What Thomas Jefferson had to say about the book of revelations

[usregimechange]

Thomas Jefferson

TO GENERAL ALEXANDER SMYTH MONTICELLO
January 17 1825

DEAR SIR,
I have duly received four proof sheets of your explanation of the Apocalypse with your letters of December 29th and January 8th; in the last of which you request that so soon as I shall be of opinion that the explanation you have given is correct I would express it in a letter to you. From this you must be so good as to excuse me because I make it an invariable rule to decline ever giving opinions on new publications in any case whatever. No man on earth has less taste or talent for criticism than myself and least and last of all should I undertake to criticise works on the Apocalypse. It is between fifty and sixty years since I read it and I then considered it as merely the ravings of a maniac no more worthy nor capable of explanation than the incoherences of our own nightly dreams. I was therefore well pleased to see in your first proof sheet that it was said to be not the production of St John but of Cerinthus a century after the death of that apostle. Yet the change of the author's name does not lessen the extravagances of the composition and come they from whomsoever they may I cannot so far respect them as to consider them as an allegorical narrative of events past or subsequent. There is not coherence enough in them to countenance any suite of rational ideas. You will judge therefore from this how impossible I think it that either your explanation or that of any man in the heavens above or on the earth beneath can be a correct one. What has no meaning admits no explanation and pardon me if I say with the candor of friendship that I think your time too valuable and your understanding of too high an order to be wasted on these paralogisms. You will perceive I hope also that I do not consider them as revelations of the Supreme Being whom I would not so far blaspheme as to impute to Him a pretension of revelation couched at the same time in terms which He would know were never to be understood by those to whom they were addressed. In the candor of these observations I hope you will see proofs of the confidence esteem and which I entertain for you.

The Writings of Thomas Jefferson By Thomas Jefferson, Andrew Adgate Lipscomb, Albert Ellery Bergh, Richard Holland Johnston, Thomas Jefferson memorial association of the United States

[prostock69]

1. I just ordered the below book to read about this very subject

When Time Shall Be No More: Prophecy Belief in Modern American Culture by Paul Boyer.
I can't wait to read it. Unfortunately, there are many "raving maniacs" that live in this world who believe in the end of days. What concerns me is that they are taking the steps to make it come true.

A Reader's Review:

"The cover of Boyer's book contains a powerful scene. A group of well-dressed people are standing in a field, gazing up at a dark and brooding, but otherwise completely empty sky. As a former fundamentalist Christian, this scene is particularly emotive, as I well understand the sense of hope mingled with foreboding that the premillenial worldview brings.

It is probably difficult for an outsider to understand how this peculiar view of the world can colour a person's entire life. I was constantly aware that at any moment I could be raptured out of the world. I scoured the headlines for a clue as to the identity of the Antichrist, and the latest movements of Gog and Magog. I was convinced that all signs pointed to the end of the world within my lifetime.

Boyer's book is an excellent overview of this type of thinking. Such puzzling terms as the Rapture, Armageddon, the Beast, 666, and the One-World Government are examined in detail. What is particularly good about this book is that it is never judgemental or pedantic. Boyer never explicitly discusses why the fundamentalist, premillenial view of the world is wrong. Instead, he shows in detail how the belief arose in the early second century, and evolved through the ages. Through each step, Boyer shows how ardent Bible students firmly believed that they were living in the last times, and how each interpreted the apocalyptic books of the Bible to fit their own situations. Such an historical overview is a far more eloquent argument against premillenialism than any exegesis of the scriptures could be.

I found this a very fascinating book. It is indispensable for the recovering fundamentalist, if only to put their beliefs into an historical context, and so make some sense of them."

[laconicsax]

2. A semantic question:

Boyer never explicitly discusses why the fundamentalist, premillenial view of the world is wrong. Instead, he shows in detail how the belief arose in the early second century, and evolved through the ages.

Shouldn't it read

Boyer never explicitly discusses why the fundamentalist, premillenial view of the world is wrong. Instead, he shows in detail how the belief arose in the early second century, and was intelligently designed through the ages.

The next sentence describes design by an intelligent creator.

Through each step, Boyer shows how ardent Bible students firmly believed that they were living in the last times, and how each interpreted the apocalyptic books of the Bible to fit their own situations

Beliefs themselves are 'designed' and any belief that makes a prediction that is shown to be patently false has to be 're-designed' by someone 'intelligent' enough to make it believable in order to survive.

[Nevernose]

3. Why is Genesis literal, but Revelation figurative?

That's what I could never figure out from the "literal truth" folks.

[laconicsax]

4. It's only literal to the point where it stops serving their purpose.

If you ask a YEC about the order of creation, or even when their god created people, you'll likely get a response that directly contradicts either Genesis chapter 1 or chapter 2.

Compare Genesis 1:25-27 to Genesis 2:18-22

Now if you challenge them on it, they'll try to change the subject and/or say that they have to ask their trusted religious leader.