Mayor Pete Attacks Trump's Faith...

[Cow Poke]

Is he a bacon denier?

Is that why he's so orange?

[rogue06]

[ATTACH=CONFIG]36649[/ATTACH]

bacon dog.jpg

[carpedm9587]

Countdown for when one of our left wing agnostic/atheists tells everyone what they should believe in order to be a Christian.

Why would an atheist tell someone what they have to believe to be a member of their own faith?

[Tassman]

I actually thought you were smart enough that I didn't need sarcasm tags there.

...is your bogus claim that the Southern Baptists misinterpreted scripture to justify slavery. You keep kabuki dancing all around that, when you should just be honest and admit, "ok, a lot of Christians did that, but I find no proof that there was any official Southern Baptist position or teaching on that".

Then what washttp://www.sbc.net/resolutions/899

So again, what was

[carpedm9587]

I actually thought you were smart enough that I didn't need sarcasm tags there.



...is your bogus claim that the Southern Baptists misinterpreted scripture to justify slavery. You keep kabuki dancing all around that, when you should just be honest and admit, "ok, a lot of Christians did that, but I find no proof that there was any official Southern Baptist position or teaching on that".

But, then, that would require you to have a modicum of credibility.

I'm joining this discussion a bit late, but this jumped out at me from the 1995 SBC statement on racism:

WHEREAS, Our relationship to African-Americans has been hindered from the beginning by the role that slavery played in the formation of the Southern Baptist Convention...

I am unfamiliar with this history, but this seems to suggest that defending slavery was at least a part of the basis of the founding of the SBC. Usually, such foundings are at least partially rooted in a scriptural defense. Do you know where I could read more on this? Do you know the history?

[Cow Poke]

I'm joining this discussion a bit late, but this jumped out at me from the 1995 SBC statement on racism:

WHEREAS, Our relationship to African-Americans has been hindered from the beginning by the role that slavery played in the formation of the Southern Baptist Convention...

I am unfamiliar with this history, but this seems to suggest that defending slavery was at least a part of the basis of the founding of the SBC. Usually, such foundings are at least partially rooted in a scriptural defense. Do you know where I could read more on this? Do you know the history?

Yes, you came in rather late.

The Southern Baptist Convention was founded because the Churches of the South were not permitted to send missionaries (a foundation of Baptist work) who were slave owners. A foundation of the Southern Baptist Convention is the "Cooperative Program", which is all about missions - state, North American and International. While there were many people who owned slaves and justified it by pointing to the "curse of Ham" (or, more precisely, the "curse of Ham's descendants"), found in Genesis, that was never a teaching or policy or doctrine or principle of the Southern Baptist Convention.

Cotton was king, and slaves were seen as a necessary evil by people both in the Southern Baptist Convention, but generally throughout the South. The SBC was not founded upon a bad interpretation of scripture, but because they wanted to fund missionaries from the South that were not previously permitted to serve, and did not want to give up their economic strength built on cotton and slavery.

As early as 1979 we (the SBC) were already talking about addressing the slavery issue, but the Convention was in the political control of the liberals, and a Conservative Resurgence began, with those of us who believed the Bible was the Inerrant Word of God winning control of the Convention. (Yes, I was part of that battle, helping to form the more conservative State Convention - the Southern Baptists of Texas) Interestingly enough, it was these Conservatives who pushed for a recognition of the sins of our past regarding slavery, and pushed for the public position and statement.

[Cow Poke]

I love you just enough to get to heaven.

Then what was the official Southern Baptist position or teaching on that?

There wasn't one. That's why you can't find one.

The Southern Baptist Convention was founded as an explicitly pro-slavery denomination following a dispute over the appropriateness of letting slave-owners be missionaries.

No, the Southern Baptist Convention was founded as a pro-MISSIONS organization, having been denied the appointment of missionaries who were, or had been, slave owners.

Because the LIBERALS were in control of our convention, and that began changing in 1979. They subsequently got mad, took their liberal theology and jumped ship.

http://www.sbc.net/resolutions/899

Yes, I was there.

So again, what was

So again, there was no official SBC spiritual/scriptural basis for defending slavery, and that "defending" did not continue for 150 years. It took that long for a public statement, but that was not an "all of a sudden" thing.

At this point, Tass, it's obvious that you're going to so what you always do ---

A) find the worst interpretation of something with the most anti-Christian bias
2) ignore any evidence to the contrary
iii) mindlessly repeat the same thing over and over and over and over and over.....

The Baptist Faith & Message is the "creed" of the Southern Baptists (though we claim not to be a creedal people). If you find ANYTHING in earlier versions of the BF&M, or the founding documents of the SBC, backing up your claim that SBC had any kind of official position justifying slavery with a bad interpretation of scripture, I'll be happy to see it and respond accordingly.

[carpedm9587]

Yes, you came in rather late.

The Southern Baptist Convention was founded because the Churches of the South were not permitted to send missionaries (a foundation of Baptist work) who were slave owners. A foundation of the Southern Baptist Convention is the "Cooperative Program", which is all about missions - state, North American and International. While there were many people who owned slaves and justified it by pointing to the "curse of Ham" (or, more precisely, the "curse of Ham's descendants"), found in Genesis, that was never a teaching or policy or doctrine or principle of the Southern Baptist Convention.

Cotton was king, and slaves were seen as a necessary evil by people both in the Southern Baptist Convention, but generally throughout the South. The SBC was not founded upon a bad interpretation of scripture, but because they wanted to fund missionaries from the South that were not previously permitted to serve, and did not want to give up their economic strength built on cotton and slavery.

As early as 1979 we (the SBC) were already talking about addressing the slavery issue, but the Convention was in the political control of the liberals, and a Conservative Resurgence began, with those of us who believed the Bible was the Inerrant Word of God winning control of the Convention. (Yes, I was part of that battle, helping to form the more conservative State Convention - the Southern Baptists of Texas) Interestingly enough, it was these Conservatives who pushed for a recognition of the sins of our past regarding slavery, and pushed for the public position and statement.

Interesting. Do you have access to sources that document this history? No insult, but I tend to find that those closely involved tend to see things from a unique perspective. Multiple sources can do a lot to tease out the truth.

[Cow Poke]

Interesting. Do you have access to sources that document this history? No insult, but I tend to find that those closely involved tend to see things from a unique perspective. Multiple sources can do a lot to tease out the truth.

Sure, but there's no argument at all on my part that slavery was THE issue that birthed the SBC. That was obviously a very divisive time in our nation, triggering the War of Northern Aggression, causing brother to war against brother, etc.

Here is an article from NPR on the matter. They're obviously no bastion of conservative thought.

Here's an article in Wikipedia, saying pretty much the same thing.

The North would not allow missionaries from the South to be appointed and funded, so the Southern churches organized their (our) own convention in Atlanta to fund what became the Cooperative Program in 1919, sending missionaries all over the world.

I think, having made the claim, it's really incumbent upon Tassy to show that there was, indeed, any official scriptural position held to justify slavery. It already existed - at least a dozen of our US Presidents were slave owners at one point in their lives. It was an evil in society that was justified, not by scripture, but by money.

[Cow Poke]

Why would an atheist tell someone what they have to believe to be a member of their own faith?

[rogue06]

Sure, but there's no argument at all on my part that slavery was THE issue that birthed the SBC. That was obviously a very divisive time in our nation, triggering the War of Northern Aggression, causing brother to war against brother, etc.

Here is an article from NPR on the matter. They're obviously no bastion of conservative thought.

Here's an article in Wikipedia, saying pretty much the same thing.

The North would not allow missionaries from the South to be appointed and funded, so the Southern churches organized their (our) own convention in Atlanta to fund what became the Cooperative Program in 1919, sending missionaries all over the world.

I think, having made the claim, it's really incumbent upon Tassy to show that there was, indeed, any official scriptural position held to justify slavery. It already existed - at least a dozen of our US Presidents were slave owners at one point in their lives. It was an evil in society that was justified, not by scripture, but by money.

While you will find individual Southern Baptists who cited Scripture in support of slavery, AFAICT the Southern Baptist Convention (SBC) itself never did. Probably the most notable would be Richard Fuller, who was one of the founders of the Southern Baptist movement as well as its president of the SBC at one time. But he never spoke for the SBC but rather expressed his own personal views.

[Cow Poke]

While you will find individual Southern Baptists who cited Scripture in support of slavery, AFAICT the Southern Baptist Convention (SBC) itself never did. Probably the most notable would be Richard Fuller, who was one of the founders of the Southern Baptist movement as well as its president of the SBC at one time. But he never spoke for the SBC but rather expressed his own personal views.

EGGactly. Tassman is just proving what an anti-Christian bigot he is, having been on this anti-SBC kick for quite some time. Here's a quote of his from 2014, telling another 'whopper', and there are probably a lot more prior to the big crash...

Most probably, if you'd been around in the 19th century, you would have supported slavery as God's will, as the Southern Baptist Convention did. OR in the mid 20th century supported miscegenation for the same reason, namely "God alone has decided these things".

The boy has ZERO interest in the truth, and is only here to spew his contempt for Christianity in general, and Southern Baptists in particular.

[rogue06]

EGGactly. Tassman is just proving what an anti-Christian bigot he is, having been on this anti-SBC kick for quite some time. Here's a quote of his from 2014, telling another 'whopper', and there are probably a lot more prior to the big crash...



The boy has ZERO interest in the truth, and is only here to spew his contempt for Christianity in general, and Southern Baptists in particular.

But both he and little jimmy appear to be big on telling Christians how they're supposed to think and act.

[Cow Poke]

But both he and little jimmy appear to be big on telling Christians how they're supposed to think and act.

And how we (or THEY) should spend our money!

[tabibito]

EGGactly. Tassman is just proving what an anti-Christian bigot he is, having been on this anti-SBC kick for quite some time. Here's a quote of his from 2014, telling another 'whopper', and there are probably a lot more prior to the big crash...



The boy has ZERO interest in the truth, and is only here to spew his contempt for Christianity in general, and Southern Baptists in particular.

I haven't found anything that calls your exposition into question - and I've stopped looking, any qualms based on the same lines of those expressed by CarpeDM being unfounded it seems.