About Me

My photo
This blog is the work of an educated civilian, not of an expert in the fields discussed.

Wednesday, December 24, 2014

Rev. Joe: Jefferson's Bible

And Also: R.I.P. Joseph Sargent, whose best known work might have been Taking of Pelham One Two Three (the original!), but also many more. This includes some good television movies and some duds (Jaws: The Revenge!). Got to take the 6 train in his memory!
It behooves every man who values liberty of conscience for himself, to resist invasions of it in the case of others; or their case may, by change of circumstances, become his own.
I read about the so-called "Jefferson Bible" (actually "Jefferson Gospels") in the past and found a version put out by the Smithsonian that is particularly attractive (if not as easy to read regarding the Bible part). This version has some introductory material and gives you a look at how the original looks with Latin/Greek, English/French versions side by side.  Again, this might look great (especially with the old fashioned look) but it is harder to read (the first link provides the text as well as letter to Benjamin Rush, Rush's encouragement to Jefferson to express his religious views perhaps the original impetus of this project). 

Jefferson was a rationalist/deist, who believed in some form of God and perhaps a future existence (recall a reference, but it might have been more of a hope -- a scientific mind like his after all would not know for sure).  He spoke of an admiration, if some disagreement (e.g., "I am a Materialist; he takes the side of Spiritualism"), of Jesus and saw his overall morals (particular as understood to be more universal than Judaism) as very beneficial. Thus, the "Jefferson Bible" tried to get to the heart of his message, which Jefferson deemed to be corrupted by those who wrote it down years later (no fan of Paul).  He compared this to Plato, who he also deemed to have corrupted Socrates' own words with personal sentiments.

The result in in effect Jefferson using a razor blade to cut and paste those portions of the gospels he deems rational, removing miraculous material such as related to his birth, miracles and his alleged resurrection. Later scholars have determined even some of the remainder did not actually happened (e.g., Jesus probably was born in Galilee and there was no grand census at the time of his birth as cited by Luke) and even if they did not, they have some meaning and value as other myths do. But, his was a worthwhile effort of finding the good even if it is thought to be mixed with some bad (in his words, "diamonds in a dunghill"), being an early case of a self-expressed "Christian" many might not think so.

Such mixture tends to be found quite often.

No comments:

Post a Comment

Thanks for your .02!