 

[Mojo]

I think the lesson here is that if you're going to go quote-mining, make sure that your sources are not freely available on the internet. See also JamesGully's claims about Charles Darwin and Oliver Wendell Holmes in this thread.

 

[DOC]

To Wollery,

Well, thanks for bringing in those quotes from post #1926. I don't agree with some of your interpretations of Jefferson's words but I'll let his word's speak for themselves.

Also, I believe, from the evidence I've presented in the thread, that Jefferson attended Christian services regularly throughout most of his presidency. So his actions, as well as his words, deserve consideration.

 

[drkitten]

So, I guess your questioning the honesty of this man,

In comparison to you, I have no doubt that he is a veritable font of honesty.

But in general, I see no reason to believe that Navy Cross Holder has any less reason to lie than the general public.

 

[wollery]

I'll let his word's speak for themselves.

DOC, I agree wholeheartedly, so here are a few more quotes from Jefferson for you to mull over.

If magistracy had vouchsafed to interpose thus in other sciences, we should have as bad logic, mathematics & philosophy as we have divinity in countries where the law settles orthodoxy.

Why have Xns. been distinguished above all people who have ever lived, for persecutions?

Ignorance is preferable to error; and he is less remote from the truth who believes nothing, then he who believes what is wrong.

The legitimate powers of government extend to such acts only as are injurious to others.

Had not the Roman government permitted free enquiry, Christianity could never have been introduced. Had not free enquiry been indulged, at the aera of the reformation, the corruptions of Christianity could not have been purged away. If it be restrained now, the present corruptions will be protected, and new ones encouraged.

Reason and experiment have been indulged, and error has fled before them. It is error alone which needs the support of government. Truth can stand by itself.

Millions of innocent men, women, and children, since the introduction of Christianity, have been burnt, tortured, fined, imprisoned

Our sister states of Pennsylvania and New York, however, have long subsisted without any establishment at all. The experiment was new and doubtful when they made it. It has answered beyond conception. They flourish infinitely.

our civil rights have no dependence on our religious opinions any more than our opinions in physics or geometry

no man shall be compelled to frequent or support any religious worship, place, or ministry whatsoever, nor shall be enforced, restrained, molested, or burthened in his body or goods, nor shall otherwise suffer on account of his religious opinions or belief, but that all men shall be free to profess, and by argument to maintain, their opinions in matters of Religion, and that the same shall in no wise diminish, enlarge or affect their civil capacities.

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.

those facts in the bible which contradict the laws of nature, must be examined with more care, and under a variety of faces. here you must recur to the pretensions of the writer to inspiration from god. examine upon what evidence his pretensions are founded, and whether that evidence is so strong as that its falsehood would be more improbable than a change in the laws of nature

in the book of Joshua we are told the sun stood still several hours. were we to read that fact in Livy or Tacitus we should class it with their showers of blood, speaking of statues, beasts, &c.

it is the history of a personage called Jesus. keep in your eye the opposite pretensions 1. of those who say he was begotten by god, born of a virgin, suspended & reversed the laws of nature at will, & ascended bodily into heaven: and 2. of those who say he was a man of illegitimate birth, of a benevolent heart, enthusiastic mind, who set out without pretensions to divinity, ended in believing them, & was punished capitally for sedition by being gibbeted according to the Roman law

do not be frightened from this inquiry by any fear of it's consequences. if it ends in a belief that there is no god, you will find incitements to virtue in the comfort & pleasantness you feel in it's exercise, and the love of others which it will procure you

you must lay aside all prejudice on both sides, & neither believe nor reject anything because any other persons, or description of persons have rejected or believed it

it is always better to have no ideas, than false ones; to believe nothing, than to believe what is wrong.

Would not Society be better without Such religions? Is Atheism less pernicious

... I concur with you strictly in your opinion of the comparative merits of atheism & demonism, and really see nothing but the latter in the being worshipped by many who think themselves Christians...

if I could not go to heaven but with a party I would not go there at all.

... the clergy, by getting themselves established by law, and ingrafted into the machine of government, have been a very formidable engine against the civil and religious rights of man..

Believing with you that religion is a matter which lies solely between Man & his God, that he owes account to none other for his faith or his worship, that the legislative powers of government reach actions only, & not opinions, I contemplate with solemn 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 & State.

The natural course of the human mind is certainly from credulity to skepticism...

reading, reflection & time have convinced me that the interests of society require the observation of those moral precepts only in which all religions agree (for all forbid us to murder, steal, plunder, or bear false witness.) and that we should not intermeddle with the particular dogmas in which all religions differ, and which are totally unconnected with morality. in all of them we see good men, & as many in one as another.

history, I believe, furnishes no example of a priest-ridden people maintaining a free civil government. this marks the lowest grade of ignorance

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

here, then, was a space of 200 years, during which the Common law was in existence, and Christianity no part of it.

Christianity neither is, nor ever was a part of the Common law.

finally, in answer to Fortescue Aland's question Why the ten commandments should not now be a part of the Common law of England? we may say they are not, because they never were made so by legislative authority, the document which has imposed that doubt on him being a manifest forgery.

in every country and in every age the priest has been hostile to liberty.

if we did a good act merely from the love of god, and a belief that it is pleasing to him, whence arises the morality of the Atheist? it is idle to say, as some do, that no such being exists. we have the same evidence of the fact as of most of those we act on, to wit, their own affirmations, and their reasonings in support of them.

a professorship of Theology should have no place in our institution [University of Virginia]

After a couple of hours poring over some of the finest language I have ever read I had to give up. Sadly I only got halfway down the page, but finished with an absolute corker;

This would be the best of all possible Worlds, if there were no Religion in it

If I'm in the mood I may post more tomorrow.

 

[stilicho]

I am sorry I resurrected this thread. I only answered since it was obvious that the OP had never actually read anything by Thomas Jefferson but simply had cropped things from dogmatists who seek to recreate the man in their own image.

Jefferson did not accept miracles, virgin birth, resurrection, the divinity of Christ, or the Trinity. That's an awful lot of the catechism to reject and still be considered a fast Christian.

And he would be entirely unelectable as an American president today.

 

[sol invictus]

Before he died Jefferson designed his gravestone, which says:

HERE WAS BURIED THOMAS JEFFERSON

AUTHOR OF THE DECLARATION OF AMERICAN INDEPENDENCE

OF THE STATUTE OF VIRGINIA FOR RELIGIOUS FREEDOM

AND FATHER OF THE UNIVERSITY OF VIRGINIA

He considered writing the religious freedom statute of Virginia (and probably by extension, the First Amendment to the US constitution) as one of the three most important things he did in his life.

He abhorred organized religion, and while he believed in the ideals Jesus supposedly represented, he was certainly not a Christian by any sensible definition (he explicitly denied the resurrection and divinity of Christ, which are the central doctrines of the religion).

 

[DOC]

He {Jefferson} abhorred organized religion...

Then why did he get on his horse and regularly attend church services in the US Capitol building throughout his presidency as was pointed out in post # 780.

http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showthread.php?postid=2589214#post2589214

 

[Hokulele]

#782, #783.

 

[fuelair]

His honesty doesn't enter into it. Your honesty is the only one in question here, and seriously, no one's really questioning it. We've had our answer, over and over and over...


So, you still don't understand that truth is measured in the words and the concepts they represent, not by the mouth that utters them?

You got some quotes off some guy's website, and that fact alone, the identity of the man, is supposed to be convincing, in and of itself? This makes sense to you?

You aren't just missing the point. You're rounding it off and sanding it down. Way to go.

I find it troubling that DUK keeps misquoting and misapplying the quotes of people whose shoes he isn't fit to lick clean. Fortunately, most of us can still seperate the honorable from the dishonorable in this.

 

[kmortis]

Die Zombi Thread Die!!!!!!!!!!!!

Second verse, same as the first.

Die Zombi Thread Die!!!!!!!!!!!!

 

[DOC]

Second verse, same as the first.

Die Zombi Thread Die!!!!!!!!!!!!

I would have thought that US citizens would have been interested in historical facts not taught in public schools such as the personal diary entry of U.S. Rep. Cutler regarding Jefferson's church attendance as was pointed out in post 780.

http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showthread.php?postid=2589214#post2589214

 

[joobz]

I would have thought that US citizens would have been interested in historical facts not taught in public schools such as the personal diary entry of U.S. Rep. Cutler regarding Jefferson's church attendance as was pointed out in post 780.

http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showthread.php?postid=2589214#post2589214

DOC, you have successfully proven that you are not interested in facts.

*sigh*



This is just getting pathetic and circular DOC.

We refute a claim, you try to back it up with a webpage that's either completely irrelevant, or produced by a totally biased source. We refute that, you bring in a point of argument that was refuted last month in another thread. We point that out, and rerefute it, you post another link to a webpage that doesn't actually say what you claim. We point this out, you post yet another link. This is refuted, you post yet another claim that has already been refuted 3 times in 2 different threads. This claim is rererererefuted. You make an appeal to authority from someone whose field of expertise is so far outside the field they're commenting on that it's in another continent. We point this out, you sound incredulous that someone so accomplished in one field could possibly be dismissed as unknowlegeable in any other field. We refer you, yet again, to the argument from authority, and point out the stupidity of that person in other fields. You post even more links to webpages that have been refuted at least 5 times in 3 threads. We rerererererererererererefute them. And so on ad nauseum.


Come on DOC, who the hell do you think you're fooling? Other than yourself that is.

Nobody, not even a spectator biased towards your opinion, could possibly take anything you have to say seriously at this point. You're making a complete fool of yourself, and everyone else is getting bored.

Your post has a lot of generalized statements with no post numbers to back them up. Please say what exactly was refuted and either how it was refuted or in what post number it was refuted. Anybody can say we did this and we did that.

And how come its OK for atheists to accept that some unusual Energy exploded and formed the matter to make 10 billion trillion stars simply because many scientists they don't know theorized it happened. Isn't that an appeal to authority. The scientists can't explain the laws of physics that made this happen and yet many in here accept it because others say so.

Well you asked.
You gave an appeal to authority which provided no evidence simply some other guys assertion. This man is a christian looking for confirmation of his belief and is unlikely to be truly honest about such matters. Especially considering that his language is such hyperbole.

The posts that refuted this claim for pretty much these reasons are
Thread: Most atheists do not know what science says about our origins post:373
Thread: Most atheists do not know what science says about our origins post:379
Thread: Most atheists do not know what science says about our origins post:380
Thread: Most atheists do not know what science says about our origins post:392
Thread: It is quite certain Peter spent his last years in Rome post:142
Thread: It is quite certain Peter spent his last years in Rome post:143
Thread: It is quite certain Peter spent his last years in Rome post:144
Thread: It is quite certain Peter spent his last years in Rome post:145
Thread: It is quite certain Peter spent his last years in Rome post:148
Thread: It is quite certain Peter spent his last years in Rome post:151
Thread: It is quite certain Peter spent his last years in Rome post:152
Thread: It is quite certain Peter spent his last years in Rome post:154
Thread: It is quite certain Peter spent his last years in Rome post:169
Thread: It is quite certain Peter spent his last years in Rome post:232
Thread: Who was Jesus? Post:21
Thread: Who was Jesus? Post:22
Thread: Who was Jesus? Post:26
Thread: Who was Jesus? Post:27

Not once, in any of these posts have you actually presented ANY OF THE EVIDENCE that Thomas Arnold claims is so convincing. Knowing you, you would have presented it if it existed. The fact that you fail to do so is clear enough admission to me that you do not have such evidence and neither did Thomas Arnold.

Notice that no quote follow my post, because YOU NEVER RESPONDED TO IT. Why have you evaded this?

Now, before you claim that this is unrelated to this thread, realize that I post it as an example of your method.

You make a claim.
That claim is refuted.
You run away.
Later, you make same claim pretending that no refutation was made.
This is the same methods a troll uses. As such, all claims of you being a troll are completely justified. Until, that is, you are ready to engage in real debate. If you believe that the claims made against you are wrong, have the guts to explain why. If you are unable to, perhaps that's a good indication that you are wrong.

Now, you have just posted the Jefferson point, which has been dealt with multiple times over. Please explain why, as Hokulele already pointed out, you seem to ignore the points made against your argument.

Starting with
post #783

A list of secondary sources given to you by Barton? That's your evidence?

Tell you what, you find me where Jefferson, in all of his prolific writing, ever mentions he went to services in the rotunda and prayed as a christian.

Why do you ignore the evidence Jefferson was rather against Christianity as an organized religion, or the evidence we can show with the Jefferson Bible that shows he did not believe in the divinity of Jesus?

Here's an interesting one: I've been to services too. Usually out of respect for a friend or relative either having an event, or a funeral. Does that mean I am also a christian?

DOC, read Darat's post, and think real hard about the totality of your loss in this thread.

Well you did accomplish one thing. We all know exactly how intellectually dishonest you, Kennedy and Barton are.

 

[Tanstaafl]

I would have thought that US citizens would have been interested in historical facts not taught in public schools such as the personal diary entry of U.S. Rep. Cutler regarding Jefferson's church attendance as was pointed out in post 780.

http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showthread.php?postid=2589214#post2589214

Did it never occur to you that they're not taught in schools because they're not true?