reply to post by DrMattMaddix
If Paine's Common Sense is anything like what I've heard, it's simply a chapter from his life.
It is not auto-biographical, nor does it represent views he would later abandon in his life. The sharpest contrast between Common Sense and his later
works would be his use of religious doctrines to justify his denouncement of the Divine Right of Kings. However, this isn't to say that he believed
such doctrines. Merely that he was writing to an audience which was predominantly Christian.
From the opening article of "Age of Reason".
IT has been my intention, for several years past, to publish my thoughts upon religion; I am well aware of the difficulties that attend the subject,
and from that consideration, had reserved it to a more advanced period of life. I intended it to be the last offering I should make to my
fellow-citizens of all nations, and that at a time when the purity of the motive that induced me to it could not admit of a question, even by those
who might disapprove the work.
Soon after I had published the pamphlet COMMON SENSE, in America, I saw the exceeding probability that a revolution in the system of government would
be followed by a revolution in the system of religion. The adulterous connection of church and state, wherever it had taken place, whether Jewish,
Christian, or Turkish, had so effectually prohibited, by pains and penalties, every discussion upon established creeds, and upon first principles of
religion, that until the system of government should be changed, those subjects could not be brought fairly and openly before the world; but that
whenever this should be done, a revolution in the system of religion would follow. Human inventions and priest-craft would be detected; and man would
return to the pure, unmixed, and unadulterated belief of one God, and no more.
Now, of course, Paine was a Deist and his idea of "One God" did not extend beyond that simple statement of belief. He rejected ideas of revelation,
of scripture, or of miracles. He did not believe in a personal god that speaks to us.
It is only in the CREATION that all our ideas and conceptions of a word of God can unite. The Creation speaketh an universal language, independently
of human speech or human language, multiplied and various as they be. It is an ever existing original, which every man can read. It cannot be forged;
it cannot be counterfeited; it cannot be lost; it cannot be altered; it cannot be suppressed. It does not depend upon the will of man whether it shall
be published or not; it publishes itself from one end of the earth to the other. It preaches to all nations and to all worlds; and this word of God
reveals to man all that is necessary for man to know of God.
In essence, he viewed science and reason as the ONLY method by which we can say anything about God. That being the case, I have no doubts that were he
alive today - he would be an Atheist, as IMO, Deism is no longer a religion based on rational observation - but is a profession of faith in spite of
rational observation. However, aside from that mere profession of faith in god, there is not much distinguishing a Deist from an Atheist. Of all the
religious flavors known to man - Deism and Atheist are perhaps the two most diametrically opposed in simplicity of definition, yet the most similar in
practice. This is why many Deists and Atheists find themselves aligned towards a common goal, and freely exchange ideas and views without the
contention which revealed religion does.
Because Deism and Atheism are so similar, many people mistake Deists for being Atheists - which is what happened to Thomas Paine. What he knew would
happen. Paine didn't come to his ideas later in life, rather, he saved his Age of Reason work until he thought his life was at an end. Which is
exactly what he did.
Indeed, Paine was considered an Atheist well into the 20th century by many prominent figures. Theodore Roosevelt refered to Paine as "a dirty little
Atheist" according to Thomas Edison.
Philosophy of Paine, By: Thomas A. Edison
Paine wrote Age of Reason while he was awaiting execution in France for his denouncement of the death sentience for King Louis XVI, and his
proposition of exile to America; the nation which he helped to free. Paine was, by the sheerest happenstance, spared the guillotine just long enough
for Thomas Jefferson to send an envoy to rescue him.
Paine was a man who would stand by his convictions - regardless of the consequences. He stood for them with a rifle in his hand for America against
the crown, returned to England to defend them on his native soil in face of charges of liable for sedition, defended them in the face of blood and
rage fueled insanity in France, and he defended them even back at home in America - by continuing to publish and argue his views in the face of an
increasingly hostile public.
Regardless of what your views on his liberal stances are, I hope you (and everybody) can at least appreciate how much of a disservice that Bob Basso
does by distorting Paine's views and his name in a manner contrary to what Paine would support now that he in no longer around to defend himself.
Regardless of whether you support Bobs views over those of Paine's, can you not see how what Bob Basso is doing is the height of disrespect - and he
should be shamed for it. At the very least, he should leave Paine's name to the merits of Paine's work - and create a fictionalized moniker to match
his fictional character.
[edit on 16-8-2009 by Lasheic]