I love my southern brothers but this revionist history is crap. The LEADERSHIP of the South forced a civil war. The SCOTUS decision to open the Territories to slavery guaranteed war.
The first shot was fired by the South at Fort Sumter.
And don’t forge that there is a God in Heaven. The grievous sin of slavery needed attonement.
The North started the war by trying to resupply a Fort in southern land. They baited the south into it.
The war was based on tax collection. Lincoln actually never cared about slavery and he wanted to send slaves back to Africa or their country of orgin. Lincoln was a tyrant
Be careful, winners write the history books
It is revisionist crap indeed! The above leads to the obvious, and damning, question: Why did they want to withdraw? The South did not want slavery ended.
>And don’t forge that there is a God in Heaven. The grievous sin of slavery needed attonement.
But is slavery itself a sin? Abraham himself possessed slaves, as did Isac and Jacob. Paul, in I Cor 7, speaks about Christians being bought with a price: that of Christ’s blood & life, even His death. Paul says that the slave [socially-seen] is free [spiritually] in Christ and also that the free [socially-seen] is a slave [spiritually] in Christ as well.
To take a step back, in Proverbs [12:10] it says:
“A righteous man cares for the needs of his animal, but the kindest acts of the wicked are cruel.”
Now, God did not send Jesus to die for animals; Jesus even says “you are worth more than many sparrows.” [Mat 10:31, Lk 12:7] So, doesn’t it make sense that the actions of any slaveholder will be held to his account on the grounds that every one of his slaves carries the Image of God? {The same justification for the capital punishment of murderers.}
IOW, I think that God is more neutral on the issue of Slavery than he is on the issue of Men’s Hearts.