Secession should be considered and allowed

[tom55]

Yes, I am pro-slavery...I have been bought with the blood of Jesus Christ. Are you a slave of Jesus Christ?

Yes, I wish the South had won the War between the States.

Stranger

You wish the south had won? So that the owning of another human being (slavery) would still be the law of the land today?

 

[Stranger]

You wish the south had won? So that the owning of another human being (slavery) would still be the law of the land today?

I answered your questions. This is not a one way street. Answer mine. Are you a slave of Jesus Christ?

Stranger

 

[epostle1]

The reaction of grief and anger demonstrated by the liberals and Democrats reveals just how deep the divisions are in this country. (USA) Every election these reactions intensify as the divide gets greater. They are to the point now where peaceful transition of power, something the US always has prided itself in for several years anyway, is a thing of the past. Now the peaceful libs are not so peaceful. Rioting, destruction of property, beating people up because they voted for Trump, or using that as an excuse to beat white people up, is now a real danger. They speak of peace and unity according to their terms. No one elses.

How prophetic!!!

 

[tom55]

I answered your questions. This is not a one way street. Answer mine. Are you a slave of Jesus Christ?

Stranger

As you know we are talking about the slavery of another human being.

Therefor when you said. "Yes, I am pro-slavery...I have been bought with the blood of Jesus Christ. Are you a slave of Jesus Christ?" You IN FACT did not answer my question with CLARITY. You are conflating two issues.

The way I take your answer "Yes, I am pro-slavery" makes me think that you are OK with one person being the legal property of another and that person is forced to obey them.

So, once again, are you pro-slavery (one human owning another human)???

To answer your question.......Yes, I am a slave* to Jesus.

*Slave (verb) defined: work excessively hard

 

[epostle1]

I answered your questions. This is not a one way street. Answer mine. Are you a slave of Jesus Christ?

Stranger

A cop out, evasive non-reply. A red herring.

Yes, I am pro-slavery...I have been bought with the blood of Jesus Christ. Are you a slave of Jesus Christ?

Yes, I wish the South had won the War between the States.

Stranger

Why? To have cheap labor?
Is a Christian slave 3/5 saved?

 

[Stranger]

As you know we are talking about the slavery of another human being.

Therefor when you said. "Yes, I am pro-slavery...I have been bought with the blood of Jesus Christ. Are you a slave of Jesus Christ?" You IN FACT did not answer my question with CLARITY. You are conflating two issues.

The way I take your answer "Yes, I am pro-slavery" makes me think that you are OK with one person being the legal property of another and that person is forced to obey them.

So, once again, are you pro-slavery (one human owning another human)???

To answer your question.......Yes, I am a slave* to Jesus.

*Slave (verb) defined: work excessively hard

I hold the same opinion of slavery as the Bible does. Do you?

And, if the war was not over slavery, what does it matter? Same old ruse. Shift attention away from the real causes of the war to 'slavery'.

The definition of salve is to be bought and paid for. Owned by another. Were you bought and paid for? Is God a slave holder?

Stranger

 

[tom55]

I hold the same opinion of slavery as the Bible does. Do you?

And, if the war was not over slavery, what does it matter? Same old ruse. Shift attention away from the real causes of the war to 'slavery'.

The definition of salve is to be bought and paid for. Owned by another. Were you bought and paid for? Is God a slave holder?

Stranger

So, once again, are you pro-slavery (one human owning another human)???

 

[Stranger]

So, once again, are you pro-slavery (one human owning another human)???

Once again, I hold the same opinion of slavery as the Bible. Do you?

Ask me again.

Stranger

 

[tom55]

Once again, I hold the same opinion of slavery as the Bible. Do you?

Ask me again.

Stranger

Slaves, obey your masters here on earth with fear and respect. And do this with a heart that is true, just as you obey Christ Ephesians 6:5......You agree with that?

 

[epostle1]

Biblical slavery is not the same as chattel or racial slavery. In most cases, it was an act of compassion especially for women and children who survived a war. God did not endorse slavery, He tolerated it.
Biblical slaves had rights, and were protected from abuse under Levitical law. They could pay off debts and earn their freedom. There is no comparison with racial slavery.

 

[Stranger]

Slaves, obey your masters here on earth with fear and respect. And do this with a heart that is true, just as you obey Christ Ephesians 6:5......You agree with that?

Yes, do you?

Stranger

 

[Stranger]

Biblical slavery is not the same as chattel or racial slavery. In most cases, it was an act of compassion especially for women and children who survived a war. God did not endorse slavery, He tolerated it.
Biblical slaves had rights, and were protected from abuse under Levitical law. They could pay off debts and earn their freedom. There is no comparison with racial slavery.

(Lev. 25:35-46)

Stranger

 

[tom55]

Yes, do you?

Stranger

I do not support one human owning another human (slavery). You have left me with the impression that you DO support it.

1st: You wish the south had won the war and they were fighting to KEEP slavery.
2nd: You won't come right out and say you don't support it which should be very easy to do if you don't support it.

 

[tom55]

(Lev. 25:35-46)

Stranger

Paul told slaves to obey their masters, he made no general defense of slavery as such, anymore than he made a general defense of the pagan government of Rome, which Christians were also instructed to obey despite its injustices. Our government has now outlawed slavery and, according to scripture, we are to obey our government (Rom. 13:1-7).

So if you think slavery is OK you are in defiance of scripture and our government.

 

[Stranger]

I do not support one human owning another human (slavery). You have left me with the impression that you DO support it.

1st: You wish the south had won the war and they were fighting to KEEP slavery.
2nd: You won't come right out and say you don't support it which should be very easy to do if you don't support it.

God supported it. Are you better than He? Was He wrong?

The South seceded. The North went to war to bring the South back.

God supported it. I agree with Him.

Stranger

 

[Stranger]

Paul told slaves to obey their masters, he made no general defense of slavery as such, anymore than he made a general defense of the pagan government of Rome, which Christians were also instructed to obey despite its injustices. Our government has now outlawed slavery and, according to scripture, we are to obey our government (Rom. 13:1-7).

So if you think slavery is OK you are in defiance of scripture and our government.

Read Paul's letter to Philemon. You will see Paul returning a runaway slave back to his master. Same as was required by our Constitution under the fugitive slave law.

Indeed, there is no institution of slavery existing in the U.S. and it is illegal. And I have no desire to start it again. That doesn't mean it was evil and wrong in the begining. Because as I showed you, it is of God. Slavery is not in defiance of God or Scripture.

Slavery is the condition of the human race. Before you were a slave to God, you were a slave to Satan and the World system. You simply changed slave owners. Does that insult you? Are you too good for that?

Stranger

 

[tom55]

Read Paul's letter to Philemon. You will see Paul returning a runaway slave back to his master. Same as was required by our Constitution under the fugitive slave law.

Indeed, there is no institution of slavery existing in the U.S. and it is illegal. And I have no desire to start it again. That doesn't mean it was evil and wrong in the begining. Because as I showed you, it is of God. Slavery is not in defiance of God or Scripture.

Slavery is the condition of the human race. Before you were a slave to God, you were a slave to Satan and the World system. You simply changed slave owners. Does that insult you? Are you too good for that?

Stranger

I am glad you have no desire to start it again. I am confused as to why you wish the south would have won the war? What would be different now if the south had won and the north lost?

 

[epostle1]

Read Paul's letter to Philemon. You will see Paul returning a runaway slave back to his master. Same as was required by our Constitution under the fugitive slave law.

Indeed, there is no institution of slavery existing in the U.S. and it is illegal. And I have no desire to start it again. That doesn't mean it was evil and wrong in the begining. Because as I showed you, it is of God. Slavery is not in defiance of God or Scripture.

Slavery is the condition of the human race. Before you were a slave to God, you were a slave to Satan and the World system. You simply changed slave owners. Does that insult you? Are you too good for that?

Stranger

Not the same at all. Philemon's Relationship to Onesimus

As early as the seventh century, Saint Bathilde (wife of King Clovis II) became famous for her campaign to stop slave-trading and free all slaves; in 851 Saint Anskar began his efforts to halt the Viking slave trade. That the Church willingly baptized slaves was claimed as proof that they had souls, and soon both kings and bishops—including William the Conqueror (1027-1087) and Saints Wulfstan (1009-1095) and Anselm (1033-1109)—forbade the enslavement of Christians.

Saint Thomas Aquinas deduced that slavery was a sin, and a series of popes upheld his position, beginning in 1435 and culminating in three major pronouncements against slavery by Pope Paul III in 1537.

However, in his overall analysis of morality in human relationships, Aquinas placed slavery in opposition to natural law, deducing that all "rational creatures" are entitled to justice. Hence he found no natural basis for the enslavement of one person rather than another, "thus removing any possible justification for slavery based on race or religion." Right reason, not coercion, is the moral basis of authority, for "one man is not by nature ordained to another as an end."

Here Aquinas distinguished two forms of "subjection" or authority, just and unjust. The former exists when leaders work for the advantage and benefit of their subjects. The unjust form of subjection "is that of slavery, in which the ruler manages the subject for his own [the ruler's] advantage." Based on the immense authority vested in Aquinas by the Church, the official view came to be that slavery is sinful.

The Truth About the Catholic Church and Slavery

Slavery is not of God, you must be deluded.

 

[Stranger]

I am glad you have no desire to start it again. I am confused as to why you wish the south would have won the war? What would be different now if the south had won and the north lost?

It's hard to say what would be different now, 156 years later. What it would have meant then is that the South would be it's own nation and have it's own interests decided without the constant interference and agitations of the Northern Federal Govt.

Why wouldn't I wish the South had won the war? They are my kinfolk.

Stranger

 

[Stranger]

Not the same at all. Philemon's Relationship to Onesimus

As early as the seventh century, Saint Bathilde (wife of King Clovis II) became famous for her campaign to stop slave-trading and free all slaves; in 851 Saint Anskar began his efforts to halt the Viking slave trade. That the Church willingly baptized slaves was claimed as proof that they had souls, and soon both kings and bishops—including William the Conqueror (1027-1087) and Saints Wulfstan (1009-1095) and Anselm (1033-1109)—forbade the enslavement of Christians.

Saint Thomas Aquinas deduced that slavery was a sin, and a series of popes upheld his position, beginning in 1435 and culminating in three major pronouncements against slavery by Pope Paul III in 1537.

However, in his overall analysis of morality in human relationships, Aquinas placed slavery in opposition to natural law, deducing that all "rational creatures" are entitled to justice. Hence he found no natural basis for the enslavement of one person rather than another, "thus removing any possible justification for slavery based on race or religion." Right reason, not coercion, is the moral basis of authority, for "one man is not by nature ordained to another as an end."

Here Aquinas distinguished two forms of "subjection" or authority, just and unjust. The former exists when leaders work for the advantage and benefit of their subjects. The unjust form of subjection "is that of slavery, in which the ruler manages the subject for his own [the ruler's] advantage." Based on the immense authority vested in Aquinas by the Church, the official view came to be that slavery is sinful.

The Truth About the Catholic Church and Slavery

Slavery is not of God, you must be deluded.

Read the Scriptures I gave. Paul was returning a runaway slave to his master. Read (Lev. 25:35-46), It is clear. God instituted slavery. Are you a slave of God? Or are you to proud for that?

Saint Bathilde, Anskar, William the Conqueror, Aquinas, the Pope, etc. etc., are not God. Follow whoever you like.

Is God a slave owner?

Stranger