Thomas Jefferson an Evolutionist?

Because the founding fathers are considered to be among the world’s most foremost scientists, even to this day, they are often quoted by creationists to bolster their arguments. This intellectually sound tactic has met with great success and many scientists have been incited to leave liberal materialist science behind and are now conducting research for the ICR. Of course, being faithful deists our American heros would no doubt support the conclusions being drawn from their statements in favor of rejecting rationalism and replacing it with traditionalist dogmatism. Seriously.

Okay, sarcasm aside, I stumbled on a website a few weeks ago that tried to give the “list of quotes from famous creationists” thing a try in order to make creationism look a bit palatable by attaching the names of popular (almost entirely) pre-Darwinian historical figures to that belief system. Interestingly, an excerpt from a rather lengthy quote penned by Thomas Jefferson in a letter made it onto the list. I say interestingly because before I found the list I had been reading one of the site’s other articles about my own position on origins: theistic evolution. Apparently, according to this site, thevos aren’t real Christians.

However, ironically the webmaster then proceeds to use the quote below in order to affirm both the validity of creationism, and of the True Religious Faith^TM of Thomas Jefferson. That’s right. Thomas “remove all the miracle stories from the New Testament” Jefferson was a real Christian. The same guy who ignored the writings of Paul, who dismissed Christian supernatural ideas as mere “spiritualism” (and said he held “materialist” views) and declared the divinity claims about Jesus to be “Platonisms!” The author can’t plead ignorance about this either. He specifically admits that Jefferson gutted the Gospels to make his book and then calls this act of sacrelige one of Jefferson’s “little quirks.” Yep. He used those exact words to describe the defacing of our New Covenent.

Hello! You creationists claim to be the ones really sticking to the Bible and us thevos are evil liberal corrupters! Whatever happened to that quote from Revelation, y’know, the one that you say proves the Bible to be the very infallible word of God and you better not mess with it or you’re gonna get burnt? Oh, yeah, here it is:

And if any man shall take away from the words of the book of this prophecy, God shall take away his part out of the book of life, and out of the holy city, and from the things which are written in this book.

And you say that stripping away the New Testament of its most basic ideas is just a “quirk,” while condemning thevos for “adding” evolution to the Bible when we don’t have to add a jot or tittle to it! The hypocrisy is so glaring that I’m just going to let this rest here.

Now, finally here’s that quote:

I think that every Christian sect gives a great handle to atheism by their general dogma, that, without revelation, there would not be sufficient proof of the being of a God. Now one-sixth of mankind only are supposed to be Christians; the other five-sixths, then, who do not believe in the Jewish and Christian revelation, are without knowledge of the existence of God! That gives [a basis for the hypothesis]…that it is more simple to believe at once in the eternal pre-existence of the world, as it is now going on, and may forever go on, by the principle of reproduction which we see and witness, than to believe in the eternal pre-existence of an ulterior cause, or Creator of the world, a being whom we see not and know not, of whose form, substance, and mode, or place of existence, or of action, no sense informs us, no power of the mind enables us to delineate or comprehend.

On the contrary, I hold, (without appeal to revelation) that when we take a view of the universe, in its parts, general or particular, it is impossible for the human mind not to perceive and feel a conviction of design, consummate skill, and indefinite power in every atom of its composition. The movements of the heavenly bodies, so exactly held in their course by the balance of centrifugal and cent. metal forces; the structure of our earth itself, with its distribution of lands, waters, and atmosphere; animals and vegetable bodies, examined in all their minutes” particles; insects, mere atoms of life, yet as perfectly organized as man or mammoth; the mineral substances, their generation and uses; it is impossible, I say, for the human mind not to believe, that there is in all of this, design, cause, and effect, up to an ultimate cause, a Fabricator of all things from matter and motion, their Preserver and Regulator while permitted to exist in their present forms, and their regeneration into new and other forms.

We see, too, evident proofs of the necessity of a superintending power, to maintain the universe in its course and order….So irresistible are these evidences of an intelligent and powerful Agent, that of the infinite numbers of men who have existed through all time, they have believed, in the proportion of a million at least to unit, in the hypothesis of an eternal pre-existence of a Creator, rather than in that of a self-existent universe.

—Letter to John Adams, April 11, 1823

Notice something? You should have, I bolded it for you. “Regeneration into new and other forms”? Does that sound like creationism to you? Not me. To me it sounds like Thomas Jefferson held views somewhat analogous to evolution. And not just any kind of evolution, he goes out of his way to make it a theistic kind. I might have this wrong, but I don’t see any other interpretation for the bolded statement than an evolutionary one.

So… we have a creationist offering a quote from a famous dead guy instead of scientific evidence when this dead guy was a Bible vandalizer and at the same time held theistic evolutionary views which he had just previously condemned and the quote supports the exact opposite conclusion from what he was using it to support!What was this guy even thinking?

The General Epistle of Jude

I mentioned earlier that I would be trying to read the whole Bible through, one random passage at a time. Today’s random passage is the General Epistle of Jude. I have some thoughts, and more than a few questions. I ask any knowledgeable persons in the studio audience to please throw their two cents in on both this book and what I had to say/ask about it.

The General Epistle of Jude
CHAPTER 1
1 Jude, the servant of Jesus Christ, and brother of James, to them that are sanctified by God the Father, and preserved in Jesus Christ, and called:

I never really thought about it, but just who is Jude? He says brother of James, but which one? Is he another of Zebedee’s kids? Is he the brother of James the brother of the Lord, making him one of Jesus’ brothers? That would make him the Judas/Judah that was listed among Jesus’ siblings, right? Or is he some other disciple the brother of some other James?

2 Mercy unto you, and peace, and love, be multiplied.

I like this verse Lovely little greeting, isn’t it?

3 Beloved, when I gave all diligence to write unto you of the common salvation, it was needful for me to write unto you, and exhort you that ye should earnestly contend for the faith which was once delivered unto the saints.
4 For there are certain men crept in unawares, who were before of old ordained to this condemnation, ungodly men, turning the grace of our God into lasciviousness, and denying the only Lord God, and our Lord Jesus Christ.

“Before of old ordained to this condemnation”? Sounds a bit Calvinistic, don’t you think? Interesting. Yet, it also seems to be more a foreknowledge thing to me, as Jude then lists the reasons they are condemned: “turning the grace of our God into lasciviousness, and denying the only Lord God, and our Lord Jesus Christ.” Unless God preordains people to do evil, which I think is something even Calvinists would reject.

And what do those things mean? turning the grace of our God into lasciviousness? Does this mean using Jesus as an excuse to be mean and judgemental? And denying the Lord? Does that mean they were closet atheists or is he being figurative?

Also, it’s interesting that Jude never claims to be verbally inspired here or even to be writing in response to a command from God.

Another note: He has a very vague audience, this letter seems to be addressed to all Christians, which to me seems to be more suggestive of the validity of verbal inspiration compared to most of the epistles in the New Testament.

And about the title, is the little descriptor above the name Jude in the original Greek version, or is it something the translators added? If I found a 1st Century Jude manuscript, would it be titled “The Epistle of Jude,” “The General Epistle of Jude,” or just “Jude”?

5 I will therefore put you in remembrance, though ye once knew this, how that the Lord, having saved the people out of the land of Egypt, afterward destroyed them that believed not.
6 And the angels which kept not their first estate, but left their own habitation, he hath reserved in everlasting chains under darkness unto the judgment of the great day.

I assume that by “angels that left their first estate” he means demons. But, this doesn’t really make sense, there were demons all over the place in the Gospels, why are they suddenly in chains of darkness? What happened, and why wasn’t it reported in the relevant scriptures? It does make sense given the demons bound in the Euphrates in the book of Revelation. Still, this confuses me.

7 Even as Sodom and Gomorrha, and the cities about them in like manner, giving themselves over to fornication, and going after strange flesh, are set forth for an example, suffering the vengeance of eternal fire.

I like this verse. The homophobes will have to shut up a little bit as here we have it spelled out in black and white that Sodom and Gomorrha wasn’t all about homosexuality. And on the other hand we have it written and black and white that homosexuality was a factor in the whole deal, which should get the fanatical gay advocates to shut up as well.

8 Likewise also these filthy dreamers defile the flesh, despise dominion, and speak evil of dignities.
9 Yet Michael the archangel, when contending with the devil he disputed about the body of Moses, durst not bring against him a railing accusation, but said, The Lord rebuke thee.

WTF? Yeah, I don’t remember remember reading this in the Torah! This looks to be one of the canon’s apocryphal references. But from what I hear, this story comes from a book that is only partially extant, and if I remember right, was of poor quality even by apocryphal standards. If the Bible is the complete, verbally inspired word of God, why would it make specific reference to a work which is not only uninspired, but no longer exists?

Not to mention that it doesn’t really make sense. Why would Satan and Mikey Boy be arguing about Moses’ body? And why wouldn’t Michael bring accusation against Satan?

10 But these speak evil of those things which they know not: but what they know naturally, as brute beasts, in those things they corrupt themselves.
11 Woe unto them! for they have gone in the way of Cain, and ran greedily after the error of Balaam for reward, and perished in the gainsaying of Core.

Who is Core?

12 These are spots in your feasts of charity, when they feast with you, feeding themselves without fear: clouds they are without water, carried about of winds; trees whose fruit withereth, without fruit, twice dead, plucked up by the roots;
13 Raging waves of the sea, foaming out their own shame; wandering stars, to whom is reserved the blackness of darkness for ever.

Feasts of charity? Is that what it sounds like? A free church-sponsored meal for poor people? Sounds like a worthy ritual. Whatever happened to it? Or do I even need to ask?

Oh, and Jude uses some beautiful imagery to describe the wicked.

14 And Enoch also, the seventh from Adam, prophesied of these, saying, Behold, the Lord cometh with ten thousands of his saints,

Ah, another apocyphal reference. Why would God reference works he didn’t approve of? Why would God reference outside works period if the Bible was his self-contained word?

And a quick comment. I’ve heard young earthers try to use this as proof that there’s not enough time for geologic time because of this. But isn’t it likely that Jude was just going off the Genesis genealogies when he said this, and those geneaologies may have been telescoped in the beginning?

15 To execute judgment upon all, and to convince all that are ungodly among them of all their ungodly deeds which they have ungodly committed, and of all their hard speeches which ungodly sinners have spoken against him.

For some reason I think Jude was trying to drive home a point or something, here. I think it has something to do with ungodliness.

16 These are murmurers, complainers, walking after their own lusts; and their mouth speaketh great swelling words, having men’s persons in admiration because of advantage.

What does “having men’s persons in admiration because of advantage” mean?

17 But, beloved, remember ye the words which were spoken before of the apostles of our Lord Jesus Christ;
18 How that they told you there should be mockers in the last time, who should walk after their own ungodly lusts.

Interesting how the apocalypse has been coming “any day now!” for the past 2,000 years.

19 These be they who separate themselves, sensual, having not the Spirit.

What does he mean by separate themselves? Avoiding church? Being divisive? Creating heretical doctrine?

20 But ye, beloved, building up yourselves on your most holy faith, praying in the Holy Ghost,
21 Keep yourselves in the love of God, looking for the mercy of our Lord Jesus Christ unto eternal life.

22 And of some have compassion, making a difference:
23 And others save with fear, pulling them out of the fire; hating even the garment spotted by the flesh.

I like this verse a lot for the same reason I liked verse 7. It’s all about balance. I think it should make both the brimstone-slingers and the sissy hell-deniers shut their yaps. Sometimes you play the nice guy, sometimes you gotta scare people a little. You gotta think, and take advantage of those synaptic firings going on between your ears.

24 Now unto him that is able to keep you from falling, and to present you faultless before the presence of his glory with exceeding joy,
25 To the only wise God our Saviour, be glory and majesty, dominion and power, both now and ever. Amen.

A stirring conclusion

Blogging The Bible!

A while ago I stumbled upon a site documenting one non-practicing Jew’s attempt to reconnect with his roots and finally get around to reading the Old Testament. It was called “Blogging the Bible,” and while I never got around to finishing reading everything he wrote, I thought it was a fascinating little endeavor.

For a long time I have been completely neglectful of my own study of the scripture, and the fact that I’ve not read all of it still lingers over my faith like a black cloud. Also I must say that the nature of my faith is changing (and I hope in a positive way) and I have many questions along with a dire shortage of answers. So, I thought I might do something similar.

I’m going to be posting Bible passages along with comments from yours truly as I try to sort out the nature, teachings and resolving difficulties for me as a Christian regarding the Bible. And hopefully at the end of it I’ll come out having read the entirety of scripture and hopefully some answers and maybe end up a better Christian. I’m crossin’ my fingers.

Don’t expect this to be some fuzzy “Oooh, wow, God is great! Aw, look at that, how wonderful!” thing. This is going to be a hard, mildly skeptical look at my faith’s founding document, not a sermon or an attempt at apologetics. And don’t expect this to be a mocking commentary such as the Skeptic’s Annotated Bible. I have a lot of respect for scripture, but even more questions. I want to learn about and from the Bible, not to look down on it.

My first entry will be on The General Epistle of Jude. I picked it randomly, but it ended up being a good decision because it has those interesting Apocryphal references and of course because it’s so short,