The Jefferson Bible

Rating:
Summary: Half Of The Life And Morals Of Thomas Jefferson
Review: Thomas Jefferson didn't necessarily believe in miracles. But he certainly believed in morals, ethics, and character. His detractors on the Sally Hemmings farce, like author Joseph Ellis, have since been proven to be all wet. Like the other book of the same name, I enjoyed "Jefferson Bible" very much. But, it's only half the story, unfortunately. The other half involves Jefferson's values from the secular point of view. The best, perhaps only, book to read for that is (and don't be misled by the title) "West Point", by Norman Thomas Remick. It perfectly compliments "Jefferson Bible". In any event, This book by Forrest Church is well presented and certainly well worth reading. It's a great read on TJ's religious beliefs, and a five-star effort.

Rating:
Summary: Ignorance + Arrogance = "Enlightenment"
Review: Thomas Jefferson was a man of the (self-described) Enlightenment. Not knowing anything about Christianity, he hated it. He disbelieved in all of its central tenets -- that Christ was Christ, not simply a "moral teacher"; that He was born of a virgin; that he rose on the third day according to the Scriptures; that He ascended into the Heavens; and that he will come again in glory, to judge the living and the dead, among others.

Yet, Jefferson called Jesus Christ "the greatest moral teacher." How could he avoid concluding that He was simply a liar or a lunatic, in light of His claims to be the "Son of Man" and "the Way, the Truth, and the Light"? Simply, he argued that His Apostles had "made it all up." The Scriptures, if Jefferson was right, were just one big lie.

Pity Jefferson. Having no familiarity whatsoever with the writings of the Church Fathers (knowledge of the works of St. Ignatius of Antioch, St. John the Theologian's student at the end of the first century and author of several surviving epistles mandating obedience to one's bishop, might have spared Jefferson the writing of his tres embarrassing "Notes on Episcopacy"), he dared to declare the Church a cabal for "priestcraft's" sake.

Silly idea, that hundreds of thousands of people would conspire to become monks in the deserts of Egypt (routinely 120 degrees in the shade), Palestine, etc. Crazy of Saul of Tarsus to give up a position of esteem among his own people for the life of a peripatetic outcast. The only explanation of these phenomena I can arrive at is that these people thought what they were doing was based on Truth.

One can grant Jefferson a little wiggle room, in light of his assumption that Roman Catholicism was the oldest variant of Christianity still extant. Yet, others in his day (including other members of the Virginia elite) knew the history of the Church well enough to be familiar with Greek Orthodoxy. (Why did Jefferson insist on equating papal abuses with "Christianity"?) They, unlike Jefferson, did not have a pathological ("sinful"?) aversion to the idea that anyone knew more than they, that their minds were the limit of wisdom. They didn't live the life of Epicurus on a mountaintop like this red-headed prodigal, supported in luxury by their slaves. They had not all bought into Satan's sin.

Jefferson didn't know, as we have seen in the last 8 years, that there is a surviving manuscript in Greek from the first century of a large portion of the Gospel of Matthew JUST AS WE HAVE IT, in biblical Greek. So much for the grand conspiracy to make "Jesus" into God. I guess He was God. What does that mean to Thomas Jefferson, wherever he is now?

Rating:
Summary: Independent Thinking on a Big Subject
Review: Thomas Jefferson was no Christian. Like many of the most famous of the founding fathers, he was a Deist, and counted himself a Unitarian, but he often said he was the sole member of a sect including no one but himself. He had confidence in his own reason and conscience. He did admire Jesus, saying, "Among the sayings and discourses imputed to him by his biographers, I find many passages of fine imagination, correct morality, and of the most lovely benevolence; and others again of so much ignorance, so much absurdity, so much untruth, charlatanism, and imposture, as to pronounce it impossible that such contradictions should have proceeded from the same being." It was Jefferson's view that he himself could sort the truth from the imposture, for he felt that the real words applicable to Jesus were "as distinguishable as diamonds in a dunghill." He thought about the process of doing so for many years, did a quick job around 1800 and did a thorough one in 1820. His purpose was to make his own version of the gospels, an extraction that would summarize Jesus's life and morals, for "I hold the precepts of Jesus, as delivered by himself, to be the most pure, benevolent, and sublime which have ever been preached to man. I adhere to the principles of the first age; and consider all subsequent innovations as corruptions of his religion, having no foundation in what came from him."

It was not enough for the polyglot Jefferson to make such a distillation from the King James Version; he also bought a couple of Greek, French, and Latin versions to use, two volumes of each, for his plan was to cut and paste the parts that he found useful into one volume, but using all four languages. The resultant volume is called The Jefferson Bible, although his own handwritten title page gives "The Life and Morals of Jesus of Nazareth, Extracted textually from the Gospels in Greek, Latin, French & English." He apparently studied the volume of his own manufacture nightly before going to bed, but he was horrified at the idea that it be published, feeling that his political enemies would use his ideas against him (his lofty Deism had produced against him charges of atheism) and that this product of his own conscience was his own comfort. His descendants did not know that the volume existed until after his death.

The English extracts of the book were printed by the Government Printing Office in 1904 in a small booklet, and a tradition began of having the book be presented to newly sworn in congressmen. Currently in print is an edition from the Beacon Press in Boston, which is entirely fitting, as this is the printing house for the Unitarian Universalist Church.

Naturally it is fascinating to go through the little volume and to see what was important to the genius of Jefferson and what was not. He left out all the Old Testament, of course, and all of Paul's additions (he felt that Paul was the "first corruptor of the doctrines of Jesus"); the Apocalypse, upon which so much of current prophetic beliefs are founded, he said was "merely the ravings of a maniac." He must have felt that only the life of Jesus was worthy of study.

But even the life does not start out in the way in which we are familiar. The first sentences of Jefferson's Bible have to do with Joseph and Mary going to Bethlehem to be taxed. There is no Annunciation, indeed, no implication that Jesus had any sort of miraculous birth; Jefferson distrusted miracles. Having seen the beginning, I turned to the final pages; I knew how the story turned out, you see, so I did not really risk ruining it for myself. The end is just as worldly; "They rolled a great stone to the door of the sepulchre, and departed." (Matthew 27:60) There is no magical resurrection in this version. The life and teachings were apparently enough.

There is a similar lack of miracles throughout. The story in the ninth chapter of John is cut short, when being presented with a blind man and asked who had sinned, he or his parents, to bring on the blindness, Jesus only gives the comment, "Neither hath this man sinned, nor his parents: but that the works of God should be made manifest in him." This sounds a bit enigmatic to me, and although the blind man may have taken comfort that his condition was not the product of sin..., I cannot think he would be happy at being a display for the works of God. A sighted man would be a better display. Anyway, the episode does not climax with Jesus making mud with his spittle and putting it on the blind man's eyes to bring him vision. One looks in vain in this volume for healed lepers, risen corpses, strolls on the waters, or renewed wine cellars. Such stories were not important to Jefferson; only the life and teachings were.

And those teachings, though familiar, are magnificent. Jesus causing the mob self-examination when it was about to stone an adultress is one of my favorites, and of course it is here. There are higher values than obedience to old laws, he makes plain. The widow still gives everything she has, thus giving more than the large sums from the rich. Jesus encouraged love of others, as much as we love ourselves; the love extended to those who have no love for us. The beseechings to do good make me painfully aware that I fall short of the sort of ideal Jesus would want: "When thou makest a dinner or a supper, call not thy friends, nor thy brethren, neither thy kinsmen, nor thy rich neighbors; lest they also bid thee again and a recompense be made thee. But when thou makest a feast, call the poor, the maimed, the lame, the blind." Surely he was being hyperbolic, but even so, I don't come close.

I think the exaggeration does not serve him in many cases. "Take no thought for tomorrow" I think of as exceedingly bad advice. I hold that there is much to be said for thinking about the here and now, but only a fool never plans for the future. Similarly, the enjoinings to abandon one's family or to give away everything one has to the poor are so far removed from the way my world works (and surely from the way the Nazarene's did, as well) that such exhortation is not only futile but argues against itself.

Jefferson has eliminated some of the verses that gave me ammunition against Biblical literalists. He includes the story about Peter denying Christ three times before the cock crows, but omits the pesky Mark 14:66-68 which shows Peter got only one denial in before the crowing. He leaves out the Holy Spirit or any verse that would show Jesus to be divine. He does not include any verses that show Jesus speaking with a short temper to his mother, as at Cana. Jesus certainly does not invite anyone to eat his flesh.

I was disappointed at some of the inclusions. It is surprising that the naturalist Jefferson allowed Jesus to go on saying that the mustard seed is the biggest of all seeds and that it grows into a plant bigger than all other herbs. Jefferson had no misgivings over having Jesus speak of a literal Noah: "Noah entered the ark and the flood came and destroyed them all." Not only does this seem to countenance a holocaust worse than any subsequent one (and against a world of poor animals, too), it makes clear that Jesus took the Old Testament myths literally.

The biggest disappointment is that although Jefferson saw fit to cut the story before any ascendancy of Jesus into heaven, he retains many of Jesus's parables of what the afterlife is like. This is not so bad in the descriptions of heaven, but also included are Jesus's warnings about hell... It is indeed a shame that Jefferson's admiration for the ethical system proposed by Jesus includes all of his verses that warn about being burned or tortured forever. Jesus's words make clear he countenances such a system. That's not morals, it's monstrosity.

I did like the Jefferson Bible, though, for its brief summation of the stories that have changed the world. I like most of all the idea of Thomas Jefferson with scissors and paste finding what was meaningful for himself in the gospels and cutting out his own version. This was the Jefferson who encouraged, "Question with boldness even the existence of a god; because if there be one he must approve of the homage of reason more than that of blindfolded fear." His Bible was an act of audacious redaction: he refused to accept the book as divinely inspired holy writ, and determined that he would examine it carefully to see in it what his own conscience and reason showed was good, and follow that good, and ignore the rest. Would that others would do the same.

Rating:
Summary: This book sends the Christian Right to the hills!!!
Review: Thomas Jefferson, one of our Founding Fathers, is clearly against the Christian church whose teachings are mainly based on those of Paul (Corinthians) which he calls the "Great Corruptor" of Jesus' teachings. I guess not all Founding Fathers are Christians (by the definition of what a Christian is, that is, one that studies all the supernatural stuff + Corinthians, etc.), eh?

Another great read is Thomas Payne's Age of Reason.

This is what the Founders want for religious freedom, not what the Christian Right wants which is to force the government into an instrument of their filth.

If you are a Christian, i strongly recommend reading this book. Jefferson examine the writings of Mark/Luke/etc and realized that the only thing that can be trusted, are when the three of them testify to the SAME effect (i.e. the resurrection section and immaculate birth are not taughted by Jesus himself, and they vary between the three accounts). He also points out the main issue: Jesus did not write his own teachings down, and unlike Plato, etc. much of the things we have today in the Bible are written years later, from HUMAN memory. He also points out the paganistic nature of Christianity, which derives from Judaism -- and in order to convert pagans to Christianity, it must have paganistic characteristics, such as supernatural events that Paul and others later added to the bible and thus, corrupted what Jesus taught.

Rating:
Summary: Arlen Williams: I've got a bridge to sell you....
Review: To put it in its simplest words.... you are a big sucker. You have been suckered in by the "Christian religion". I can't believe that in today's world that anyone could still believe the bible. There have been more people murdered, by far, in the bible than any other book in history!!! Just for your information, the world is not flat, woman are not equal to "half a man", children should not be "stoned to death" for disrespecting their parents, and no, it is not okay to sell your daughter into slavery (I don't care what Moses says).

Rating:
Summary: The magic of scissors and glue!
Review: Wow. I can't believe I bought into the readers' reviews and wasted an evening reading this tripe. What I thought would be a thorough analysis of the words and life of Jesus turned out to be what seems like the busywork of some obsessive-compulsive, sitting in his room for three nights, cutting and pasting pieces of the bible into a book. Some revelation. It doesn't take a genius to figure out which parts to of the bible to omit based on his criteria - anything that has to do with miracles, magic and the supernatural has got to go. So what's left? The same old beatitudes and commandments, with no expounding whatsoever. If you're looking to read a condensed version of the bible with what Jefferson has considered to be just the facts, and nothing more, then this is the book for you.

Rating:
Summary: "For who is in a position to condemn. NO, not one."
Review: Yes, Jesus is our redeemer. (And to the Atheist: He is our friend and savior. He does not condone slavery or abuse or war. As said in the t.v. series Joan of Arcadia when Joan asks Him if He is so good then why all this suffering? Why all these wars "in His name". To which He replies, "That is politics. Not me." God asks that we follow Him, yes, but not blindly. I am a Christian, but I do believe in all human rights and do not condone abuse or slavery. Yes, it is sad some use the Bible for hate when He is the God of love. Hopefully, you can meet some Christians that exemplify God's love rather than hatred. We do exist. And so do some of the churches. I am sorry that you have had to endure hypocrisy and hatred. That is not what Jesus or the Christian church is about)

THAT said. I think some of the "reviewers" forgot: "Who is in a position to condemn. NO, not one!" NOONE has the authority to tell anyone they are going to Hell becaue they didn't like the way a book was written. THAT is God's desicion alone. I will admit that reading the reviews about "taking a razor," put me off guard, but I would imagine it is being taken out of context. And again we need to be careful that we do not worship a book. We don't worship a book. We worship Jesus. This was shown in a sermon to which the minister tried to get people to understand by saying that "is this what you worship? If so, you need to throw it out the window". I am paraphrasing, but the message was we need to worship Jesus and what He taught us and teaches us. It is our relationship with Him and worship of Him not a book. I am NOT saying the Bible doesn't matter. It does very much, but sometimes many paradoxically can have such an idolotry for the book that they forget about Jesus.

If Jefferson committed his life to the Lord, that cannot be broken. "Nothing on Heaven or on earth can seperate us from the Love of God." Perhaps that is why we have so many atheists and agnostics or other non-belivers in the world, because like the atheist "reviewer" they don't see God's love exemplified in the world. Does it mean we accept anything? No, of course not. Yes, I do believe God rose from the dead and that Jesus cannot be reduced to just a nice guy. HOWEVER, are there not other books that focus on just Jesus's words? Yes, there are books which quote his promises only. Books that only have Jesus's words in them abound. Do we condem the authors to Hell because it only contains His words??? Of course not. They are not saying they don't believe in God. They are just helping people to see what Jesus was about in a more condensed version. Prayerfully this can be more of a witness helping them to go to the Bible but more importantly having a relationship with Jesus. Yes the Bible is important but it is God who came in human form. Who healed us, befriended us, saved us. THAT is what is important. OH and if we are talking about taking out....who took out what happened to Jesus between his infancy and his adult ministry? Granted, I am Protestant and I understand that his ministry in the gospels is what is important. However, I would say that is a big chunk taken out. What about devotionals? They have just a section of God's word. They have an interpretation of the scriptures. What about music? So much is in tune with God's word but they might take out a bit here or there or add for the music's sake. Are they going to Hell? NO! Whosoever believes in Him will NOT die but have ever lasting life. If Jefferson believed in the Lord, NOT ONE of you can take that away.