# Guess who wrote following?



## fivepointcalvinist (May 16, 2006)

"œThe Christian God is a being of terrific character - cruel, vindictive, capricious, and unjust"

"œChristianity is the most perverted system that ever shone on man"

"œThe authors of the gospels were unlettered and ignorant men and the teachings of Jesus have come to us mutilated, misstated and unintelligible"

"œReligions are all alike -- founded upon fables and mythologies"

"œI do not find in orthodox Christianity one redeeming feature"

"œWe discover (in the gospels) a groundwork of vulgar ignorance, of things impossible, of superstition, fanaticism and fabrication"




















THOMAS JEFFERSON


----------



## Semper Fidelis (May 16, 2006)

Sounds like a son of the Enlightenment to me.


----------



## gwine (May 17, 2006)

I was going to say Richard Dawkins.

This quote from an interview with _Salon_ writer Gordy Slack. (Caution: offensive picture at the heading)


> GS - Still, so many people resist believing in evolution. Where does the resistance come from?
> 
> RD - It comes, I'm sorry to say, from religion. And from bad religion. You won't find any opposition to the idea of evolution among sophisticated, educated theologians. It comes from an exceedingly retarded, primitive version of religion, which unfortunately is at present undergoing an epidemic in the United States. Not in Europe, not in Britain, but in the United States.
> 
> ...


----------



## Ivan (May 17, 2006)

For a second, Gerry, I thought you said Richard Dawson.....

Dawkins said, "My American friends tell me that you are slipping towards a theocratic Dark Age."

My comment to Dawkins, "Dude, turn out the lights your party is over."


----------



## VirginiaHuguenot (May 17, 2006)

See this thread concerning Thomas Jefferson from the Politics forum.


----------



## fivepointcalvinist (May 17, 2006)

andrew, thread's gone...


----------



## VirginiaHuguenot (May 17, 2006)

> _Originally posted by fivepointcalvinist_
> andrew, thread's gone...



No, it's still there. Do you have access to the Politics forum?


----------



## Semper Fidelis (May 17, 2006)

What's your point Ryan? Who cares about G.W. Bush. You and some others are obsessed about that man in an unhealthy and hateful way.

Seriously, we're dealing with Jefferson here. What difference does it make what others have said in _this_ thread.


----------



## gwine (May 17, 2006)

> _Originally posted by SemperFideles_
> What's your point Ryan? Who cares about G.W. Bush. You and some others are obsessed about that man in an unhealthy and hateful way.
> 
> Seriously, we're dealing with Jefferson here. What difference does it make what others have said in _this_ thread.



 Calling people 'brainwashed neocons' sure gets them lined up on your side. As much as I like to read, articles (or threads) that constantly berate turn me off. There is a way to say things that can be challenging yet provocative.

Not that Christ shied away from controversy. But in all that He never sinned.


----------



## Average Joey (May 17, 2006)

Ugh!It does bother me that somebody like Jefferson would say something like that.I always heard that he was a Christian.So sad.


----------



## kceaster (May 17, 2006)

I was going to guess Fred Burnett. He is a professor at Anderson University and Seminary. I had him for Biblical Exegesis. Complete liberal. Dares students to get him fired for his comments about Christianity.

So much for the Christian Liberal Arts University. It started as a Bible college.

KC


----------



## Anton Bruckner (May 17, 2006)

> _Originally posted by Average Joey_
> Ugh!It does bother me that somebody like Jefferson would say something like that.I always heard that he was a Christian.So sad.


you probably heard of Kennedy of Coral Ridge. Jefferson was a Deist that carried on a sexual union with his female house slave........in addition he was a very smart man, who helped write our constitution.

[Edited on 5-17-2006 by Slippery]


----------



## Average Joey (May 17, 2006)

> _Originally posted by Slippery_
> 
> 
> > _Originally posted by Average Joey_
> ...



I happen to like D. James Kennedy.


----------



## Anton Bruckner (May 17, 2006)

> _Originally posted by Average Joey_
> 
> 
> I happen to like D. James Kennedy.


he's too much of a propogandist though. the guy made every american in the 16th, 17th, 18th, 19th and the first half of the 20th century into Christians  then the facts proved otherwise.


----------



## Average Joey (May 17, 2006)

> _Originally posted by Slippery_
> 
> 
> > _Originally posted by Average Joey_
> ...



How can you say propagandist?Is that what he`s about,propaganda?Some of the men he has mentioned truely were Christians.Just because he made a few mistakes doesn`t make him a propagandist.

What is with everybody on this board today?Everybody is so stuck up and rude.


----------



## Anton Bruckner (May 17, 2006)

I don't think they were mistakes, especially in the case of Jefferson. It is a know fact that Jefferson was a deist who regularly had sexual relations with his female house slave Sally Jemminigs or Hemmings, and Kennedy willingly tried to spin Jefferson otherwise in light of these very known facts by willingly surpressing them.

He likewise tried to spin Isaac Newton as a Christian eventhough Isaac Newton did not believe in the trinity. (Jefferson also did not believe in the Trinity)

The fact is one can always find biblical phrases from muslims, mormons, jehovah's witnesses and oneness pentecostals, but that that doesn't make anyone of them christians. so too are deists. It is this superficial resemblence that kennedy capitalizes on.

But Kennedy is forced into such a position because he basic thrust of preaching is that one should believe Christianity, because famous men whom we admire were Christians.

[Edited on 5-17-2006 by Slippery]


----------



## fivepointcalvinist (May 17, 2006)

> _Originally posted by VirginiaHuguenot_
> 
> 
> > _Originally posted by fivepointcalvinist_
> ...



guess not; says "Sorry, you are not permitted to view this forum"


----------



## VirginiaHuguenot (May 17, 2006)

> _Originally posted by fivepointcalvinist_
> 
> 
> > _Originally posted by VirginiaHuguenot_
> ...



If you are interested, you should contact an admin to request access to this forum.


----------



## Puritanhead (May 17, 2006)

> _Originally posted by Slippery_
> Jefferson was a Deist that carried on a sexual union with his female house slave........in addition he was a very smart man, who helped write our constitution.



Only the deist part and intelligence part is true... the rest is myth, legend or lies like global warming and the elusive sasquatch.





> _Originally posted by Slippery_
> I don't think they were mistakes, especially in the case of Jefferson. It is a know fact that Jefferson was a deist who regularly had sexual relations with his female house slave Sally Jemminigs or Hemmings, and Kennedy willingly tried to spin Jefferson otherwise in light of these very known facts by willingly surpressing them.


Fact? Actually, you have no way of proving that Hemmings relationship Keon... it was all fanciful speculation perfectly fit for the Clinton era-- when taking the founders and rolling them in the mud was fashionable, because all of our _high and mighty_ in our-time were scoundrel adulterers (i.e. Kennedy, Clinton, Gingrich).

Political newspapers during the 1790s and 1800s were poisonous in their rhetoric... The Federalists hated Republican journalists for their muckracking so much that they tried to get them jailed for libelous speech all of the time. Washington was said to ride into Washington _saddling an ass_, so the caricatures were obviously crude. It was in this poisonous political environment that Federalist newspapers in the northeast countered with blistering attacks on southerners, accusing them of miscegeny, because it was taboo to the New Englander. They liked to confirm their worst suspicions of one another in sensationalist editorials, comics and commentary... Jefferson was said to be the guillotine-welding atheist infidel of the south who consorted with his slaves, which gave cause for derision among New Englanders. You can hate someone more if you presume the worst of them, and they wanted to geniunely hate one another.

When Clinton's revelations of adulterous affairs boiled over-- it was in this environment that sensationalists sought to revive the old Jefferson smear. It was more likely that Jefferson's father had consorted with a slave giving rise to Sally Hemming, which could explain any DNA markers. Though that evidence remains very questionable and is perhaps tainted... I don't want to spell out the implications of what it means for T. Jefferson to have an affair give his father having blood ties to Sally's parent. I doubt very seriousl that it is true. His notes on Virginia convey a subtle racism-- which I believe preclude the feasibility of his desire to take a slave as a mistress.

You're also in error saying Jefferson wrote the Constitution. Jefferson was missing in action, and serving as a diplomat in France, and merely watched the drafting and ratification of the Constitution as a spectator based on what he heard in correspodence. His pragmatic hope was that the circumstances would work out as such that a Constitution and a Bill of Rights would receive a simultaneous adoption, even if it means holdout states obstructing the initial ratification. He was only an observer. Jefferson wrote the Declaration of Indepence.

Get your facts straight!

[Edited on 5-18-2006 by Puritanhead]


----------



## Puritanhead (May 17, 2006)

*This thread is pointless*



> _Originally posted by SemperFideles_
> What's your point Ryan? Who cares about G.W. Bush. You and some others are obsessed about that man in an unhealthy and hateful way.
> 
> Seriously, we're dealing with Jefferson here. What difference does it make what others have said in _this_ thread.


You know, I could say some of you guys are "obsessed about" Jefferson "in an unhealthy and hateful way."

I hath withdrawn my remarks... I posted the tacit G.W. Bush Unitarian affirmations or quotations to make a subtle point. If I had singled out Lincoln or George W. Bush and started such a thread and threw out quotable evidence of their denial of orthodox Christianity, or tacit Unitarianism or deism"”then I would likely be greeted with derision. I have vindicated my point in the response that was elicited.

It's true that Bush did say good Muslims goto Heaven, among other statements that deny John 14:6. People can search for those quotes on the Internet, I don't have to plug them again.

My tacit point was simple"”some people pick their _sacred cows_ among political leaders, and have their double standards about identifying their _infidels_... it's always been fashionable to think of our great leaders as great Christians even though it's not always the case. Politicians have always kissed babies and shown up at religious services from time to time"”however, it does not make them Christians. Both Hitler and Lincoln spoke of "providence," but it doesn't make them Christians. Both denied and mocked Christianity in private, which has been documented. D.J. Kennedy gets way off base in his tract book on the faith of America's leaders, particularly Jefferson and Lincoln.

 Puritanhead


----------



## ChristianTrader (May 17, 2006)

http://www.wallbuilders.com/resources/search/detailpf.php?ResourceID=15


----------



## Peter (May 17, 2006)

Jefferson, Lincoln and Bush are all infidels. Davis wasn't such a shinning beacon of Christianity either. Mind you Davis was the one with a Jew in his cabinet and a number of high ranking Romanist appointees, not Lincoln. The Neo-confederate movement is almost as deluded as D.J. Kennedy.


----------



## srhoades (May 17, 2006)

I thought the whole sexual relations with the slave girl was propigated my postmodern deconstructionists.


----------



## Anton Bruckner (May 18, 2006)

> _Originally posted by Puritanhead_


Fact? Actually, you have no way of proving that Hemmings relationship Keon... it was all fanciful speculation perfectly fit for the Clinton era-- when taking the founders and rolling them in the mud was fashionable, because all of our _high and mighty_ in our-time were scoundrel adulterers (i.e. Kennedy, Clinton, Gingrich).

Political newspapers during the 1790s and 1800s were poisonous in their rhetoric... The Federalists hated Republican journalists for their muckracking so much that they tried to get them jailed for libelous speech all of the time. Washington was said to ride into Washington _saddling an ass_, so the caricatures were obviously crude. It was in this poisonous political environment that Federalist newspapers in the northeast countered with blistering attacks on southerners, accusing them of miscegeny, because it was taboo to the New Englander. They liked to confirm their worst suspicions of one another in sensationalist editorials, comics and commentary... Jefferson was said to be the guillotine-welding atheist infidel of the south who consorted with his slaves, which gave cause for derision among New Englanders. You can hate someone more if you presume the worst of them, and they wanted to geniunely hate one another.

When Clinton's revelations of adulterous affairs boiled over-- it was in this environment that sensationalists sought to revive the old Jefferson smear. It was more likely that Jefferson's father had consorted with a slave giving rise to Sally Hemming, which could explain any DNA markers. Though that evidence remains very questionable and is perhaps tainted... I don't want to spell out the implications of what it means for T. Jefferson to have an affair give his father having blood ties to Sally's parent. I doubt very seriousl that it is true. His notes on Virginia convey a subtle racism-- which I believe preclude the feasibility of his desire to take a slave as a mistress.

You're also in error saying Jefferson wrote the Constitution. Jefferson was missing in action, and serving as a diplomat in France, and merely watched the drafting and ratification of the Constitution as a spectator based on what he heard in correspodence. His pragmatic hope was that the circumstances would work out as such that a Constitution and a Bill of Rights would receive a simultaneous adoption, even if it means holdout states obstructing the initial ratification. He was only an observer. Jefferson wrote the Declaration of Indepence.

Get your facts straight!

[Edited on 5-18-2006 by Puritanhead] [/quote]

While I will agree that the far left love to pick on Jefferson and deconstruct the mythical glorication of our founders that in no way proves that Jefferson did not copulate with his slave girl. Fact is many slave owners copulated with their slaves. Their slaves were their property. Heck, all men have urges, and these urges become more manifest if men have total control over another being. Check out the Greeks and the Romans and their orgies. And of course Enron, Tyco and Adelphia. Moral constraints become weakened when a person's power increases.

Anyway here are some propositions in relation to the DNA evidences of Jefferson and his descendents.
DNA Test offer Evidence that Jefferson Fathered..

That being said, in the light of Jefferson's Deistic and sexual impropriety, whilst being held in the highest esteem, the left and the clintonians had all right to use this to manifest the hypocrisy of the right when the clinton-lewinsky scandal broke. 

As for subtle racism precluding the possibility of interracial sex, that is pure bunk. Almost all African Americans in recent studies have shown to carrying DNA of european ethnicity and there is still a potent degree of racism an anti interracial marriage sentiments in America today, and how much more back then. And what Jefferson wrote wasn't subtle racism. That's an understatement. 

Fact is a person could be a racist and still have sex with a person of another race. Proof, Strum Thurmond. Ironically he had sex with a female maid. And evidences must be brought to bear to extricate Jefferson and indict his father in this charge. And so far I've seen nothing that suggests this. Jefferson stands guilty in light of the DNA evidences.

But what I know is that Jefferson was waay too smart for his own good, and could have deceived many and he still does to this day, in having them believe he was a mother theresa.

And I did err by saying Jefferson wrote the constitution when in actuality it was the declaration of independence. But really, he plagarized the declaration of independence.


----------



## Anton Bruckner (May 18, 2006)

> _Originally posted by Peter_
> . The Neo-confederate movement is almost as deluded as D.J. Kennedy.


----------



## Average Joey (May 18, 2006)

Sorry about yesterday Keon.I do like some of D.James Kennedy`s sermons.I guess he is a fine example of politics mixed into Christianity instead of Christianity making his politics.


----------



## Anton Bruckner (May 18, 2006)

well you can't blame em. kennedy is from the old school. he lived in an america with values. for him to see liberals, homosexuals, feminists and athiets run amock and have control over our children, is enough to make him go beserk.

but no matter how sincere our motivation, the gospel works best when its preached in its most purest form.

I believe the only way we can take America to a high moral plane is by simply preaching the Gospel. Only when individuals become sanctified and reform, communities change for the better, and only when communities change for the better nations change for the better.


----------



## Ivan (May 18, 2006)

> _Originally posted by Slippery_
> I believe the only way we can take America to a high moral plane is by simply preaching the Gospel. Only when individuals become sanctified and reform, communities change for the better, and only when communities change for the better nations change for the better.



AMEN!!!!!!!


----------



## Ambrose (May 18, 2006)

> _Originally posted by Slippery_
> 
> While I will agree that the far left love to pick on Jefferson and deconstruct the mythical glorication of our founders that in no way proves that Jefferson did not copulate with his slave girl. Fact is many slave owners copulated with their slaves. Their slaves were their property. Heck, all men have urges, and these urges become more manifest if men have total control over another being. Check out the Greeks and the Romans and their orgies. And of course Enron, Tyco and Adelphia. Moral constraints become weakened when a person's power increases.
> 
> ...



Tom and Sally and Joe and Fawn: The New Jefferson Myth

It would sure be hard to prove that Jefferson "that Jefferson did not copulate with his slave girl." Impossible, actually! 

But the DNA test doesn't prove that he fathered any of Hemings' descendants either. 

It may be true. You can say you believe that it is, but it is not proven nor is it a fact.


----------



## Bladestunner316 (May 18, 2006)

I know this is slightly off topic but Im going to say it anyway. If the church can get its act together and trul be together for the gospel like the conference earlier this year said and deal with ecclesiasticl differences charitably(unlike PPT) and be a strong influence for the gospel(Lord Willing) then if the gospel spreads by a more united church and peoples hearts are inclined towards it then true political reformation will begin. Does not mean we shouldnt try for political reform now but the gospel should be our banner.


blade


----------

