Thomas Jefferson (1743–1826)

It's an interesting idea. Take the four gospels of the new testament. Put all the accounts into one linear volume and cut out the miracles. What you have is the account of a philosopher/story-teller with a very unhappy ending.

I liked it. It only takes a couple of hours to read, I got to refamiliarise myself with all the parables and imagine a more relatable Jesus figure.

Other only real problem is it gets a bit repetitive. The same lessons get taught at different times over the four gospels show more so now all the stories are compiled into one Jesus repeats himself a lot.

Not quite sure what the point was. As an atheist, I appreciate a more reality-based telling and can get behind a "be excellent to each other" type message but it's still very heavy on "the coming of the kingdom of Christ." Not sure the purpose of taking out miracle healing and virgin births but keeping references to angels, heaven, hell, and all that stuff. It kind of leaves the book in an odd place, it's enough to upset the people that like full-blown magical Jesus but not enough to win over people that want to follow the golden rule without needing heavenly rewards pushed on them. I guess the Jefferson bible is headed to book limbo. show less

Quite possibly the best book of history I've ever read - the American Revolution, the Enlightenment, the French Revolution, shopping lists, child care instructions, treaty negotiations, rumination on religion, book reviews, art criticism, and too many more subjects to list. The complete correspondence between three of the founders (Abigail Adam's letters to and from Jefferson are included) constitutes in my humble opinion the best of history in the raw, the very stuff that still weaves it's show more way through our world two hundred years later. I cannot recommend this highly enough. show less

Although modern listings all refer to this book as “The Jefferson Bible” the proper title, the one that the editor, Thomas Jefferson, gave it is “The Life and Morals of Jesus of Nazareth” I call Jefferson the editor, not the author, for the very good reason that he did not write the book he assembled it. He literally cut and pasted it together from six of his own Bibles, two in English, two in French, and two with both Latin and Greek text printed in parallel. One of the library show more subject listings for the book explains Jefferson’s intention very succinctly, “Jesus Christ › Biography › Sources, Biblical” Each of the four Gospels tells the same story, the biography of Jesus. Jefferson extracted the biographical information from each and assembled them to tell the story of Jesus’ life in a single unit.

I have had the book on my shelves for several years and was motivated to read it after seeing the very Bibles that Jefferson worked with on display at the Smithsonian Museum of American History. I was also interested in learning, after listening to current politicians, what blasphemy Jefferson had committed. All i found is that In one spot he missed clipping all the words in a phrase and in another he lightly wrote in the margin his understanding of the Roman law the priests charged Jesus with breaking. Jefferson seemed to agree with Pilate on Jesus’ innocence. I found no blasphemy. Except for the notes in the margins every word also found in every modern Bible and I expect that many people write notes in the margins of their Bibles, hoping to clarify their thoughts on passages, without committing blasphemy. The missing words, they are at least a harmless mistake made by a 77 year old man tired after a days work and at worst a venial sin of omission.

My edition of Jefferson’s work has a preface by Forrest Church and a short article by Jaroslav Pelkan, both of which help illuminate Jefferson’s motivation for this project and explain the idea of exploring Jesus as a moral teacher, a project undertaken by several of Jefferson’s contemporaries in several forms as the article explains.

It is the morals of Jesus that most stand out after Jefferson finished with his razor and gluepot. “The Life and Morals of Jesus of Nazareth” show that Jesus spoke more of virtue than sin, unlike modern Christians. The road to damnation is not traveled by sinners, they can be forgiven. Damnation, according to the words of Jesus, comes from a lack of virtue. (Matthew 25:37-46)

Much of Jefferson’s earlier writings appears to be inspired by the words of Jesus. “We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.” is, in meaning, no different from the text in Matthew cited above. And what is (Matthew 22:20-22) but Jesus saying that God, the Church, is separate from the state, Caesar.?

Jefferson was concerned that the authors of the Gospels wrote many years after the events they told of and that they were carpenters and fishermen, not men of letters. He also worried that translators over the centuries may have introduced errors, either accidentally or otherwise. Jefferson was very aware of the compromises that need to be made when writing as a group, even in a group of well meaning men. He felt that focusing on the words and acts of Jesus would permit him to see the essence of Christ's teaching. If he was successful it appears to me that modern “Christians” have drifted far from what Jesus taught and have become simply Old Testament Gentiles. show less

Raised by agnostics, I never had much of a religious education. This book, which was written to focus on the actions and words of Jesus which did not appear to be miraculous, seemed to be a good way to learn about the doctrine of someone who is arguably the most influential people in history. Stripping away the divine acts, the reader is left with a narrative about a man seeking to reform the morality of his time.

Some elements of his philosophy resonate more than others. I wasn't show more particularly moved by Jesus' proclamations on divorce and adultery. As one who has never has been compelled to change my behavior in the Sabbath, his early counsels not to refrain from doing good works on Sunday seem as a matter of course. Other ideas I appreciated more, such as his precepts to love - to love one's neighbor, to love one's enemy. If the world were occupied by more people who sought the betterment of the conditions of others, we would be doing better, I think. To the extent that he talks about money (and I was surprised to discover how much money was discussed), Jesus seemed to favor the rich over the poor, and believe in lifting up those who had the least. In this sense, I think I would have agreed with the person whose creed has become such a world-shaping force.

Ultimately, I was surprised at how brief the read was. Sans miracles, divinity, and awe, the Gospels are a remarkably brief text on a someone who appears to have been an influential, respected man of his time. I'm glad to have read the book, but I have to admit I wasn't much moved by it. show less