Posted on 06/20/2015 12:35:53 PM PDT by Republican Wildcat
‘never’ are these ‘days are done’
‘may Each go’ as far
‘A favorite tune’ and ‘never’ can we tell where ‘we’ve’ gone
Praise the Lord! ... Am going to ‘Lay My Burdens Down’!
the Moon and God is ‘joy upon’ If you make it ‘through the day’ is not that far ....
no doubt ... there is no ‘piece of mind’ from coming ‘back to you’
those that hate ‘the truth’ put America out like a burning cigarette ... because ‘the truth’ hurts and states what those that lie do ...
[rusty schucklefurd] Well said, and I completely agree with you.
It would be nice to leave the divisiveness behind, but so to do is to capitulate to hate-filled agitators and cynical politicians on the make. We must defend our symbols and our ideals, as well as our laws and our government, against such people.
Demonization calls for a defense, not a wrongheaded surrender and promise to "do better". One can never satisfy such people; they will become your masters and your tormentors forever.
Yes and in so doing T J Jackson was violating Virginia statute law which forbade teaching slaves to read and write. (These laws which emerged from the Nat Turner uprising seem to have been largely ignored by quite a few upper class and even just regular southerners. I think Booker T Washington learned the rudiments of reading and writing before 1865.
In any case Jackson in the uniform of a CSA general graces one of the stained glass windows of a black church in Roanoke, I believe,. It was founded by one of the black children who learned to read at Jackson’s Sunday School class.
the ‘smile’ on your face lets one know it is a smile? But you drown out the crowd ///
Thank You, May there be scaring ‘to truth’ ... Moving ‘down in the river’ to pray.
And yet the cross of the Confederate flag emblazons the Cross of St. Andrew, on which a true Christian martyr was crucified. It also emblazons the nation flag of Scotland to this day....
Well, no, not if the people of [fill in the State] don't see it that way.
If you think that's the case, then the Journolister abusers have won you over at least, and I'm sorry to hear it. I don't believe a word those b*stards say, because I know they've been on the warpath for 25 years now, as a campaign of "cultural imperialism", to get Southerners to give up barbecue and persimmons and start eating knishes and bagels instead. But the campaign is more valuable to them than any cultural inroads they might make (like persuading Tidewater people to say "youse guys" and "f'geddaboudit"), because they're playing it for "keepsies" politics.
it is up to the people of South Carolina and Mississippi
I agree. But the campaigners know how to make the merchant Republican class go "squish" by threatening economic boycotts, which sets the hoteliers and vendors' groups to squealing, and they rush to the governor (as they did in Georgia over the flag controversy there, and got a Republican governor, a winner, to go back on his political promise and go "squish"), and beg him to surrender the State, to avert the wrath of the NAACP, the NFL, and whoever else the civil-rights NGO grandees and their power-junkie pals can get to go along with them.
I am from the Midwest. My state was divided. I see the confederate flag as a symbol of freedom, a call to escape from the tyranny of a centralized government monster that daily grows to oppress those that want to be left alone to live their own lives.
What value has preserving the union had? It was a political construct that led to brother killing brother, Americans killing Americans. Political constructs, pieces of paper, are they really worth more than human lives?
well ... as racists go ... and as History goes ... Maybe one should talk to an American Indian?
re: “No, it isn’t. Nor is it disingenuous to point out that the ethics and morals of owning and working slaves was referenced in Numbers and Deuteronomy;. . .”
It is disingenuous for you to insinuate that Jesus was some how endorsing slavery by not rebuking the Roman centurion for owning a slave.
The issue was whether or not Russell Moore was incorrect in saying that the Christian world view holds slavery or the idea of owning another person as abhorrent - you claimed he was incorrect in that statement. I demonstrated that, from Christian, New Testament theology, slavery and the idea of owning another human being as a slave/property has become abhorrent.
Now, you’ve changed to the Old Testament, where it is true that slavery was practiced and allowed under Old Testament Covenant Law. However, there were different kinds of “slavery”. The Antebellum South tended to lump all its forms into one thing, which is incorrect and also disingenuous.
For one, there were slaves who were what we would call “indentured” servants/slaves, who voluntarily sold themselves into slavery to pay off a debt. They could purchase their way out of such slavery.
Two, there were slaves who were people taken in combat or a nation conquered by Israel. These persons were slaves as the result of warfare.
It was a violation of God’s law to take a person, who was not at war with Israel, or did not have an unpaid debt - to basically kidnap them in order to sell them into slavery:
“Anyone who kidnaps someone is to be put to death, whether the victim has been sold or is still in the kidnapper’s possession.” Exodus 21:16
“If someone is caught kidnapping a fellow Israelite and treating or selling them as a slave, the kidnapper must die. You must purge the evil from among you.”
Deuteronomy 24:7
There were also slaves that were people bought from other nations. This is probably the closest thing to the institution of slavery in the antebellum South. Yet, even here, if any slave was hurt by the slave owner with a debilitating injury, such as the loss of an eye or tooth, that slave was to be set free to help make up for that loss.
What you are missing is that with Christianity, as Paul said, in Christ there is no slave or free, Jew nor Greek, male nor female - we are all one in Christ. It was the theology of that passage, and others, that led to the full abolition of slavery in the Christian world. How can I make a slave or treat as just a piece of property, my Christian brother or sister? It is true that Paul did not push for slavery’s abolition himself, but he did give strict guidelines by which Christians who owned slaves were to treat them - and, how to view them - as equals in Christ.
Again, Paul says in 1 Corinthians 7:22-23,
“For the one who was a slave when called to faith in the Lord is the Lord’s freed person; similarly, the one who was free when called is Christ’s slave. You were bought at a price; do not become slaves of human beings.”
“Slaves, obey your earthly masters with respect and fear, and with sincerity of heart, just as you would obey Christ. Obey them not only to win their favor when their eye is on you, but as slaves of Christ, doing the will of God from your heart. Serve wholeheartedly, as if you were serving the Lord, not people, because you know that the Lord will reward each one for whatever good they do, whether they are slave or free. And masters, treat your slaves in the same way. Do not threaten them, since you know that he who is both their Master and yours is in heaven, and there is no favoritism with him.”
The point is, from the Christian perspective, slavery was eventually seen as evil and inhumane. It was Christianity that led to it’s demise. There is no denying that.
or was it standing up to moslems?
Bingo. You nailed it that the Confederate flag controversy is an artificial one. I have no problem with the descendants of Union veterans want to honor their ancestors. I have no problem with blacks wanting to honor rheir ancestors. They have every right to. But if I choose to honor my Confederate kin and the flag they fought under,you’d think it was the crime of the century the way some busybodies react. I have family who served on each side and I respect and admire them all as real men who had the courage of their convictions. But there are folks, especially those of the liberal variety,who recall the likes of Benedict Arnold and Adolf Hitler,to those who admire their kin in Gray. No one is forcing them to fly the Confederate flag. Why can’t they just quit brewing up a storm of rancor on those who do fly that flag? They yap about bigotry and racism. Yet,they stir up bigotry and racism with their nasty remarks and attitudes. And,yes,I realize there are those on the Southern side guilty of the same thing. The men in Blue and Gray were all Americans and we do well just to let everyone admire whom they want to on either or both sides. I hope I don’t sound incoherent,but I’m sick of kill-joys continually stirring up a hornet’s nest.
re: “But, whether we like it or not, the media has been successful in identifying it as such.”
“Well, no, not if the people of [fill in the State] don’t see it that way.”
Again - I do not see the Confederate flag as racist or bad in any way. I’m saying the media has convinced many others - especially Black Americans - that it is. What think about it or you think about it is irrelevant. I daresay if you ask just about any Black person if they think the Confederate Battle flag is racist - what do you think their answer will be??
It won’t matter all the history and facts you put forth, it is an emotional position for some people and they won’t hear what you are saying.
So, as I said - it is ultimately up to the people in those states to decide. Not me nor you.
Jefferson didn't abolish his own personal usage of slavery, and Washington didn't free his slaves till after his death. Washington was slowly coaxed into being an abolitionist. For most of his life he wasn't, it was only towards the end that he became one. Madison owned 100 slaves during his life.
They may have opposed slavery with their words, but they certainly never got to the point of opposing it with their deeds. (Except for Washington, after he died.)
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.