What do you think?
Rate this book
Writings of Thomas Paine; Volume 4 (1794-1796): The Age of Reason
This work has been previously published and carefully edited by humans to be read digitally on your eReader. Please enjoy this historical and classic work. All of our titles are only 99 cents and are formatted to work with the Nook. Also, if it is an illustrated work, you will be able to see all of the original images. This makes them the best quality classic works available for the lowest price. So enjoy this classic work as if it were the original book!
Nook
First published November 30, 2010
1 person is currently reading
5 people want to read
About the author
Moncure Daniel Conway
456 books11 followersMoncure Daniel Conway was an American abolitionist minister. At various times Methodist, Unitarian, and a Freethinker, the radical writer descended from patriotic and patrician families of Virginia and Maryland but spent most of the final four decades of his life abroad in England and France, where he wrote biographies of Edmund Randolph, Nathaniel Hawthorne and Thomas Paine and his own autobiography. He led freethinkers in London's South Place Chapel, now Conway Hall.
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 of 1 review
May 16, 2016
I will split this review on two parts—as the work itself may provide no other possibility. Each part of this review is directed towards each part of Paine's book; and the reason for this is no other than the fact that, putting aside all the very fundamental differences, the two pieces were written in different times.
The first part of Thomas Paine's book, The Age of Reason, is a somewhat "common book"—let it be known that I am grouping it as common because of the subject and intent—by today's standards. However, let it be borne in mind that it may be common in today's standard, but it costed the lives of several people related to it—either by death due to the consequences of prosecution or because of severe defamation, which would result in the first; and it could have costed the author's life. It is extremely important that we understand the course of events in the years this book was being written, and those that followed, as well as the author's life. While it does not required an scholars's perspective, awareness, or extensive knowledge of all the events, it is still necessary to do so in a lesser degree. I stumbled upon an editor—Moncure D. Conway—that pointed out some facts that were unknown to me, and that would later, in the second part of the book, be explained. For those aware of Paine's life, it is not a secret that he played an important role on the American revolution of 1776, which ended with its independence from England. What may not be known, however, is that, later on, another of his books—this book—would achieve a very similar reaction. It would get him in troubles, however, much like his earlier writings, it would help shape the future of religion and state.
The first part of this book is hardly anything else than a way to try to explain others what he thought about religion, and a critique of it. While it does have something worth in it, I cannot think it is worthwhile for those who may not found it interesting to learn about history and how some people tried to communicate their ideas. However, for those not only willing to learn history, but to learn about a person that shaped the world, to have the chance to read what this person said; is good book. This first part lays the some foundation by which one may criticize religion, and ideas in general, but it does it in a simple way, and very quickly. Do not expect the author to dwell on a specific subject for too long, for he will not. One thing that gets to be very clear is that, the author, while criticizes religions and their way of describing god, does not reject the idea of a god altogether; and he argues in favour of the idea of deism several times. But most importantly, he attacks the idea, but not the people who believe in such, and even admits they have their right to do so, as he has it. In short: it is an interesting reading. His views on the cosmos, the universe, is something that does not stop to amaze me; it is the voice of a person who is genuinely moved by it.
The second part of Thomas Paine's book, The Age of Reason, starts by telling the reader about the the reaction that his first part received, as well as explaining what was going on during the time he was writing it. Now, while I already hinted the fact that this may be very common on today's standards, and that it is important on its historical context, this second part, it must be said, not only defeats the first one in content, but does so in a magnificent way. The second part of this book has what lacked on the first part—arguments made with a strong base. To achieve such goal Paine used not what many would—very wrongly—do today, he used not arguments based on facts and logic gathered from the real, natural world; rather, he used the bible itself as a weapon against the bible. However, he does, every now and then, give forth his own arguments against the bible:
"The most extraordinary of all the things called miracles, related in the New Testament, is that of the devil flying away with Jesus Christ, and carrying him to the top of a high mountain; and to the top of the highest pinnacle of the temple, and showing him and promising to him all the kingdoms of the world. How happened it that he did not discover America? or is it only with kingdoms that his sooty highness has any interest.”
And of course:
“How strange and inconsistent is it, that the same circumstance that would weaken the belief even of a probable story, should be given as a motive for believing this one, that has upon the face of it every token of absolute impossibility and imposture”
Making it very clear that we allow ourselves to cast a very different judgement on, for example, the bible—or its prophets, while we, under other circumstances, would not do so. Paine makes a call for skepticism on the words of men, whom have claimed to speak in behalf of God. This can only be obvious by his following statement:
“When it is revealed to me, I will believe it to be revelation; but it is not and cannot be incumbent upon me to believe it to be revelation before; neither is it proper that I should take the word of man as the word of God, and put man in the place of God”
And of course:
“When it is revealed to me, I will believe it to be revelation; but it is not and cannot be incumbent upon me to believe it to be revelation before; neither is it proper that I should take the word of man as the word of God, and put man in the place of God”
That said, I've already heard and read that Paine has been called an "atheist." Such claim could not be any more wrong and farther from reality than anything else than could be said about Paine. As I have already stated, Thomas Paine, in the first part of the Age of Reason, advocated for deism; and he does so again in the second part:
“that the only true religion is deism, by which I then meant and now mean the belief of one God, and an imitation of his moral character, or the practice of what are called moral virtues."
He admits that science is the only way by which we can see God:
“The principles of science lead to this knowledge; for the Creator of man is the Creator of science, and it is through that medium that man can see God, as it were, face to face.”
The idea of him being an atheist is thus disproved.
To sum it up: the book is, in no way, hard to understand, nor tedious. It is written in a way that most of the readers should be able to comprehend it. Having not much else to say: this piece of writing is, I believe, not only a good work; but a necessary reading for those interested in the subject.
The first part of Thomas Paine's book, The Age of Reason, is a somewhat "common book"—let it be known that I am grouping it as common because of the subject and intent—by today's standards. However, let it be borne in mind that it may be common in today's standard, but it costed the lives of several people related to it—either by death due to the consequences of prosecution or because of severe defamation, which would result in the first; and it could have costed the author's life. It is extremely important that we understand the course of events in the years this book was being written, and those that followed, as well as the author's life. While it does not required an scholars's perspective, awareness, or extensive knowledge of all the events, it is still necessary to do so in a lesser degree. I stumbled upon an editor—Moncure D. Conway—that pointed out some facts that were unknown to me, and that would later, in the second part of the book, be explained. For those aware of Paine's life, it is not a secret that he played an important role on the American revolution of 1776, which ended with its independence from England. What may not be known, however, is that, later on, another of his books—this book—would achieve a very similar reaction. It would get him in troubles, however, much like his earlier writings, it would help shape the future of religion and state.
The first part of this book is hardly anything else than a way to try to explain others what he thought about religion, and a critique of it. While it does have something worth in it, I cannot think it is worthwhile for those who may not found it interesting to learn about history and how some people tried to communicate their ideas. However, for those not only willing to learn history, but to learn about a person that shaped the world, to have the chance to read what this person said; is good book. This first part lays the some foundation by which one may criticize religion, and ideas in general, but it does it in a simple way, and very quickly. Do not expect the author to dwell on a specific subject for too long, for he will not. One thing that gets to be very clear is that, the author, while criticizes religions and their way of describing god, does not reject the idea of a god altogether; and he argues in favour of the idea of deism several times. But most importantly, he attacks the idea, but not the people who believe in such, and even admits they have their right to do so, as he has it. In short: it is an interesting reading. His views on the cosmos, the universe, is something that does not stop to amaze me; it is the voice of a person who is genuinely moved by it.
The second part of Thomas Paine's book, The Age of Reason, starts by telling the reader about the the reaction that his first part received, as well as explaining what was going on during the time he was writing it. Now, while I already hinted the fact that this may be very common on today's standards, and that it is important on its historical context, this second part, it must be said, not only defeats the first one in content, but does so in a magnificent way. The second part of this book has what lacked on the first part—arguments made with a strong base. To achieve such goal Paine used not what many would—very wrongly—do today, he used not arguments based on facts and logic gathered from the real, natural world; rather, he used the bible itself as a weapon against the bible. However, he does, every now and then, give forth his own arguments against the bible:
"The most extraordinary of all the things called miracles, related in the New Testament, is that of the devil flying away with Jesus Christ, and carrying him to the top of a high mountain; and to the top of the highest pinnacle of the temple, and showing him and promising to him all the kingdoms of the world. How happened it that he did not discover America? or is it only with kingdoms that his sooty highness has any interest.”
And of course:
“How strange and inconsistent is it, that the same circumstance that would weaken the belief even of a probable story, should be given as a motive for believing this one, that has upon the face of it every token of absolute impossibility and imposture”
Making it very clear that we allow ourselves to cast a very different judgement on, for example, the bible—or its prophets, while we, under other circumstances, would not do so. Paine makes a call for skepticism on the words of men, whom have claimed to speak in behalf of God. This can only be obvious by his following statement:
“When it is revealed to me, I will believe it to be revelation; but it is not and cannot be incumbent upon me to believe it to be revelation before; neither is it proper that I should take the word of man as the word of God, and put man in the place of God”
And of course:
“When it is revealed to me, I will believe it to be revelation; but it is not and cannot be incumbent upon me to believe it to be revelation before; neither is it proper that I should take the word of man as the word of God, and put man in the place of God”
That said, I've already heard and read that Paine has been called an "atheist." Such claim could not be any more wrong and farther from reality than anything else than could be said about Paine. As I have already stated, Thomas Paine, in the first part of the Age of Reason, advocated for deism; and he does so again in the second part:
“that the only true religion is deism, by which I then meant and now mean the belief of one God, and an imitation of his moral character, or the practice of what are called moral virtues."
He admits that science is the only way by which we can see God:
“The principles of science lead to this knowledge; for the Creator of man is the Creator of science, and it is through that medium that man can see God, as it were, face to face.”
The idea of him being an atheist is thus disproved.
To sum it up: the book is, in no way, hard to understand, nor tedious. It is written in a way that most of the readers should be able to comprehend it. Having not much else to say: this piece of writing is, I believe, not only a good work; but a necessary reading for those interested in the subject.
Displaying 1 of 1 review