The U.S. NOT founded upon Christianity

[Quantum Windbag]

None the less, Jefferson and Franklin were Deists, not Christians. An important distinction. They took great care to craft governing documents based on reason, not religion.

One more time.

Jefferson was a Christian by his own words, your opinion of his religion has a lot less weight than his words do.

And Maxine Waters is a liberal by her own words, yet she wants to nationalize the oil industry....

You don't think socialism is a liberal philosophy?

 

[Christopher]

How can any nation be a 'free nation' when there are slaves?

We were not a completely STABLE free nation, that is the point. Like I said to boedica I trust Washington's judgment. He lived during that time, knew how to best run the country and what would tear it apart. He also knew that slavery needed to be abolished.

Where oh where did Washington say that slavery needed to be abolished?

George Washington's Mount Vernon - George Washington and Slavery

George Washington's attitude toward slavery changed as he grew older. During the Revolution, as he and fellow patriots strove for liberty, Washington became increasingly conscious of the contradiction between this struggle and the system of slavery. By the time of his presidency, he seems to have believed that slavery was wrong and against the principles of the new nation. As President, Washington did not lead a public fight against slavery, however, because he believed it would tear the new nation apart.

 

[bodecea]

We were not a completely STABLE free nation, that is the point. Like I said to boedica I trust Washington's judgment. He lived during that time, knew how to best run the country and what would tear it apart. He also knew that slavery needed to be abolished.

Where oh where did Washington say that slavery needed to be abolished?

George Washington's Mount Vernon - George Washington and Slavery

George Washington's attitude toward slavery changed as he grew older. During the Revolution, as he and fellow patriots strove for liberty, Washington became increasingly conscious of the contradiction between this struggle and the system of slavery. By the time of his presidency, he seems to have believed that slavery was wrong and against the principles of the new nation.

Easy to say....third person...where are HIS comments on this? I've been to Mount Vernon, he had about 300 slaves and profitted quite well from them.

 

[JBeukema]

When you understand their predicament more fully, it is not so hilarious and actually makes sense. Phasing out anything that has been so entrenched in society is always difficult.

We hold these truths to self-evident, that all White landed gentry are created equal in their prosperous birth, and are bestowed by their wealth with certain inalienable privileges of prestige, that among these are the rights to life, liberty, and chattel...

Please explain how you would have done things differently back then. After that, please explain how you would know better than they on how to abolish slavery.

Simple. State that, as all are created equal, no man is to own another as property.

If they believed a word of their own rhetoric in the DoI, this is what they would have done.

But the sons of Cane aren't people, I guess.

 

[JBeukema]

One more time.

Jefferson was a Christian by his own words, your opinion of his religion has a lot less weight than his words do.

And Maxine Waters is a liberal by her own words, yet she wants to nationalize the oil industry....

You don't think socialism is a liberal philosophy?

wow....


First off, 'socialism' is not a singular ideology. Secondly, socialist ideologies, which arose rimaily out of communist thought are at odds with Liberalism.


Go, read.

Marxists Internet Archive Library, Complete Index of Writers

Socialism is 'liberal' only with a small l and only in the sense of social liberalism- it can be very illiberal in economic terms. True Liberalism (classical doctrine, AKA bourgeois liberalism) holds anathema the economic aims of socialist ideologies.


Just look at the discussions/arguments between myself (a moderal social democrat) and the Liberals on this very forum.

 

[Christopher]

Anyone else find it hilarious that they fought for freedom but freeing people would tear them apart?

When you understand their predicament more fully, it is not so hilarious and actually makes sense. Phasing out anything that has been so entrenched in society is always difficult.

I am always appalled that so many conservatives wil

1. WHINE and COMPLAIN about LIBERALS TRYING TO ENSLAVE them

and then turn around and calmly, rationally, expain to us how

a. christian slavery (as in the bible) really wasn't so bad
and
b. ending slavery for blacks coudn't be done overnight....it took a LOOOOOOOOOONG time to convince conservative christians that slavery (the kind that god condones in the bible) probably wasn't such a good thing


look
when we liberals try to enslave you
trust us
it will be MUCH MORE like the christian version of slavery

so
it won't be that bad

I have not complained that liberals are trying to enslave me, so this is a deflection on your part.

I have not said that "Christian slavery" is not so bad. I said it was different than the way we define it today and that I questioned things the Bible says about it. Regardless, nowhere does the Bible actually condone slavery. Please provide chapter and verse for your proof.

If you think slavery could have been abolished overnight, it is you who needs to face reality. History has already proven there were enough people, including Christians, to abolish it. So, broad brushing all Christians on this matter is being dishonest.

 

[JBeukema]

. History has already proven there were enough people, including Christians, to abolish it.

Then why didn't they?

All men are created equal and endowed..


Guess ******* weren't men- just chattel.

Way to go, FF- Lockean Liberalism is fucking awesome!

 

[JBeukema]

Not to mention totalitarian socialism...

 

[Christopher]

Where oh where did Washington say that slavery needed to be abolished?

George Washington's Mount Vernon - George Washington and Slavery

George Washington's attitude toward slavery changed as he grew older. During the Revolution, as he and fellow patriots strove for liberty, Washington became increasingly conscious of the contradiction between this struggle and the system of slavery. By the time of his presidency, he seems to have believed that slavery was wrong and against the principles of the new nation.

Easy to say....third person...where are HIS comments on this? I've been to Mount Vernon, he had about 300 slaves and profitted quite well from them.

Here you go, from the Library of Congress:George Washington Papers at the Library of Congress, 1741-1799 - Collection Connections - For Teachers (Library of Congress)

. . .I never mean (unless some particular circumstance should compel me to it) to possess another slave by purchase; it being among my first wishes to see some plan adopted, by which slavery in this country may be abolished by slow, sure, and imperceptible degrees.

I've been to Mount Vernon as well.

 

[Christopher]

. History has already proven there were enough people, including Christians, to abolish it.

Then why didn't they?

All men are created equal and endowed..


Guess ******* weren't men- just chattel.

Way to go, FF- Lockean Liberalism is fucking awesome!

Are you saying slavery was not abolished?

 

[Christopher]

We hold these truths to self-evident, that all White landed gentry are created equal in their prosperous birth, and are bestowed by their wealth with certain inalienable privileges of prestige, that among these are the rights to life, liberty, and chattel...

Please explain how you would have done things differently back then. After that, please explain how you would know better than they on how to abolish slavery.

Simple. State that, as all are created equal, no man is to own another as property.

If they believed a word of their own rhetoric in the DoI, this is what they would have done.

But the sons of Cane aren't people, I guess.

You did not explain how you would know better than they on what to do.

 

[JBeukema]

wait changing the nation through ' sure, and imperceptible degrees.'?








HE WAS A PROGRESSIVE COMMUNIST KENYAN NAZI!!

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ng9uRpt94Pk]YouTube - Glenn Beck Misspells "Evolution"[/ame]

 

[JBeukema]

Please explain how you would have done things differently back then. After that, please explain how you would know better than they on how to abolish slavery.

Simple. State that, as all are created equal, no man is to own another as property.

If they believed a word of their own rhetoric in the DoI, this is what they would have done.

But the sons of Cane aren't people, I guess.

You did not explain how you would know better than they on what to do.

Did you not read

 

[JBeukema]

. History has already proven there were enough people, including Christians, to abolish it.

Then why didn't they?

All men are created equal and endowed..


Guess ******* weren't men- just chattel.

Way to go, FF- Lockean Liberalism is fucking awesome!

Are you saying slavery was not abolished?

Not by any of them.

 

[Christopher]

Simple. State that, as all are created equal, no man is to own another as property.

If they believed a word of their own rhetoric in the DoI, this is what they would have done.

But the sons of Cane aren't people, I guess.

You did not explain how you would know better than they on what to do.

Did you not read

So, you had all the information they did and knew how things would affect the country at the time? Sorry, I'm going to trust their judgment over yours.

Back to my example, if Obama believes his rhetoric about the need to implement a universal health care system, why hasn't he?

 

[JBeukema]

Right, so rather than address the fact that they had slaves and the fact that the bible condones slavery and the fact that his nation was founded as a secular nation, you want to talk about how Obama can't pass legislation without congress

 

[Christopher]

Right, so rather than address the fact that they had slaves and the fact that the bible condones slavery and the fact that his nation was founded as a secular nation, you want to talk about how Obama can't pass legislation without congress

Now you are deflecting. I used Obama as an example. He knows he cannot implement a universal health care system because it takes time. He is smart. So were the founders.

Show me exactly where the Bible condones slavery. Chapter and verse, describe the context first.

 

[Sky Dancer]

Right, so rather than address the fact that they had slaves and the fact that the bible condones slavery and the fact that his nation was founded as a secular nation, you want to talk about how Obama can't pass legislation without congress

Now you are deflecting. I used Obama as an example. He knows he cannot implement a universal health care system because it takes time. He is smart. So were the founders.

Show me exactly where the Bible condones slavery. Chapter and verse, describe the context first.

However, you may purchase male or female slaves from among the foreigners who live among you. You may also purchase the children of such resident foreigners, including those who have been born in your land. You may treat them as your property, passing them on to your children as a permanent inheritance. You may treat your slaves like this, but the people of Israel, your relatives, must never be treated this way. (Leviticus 25:44-46 NLT)

single when he became your slave and then married afterward, only he will go free in the seventh year. But if he was married before he became a slave, then his wife will be freed with him. If his master gave him a wife while he was a slave, and they had sons or daughters, then the man will be free in the seventh year, but his wife and children will still belong to his master. But the slave may plainly declare, 'I love my master, my wife, and my children. I would rather not go free.' If he does this, his master must present him before God. Then his master must take him to the door and publicly pierce his ear with an awl. After that, the slave will belong to his master forever. (Exodus 21:2-6 NLT)


When a man sells his daughter as a slave, she will not be freed at the end of six years as the men are. If she does not please the man who bought her, he may allow her to be bought back again. But he is not allowed to sell her to foreigners, since he is the one who broke the contract with her. And if the slave girl's owner arranges for her to marry his son, he may no longer treat her as a slave girl, but he must treat her as his daughter. If he himself marries her and then takes another wife, he may not reduce her food or clothing or fail to sleep with her as his wife. If he fails in any of these three ways, she may leave as a free woman without making any payment. (Exodus 21:7-11 NLT)

Slaves, obey your earthly masters with deep respect and fear. Serve them sincerely as you would serve Christ. (Ephesians 6:5 NLT)

Christians who are slaves should give their masters full respect so that the name of God and his teaching will not be shamed. If your master is a Christian, that is no excuse for being disrespectful. You should work all the harder because you are helping another believer by your efforts. Teach these truths, Timothy, and encourage everyone to obey them. (1 Timothy 6:1-2 NLT)

 

[JBeukema]

Right, so rather than address the fact that they had slaves and the fact that the bible condones slavery and the fact that his nation was founded as a secular nation, you want to talk about how Obama can't pass legislation without congress

Now you are deflecting. I used Obama as an example. He knows he cannot implement a universal health care system because it takes time. He is smart. So were the founders.

Show me exactly where the Bible condones slavery. Chapter and verse, describe the context first.

Obama has to work within the confines of the law (you know Congress passing new laws and such).

The FF wrote the law.

Sorry, my littler slavery apologist, but you fail again.

And if you want to pretend the bible doesn't permit slavery, then nobdy's going to take you seriously. That's been discovered time and again.

here

 

[Quantum Windbag]

To claim Jesus was not divine if the to throw away the entire premise of Christianity- that the LORD payed for your sins by sending his only begotten son, who was of himself (the concept of divinity multiplicity goes back to Genesis)to live a sinless life and pay what he owed Satan in accordance with the greatest bet ever made. This carries over into Revelation, where it is made clear to those familiar with Jewish property laws that the debt is payed, yet God has not yet claimed back the Earth, though it is his to rule and he holds the deed to creation, sealed with seven seals.

If Jesus was not divine, he cannot be sinless, since we are born imperfect and blighted by the stains of the world's fallen state (see: original sin and 'noone is without sin'). Hence he cannot pay the the price (the life of a sinless man) he payed upon the cross ('it is finished'). Hence salvation is not possible through Jesus- unless h was divine, starting with a clean slate upon his birth, and lived a sinless life.

I am amazed. I thought most Christians were really bad at articulating their theology, but you have surely taken the cake with this post. You know less about Jesus work than most people, I would suggest you do a really good study of Romans, particularly chapters 4 and 5, before you try to insist that the only way Christianity works is if Jesus is divine. Even the Catholics do a better job than you do with the Immaculate Conception.

And trust me on this one, there are plenty of Jewish scholars who would scoff at your contention that divine multiplicity, whatever it is you mean by that, goes back to Genesis.