Welcome to Baptist Board, a friendly forum to discuss the Baptist Faith in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to all the features that our community has to offer.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon and God Bless!
Alas, even the history forum is no refuge from what passes as political discussion on this site.
Oh, please. They were documented. It was called a "bill of sale."
Oh, please. They were documented. It was called a "bill of sale."
You guys realise that CTB is trolling you, right?
Do we just lump them in with the ones who infiltrate our borders (both north and south as we're now finding out) and do untold property and/or physical damage to what in many cases our home areas already are experiencing?
We, Americans, did not create the need and atmosphere for this type of scrutiny over immigration Islam did. This is not necessary in America because of the hard hearts of Americans it is only necessary because of the evils of Islam.
If it comes down to Americans being at risk or some innocent refugees not making it into this country then the Safety of Americans comes first. Period.
This might interest you.
Not greatly. In that post of mine I italicized remember, to put it in the same sense as The Boy asking if anyone remembers the era of slave ships. No one on this board remembers.
As for your reference about the Quackers, they were the UU's of that day; a social movement disguised as a religious movement. There are enough scriptures for anybody-- even atheists-- to pick from in agreement. The hypocrisy of claiming to be an ultra-personal shareholder with God [the "inner light"], while mostly repudiating His Word is sickening.
Originally Posted by Alcott View Post
Do you remember anyone complaining when that was done?
Thanks for the link.
Having grown up near Philadelphia PA, I'm quite aware of some of the things in which Quakers back in the days of slavery got involved in.
I remember witnessing to a Quaker once. You see, the town of Quakertown is probably only 15 miles from my hometown in PA.
Pennsylvania's founder, William Penn, was said to have owned just about all of SE Pennsylvania because the King of England let Penn buy that area just like someone today can buy a huge area of property from a realtor and call it "his own private property," because, in fact, that's exactly what it is.
Originally the colony of PA was practically all William Penn's land. The word "Pennsylvania" itself literally was derived from the joining of two words: "Penn" and "sylvania," which is Latin for our words "forest" or "woods." Thus "Pennsylvania" literally means "Penn's Woods." I remember seeing pictures of a map that was made back in the 1660's that had "Penn's Woods" where Pennsylvania is today.
However, a generation or so after William Penn died, the people in and around Philadelphia grew tired of being ruled by the small clique of Penn's descendants, or those who were buddies with them, and applied to the English authorities to change PA's original charter so that land holders who weren't members of Penn's family would be able to hold colonial offices as well.
Anyway, historically, groups such as the Quakers have been against the ownership of one human by another one, thus they were quite active in the early Abolitionist movement in the US.
Moreover, William Penn was on fairly good terms with the Indians of that area. In fact, he even signed something like a treaty with them which some claim had a provision which allowed neighboring Indians to seek refuge in and among the European settlers who'd migrated to "Penn's Woods."
There were several "nations" of Indians who saw the ever-expanding claims of the European settlers as a threat to their lands. Many of these "Native Americans" had no concept of what we call private ownership of land. To these Indians, a deed on a piece of land meant nothing.
Thus when the European settlers started expanding into the regions beyond what's known as the Appalachian Mountains, bloody conflicts soon arose between the Europeans and the Indians living in that area.
Between the Indians and the European settlers was something like a "buffer state" that was largely populated by those Indians who were much more friendly to the European settlers.
When the more war-like Indians started attacking the European settlers who'd moved into their lands, oftentimes the Indians would mount up raiding parties designed to push these European intruders back further east into those "buffer states" in which the more friendly Indians had settled.
Consequently, both the European settlers AND those more friendly Indian tribes became refugees that were physically forced to seek refuge within what was originally William Penn's own little colony.
Of course these refugees had no documentation with them so, in a sense, these Indians were, you guessed it, "Undocumented" people that were forced back into the lands that Penn claimed that he'd protect them.
Strange how history can sometimes affect things that are centuries old--and usually forgotten by most folks--into challenges that we face today.
Do you also condemn the pro-life efforts of athiests, Quakers, or anyone else?
Since slavery does still exist today, why is that not the emphasis, instead of "cry out against slavery then?" If you think not enough people [meaning whites] worked to end slavery 150 to 300 years ago, just what are you doing now to end slavery wherever it still exists?The last thing I would say is that while we might view the fact that there are those today who continue to cry out against slavery then,...
Alas, even the history forum is no refuge from what passes as political discussion on this site.