Paul the Apostle A Deceiver? Invented Christianity? Say it isn't So! Nonsense!

jefferson denied the essentials of the Christian faith, denied the Cross/resurrection, so he was a confirm heretic...

John Calvin merely understood the Bible differently than you, and watch out addressing him as a heretic, as he was a teacher gifted by God, and was wiser than you or me in this area, I would presume!

Would you hold the same dsregard towards Apostles peter/paul?john?
As they to varying degrees taught on same things, calvin just fleshed out their biblical outlines!

 

I simply used the word the Calvinists used.

Thomas Jefferson's religious views were off base, but he did not present his views as something others must hold. That was Calvin's bag.

It is because I hold Peter, Paul and John in high regard, that I consider Calvin a heretic of the worst kind.

The government does not have the right to declare the views of men illegal. But those who believe in the God of compulsion would disagree. Burn the heretics they would cry. Thomas Jefferson stands today and forever against every form of tyranny over the minds of men.

 

Reply to C4K

Jefferson was opposed to claims of supernatural power, or claims for things incomprehensible. Thus corruptions flowed from taking the simple truths of Jesus, which a child could understand, and adding on the inventions of Plato's metaphysics.

So while it is true there is no need to defend his unbiblical understanding of religion, there is also no need to misrepresent his views.

Therefore his exact words were not "Paul was 'the first corrupter of the great doctrines of Jesus.'" In his letter to William Short, dated April 13, 1820 he wrote the following:

"Among the sayings & 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. I seperate therefore the gold from the dross; restore to him the former & leave the latter to the stupidity of some, and roguery of others of his disciples. Of this band of dupes and impostors, Paul was the great Coryphaeus*, and firm corrupter of the doctrines of Jesus. These palpable interpolations and falsifications of his doctrines led me to try to sift them apart. I found the work obvious and easy, and that his part composed the most beautiful morsel of morality which has been given to us by man."

*Coryphaeus refers to the leader of a group.

 

'First' compared to 'firm.' Thats pretty close for thirty years of memory . I'm happy with myself!

 

It is amazing that so many evangelical Christians hold Thomas Jefferson in high esteem. An important founding father, for sure, but after I read up on his beliefs regarding Christ (completely unorthodox) and learned about the Jefferson Bible, I've lost all respect for the man, to the point where I see people quoting him as if he was some wise individual, especially when it comes to economics, of which he knew next to nothing, it makes me about want to puke.

But Jefferson is a topic for another thread. I just had to chime in on this point.

 

:laugh:

He finally found a kindred spirit....:laugh::laugh: an unsaved persons rambling attack on the God of scritpure....impressive:thumbsup:

 

Comprehend

I don't think we can really fathom living in a country who was trying to save a whole country of called people and destroy what they thought was evil around them. How people came to America for freedom of religion. I Don't know exactly what happened at that time, I have heard of people being burned at the stake and tortured and hung for their beliefs, but what people did to have freedom of religion. There is no excuse for man to tear out scripture for others who have misunderstood to their own destruction.

 

:thumbsup::thumbsup::thumbsup:

 

Icon,

I am in no way condoning Jefferson or any of his religious views, you are a bit out of line here, unless I am reading you wrongly, skillfully attempting to suggest that Van is a "kindred spirit" to an unsaved non-believer. If I am wrong, then you have my apology, if not, you should not suggest such things.

 

The gang of Calvinists continue to shift discussion from the topic to my character and qualifications. Anything but the basis of Thomas Jefferson's disdain for the corruptions of Calvinism upon the doctrines of Jesus. According to Jefferson, as per a quote provided by a Calvinist, Calvin introduced more corruptions into Christianity, than Jesus corrected. Here is the quote:
"Calvinism has introduced into the Christian religion more new absurdities than its leader [Jesus] had purged it of old ones,"

So lets see, Augustine's neo-Platonism was adopted and expanded in the dark ages, and it was from this corruption Jefferson sought to untangle the doctrines of Jesus. He (Jefferson) missed by a great deal, as I and others have pointed out. However, those that advocate for the God of compulsion, i.e. Calvinists, created part of the morass Jefferson tried unsuccessfully to excise.

See posts # 30 and 40 for more info.

 

Here is Thomas Jefferson's view of Calvin:

DEAR SIR, -- The wishes expressed, in your last favor, that I may continue in life and health until I become a Calvinist, at least in his exclamation of `mon Dieu! jusque à quand'! would make me immortal. I can never join Calvin in addressing his god. He was indeed an Atheist, which I can never be; or rather his religion was Daemonism. If ever man worshipped a false god, he did. The being described in his 5. points is not the God whom you and I acknolege and adore, the Creator and benevolent governor of the world; but a daemon of malignant spirit. It would be more pardonable to believe in no god at all, than to blaspheme him by the atrocious attributes of Calvin.

See post #40 for additional details.

Works based salvation is false doctrine, but faith without works is dead. Salvation is by faith alone, but the faith is the kind from which faithfulness flows. So Jefferson recognizing the need to walk the talk was close to the mark, but alas his solution threw the baby out with the bath water. However, in the above quote, Jefferson was addressing the idea that God would punish people forever for doing the only things they are able to do. Such a god would be a malignant spirit.

 

It is obvious Preacher for truth cannot read. The quote contains partial quotes, the the remainder was written by someone talking about Jefferson. ROFLOL

Jefferson certainly rejected Paul but NOT for all the same reasons he rejected Calvin's absurdities. Recall where I addressed this issue. (1) Trinity, (2) Divinity of Christ, and (3) miracles including rising from the dead? These are the reasons Jefferson rejected Paul, and thus Jefferson's view was unbiblical and unchristian.

Now returning to Jefferson's view of Calvinism, he considered unconditional election an absurdity added to Christianity by Calvin. So if Jefferson misunderstood Ephesians 1:4, and I have not seen where he specifically talked about it, then he would reject Paul as providing the basis of unconditional election. However, since Paul did not actually provide any support whatsoever for this false doctrine, Jefferson's scorn rightly should fall on Calvinism alone.

 

"The serious enemies are the priests of the different religious sects, to whose spells on the human mind it's improvement is ominous. Their pulpits are now resounding with denunciations against the appointment of Dr. Cooper whome they charge as a Monarchist in opposition to their tritheism. Hostile as these sects are in every other point, to one another, they unite in maintaining their mystical theology against those who believe there is one god only. The Presbyterian clergy are loudest. The most intolerant of all sects, the most tyrannical, and ambitious; ready at the word of the lawgiver, if such a word could be now obtained, to put the torch to the pile, and to rekindle in this virgin hemisphere, the flames in which their oracle Calvin consumed the poor Servetus, because he could not find in his Euclid the proposition which has demonstrated that three are one, and one is three, nor subscribe to that of Calvin that magistrates have a right to exterminate all heretics to Calvinistic creed. They pant to restablish by law that holy inquisition, which they can now only infuse into public opinion."

Thomas Jefferson wrote this in a private letter in 1820. He was trying to create a wall between church and state such that the government could not use the law to make views differing from the lawmakers illegal. Kind of important.

 

Closed at author's request.