Radorth

The "enlightenment," credited to a miniscule number of "free-thinkers," just happens to coincide with the widespread dissemination of the NT. All coincidence? I do not think so.

For all practical purposes, there were no NT's to read before 1700, and then preachers were contradicting most of it anyway. (And still are)
There were few "authentic Christian disciples" to speak of. How could they be if they were forced to believe what came from the pulpit? "Kill a Muslim, get mom out of purgatory." unless you would like to count those with free access to it, men like Newton, Bacon and Locke whom Jefferson wisely called "the three greatest men in history."

All Christians. Then came Quakers, Bible in hand, with the most egalitarian of ideas. Where did they come from? Mithra? The mouth of Jesus perhaps?

And the Methodists and their underground railroads? What was Beecher? A closet atheist? Why did Franklin admire George Whitefield, and pine that he wished they had done more together, such as start a colony in Ohio in order to set a "better Christian example."

The first published black female poet, an ex-slave named Phyllis Wheatley was a convert of Whitefield, and I have no doubt she would have died in obscurity without his influence. He was kicked out of churches in New England for his egalitarion preaching and for "allowing women, negroes and children" to speak from the pulpit.

If you want to blame theists for a messy history, at least point like Jefferson to "the rags of the clergy" and admit like he that Jesus set the moral standard for all time. It's called separating the Baby from the bathwater. But of course this would require the mental effort to actually think freely instead of making mindless, and sweeping statememts.

Radorth

Toto

I think you are correct in pointing out that actually reading the Bible has lead to the undermining of Christianity, and the Bible has produced more atheists than any other single book. I think you are also correct in tracing a lot of good to dissenting Christians, who paved the way for modern secular humanism by loosening the bonds of authority and dogma so they could finally be shaken off completely.

Other than that, I'm not sure what your point is.

You point out some good Christians from a time and place where practically every one was a Christian (or had to pretend to be.) But most of their fellow Christians throughout history thought that slavery was part of God's plan.

The Enlightenment and the spread of the NT are both connected to the invention of the printing press. It would be a logical fallacy to say that reading the NT produced the Enlightenment, if in fact that is what you are trying to say.

Jefferson, of course, took his scissors to the New Testament and cut out all of the supernatural bits. He, like many Deists, thought that Jesus was an exemplary moral person, but not a God. But the morality that Jesus (or the writers of the NT) espoused can be found in many other religions and in the Greek philosophies of the time. It was not original with the authors of the NT.

So where does that leave you? If you save the baby and throw out the bathwater, is what you have left Christianity, or just a naked baby?

JohnR

Funny thing is the Mormons claim the enlightenment
was caused by Joeseph Smith in 1730. The breaking of the seal. Me I think it was better education.

Jayhawker Soule

... then you should do so in the appropriate forum rather than poluting this one.

Vorkosigan

The "enlightenment," credited to a miniscule number of "free-thinkers," just happens to coincide with the widespread dissemination of the NT. All coincidence? I do not think so.

It also coincides with rising living standards, increasing global trade, the rise of colonialism, the development of science, the experience of religious warfare, and many other things. But you're right, describing the Englightenment seriously would require the mental effort to actually think freely instead of making mindless, and sweeping statememts.

lpetrich

I think that this belongs in Miscellaneous Religious Discussions or Rants, Raves, and Preachings, but I'll answer anyway.

First off, Joseph Smith, founder of Mormonism, had received his "revelations" around 1830, not 1730

And about Radorth's examples,

Isaac Newton had been seriously interested in theological matters -- an interest that took the form of writing vast volumes on the prophecies of Daniel and Revelation, and also of supporting Arianism, the heresy that Jesus Christ is subordinate to God the Father rather than the two being coequal.

And he had to keep his mouth shut about his theological beliefs in order to keep his job.

Likewise, Francis Bacon's defenses of religion had a cover-his-rear-end quality about it.

And Robert Locke had invented the social-contract theory of government -- which is totally unbiblical. And both the US Constitution and the Declaration of Independence contain this theory.

Peter Kirby

I agree that this would be more appropriate in RRP.

best,
Peter Kirby