Charlottesville, The KJV Bible, & Historical Revisionism

Long time church goers and fellow southern Christians will tell you there is but one translation of the Bible. The 1611 King James Version of The Bible. I heard someone say it’s so bad that some old southerners believe Moses gave his Sermon on the Mount from the King James Version of the Bible. This still makes me giggle, because it’s absolutely true, nobody messes with the KJV of the Bible.

In a way I find this good because it means that people grasp the understanding of how important it is to preserve the content of our sacred book. Those 66 inspired Holy books that comprise the Bible must never be re-written or changed in anyway that distorts what God wrote. As believers we protect each and every scripture, in olden days people gave their lives gladly to protect the validity of the Bible. In modern times, as things change so rapidly, I take solace in the Word of God that’s stays the same.

Unless you study beyond what the normal believer normally does you may not be aware that there was a English translation preceding the KJV of the Bible called the Geneva Bible (1560) it was translated from Jeromes Vulgate which is actually the Great Granddaddy of most translations of the Bible. To this date every time a new translation comes out it is proverbial nails on the Christian chalkboard to those that hold fast that there is but one true translation of the Bible, the tried and true, King James Version of Bible.

Rewriting or changing even the smallest scripture in the Bible would alter it forever. It stands as absolute truth in its present preserved form. If we start subtracting passages that are not politically correct in this day and age because they make people feel uncomfortable we bastardized the whole Bible and effect the faith of future generations. Parts of the Bible are uncomfortable. King Herod ordering the slaughter of all children trying to kill Jesus is a gruesome thought. The Old Testament is full of bloody wars and entire societies being obliterated. So what happens if you edit those out to make the reader feel more comfortable?

The Bible is a teacher. The Bible is a mirror. It allows us to see our spiritual self. It convicts us of sin, it advices our walk, it guides our lives and sometimes the lessons it uses are to learn from others mistakes. Once we start chiseling away at what we don’t like to see or hear the Bible no longer stands for absolute Truth but becomes truth as we see it.

History is like a mirror too, because we can look back and compare ourselves to what we find. I often look back on my own life and make adjustments based on things that worked for me or things that failed. That’s the absolute truth of history, it happened. We can either have a truthful recollection of it or we can chip away at it until it’s a lie and comforts people. The problem is with history just like the Bible, if you remove too much, the power to learn anything from it dissolves, and people will repeat it.

Truth is America was built on the backs of slaves that were treated inhumanely and suffered greatly. This is the painful, ugly, festering truth. And we must ask why would our government WANT to destroy all evidence of this part of history? Why are they allowing statues to be removed or flags to be taken down? I liken it to a Christian allowing someone to put out a new Bible that’s been conveniently hacked away at to promote their own agenda.

Why do they want all record of it destroyed?
Two words : Historical Revisionism

I want our government to erect a wall similar to The Vietnam War Memorial Wall in Washington DC that all current surviving family of slaves could submit their ancestors name or names to be engraved on that wall forever….never to be forgotten.

I also feel that there should be a NATIONAL MUSEUM OF SLAVERY dedicated to the story of those human rights abuses slaves suffered on American soil. There should be a conscientious effort to preserve every artifact and every story of the atrocities that occurred not only in the South but in the North as well. Instead of demolishing every remnant that it happened, we need to finally stand together and demand a NATIONAL recognition of it and an effort needs to be made to make a TRUTHFUL record of it. Preserving every disgusting detail of the abuse slaves suffered on plantations, on the boats bringing them here, and on wealthy northern owners farms. I want every family ripped apart, every woman used for breeding and every man beaten or killed unjustly stories told.

We need to see REAL NUMBERS, REAL FACES, REAL STORIES. And not the story of the Civil War with a sideline on slavery. Slavery needs to be upfront and center and exposed from every angle.

I want our children to leave this museum in tears. I want schools to take trips to see this wall. I want to preserve how horrible it was. I want children to see what evil men are capable of doing. In 100 years what will the slaves story look like if the history is rewritten, all artifacts and remnants destroyed? Will children be taught about it truthfully or will it be rewritten in a softer more swallowable fashion that degenerates the vulgarity of the truth? Will it make certain people look better or less guilty? What will be the outcome of destroying the evidence?

The last slaves to live have passed away. They live on in stories told to their children and their children’s children. The record of their lives is preserved more in oral tradition than recorded fact. This make their heritage, their very existence , vulnerable to be destroyed. By erasing all books, monuments, flags and other symbols we are only solidifying this situation to be forgotten or remembered in a way that is “more comfortable” for those who learn about it in the future.

Protect the truth.
The truth shall set you free.


Notes:

A National Museum was started but currently it sits in a state of oweing 215K in back taxes.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_National_Slavery_Museum

*** I recommend the Interlinear Hebrew Greek English Bible for an accurate study of scriptures. Also available in a 4 Volume Set (larger print than single volume) Interlinear Hebrew Greek English 4 Volume Set

http://www.thewayonline.wordpress.com

32 thoughts on “Charlottesville, The KJV Bible, & Historical Revisionism

      1. A contrarian ?

        Historically speaking, the first-century Christians–including Jesus and the apostles–effectively considered the seven deuterocanonical books canonical.

        the 73 book canon is exhibited by the Synod of Rome in 382, the Council of Hippo 393, the Council of Carthage (397), a letter from Pope Innocent I to Exsuperius, Bishop of Toulouse (405), and the Second Council of Carthage (419). In every instance, the canon was identical to what Catholic Bibles contain today.

        Liked by 1 person

      2. All Christians were being instructed by the Catholic Church via a text that was kept in a language common folks could not understand. All Christians did not receive a copy of any cannon until people were burned at the stake for heresy so they could have it.

        I’m not Catholic.

        Like

      3. Clearly, my inductive skills from reading your post would have concluded that you’re not Catholic.

        However, from my background in the field of history in academia, when one makes an assertion for what is the truth in history, we have to remember biases, which you’d argue that I have a Catholic bias, and perhaps rightly so; however, that doesn’t mean you do not argue from a bias yourself. Furthermore, ‘bias’ in the field of history does not carry a negative connotation, it’s more of a state of fact.

        Regardless, if one advocates for standing against revisionists in history and truth. One cannot negate that there that are a great many who claim that Luther, Calvin, et al. by removing books from the Canon that were agreed upon as early as 1st century A.D; they are in fact, revisionists.

        You make the assertion KJV compiled in the 17th century with its 66 canon is the epitome of Christian scripture.

        I make the assertion that early 1st century Christians would wonder where some of their books in that Canon were.

        Regardless of bias, only one can be true, and we can discuss the historicity of the actual Canon of scripture, or I suppose if you’d wish to engage in more mud sling with subtle ad hominems, there will be no profit from the actual truth.

        Liked by 1 person

      4. What do you think of Athanasius’s Festival Letter in 367? And for the record I prefer the Geneva to the KJV of the Bible. I also love reading the other writings, I feel almost like I am in a time machine transported back to early Christianity. I do not condemn the Catholic Faith or condemn your use of Deuteronical books. I believe my Bible to be complete at 66 books.

        Like

      5. I think Athanasius’ letter is an invaluable piece of history that led to the recognition of the 7 Catholic epistles in the east and attempted to convince those toward accepting Revelations.

        However, I think we have to look at his letter not as definitive authority on the matter.

        Liked by 1 person

      6. However, If I were to engage with your assertion of being burned at the stake for reading the Bible, again this is a historical analysis based on bias toward the Catholic Church. Now, it’s true that folks at period of time in the Church were discourages from reading the Bible; however, for about 3/4 of the Church’s history Bible’s were rare and weren’t readily available to the general public. The Church, including in the letters of St. Paul, actually encourages study of scripture; however, has always rejected personal interpretations of said scripture. When Luther et al, plus the advent of the printing press came along, indeed there were horrible crimes committed, but to simply make the assertion that it was because the Church kept it in a language common folks could not understand is a facile in the complex study of history, wouldn’t you say?

        Not everyone needs to be a theologian or Bible scholar to be a faithful Christian. Poor, illiterate souls have become martyrs and saints for Christ.

        Liked by 1 person

      7. I wonder what William Tyndale would take away from this comment? Or any of these martyrs….

        1126 – Peter of Bruis – Burned at the Stake – Rejected Rome’s traditions
        1155 – Arnold of Brescia – Bible Preacher – Hanged and Burned
        1211 – 80 Waldensians – burned at the stake
        1215 – 80 Christians – Tried by red hot iron and burned to death the same day in Strasburg, Germany.
        1237 – 15 Christians burned alive at Cerdagne and Castlebon, Spain
        1315 – Waldensian Bishop Neumunster – Burned at the stake in Hamburg, Germany
        1315 – 50 Women and children burned at the stake in Schweidnitz in Silesia
        1386 – Christmas Eve- Inquisitor Borelli attacks Valley of Pragela; hundreds frozen to death trying to escape.
        1400 – William Sawtree – Wycliffe follower – Burned at the stake
        1408 – John Resby – Heresy – Burned at Perth, Scotland
        1409 – Tailor named Bradbe – Wycliffe follower – Roasted alive in a barrel
        1415 – John Huss – Burned for preaching the Gospel and rejecting Rome’s views
        1416 – 300 burned at the stake in Saxony
        1417 – Sir John Oldcastle – Helped distribute Wycliffe Bible – Martyred for his faith by being roasted over fire
        1427 – John Purvey – Bible distribution – died in prison – 1421-7
        1431 – Paul Craws – Convicted at St. Andrews, Scotland and burned to death
        1481/2 – 2,000 people burned alive in Spanish Inquisition in Seville and Castile
        1488 – 3,000 Waldensian believers murdered in a cave called Aigue-Froid
        1506 – William Tylsworth – Burned for his faith in the Word of God
        1511 – James Brewster – Burned at the stake – Having a book of Scripture
        1514 – Richard Hun – Died suspiciously in Lollard’s Tower in London
        1519 – Six men and women burned for teaching their children the Lord’s prayer – London
        1525 – Gospel preacher named Schuch – Burned at the stake in Strasburg for preaching and having a Bible – His Bible was burned with
        him.
        1528 – Patrick Hamilton – Burned at the Stake in Scotland for declaring that it is the right of any person to read God’s Word
        1529 – Louis Berquin – Burned at the Stake in France for printing and distributing Bible tracts in French
        1530 – John Tewksbury – Burned at the stake for Bible distribution – England
        1531 – Thomas Bilney – Martyred for preaching and distributing the Tyndale Bible
        1531 – Richard Bayfield – Burned at the stake for Scripture distribution
        1532 – James Bainham – Burned for possessing Scriptures in the English language
        1533 – Henry Forrest – Benedictine Monk who became saved – Burned at the stake in St. Andrews, Scotland
        1533 – John Fryth – Burned for preaching the true Gospel – England
        1534/5 – 24 Protestants burned alive in Paris, France
        1535 – Dean Forret – Burned for having Scripture in the English tongue – Scotland
        1536 – William Tyndale – Burned at the Stake for Translating the Bible into English – His translation became the groundwork for the King
        James Version
        1536 – Ann Boleyn – Wife of Henry the VIII – Beheaded for the true faith
        1540 – Thomas Garrett – Friend of Tyndale – Burned at the stake – England
        1545 – Massacre of Merindol and Cabrieres, France – Thousands of Waldensians murdered
        1546 – Peter Chapot burned to death in Meaux, France for bringing French bibles to France
        1546 – Stephen Polliot – Burned at the Stake for bringing Scriptures into France – His tongue was cut out so he could not witness to those
        around him at his execution.
        1546 – Ann Askew – Tortured and burnt for studying and believing the true Scriptures
        1548 – Paul Fagius – Burned for translating the Bible – England
        1548 – Martin Bucer – Burned for translating the Bible – England
        1553 – Nicholas Nayle – Burned at the stake in Paris because he brought gospel books for believers.
        1554 – Lady Jane Grey – Beheaded for her conversion to true Christianity
        1555 – Nicholas Ridley – Burned for his faith – England
        1555 – Hugh Latimer – Burned for his faith – England
        1555 – John Rogers – Translator of the Matthews Bible into English
        1556 – Bartholmew Hector – Preaching and Bible Distribution -Burned at Thurin
        1560 – Julian Hernandez – Burned at the stake in Spain for Bible Distribution
        1560 – Jean Louis Paschale – Believed the Bible over Romish teachings
        1560 – Stefano Negrino – Starved to death in prison – Italy
        1561 – 88 men had throats slit in Montalto – Italy
        1561 – Hugo Chiamps – Entrails torn from his body at Turin, Italy
        1561 – Peter Geymarali – Entrails torn from his body at Lucerna, Italy
        1561 – Maria Romano – Buried alive at Rocco-patia, Italy
        1561 – Magdalen Foulano – Buried alive at San Giovanni, Italy
        1561 – Susan Michelini – Hands and feet bound – Left to die in cold and hunger – Saracena, Italy
        1561 – Bartholomew Fache – Gashed with Sabres and wounds filled with quicklime – Died from the agonizing pain
        1561 – James Baridari -Sulpherous matches placed all over body and then lit
        1561 – Daniel Revelli – Mouth filled with gun powder and then lit – Head blown to pieces
        1561 – Maria Monnen – Flesh cut from cheek and chin thus exposing cheek bone- left to Perish
        1561 – Thomas Margueti – Mutilated to death at Miraboco, Italy
        1561 – Sudan Jaquin – Cut to bits in La Torre, Italy
        1561 – Sara Rostagnol – Slit open from legs to Bosom – Perished on road between Eyral and Lucerna
        1561 – Anna Char bonnier – Impaled on a spike and carried from San Giovanni to La Torre
        1561 – Daniel Rambaud – Refused to renounce the true Gospel as they took his nails off, then fingers, then his feet, then his hands, then
        his arms and finally his legs at Paesano, Italy
        1562 – James Bovell – Rejected Rome’s teachings in favor of the Bible
        1566 – Francesco Spinula – Drowned at Venice, Italy for making a Latin version of the Psalms
        1567 – Pietro Carnesecchi – Refused to bow to papal authority
        1570 – Aonio Paleario – Martyred for writing a book called “The benefit of Christ’s Death.”
        1572 – St Bartholomew’s Day Massacre – 4,000 brutally murdered of the French Huguenots – It lasted from August 24 to October 23 –
        Total killed during this time was about 35,000
         

        Like

      8. I was only addressing where I got that weird notion that the Catholic Church didn’t want the common lay people to have a Bible. Children burned for reciting the Lord’s Prayer? Under what Spirit are we operating to burn children for reciting the Lord’s Prayer?

        Like

      9. Of course, I admitted in the original comment, crimes were committed by men of the Church, nonetheless, crimes were committed by reformers against those who refused to turn away from the Church.

        The point of my comment was to show the futility of pointing a finger for men on either side by showing a carnage list.

        Do I think such a list a proper representation of Lutheranism or Anglicanism? Of course not; however, my assertions originally based on ideas because I defend the ideas of what constitutes as books of the bible or other realms of theology because my faith’s identity doesn’t rest on a protest of another’s faith, but instead on, Christ.

        I could care less what folks did to Catholics. They were wrong. Catholics were wrong for killing too. However, it’s a clear red herring, because it doesn’t determine whether the Catholic Church’s position has a better historical position than any other.

        Liked by 1 person

      10. Your comment on this post is absolutely perfect. Because both of us are educated people who will debate the issue until Christ’s second coming. This in fact does not nullify my original point to the post, but solidifies the importance of keeping history in tact and truthful.

        Regardless of what side we stand on…you and I both know of William Tyndale, we both know of Martin Luther, we both know of the bloody carnage that allowed for each of us to have a copy of the Bible (yours has 73 Books mine has 66)…

        Imagine if all the early texts had been burned. Destroyed. What a loss for all humanity.

        And also at the end of the day I know that you confess Jesus Christ is the Son of God, born of the Virgin Mary, sacrificed for our sins and resurrected on the third day. And that dear brother makes us family. And my Bible although only 66 books in Mark 9:40 says “for whoever is not against us is for us.”

        Liked by 1 person

      11. Wait, did you want the whole list?

        John Almond, priest, 1612[2]
        Edmund Arrowsmith, Jesuit priest, 1628
        Ambrose Edward Barlow, Benedictine priest, 10 September 1641[3]
        John Boste, priest, 24 July 1594[4]
        Alexander Briant, Jesuit priest, 1 December 1581
        Edmund Campion, Jesuit priest, 1 December 1581
        Margaret Clitherow, laywoman, 25 March 1586[5]
        Philip Evans, Jesuit priest, 1679
        Thomas Garnet, Jesuit priest, 1608
        Edmund Gennings, priest, 1591
        John Griffith (alias Jones), Franciscan friar, 1598
        Richard Gwyn, layman, 1584
        John Houghton, Prior of the London Charterhouse, 4 May 1535
        Philip Howard, Earl of Arundel, layman, 1595
        John Kemble, priest, 1679
        Luke Kirby, priest, 30 May 1582
        Robert Lawrence, Prior of the Beauvale Charterhouse, 4 May 1535[6]
        David Lewis, Jesuit priest, 1679[2]
        Anne Line, laywoman, 1601
        John Lloyd, priest, 1679
        Cuthbert Mayne, priest, 1577
        Henry Morse, Jesuit priest, 1645[2]
        Nicholas Owen, Jesuit lay-brother, 1606
        John Payne, priest, 1582
        Polydore Plasden, priest, 1591[2]
        John Plessington, priest, 1679
        Richard Reynolds, Brigittine monk of Syon Abbey, 4 May 1535[7]
        John Rigby, layman, 1600
        John Roberts, Benedictine priest, 1610
        Alban Bartholomew Roe, Benedictine priest, 1642
        Ralph Sherwin, priest, 1 December 1581
        John Southworth, priest, 1654
        Robert Southwell, Jesuit priest, 1595[2]
        John Stone, Augustinian friar
        John Wall, Franciscan priest, 1679[2]
        Henry Walpole, Jesuit priest, 1595[2]
        Margaret Ward, laywoman, 1588
        Augustine Webster, Prior of the Axholme Charterhouse, 4 May 1535
        Swithin Wells, layman, 1591
        Eustace White, priest, 1591[2]

        Liked by 1 person

      12. Since you mentioned, the Council of Carthage, I’ll reference the actual text and list of books from the primary source:

        16 [Placuit] ut praeter Scripturas canonicas nihil in Ecclesia legatur sub nomine divinarum Scripturarum. Sunt autem canonicae Scripture: Genesis, Exodus, Leviticus, Numeri, Deuterenomium, Iesu Nave, Iudicum, Ruth, Regnorum libri quatour, Paralipomenon libri duo, Iob, Psalterium Davidicum, Salomonis libre quinque, Duodecim libri prophetarum, Esaias, Ieremias, Daniel, Ezechiel, Tobias, Iudith, Hester, Hesdrae libre duo, Machabaeorum libre duo.

        17 Novi autem Testamenti, evangeliorum libri quatuor, Actus Apostolorum liber unus, Pauli Apostoli epistolae tredecim., eiusdem ad Hebraeos una, Petri duae, Iohannis tres, Iacobi una, Iudae una, Apocalipsis Ioannis.

        Liked by 1 person

  1. A couple of thoughts here…

    I was fortunate enough to have been stationed in Germany years ago. I met a number of locals both old and young. I even worked with two Germans who were of sufficient age to have been youths during the WWII era, in fact. Germany has felt their own nation’s past-guilt for decades now and they’ve gone through something similar to our own historical thoughts about slavery (with respect to the Nazis and Hitler and such). It would convenient to wash away the past. But they don’t. There are youthful Germans who try to erase the past or to re-write it but the nation as a whole does a pretty good job of remembering. Compare/contrast German Chancellor Angela Merkel’s remarks on Charlottesville with Trump’s if you have any doubt.

    I was also lucky enough to have done some research in England regarding the Spanish Inquisition and the sheer numbers of people killed is rather staggering. Do not underestimate the attempts at revising history with respect to this ugly institutional period in history by the Catholic church. That same Ferdinand/Isabella of Christopher Columbus fame exiled more than 160,000 Jews from Spain. Similar fates were seen for Muslims as well at twice this number. Given the church’s reach, there were localized versions of this in outlying regions like Peru, Mexico, Sicily, Portugal. Current texts suggest that the death count was a mere 3000-5000 people but I would suggest that the actual count is more like a hundred times greater. This is your revisionistic history at its finest. History seemingly forgets the wide scope of activities and its related victims that Catholicism found objectionable during this time. During their trial, the victim was tortured in front of the Inquisition and audience until they either died or confessed to whichever “crime” was on the list of offenses supposedly committed. Even if that 5000 number statistic is an accurate figure of those who were burned at the stake, that puts modern estimates at a quarter of a million who were then minimally tortured.

    Liked by 1 person

    1. I had to learn about St. Patrick for church History. In my studies, we learned the story of a young man abducted, sold into slavery, that lived in misery. He finally escaped and spent his life trying to end persecution.

      Mind you, what I know of St. Patrick comes from his Confessions. It was written by St. Patrick himself.

      If you google St. Patrick today you will read that he was a tax collector and a slave trader. This is terrible. And it is history Revisionism, and erroneous.

      Slavery did happen in the United States but I honestly feel it was the fruit of a much larger root – racism. Viewing African slaves as inferior and that was not secluded to the Southern States. The North, especially Abraham Lincoln, were as racist. Some of Lincolns speeches are DISGUSTING.

      Slavery in the US was ended more by Christianity than by The Civil War. It was preached that all men, free or bond, was eligible for salvation. Slaves would hold secret worship sessions in the swamps which were punishable by beating or worse. The reason being slave owners could “own” a heathen slave but not a brother or sister in Christ…the conscience of the country was changing as revivals broke out. It was Christ who set the captives free, even here. But you don’t hear about that unless you go back and read historical documents kept by church and state.

      This is an excerpt by a speech Robert E. Lee gave in 1856…

      “Their emancipation will sooner result from the mild and melting influences of Christianity than from the storm and tempest of fiery controversy. This influence, though slow, is sure. The doctrines and miracles of our Savior have required nearly two thousand years to convert but a small portion of the human race, and even among Christian nations what gross errors still exist! While we see the course of the final abolition of human slavery is still onward, and give it the aid of our prayers, let us leave the progress as well as the results in the hands of Him who, chooses to work by slow influences, and with whom a thousand years are but as a single day.”

      He goes on to conclude with…

      “Is it not strange that the descendants of those Pilgrim Fathers who crossed the Atlantic to preserve their own freedom have always proved the most intolerant of the spiritual liberty of others?””

      Contrast that with what Lincoln has been quoted with saying

      “Our republican system was meant for a homogeneous people. As long as blacks continue to live with the whites they constitute a threat to the national life. Family life may also collapse and the increase of mixed breed bastards may some day challenge the supremacy of the white man.”

      Now, if you were to ask people, if Abraham Lincoln was a champion for equality in America…given the already existing revisions to history must would say yes. Growing up here I remember my teacher telling me that Abraham Lincoln loved black people.

      Which is strange because quotes like theses make him look racist.

      In his 1858 debate with Sen. Steven Douglas, Lincoln maintained, “And inasmuch as they cannot so live, while they do remain together there must be the position of superior and inferior, and I as much as any other man am in favor of having the superior position assigned to the white race.”

      During the same speech: “I will say then that I am not, nor ever have been in favor of bringing about in any way the social and political equality of the white and black races.”

      and what about this…

      “I have no purpose, directly or indirectly, to interfere with the institution of slavery in the states where it exists. I believe I have no lawful right to do so, and I have no inclination to do so.”

      We DEFINITELY are watching history change right before our eyes. If Saint Patrick’s writings had been destroyed, so would have his legacy. Lincoln was never any less of a racist than any confederate soldier. These are facts, preserved in invaluable artifacts. But the sad thing is, most don’t bother to educate themselves are look past the feelings invoked by a social media post or a harsh word by a stranger on TV.

      It’s time to wake up and understand we need EVERYTHING we can preserved from the past. – even if it’s to be tucked away in a warehouse somewhere. Thanks for the very thought provoking post. Great information. God bless!

      Like

  2. That’s very enlightening about Robert E. Lee. His wife inherited slaves in a probate and he was instrumental in “doing right” by them. So it’s important to note that even though he was peripherally involved/engaged in slavery, it was through circumstance and he made to correct that.

    I had to research your Abraham Lincoln quote (the first one at least) and I believe that you have the attribution wrong. Reference: http://quod.lib.umich.edu/a/alajournals/0599998.0006.003?view=text&seq=40 Reading this closely, it’s the Reverend James Mitchell of Indiana (May 15, 1862) who was trying to convince Lincoln with these very words “…as long as the Negroes…”

    From this, we see that Lincoln worked out a compensated emancipation deal in which the government would buy the slaves from their district.

    Here is a more contextual telling of the speech from Lincoln “…And inasmuch…” http://teachingamericanhistory.org/library/document/the-lincoln-douglas-debates-4th-debate-part-i/ Note from the cheers and laughter which he received, he was really playing to this crowd’s wishes. Reading between the lines—which is usually required for very public expressions like this—we clearly see that Lincoln is against the mixing of the races. (One could indirectly suggest that mixing of the races is bad/evil/whatever without actually saying those words directly and this is reasonably what he did there that day.) Remember of course that he was a polished public speaker and former lawyer so he gave the audience exactly what it came to hear.

    Regarding Lincolns “I have no purpose…” comment, I would suggest that this is a political lie. His words here directly contradict with his actions, say, in Indiana from the anecdote above. He had every intent to undermine slavery wherever it existed.

    I couldn’t tell you much about Patrick other than to guess that he was a handsome young man.

    Liked by 1 person

    1. I think our past was no doubt constructed on racism. I maintain that racism was the root and slavery the fruit. It was both the North and South.

      Racism is a disgusting evil of men. And it exists in the heart, not in statues or flags. What we need to do is truthfully record and preserve history. I understand the feeling of some that glorifying men who fought for slavery is absurd. Again I say, slavery was the fruit of a racist root.

      If you really dug into history you would find many of our founding fathers were racist and owned slaves. So will we then dismantle Mt Rushmore or burn the Declaration of a Independence. I maintain a different proposal…

      Preserve the past, develop an educational strategy that breaks down the walls that CURRENTLY exist that could ever foster that root to grow fruit again. I really think it would be beneficial to start telling the truth.

      I commented on a young mans blog that when I see that giant pile of shoes located at the holocaust museum the last thing it does is inspire me to recreate what Hitler did….

      It does the exact opposite.

      There are so many things in the here and now that need our attention that we need to destroy other than statues. Read my post on Cobalt and Cotton. Slavery still exists today! America has just outsourced it.

      Like

      1. I would suggest that Racism is the child of Fear & Ignorance. When you learn more about another race, you are more likely to see commonality to your own and to welcome them. Fear is an odd and mostly-useless emotion but the media, for example, keeps it well-fed most of the time. They do so because it sells.

        “The few who understand the system, will either be so interested from its profits or so dependent on its favors, that there will be no opposition from that class… Let me issue and control a nation’s money and I care not who writes the laws.”
        ~ Mayer Amschel Bauer Rothschild, 1744-1812
        https://prof77.wordpress.com/the-20/the-international-bankers-famous-quotes-about-international-bankers/

        Regarding slavery, I have some bad news for you. At the end of the Civil War, America was incorporated so that it could incur debt from international banking (the Rothschilds of London) – see “The Act of 1871”. At the end of WWII both England and America were heavily in debt. The International Monetary Fund (IMF) picked up the debt by both countries and now effectively own all of us and not as slaves but as “chattle” (think cows/horses who have no rights whatsoever and may be bought/sold/slaughtered). At this time, the U.S. had managed to accumulate 70% of the world’s gold reserves so the IMF picked this up as well as all our real estate. Legal terms were muddled so that we don’t actually own anything even if we’ve paid for it. The IRS/CIA/FBI/etc all report directly to the IMF rather than to our federal government. It’s all a sham. JFK was the last sitting president who was briefed on this situation but he wanted to tell everyone about the lies so he was assassinated by the CIA; they haven’t clued in an American president since. Your SSN is an asset tag if you think about it. If one believed in such things, you might suggest that your SSN is the mark of the beast, or so I would guess.

        http://supremelaw.org/letters/us-v-usa.htm

        Liked by 1 person

      2. I agree with you. I told a friend that in the current day and age America sits like a great big grande Southern Mansion. Mexico, India, Africa, China & Taiwan are our new outsourced cotton fields.

        Slavery STILL exists. It has little to do with fear or ignorance but is extremely racist and opportunistic. Though greed, we find impoverished people and exploit them, to fuel our uber-consumer society here in the US.

        For people to preach on antislavery yet partake in such uberconsumerism is hypocritical in my opinion.

        Like

  3. Honestly, I just find it interesting that there’s been no debate in this thread over the KJV issue (other than the number of books in the canon). I’m not a KJV-only guy, but I still use it most of the time.

    Slavery and racism has certainly become the topic of the day. Unfortunately, so many who debate the racism issue do it from the perspective of a godless worldview – which ultimately relegates the worth of the individual and the view of race to the subjective and relative whims of humanity.

    Liked by 1 person

    1. I only used the KJV issue as an illustrative example. I believe the best version of the Bible is the one that gets you into it and reading it on a daily basis. I like the Geneva, the NIV too. The first Bible I read from cover to cover was a NKJV. ❤️

      Liked by 1 person

      1. But your post has prompted me further towards writing my own piece defining racism. To borrow the words of a great swordsman, the media keeps using that word, but I don’t think it means what they think it means.

        Liked by 1 person

      2. I believe racism to mean classifying and then discriminating against said classified people to exploit any disadvantages or vulnerabilities they may possess in order to achieve a “perceived” superiority- not an actual but perceived superiority. Or inflicting prejudice or ill will towards another based solely on their skins color or ethnic heritage.

        Truth is there are no superior races of people.

        Like

  4. There are several translations of the Bible I have read. The Jerusalem which has 33 books and has a Roman impermature (SP). The Cambridge New English which has 33 books and beautiful poetic language in the Psalms. The WEB online which has both the 66 book and the 33 book versions available. Last the ESV which I use for personal Bible study and have used in the past when writing my blog. I have been using the WEB for quotes on the blog because it is open market. This is a fascinating discussion.

    Liked by 1 person

    1. Biblegateway.com has the 1599 Geneva Translation available…and I personally prefer it to any other. Plus it gives a chapter summary of the key verses of any given chapter. Technology is pretty amazing.

      I used the KJV as an analogy, I do not prefer it nor do I subscribe to the teaching that reading from or teaching from any other translation will land you in hell (which sadly is actually a thing in some churches)…

      I love the Geneva Bible personally…I have studied from the ESV as well. There are two types of translation styles…word for word or meaning for meaning and honestly both have pros and cons and it’s hard to say what is best.

      Like

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s