The Erotic Apologist wrote:No, English Protestantism did not exactly end slavery. What England did was to move the institution of slavery off shore, to the Western Hemisphere, while continuing to import slave-produced goods. Even during the Civil War, England's textile industry looked to King Cotton as a source of raw material. Only after the North managed to blockade Southern ports did England wean itself of Southern cotton.
Well, is that different today with goods imported from Communist Red China? The covert Christian influence is still there pointing a finger and saying that such is evil and will eventually be punished.
You bring up a very good point, Nipper--nothing has really changed because modern America (with its Christian heritage) is misbehaving in much the same way as Protestant England did during the Civil War. Specifically, America has simply hidden its sweat shops in a distant land where the sight of wage slavery will not offend Christian sensibilities. In other words, modern Christians are every bit as rotten as their forebearers.
Does the name Erik Prince ring a bell? It should, because Brother Prince is the former CEO of Blackwater USA. He is also a wild-eyed, foaming-at-the-mouth militant Christian. Google him.
_________________ Surprise, surprise, there is no divine mandate for the Church to discuss and portray its history accurately. I've worked with the Historian's office. Their mandate is to preserve history and make it available to scholars and others, not to write about it. The clerks who work in the department are more clueless on some basic issues of history than I am, and that's not saying much. --Robert D. Crockett
Surprise, surprise, there is no divine mandate for the Church to discuss and portray its history accurately. --Yahoo Bot
I pray thee, sir, forgive me for the mess. And whether I shot first, I'll not confess. --Han Solo, from William Shakespeare's Star Wars
LittleNipper wrote:Well, that Ishmael is not Biblical truth. God hates slavery and that is why Jesus came to set the captives free. The truth will set one free and not lies.
If god really hated slavery, why didn't just put it in the ten commandments? Seems he could have just added it in there with a quick swipe of his finger. "Thou shall not make slaves of they fellow human beings" or something like that.
I mean, think about it. Which of the 10 commandments is actually worse than slavery? Killing. That is the only one.
I do not feel obliged to believe that the same God who has endowed us with sense, reason, and intellect has intended us to forgo their use. - Galileo
Yeah, well, that's just, like, your opinion, man. - The Dude
Don't you know there ain't no devil, there's just god when he's drunk - Tom Waits
son of Ishmael wrote:I mean, think about it. Which of the 10 commandments is actually worse than slavery? Killing. That is the only one.
Actually "Thou shalt boil thy water" would have been a better Commandment in terms of saving lives. How about "Thou shalt not abuse thy wife and/or offspring"?
Not as important (in Moses interpretation of Gods eyes) as "You shall have no other gods before me." which seems a tad self absorbed....
That said, with the Book of Mormon, we are not dealing with a civilization with no written record. What we are dealing with is a written record with no civilization. (Runtu, Feb 2015)
Not according to the Bible. It's promoted in both the Old and New Testaments.
mak, do you believe God hates slavery?
That said, with the Book of Mormon, we are not dealing with a civilization with no written record. What we are dealing with is a written record with no civilization. (Runtu, Feb 2015)
Bazooka wrote:Not as important (in Moses interpretation of Gods eyes) as "You shall have no other gods before me." which seems a tad self absorbed....
by the way I love my wife...
And to love her with all the heart, and with all the understanding, and with all the soul, and with all the strength you have even if you are sixty eight year old...
LWIT (ludwig's inspired translation) Mark 12:33
- Whenever a poet or preacher, chief or wizard spouts gibberish, the human race spends centuries deciphering the message. - Umberto Eco - To assert that the earth revolves around the sun is as erroneous as to claim that Jesus was not born of a virgin. - Cardinal Bellarmine at the trial of Galilei
LittleNipper wrote:The Disciples were reminded of what Christ said and did. Mormons seem to make it up as they go along. The disciples' remembrances were just that ---- remembrances. These remembrances do not contradict the Old Testament
Then why does James' quotation of Amos 9 in Acts 15 completely change the meaning of vv. 11-12, (coincidentally in exactly the same way the Septuagint's mistranslation of the words אדום and ירש change them)?
Understand that as a Fundamentalist Christian, I also hold to a dispensationalistic view of biblical prophecy. You may wish to read the following to get a Dispensationalist view of your concern: http://ntresources.com/blog/documents/A ... cts15b.pdf
[Rev. Billy Graham, was president of Northwestern from 1948 to 1952. (Then, the school was Northwestern Bible College.)]
Last edited by Guest on Mon Jul 29, 2013 12:25 pm, edited 2 times in total.
LittleNipper wrote:The Disciples were reminded of what Christ said and did. Mormons seem to make it up as they go along. The disciples' remembrances were just that ---- remembrances. These remembrances do not contradict the Old Testament ---- Mormonism does... (example: no other god & no one remains married in heaven)
Which has absolutely nothing to do with the questions I asked you.
Focus LN. Please distinguish between the verification process you use (the comforter) and the one Mormons use, which is that same comforter. Since you are clearly getting destroyed by Makelan in any attempts to prove your brand of Christianity via your own shallow Biblical interpretations, your only resort is to claim a sure knowledge through this verification process, one that does not produce any consistent results.
A Fundamental Dispensational view is hardly shallow. And if you think so, please read the paper above and fully consider the dynamic ramifications.
[Rev. Billy Graham, was president of Northwestern from 1948 to 1952. (Then, the school was Northwestern Bible College.)]
I'm well aware of what dispensationalists have to say. I'm not interested in those silly fallacies.
By the way, I'm curious if you're aware that you've linked people to a paper that shows that the author of Acts 15:16-17 made use of a Greek testimonia that mistranslates the Hebrew text of Amos 9:11-12. You should check out the response to Glenny's paper, too (here).
Last edited by Guest on Mon Jul 29, 2013 12:55 pm, edited 1 time in total.
[Rev. Billy Graham, was president of Northwestern from 1948 to 1952. (Then, the school was Northwestern Bible College.)]
I'm well aware of what dispensationalists have to say. I'm not interested in those silly fallacies.
I don't believe you understand any of it. Especially, if you had it explained to you through Mormon dogma. And The Rev. Graham is hardly a person anyone should call silly.
