Are Americans Pro-Slavery?

Taking an authors works out of context,

If the shoe fits... You simply don't like the conclusion.

you are obviously NOT the one to be "schooling" me about anything, especially the Constitution.:D

No, I'm not. That's why I back everything up with evidence from the Founding Fathers. Their statements on the Constitution are quite valid.

When you stop relying on C&P of others works, and start demonstrating the ability to think critically,

If one were to copy and paste the statement "2+2=4" would it be invalid because it was copy and pasted?

Please answer the question. You just got yourself caught in yet another fallacy.
 
Werbung:
No. Federal Farmer was the one who first quoted Jesus Christ on the matter. Go back and read.

No where in his post did he mention Jesus. He simply used a common saying and then you ranted about what Jesus had to say on the matter.

Argue if you want this saying is attributed to Jesus, whatever, but the point he was making was that taxes have been paid by all civilized societies, Jesus had nothing to do with this thread until you brought him in...
 
Not a correct interpretation:

The first problem with the Bible is that you can interpret pretty much to mean whatever you want.

But none of this debate about what the Bible has to say changes the fact that the Romans paid taxes, as have all civilized societies.
 
You just don't want to be honest, do you? It was not a common saying. The statement originated with Jesus Christ:

“Render unto Caesar what is Caesar's…” is the beginning of a phrase attributed to Jesus in the synoptic gospels

Argue all you want with who said it, the point of his statement had nothing to do with Jesus. I am done with this conversation, since you are not interested an an actual debate.

For the record, it is a common saying now, and part of the everyday vernacular but again (as I mentioned before) his post had nothing to do with Jesus as much as it did with the idea that all civilized societies paid taxes.
 
The first problem with the Bible is that you can interpret pretty much to mean whatever you want.

Again, I'm not the one who introduced religious quotes in support of my position, that was Federal Farmer.

But none of this debate about what the Bible has to say changes the fact that the Romans paid taxes, as have all civilized societies.

That's an Appeal to the Majority and an Appeal to Tradition.

And what you conveniently omit is that taxes eventually were a major part in the destruction of their society.
 
Argue all you want with who said it,

There is no argument. Jesus Christ said it according to every credible source available. Your opinion proves nothing. If you have conflicting evidence, THEN PRODUCE AND PRESENT IT. Your fallacies bore me.


the point of his statement had nothing to do with Jesus.

Yes, it does, since it was a statement made by Jesus Christ he was using to try and justify his position.

I am done with this conversation, since you are not interested an an actual debate.

You're the one ignoring the truth and trying to state the quote didn't originate with Jesus Christ.
 
Didn't you establish in your other thread that there was no real Jesus?

What my other thread establishes is that he wasn't divine.

If so, then why are you quoting him?

Again, the first person in this thread to quote him was Federal Farmer. I am merely responding to his incorrect interpretation. You people need to learn how to read.
 
There is no argument. Jesus Christ said it according to every credible source available. Your opinion proves nothing. If you have conflicting evidence, THEN PRODUCE AND PRESENT IT. Your fallacies bore me.




Yes, it does, since it was a statement made by Jesus Christ he was using to try and justify his position.



You're the one ignoring the truth and trying to state the quote didn't originate with Jesus Christ.



How can you believe there is a credible source for anything Jesus said if you don’t believe Jesus ever existed, at least that was what I got from your posts in the other thread about religion and that ziegest film or what ever it was called?
 
What my other thread establishes is that he wasn't divine.



Again, the first person in this thread to quote him was Federal Farmer. I am merely responding to his incorrect interpretation. You people need to learn how to read.

Was not divine? I just got done watching that first part. By the end it was saying only 4 historians ever mentioned him and they are all questionable especially Josephus who the film claimed never really even said anything about him at all in the first place.

I did not get from that film they were saying Jesus existed but was not divine, just that he did not exist and the story was a copy of older stories out of Egypt.
 
Werbung:
Back
Top