Thomas Jefferson's admiration and financial support of Christianity

[DOC]

In response to some discrepency about Martha Jefferson and Jefferson's mental state in France:

According to Wiki's profile on Martha Jefferson, she died after the birth of her sixth child in 1782. It also said the French Delegation considered her musical and educated. So I'm not sure where she was when she died. I also didn't find what Jefferson was doing between 1781 and 1785 (the year he became Minister of France). It's certainly possible that Jefferson lived in France before he was Minister (the french delegation knew his wife.)

The Martha article also said her death caused Jefferson to be severely depressed for several years after. So maybe Kennedy wasn't 100% wrong on these facts.

 

[Cleon]

In response to some discrepency about Martha Jefferson and Jefferson's mental state in France:

According to Wiki's profile on Martha Jefferson, she died after the birth of her sixth child in 1782. It also said the French Delegation considered her musical and educated. So I'm not sure where she was when she died. I also didn't find what Jefferson was doing between 1781 and 1785 (the year he became Minister of France). It's certainly possible that Jefferson lived in France before he was Minister (the french delegation knew his wife.)

Yes, as I said, he moved to France in 1784, and didn't become Minister until 1785. 1784, you will notice, is still after 1782.

The French delegation to which the article refers is the delegation to Virginia, while she was the state's First Lady. (You might note that a country rarely sends delegations to itself. A "French delegation" while Jefferson was serving as Minister doesn't make a whole lot of sense.)

In any event, google harder. Martha died (and was buried) at Monticello. Monticello is in Virginia. Not France.

The Martha article also said her death caused Jefferson to be severely depressed for several years after. So maybe Kennedy wasn't 100% wrong on these facts.

No, he's wrong on the facts, all right. Facts are facts--they're not open to interpretation. Jefferson's wife died before he left for France. His mother, a full decade before. (I notice you're still silent on the "best friend" bit.)

Basically, DOC, here's what I'm trying to say:

STOP RELYING ON KENNEDY FOR HISTORICAL INFORMATION. HE CLEARLY DOES NOT KNOW WHAT HE'S TALKING ABOUT. IF YOU ARE SERIOUSLY INTERESTED IN LEARNING ABOUT JEFFERSON, GO TO A LIBRARY (THEY'RE FREE!) AND READ AN ACTUAL BOOK ON THE SUBJECT.

On the other hand, if you are merely (as I suspect) interested in Jefferson as an ideological tool, carry on. You're doing an excellent job of ignoring irritating facts that get in the way of "Dr." Kennedy's pronouncements.

 

[UnrepentantSinner]

I was watching a DVD of Frank Capras masterful WWII propaganda movie Why We Fight and it was absolutely wonderful, even if there were things that didn't quite sit right in my post 1964 Weltanschauung. One thing I found interesting was when he had a group of schoolchildren saying the Pledge of Alliegence - Under God was not part of the pledge at the time. It was actually strange to hear it said properly.

 

[Dr Adequate]

Why, even Wiki says Jefferson attended church services weekly in the House of Representatives.

I was referring to the war memorial. Dolt.

Do you really not see why your suggestion is silly? And that "silly" is not one of the desiderata for a freakin' war memorial?

 

[Dr Adequate]

Let's see than we have John Adams. I haven't read much about him ...

Tom, had you and I been 40 days with Moses, and beheld the great God, and even if God himself had tried to tell us that three was one ... and one equals three, you and I would never have believed it. We would never fall victims to such lies. - John Adams, letter to Thomas Jefferson

Where do we find a precept in the Bible for Creeds, Confessions, Doctrines and Oaths, and whole carloads of other trumpery that we find religion encumbered with in these days? - John Adams

The divinity of Jesus is made a convenient cover for absurdity. - John Adams

This would be the best of all possible worlds, if there were no religion in it. - John Adams

 

[DOC]

I was referring to the war memorial. Dolt.

Do you really not see why your suggestion is silly? And that "silly" is not one of the desiderata for a freakin' war memorial?

No I don't see why my suggestion was silly. I don't find the cross silly, or the Star of David silly, or the Koran silly, or a Buddist Shrine silly. I'm dead serious. If a military service person's family wants to put a religious symbol or even a non-religious symbol at a War Memorial and their loved one served in that war I'm all for it. Of course their would have to be a size restriction and their would need to be enough room and it couldn't be too obscene. But that could all be worked out by a volunteer commitee. I believe that liberal groups have got us so brainwashed about religion in public places that we have totally given up the right to exercise our spiritual beliefs freely.

 

[DOC]

Yes, as I said, he moved to France in 1784, and didn't become Minister until 1785. 1784, you will notice, is still after 1782.

The French delegation to which the article refers is the delegation to Virginia, while she was the state's First Lady. (You might note that a country rarely sends delegations to itself. A "French delegation" while Jefferson was serving as Minister doesn't make a whole lot of sense.)

In any event, google harder. Martha died (and was buried) at Monticello. Monticello is in Virginia. Not France.



No, he's wrong on the facts, all right. Facts are facts--they're not open to interpretation. Jefferson's wife died before he left for France. His mother, a full decade before. (I notice you're still silent on the "best friend" bit.)

Basically, DOC, here's what I'm trying to say:

STOP RELYING ON KENNEDY FOR HISTORICAL INFORMATION. HE CLEARLY DOES NOT KNOW WHAT HE'S TALKING ABOUT. IF YOU ARE SERIOUSLY INTERESTED IN LEARNING ABOUT JEFFERSON, GO TO A LIBRARY (THEY'RE FREE!) AND READ AN ACTUAL BOOK ON THE SUBJECT.

On the other hand, if you are merely (as I suspect) interested in Jefferson as an ideological tool, carry on. You're doing an excellent job of ignoring irritating facts that get in the way of "Dr." Kennedy's pronouncements.

Unfortunately you've wasted a lot of time on your post. I've read many books. For example, who in these forums knew about the indredible religious content of Abraham Lincoln's second inaugaral address. I believe it would be very few. But I knew because I read it in a book recently. I've also read a book on the Muslim religion recently.

 

[wahrheit]

I've read many books.

 

[DOC]

In case there are some new people visiting this forum. Probably the most important posts I've made are posts #61 and post #145. I would recommend you read those posts first and than any replies and then make your own judgements. If there are discrepencies, than do your own research. Don't take my word or anyone elses.

 

[DOC]

You should be thankful I have or you wouldn't have known about Lincoln's 2nd inaugural adress.

 

[DOC]

Several people in this forum have complained about a lack of sources. Well here's an article about Jefferson and other founders with "31 sources".


The URL was not working so punch in on Google

"The Founders on Public Religious Expression"

 

[Garrette]

For example, who in these forums knew about the indredible religious content of Abraham Lincoln's second inaugaral address. I believe it would be very few. But I knew because I read it in a book recently. I've also read a book on the Muslim religion recently.

I had been lurking in this thread under the assumption that you are not a troll; misguided and misinformed, perhaps, but basically honest.

This post causes me to reconsider.

Are you going to continue casting bread crumbs of unsubstantiated claims upon the waters of JREF, ignoring the hundreds that sink quickly to the bottom while waiting for the one--of hundreds--that remains at least partly afloat so that you can leave to loudly proclaim elsewhere I was right! I showed those atheists!

You do not acknowledge when it is irrefutably shown that Kennedy spouts falsehoods, when it is shown conclusively that Jefferson was not Christian, that Adams was not Christian, that all your basic claims fall apart upon scrutiny.

Yet now you scurry to your next claim, presumptuously, insultingly, and incorrectly assuming that most posters on this thread do not know this thread when I would wager a large amount that most posting here not only know about Lincoln's Second Inauguaral Address but have known of it for far longer than you and understand it--and its implications--far better.

 

[Cleon]

Unfortunately you've wasted a lot of time on your post. I've read many books. For example, who in these forums knew about the indredible religious content of Abraham Lincoln's second inaugaral address. I believe it would be very few. But I knew because I read it in a book recently. I've also read a book on the Muslim religion recently.

Is this a joke?

 

[Ladewig]

If there are discrepencies, than do your own research.

I would accept these words from you much more easily if there were any evidence that you applied them to yourself. Are you prepared to admit that Kennedy was makes a very lousy source for people doing research?

 

[UnrepentantSinner]

Several people in this forum have complained about a lack of sources. Well here's an article about Jefferson and other founders with "31 sources".


The URL was not working so punch in on Google

"The Founders on Public Religious Expression"

Oh Krishna on a cruch. You're not suggesting we look up the Library of Congress a** kiss to the Religous Right that basically was derived from Barton's nonsense do you? I have a link I can provide later today criticizing that exhibit.

We can get into that later when I have more time, but for now I want to ask you a simple question about the Constitution. Madison was Jefferson's protege. While a lot of what would become America was influenced by Hamilton, why didn't Jefferson's supposed vocal and public support for Christianity make it's way into the Constitution via his influence with Madison?

Do you have an answer as to why the Constitution begins with "We The People" instead of with an homage to God or Jesus?

 

[Questioninggeller]

Unfortunately you've wasted a lot of time on your post. I've read many books.

He didn't waste time with his post. He showed:

1) Kennedy to be wrong.
2) You ignored Kennedy's mistakes for ideological, not factual, reasons.

By the way, I think we all have read "many books," but it is rare that one has to tell that on an internet forum as they ignore errors in the works they cite.

 

[Questioninggeller]

You should be thankful I have or you wouldn't have known about Lincoln's 2nd inaugural adress.

Have you ever taken a college level history course?

 

[drkitten]

No I don't see why my suggestion was silly. I don't find the cross silly, or the Star of David silly, or the Koran silly, or a Buddist Shrine silly. I'm dead serious. If a military service person's family wants to put a religious symbol or even a non-religious symbol at a War Memorial and their loved one served in that war I'm all for it. Of course their would have to be a size restriction and their would need to be enough room and it couldn't be too obscene.

Oddly enough, the ACLU agrees with you.

But that's completely irrelevant to the specific case of the Mojave Cross.

First, the cross was not erected by "a military service person's family," but by the Federal Government, and second, the Federal Government specifically disallows anyone else from putting up any other permanent symbols at that particular war memorial.

The problem is not that there is a cross on public land. The problem is that there is an OFFICIAL cross on public land, and that the government will not allow similar official Buddhist shrines or FSM pasta bars.

I believe that liberal groups have got us so brainwashed about religion in public places that we have totally given up the right to exercise our spiritual beliefs freely.

Show me how pastafarians have the right to "excercise freely" regarding the Mojave Cross and you might have a point.

Otherwise, this just becomes another link in a long chain of your factual inaccuracies.

 

[Ducky]

Several people in this forum have complained about a lack of sources. Well here's an article about Jefferson and other founders with "31 sources".


The URL was not working so punch in on Google

"The Founders on Public Religious Expression"

You are not able to copy and paste a web address? Google can return literally millions of results. This isn't going to cut it.

Also, for someone that has gone to college and has an advanced degree your grasp of the written word is atrocious. "Their" is not interchangeable with "there" nor is "your" and "you're." If you wish to be taken seriously, I think you should proofread your posts, cite your sources, and acknowledge when you have been presented with evidence to the contrary of your assertions.

 

[Malachi151]

Speaking of Madison:

http://www.rationalrevolution.net/articles/history_of_the_separation_of_chu.htm

Strongly guarded as is the separation between Religion and Government in the Constitution of the United States, the danger of encroachment by Ecclesiastical Bodies, may be illustrated by precedents already furnished in their short history.
- James Madison; Monopolies, Perpetuities, Corporations, Ecclesiastical Endowments

Who does not see that the same authority which can establish Christianity, in exclusion of all other Religions, may establish with the same ease any particular sect of Christians, in exclusion of all other Sects? that the same authority which can force a citizen to contribute three pence only of his property for the support of any one establishment, may force him to conform to any other establishment in all cases whatsoever?

...

If Religion be not within the cognizance of Civil Government how can its legal establishment be necessary to Civil Government? What influence in fact have ecclesiastical establishments had on Civil Society? In some instances they have been seen to erect a spiritual tyranny on the ruins of the Civil authority; in many instances they have been seen upholding the thrones of political tyranny: in no instance have they been seen the guardians of the liberties of the people. Rulers who wished to subvert the public liberty, may have found an established Clergy convenient auxiliaries. A just Government instituted to secure & perpetuate it needs them not. Such a Government will be best supported by protecting every Citizen in the enjoyment of his Religion with the same equal hand which protects his person and his property; by neither invading the equal rights of any Sect, nor suffering any Sect to invade those of another.
- James Madison; Memorial and Remonstrance Against Religious Assessments, 1785

The settled opinion here is, that religion is essentially distinct from civil Government, and exempt from its cognizance; that a connection between them is injurious to both;
- James Madison; Letter to Edward Everett, March 18, 1823

Nothwithstanding the general progress made within the two last centuries in favour of this branch of liberty, & the full establishment of it, in some parts of our Country, there remains in others a strong bias towards the old error, that without some sort of alliance or coalition between Gov' & Religion neither can be duly supported: Such indeed is the tendency to such a coalition, and such its corrupting influence on both the parties, that the danger cannot be too carefully guarded agst.. And in a Gov' of opinion, like ours, the only effectual guard must be found in the soundness and stability of the general opinion on the subject. Every new & successful example therefore of a perfect separation between ecclesiastical and civil matters, is of importance. And I have no doubt that every new example, will succeed, as every past one has done, in shewing that religion & Gov will both exist in greater purity, the less they are mixed together;
- President James Madison, 1822