Taking Richmond

OTOH, Some the folks who wore blue and won the war were Pennsylvania farm boys, not yet 16 years old. I think Christ's ministry was deeply hindered by those who twisted scripture such that slavery was not condemned as a horrific abomination. How many wearing gray died thinking they were on the side of God? When thinking about Portland, do we consider that God visits the inquiries of our fathers down to the third and fourth generation. All through my life I could see the smoke, but nobody poured water on it, and now the godless Marxists are pouring gasoline on it. Make a list of destructive heresies.

 

As tempting as it may be, I think the tar brush is not that narrow. Certainly the economics of the slave trade also played a part. Tribalism is the antithesis of Christianity, either we are all the same in Christ, or we think we are different than some siblings.

 

Sweat shop labor in the North was as brutal as or worse than slavery.
My grandmother told the story of her Grandfather and his slaves. They had it so brutal on his huge plantation that at wars end, all, every one, stayed as a share cropper. She said he made more money with them share cropping than he did when they were slaves.

 

Nice retort, but that was before General Grant, the leader who eventually took Richmond. The problem for the Union was not the fighting ability of the common soldier, but finding a competent leader - and that was achieved with the appointment of General Grant.

 

Really? I'm sorry, but I don't think that nothing could match being out in the hot sun all day in the fields with nothing but a hovel to go back to at night and with nothing but the promise of another day in the hot fields.

 

So here we have it, a professing Christian saying slavery was ok because it was better than something worse.
No Sir, you are wrong. The Bible says it is better to be free than slave. Putting people in chains, and treating them as livestock is as demonic as it gets.
As long as Christians tolerate this sort belief, we will never heal our land.

 

I’m sorry, I fail to see where he said slavery was OK. You go on to paint him, as a Christian, as being the main problem with this country. I disagree. It is people who will twist the truth to suit their agenda who are the problem. Those who buy into the narrative under the guise of doing the right Christian thing.........they are the problem. Useful idiots. Isn’t that the correct terminology of the ‘goal’?

 

Sweat shop labor in the North was as brutal as or worse than slavery. The implication is that two wrongs make a right, since people were exploited in the north, exploiting blacks in the south is just as "ok."

 

See post 11.

And note, neither post #9 or #10 stated slavery was awful, or acknowledged those Christians who attempted to justify it were introducing destructive heresy into the body of Christ.

 

No, it gets much worse. For example, sacrificing unborn children as though mere blobs of flesh to the gods of personal greed. That those who see themselves as once oppressed by slavery could so readily engage in it demonstrates an especially egregious depth of depravity.

 

Sweat shop labor.
Do you know the history of slavery? The slaves had days off. They lived normal lives. Do you know the history of the slave market in Charleston, SC? I will give you a hint. They did not sell slaves there.

 

Lies. Lies. And (snip) lies. Did I say slavery was OK? Did I say it should have continued?
(snip) no I didnt! Read what I say. Stating your opinion as my statements is pure lies.

 

Utter nonsense, and once again we see the two wrongs make a right demonic argument. If a shipper of slaves used the "tight pack" method of loading their slave ship, it was not uncommon for about 50% of the "cargo" to die on the voyage.

Slavery is a stain on the world, where people with guns and power exploited native peoples for their economic gain, and claimed God was on their side, by twisting scripture to allow slavery, and the taking of land by power or guile from native peoples (manifest destiny.)

When I see a statue of Robert E. Lee, I do not expect the placard to read, He wrongly concluded service to the state of his birth was more important than faithful service to God's command to do unto others as you would like others to do unto you.

 

So often the folks on the dark side, claim to be in the right. Beware of those like Clinton who imply falsehoods, and then deny they misled their audience. "I did not have sexual relations with that women."

Did Mr. Reynolds say the exploitation in the north was just as bad as the south? Nope
Did He imply it? You bet.

I am so sick of these deceivers who claim they are being mistreated, when they systemically mistreat truth.

Sweat shop labor in the North was as brutal as or worse than slavery. The implication is that two wrongs make a right, since people were exploited in the north, exploiting blacks in the south is just as "ok."

 

Again, lies.
My implication is study history through the lens of its time. Two wrongs do not make a right, but one can not sanctimoniously ignore their wrong while pointing out the wrongs of another. Slavery was evil, but the North had its own evils. You meed to look at the international slave trade. Who engaged in it. How were the slaves obtained. When did it end. After its end, what did many former slave traders do after the abolishment of import?
Who rounded up slaves in Africa?
You try to over simplify a complicated time in world history.

 

That response exhibits no understanding of my statement, and badly mischaracterizes it. It did not attempt to justify slavery, and made no mention of slave trading, which is also worse than slavery. So, contrary to your claim, there are things worse than slavery. Murdering one's own unborn children out of convenience is far worse than slavery. Those complaining about past slavery and yet engaging in such a gross evil today are especially deceived. Saying so justifies none of it.