Thomas Jefferson and Ben Franklin

[SunTracker]

were not Christians.  They were something called "Diests".  Thomas Jefferson even wrote his own version of the bible that took out every reference of Jesus being the son of god.

Learned this interesting tidbit in class today.

[rpm]

They also were advocates for marijuana. **** liberal hippies!

[SaburoS]

More for the hemp fibers that were superior to the other fibers available. Basically a weed that would grow to incredible lengths in a short time. Made for really good rigging rope for the sailing vessels of the day. Good for making clothing as well.
Wasn't it law that land owners had to have at least two growing on their property?

[Lance]

Now Tom Jefferson and Ben Franklin had some fine qualities, but I'd be hard pressed to believe that hemp has ever had a greater friend or defender than Ray.  Ray was a guy I used to play paintball with in Houston.  He was the type that could recite the dialog of any Cheech and Chong movie word for word, had subscriptions to High Times magazine, and whose household decorating motif was neo-bongism.  

Whenever I saw him talking to some new guy at the paintball field, I had a game I'd like to play.  I'd walk over, join the conversation and when I had an opening I'd say something along the lines of, "Hey, Ray, did you know that such and such marijuana law in such and such state was enacted that further restricts access to marijuana?"  I'd then walk away, leaving the new guy there to listen to one of Ray's 2 hour discourses consisting of vague, half-formed thoughts regarding all of the blessings of hemp/marijuana and the evils of the war on drugs.  It was always good for a laugh or two, and sort of became a rite of passage at the field.  If anyone came back after that, we (the regulars) realized they had no self respect and would do anything to fit in, so we shunned them completely.

[gofaster]

Originally posted by Lance
Ray was a guy I used to play paintball with in Houston.  He was the type that could recite the dialog of any Cheech and Chong movie word for word, had subscriptions to High Times magazine, and whose household decorating motif was neo-bongism.  

Doped and armed!

[Spitter]

Originally posted by SunTracker
were not Christians.  They were something called "Diests".  Thomas Jefferson even wrote his own version of the bible that took out every reference of Jesus being the son of god.

Learned this interesting tidbit in class today.

Ah, you 'learned' this in class today?  Who told you?  What was thier source?  Did they have substantiated documentation to back it up?  

I'm not sying that your statment is incorrect, it is, in fact true, but the extent to which both of these men believed or not varies significantly.  
And, someone told you they were Diests, but do you know what a deist is?  

I'm not trying to flame you, or be mean in any way.  Just trying to light the fire of free thinking and skepticism in ya!  Chek out some of these links for a lot of good information on the framers, and lots of good original writing sources from the framers of the constitution.

Always get accurate data, learn to question authority young, and do it every chance you get, you learn more, and it keeps them honest!  


http://memory.loc.gov/ammem/amlaw/lwfr.html

http://memory.loc.gov/ammem/amlaw/lwac.html

http://memory.loc.gov/ammem/amlaw/lwsp.html

http://memory.loc.gov/ammem/amlaw/lwjc.html

http://memory.loc.gov/ammem/amlaw/lwej.html

http://press-pubs.uchicago.edu/founders/tocs/toc.html

http://www.archives.gov/

http://www.ourdocuments.gov/

http://www.yale.edu/lawweb/avalon/avalon.htm

http://www.si.edu/history_and_culture/

http://www.loc.gov/

http://thomas.loc.gov/

http://members.tripod.com/~candst/toc.htm

 
Cheers,
Spitter

[Ripsnort]

Originally posted by SunTracker
were not Christians.  They were something called "Diests".  Thomas Jefferson even wrote his own version of the bible that took out every reference of Jesus being the son of god.

Learned this interesting tidbit in class today.

College or High school?  What class?  Hopefully it was a class ABOUT religion, otherwise my worse fears are proven once again about our education system.

[weaselsan]

Originally posted by Ripsnort
College or High school?  What class?  Hopefully it was a class ABOUT religion, otherwise my worse fears are proven once again about our education system.

Couldn't have been American History, that doesn't begin until 1960 in todays schools.

[Frogm4n]

You do realize that jesus wasnt even considered to be a diety untill emporer of rome converted. It would be unfit for the caesar to follow the teachings of someone that wasnt a god.

[john9001]

Ben Franklin is my hero, he drank and made love to french women, well ok, he did some other stuff also.

[majic]

Originally posted by Frogm4n
You do realize that jesus wasnt even considered to be a diety untill emporer of rome converted. It would be unfit for the caesar to follow the teachings of someone that wasnt a god.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but in all my years growing up in a Catholic home, nobody ever said Jesus was anything but the son of God.  (admittedly I am not very religious nowadays, but that's how I remember it.)

[Frogm4n]

Well of course the RCC is going to teach that the bible is absolute 100 percent correct. It dosnt dwell into actually historical texts and artwork that are non christian. To find actual facts about early christian history your going to have to read secular works on the roman empire between 200-500 a.d.

btw the rcc was created by the Roman Government. hence the location of the vatican and the title of the church. Official language of latin etc....

[capt. apathy]

To find actual facts about early christian history your going to have to read secular works on the roman empire between 200-500 a.d.

so you think second hand accounts from 200-500 years later will give more acurate information.

interesting reasoning.  so by your logic my acounting of what the founding fathers had in mind when forming this country would be more acurate than documents from that time period?

[Frogm4n]

Originally posted by capt. apathy
so you think second hand accounts from 200-500 years later will give more acurate information.

interesting reasoning.  so by your logic my acounting of what the founding fathers had in mind when forming this country would be more acurate than documents from that time period?

You really have no idea what i just said did you? Partly my fault, my grasp of expressing my thoughts on 'paper' are quite weak. I think non biblical texts from that time period are more accurate, as is the artwork from that period. These are things that were not considered holy and were not commishined by caesar or the pope. Studying neo platonic theory and agustine is quite interesting.

Of course not many documents survive to this day because the christians in egypt burned down the western worlds largest library. And back then most books only had 1 or 2 copys.

[majic]

Originally posted by Frogm4n
Well of course the RCC is going to teach that the bible is absolute 100 percent correct. It dosnt dwell into actually historical texts and artwork that are non christian. To find actual facts about early christian history your going to have to read secular works on the roman empire between 200-500 a.d.

btw the rcc was created by the Roman Government. hence the location of the vatican and the title of the church. Official language of latin etc....

Then clarify please.  Who did the early Christians believe Jesus was?  Not the son of God?