The Age Of Reason _ Thomas Paine 1794

[jllundqu]

An excellent book written by a man who sifted through the arguments and came to a rational conclusion based upon careful study and examination. It is a book based upon REASON and LOGIC... not faith or superstition. The arguments are concrete. Enjoy:

http://klymkowskylab.colorado.edu/Re...f%20Reason.pdf

[jllundqu]

From Chapter 6

Examination of the Old Testament
These books, beginning with Genesis and ending with Revelations,
(which, by the bye, is a book of riddles that requires a revelation to explain
it) are, we are told, the word of God. It is, therefore, proper for us
to know who told us so, that we may know what credit to give to the report.
The answer to this question is, that nobody can tell, except that we
tell one another so. The case, however, historically appears to be as
follows:
When the church mythologists established their system, they collected
all the writings they could find, and managed them as they pleased. It is
a matter altogether of uncertainty to us whether such of the writings as
now appear under the name of the Old and the New Testament, are in
the same state in which those collectors say they found them; or whether
they added, altered, abridged, or dressed them up.
Be this as it may, they decided by vote which of the books out of the
collection they had made, should be the Word of God, and which should
not. They rejected several; they voted others to be doubtful, such as the
books called the Apocrypha; and those books which had a majority of
votes, were voted to be the word of God. Had they voted otherwise, all
the people since calling themselves Christians had believed otherwise;
for the belief of the one comes from the vote of the other. Who the people
were that did all this, we know nothing of. They call themselves by the
general name of the Church; and this is all we know of the matter.
As we have no other external evidence or authority for believing these
books to be the word of God, than what I have mentioned, which is no
evidence or authority at all, I come, in the next place, to examine the internal
evidence contained in the books themselves.
In the former part of this essay, I have spoken of revelation. I now proceed
further with that subject, for the purpose of applying it to the books
in question.
16
Revelation is a communication of something, which the person, to
whom that thing is revealed, did not know before. For if I have done a
thing, or seen it done, it needs no revelation to tell me I have done it, or
seen it, nor to enable me to tell it, or to write it.
Revelation, therefore, cannot be applied to anything done upon earth
of which man is himself the actor or the witness; and consequently all the
historical and anecdotal part of the Bible, which is almost the whole of it,
is not within the meaning and compass of the word revelation, and,
therefore, is not the word of God.

Good stuff

[Marenco]

I haven't read the book yet but i would like to hear others thoughts on here about this book if they have read it...

[shakey1]

Looks like an inarresting read... thx!

[Superfluous Man]

An excellent book written by a man who sifted through the arguments and came to a rational conclusion based upon careful study and examination. It is a book based upon REASON and LOGIC... not faith or superstition. The arguments are concrete.

Sarcasm?

[jllundqu]

Sarcasm?

No. Have you read it?

[roho76]

Very good read. Dude spent time in prison for writing it and had to finish when he got out.

[1stvermont]

Good stuff

I just want to mention his objection is inaccurate and non historical. This will be responded to from a christian perspective in an upcoming thread.

[jllundqu]

I just want to mention his objection is inaccurate and non historical. This will be responded to from a christian perspective in an upcoming thread.

Are you claiming to know who the author of the old testament is?

Are you denying that men voted on which books/gospels would be considered 'the word of god?'

Just what about it is 'non historical'?

[Superfluous Man]

No. Have you read it?

Yes. Paine was a low brow pamphleteer who was the opposite of all the things you said. And in the Age of Reason, he was at his worst.

[Superfluous Man]

Are you denying that men voted on which books/gospels would be considered 'the word of god?'

Are you saying you believe they did?

Because that there is a pretty outrageously unhistorical claim.

[Anti Federalist]

I much preferred "Common Sense".

In "Reason" Paine attempted to condemn religious zealotry and ended up sounding like...a zealot.

[bunklocoempire]

Can someone please highlight the peace part for me? Or tell me where to find it in T.P.'s writings?

"Thomas Paine's writings bring me peace, and therefore peace to others, because..."

Thanks.

[Natural Citizen]

On the Duty of Civil Disobedience by Henry David Thoreau, 1849 (Original title: Resistance to Civil Government) is a good read.