Louisiana Purchase

by

“Even Finer” Comes Across a Little Fuzzy

Previously,

Welcome to the blog about Thomas Jefferson that really isn’t about him, even though it’s about him…

Carlos’ latest installment, “Even Finer” is a rebuttal to my assertion that Thomas Jefferson’s religious views were founded on biblical principles as opposed to the “diversity of philosophies” that were common during colonial times.

In “Even Finer”, Carlos writes:

My statement was not about Jefferson, per se, but about the diversity of philosophies current in our nation’s early years. My point was that casting the “way it used to be” as being guided by “Biblical Principals” as a contrast to the current day or other times in our history is a false abstraction.

True, Carlos’ statement isn’t about Jefferson per se, but if my friend is going to make the assertion that there were a “diversity of philosophies in our nation’s early years” and then use Jefferson as an example, he is then obligated to demonstrate Jefferson’s divergence from biblical principles. David Barton’s Wallbuilders website provides abundant information to the contrary. I encourage you to read it, if you haven’t already, but to highlight a few points:

  • Jefferson encouraged local governments to make land available for Christian purposes
  • Jefferson agreed to provide government funds to help evangelize Indians
  • Jefferson’s University of Virginia wasn’t established as a secular university, but as a “trans-denominational university”, having multiple seminaries for various Christian denominations

“Okay, nice bullet points, but that doesn’t mean Jeff didn’t have other values that conflicted with biblical principles.” True enough, so then what proof does “Even Finer” provide to support its point? Well, here’s the list—Jefferson:

  1. Disagreed with other founders
  2. Retained slaves and had an affair with Sally Hemmings, one of his slaves
  3. Extended the idea of implicit power in the Louisiana Purchase, even though he championed a strict constructionist view of the Constitution 
  4. Supported going beyond the written law in certain circumstances
  5. Took on personal debt
  6. Didn’t honor the national debt
  7. Used low brow political tactics
  8. Increasingly adopted Deist views
  9. Rewrote the Bible

It looks pretty substantial until you realize:

  • Disagreements with others don’t necessarily mean you’re opposed to their values. Sure Jefferson disagreed with other founders – but did they disagree on biblical principles (not biblical theology, but biblical principles)? “Even Finer” fails to provide any support for this assertion.
  • Though Jefferson had slaves, he was one of the leading figures that fought to end slavery, however, the British Crown forbade emancipation. When the states sought independence, it was Jefferson’s original draft of the Declaration of Independence that sought emancipation of slaves; and while in the Continental Congress he tried to pass legislation to abolish slavery in all the states.
    As for the alleged affair with Sally Hemmings, there are a couple of points worth noting:
    1) Even if Jefferson had an affair with Ms. Hemmings, he never endorsed having intimate relations with slaves
    2) There is substantial evidence that Jefferson, in fact, did not have an affair with Ms. Hemmings. Unfortunately, there has been too much hearsay on this issue and very little substance. I submit Thomas Jefferson and Sally Hemmings: The Search for Truth as evidence.
  • As for the Louisiana Purchase, I suggest “How Should the Courts Interpret the Constitution”, where under the Et Tu Quoque heading I detail that Jefferson actually sought congressional (and constitutional) approval for the purchase; when that wasn’t going to pan out, he took matters into his own hands and made the deal.
    Here’s the point: if Jefferson believed in the idea of implicit powers within the Constituion (and not strict constructionism), there wouldn’t have been any need to seek out congressional approval first. But that’s exactly what he did. When Congress wouldn’t play ball with him, that’s when he decided to get implicit. 
  • As for Jefferson’s liberal support for acting beyond the written law in certain circumstances: 1) “Even Finer” makes the assertion, but unfortunately fails to specify what circumstances are being referred to (definition, anyone?) 2) Even if there are specifics to support this point, acting beyond the written law was obviously the exception, not the rule – so even if this were true, Jefferson isn’t making a rule of this principle, but an exception to a principle
  • Regarding Jefferson’s personal debt: so what? Again, a person may value biblical principles and not hold to them (it may make him a hypocrite, but it doesn’t demonstrate a divergent value). In other words, just because I spend my money like a drunken sailor and then tell my friends to be self-disciplined and thrifty doesn’t mean I don’t value those biblical principles, it means I don’t practice what I preach.
  • Lack of support for honoring the national debt and low brow political tactics—hmm, again, I’m not sure what Carlos is specifically referring to, so I’ll limit my comments to: specifics, please…
  • As for Jefferson’s alleged Deist views and rewriting the Bible, I’d recommend looking at the Wallbuilders articles that provide documentation that his beliefs weren’t deist, nor that he rewrote the Bible, but instead created a Christian primer for Indians (not a Bible) using only Jesus’ words in order to introduce them to Christianity.

So what do we see from all this? We see that Jefferson was real: a living, breathing, fallible, honorable, three-dimensional man with strengths and foibles (I love that word). There’s no argument there. Was he a Christian? Not in the orthodox sense, though he himself said, “I am a real Christian, that is to say, a disciple of the doctrines of Jesus.” Did he value biblical principles? The historical record resounds with a hearty yes.

So where’s the “diversity of philosophies” as demonstrated in the life of Jefferson? Was he a fallen man like the rest of us? Yeah, he was. But I ask again, where’re his divergent philosophies that show that biblical Christianity was simply one of many many ideas swimming around in the cultural and political soup of the early days of our new republic?

[shrug] I still don’t see the evidence…

What I do see is a man who loved his country, had his faults, and saw Christianity as the foundation for our republic. As Jefferson said,

No nation has ever existed or been governed without religion. Nor can be. The Christian religion is the best religion that has been given to man and I, as Chief Magistrate of this nation, am bound to give it the sanction of my example.

Nothing fuzzy about that.