Fether

Question about the Jewish image of the Messiah

Recommended Posts

From my understanding, the Jewish religion sees the Messiah as a political figure that will save them right?

if that is true and I’m not mistaking, here is my question.

Is the messiah they look for going to be divine in any sorts? Or is it just a man?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
19 hours ago, Semi said:

He goes so far as to say he himself (Ben) could be the Messiah.  

I was literally having the exact thought while writing this post xD he has my vote for being the Jewish messiah

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 8/17/2018 at 8:58 PM, Fether said:

I was literally having the exact thought while writing this post xD he has my vote for being the Jewish messiah

Let's keep Ben in America for the 2024 Presidential election. Let him save America first, and by so doing, ensure Israel's safety - at least while he serves for 8 years. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 hours ago, Semi said:

Let's keep Ben in America for the 2024 Presidential election. Let him save America first, and by so doing, ensure Israel's safety - at least while he serves for 8 years. 

America, please don't vote for another ideologue who will willingly torpedo his friends and promote the enemy in the name of his ideology.  Aka Ben Shapiro and Mitt Romney.

Shapiro belongs on the public square where he can argue ideology all day long.

Edited by anatess2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, anatess2 said:

America, please don't vote for another ideologue who will willingly torpedo his friends and promote the enemy in the name of his ideology.  Aka Ben Shapiro and Mitt Romney.

Shapiro belongs on the public square where he can argue ideology all day long.

anatess2, hello, nice to meet you. Do you object to Ben? What is it you don't like about his viewpoints? Specifically, copy here what it is you don't support. 

What/who is your ideal President? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Semi said:

anatess2, hello, nice to meet you. Do you object to Ben? What is it you don't like about his viewpoints? Specifically, copy here what it is you don't support. 

What/who is your ideal President? 

I don't object to Ben.  I don't object to people's ideology if they're honest peddlers of it.  It is what it is.

I object to ideologues running powerful countries.

My ideal American President?  Trump.  Non-ideologue, pragmatic, with extensive executive experience and an instinct for American conservative ideals and national sovereignty.  Trump can't spell conservative yet he is more effective in promoting conservative ideals than any of the people competing against each other on who is the most conservative.  I'd trust him to be the President of the Philippines as well because of this although I'd rather have a Filipino with the same instincts due to the cultural history. 

Here is the main difference between Ben Shapiro (ideologue) and somebody like Trump (pragmatic)... Rex Tillerson was interviewed during his confirmation hearings about Philippine President Duterte's extra-judicial killings by Marco Rubio.  Rubio tried to get Tillerson to denounce Duterte and to state his support for the UN Human Rights Commission.  Tillerson refused to be baited into the ideology.  Rather, Tillerson stated unequivocally that Duterte's 85% approval by the Filipinos make him believe that there is more to the matter of extra-judicial killings than what the UN Human Rights Commission is acting on and, therefore, his position is to go to the Philippines and study what is going on "on the ground" and make a determination if the USA will need to interfere with Philippine affairs or leave the Philippine people to self-determination as their right as a sovereign nation.

Tillerson is the pragmatist, Rubio is the ideologue.  I will not support a Rubio presidency in the same manner that I will not support a Shapiro presidency in the same manner that I supported Trump over Cruz although my first pick was Carson.

Edited by anatess2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@Semi I’m ganna have to agree with @anatess2 on this.

I absolutely love Shapiro. I have never heard him say anything I disagree with as far as politics go. But great and high morals do not make a president

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Fether said:

@Semi I’m ganna have to agree with @anatess2 on this.

I absolutely love Shapiro. I have never heard him say anything I disagree with as far as politics go. But great and high morals do not make a president

God seems to disagree.

But in fairness, there’s a good chance God doesn’t know what he’s talking about.  He was never manly enough to date a porn star, for example.

As for Shapiro, his sin is quite clear.

Edited by Just_A_Guy

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I noticed that I first shared the following article by a man from Uganda back in September of 2010 so he wrote this some time before then.  I got the impression from some of his other writings that he had had a near death experience during a bout of malaria...... which could help to explain his being given an intriguing insight on Isaiah 45.  

 

Quote

Eporu Ronald Alfred

Kakira Deliverance Church,
P.O. Box 3191, Kakira, Jinja, Uganda

......

Dear brethren, 
I salute you in the name of our Lord Jesus Christ!

RE: SHARING NEW DISCOVERIES OF THE TRUTH IN BIBLE PROPHECY CONCERNING THE IMMINENT HEALING AND UNITY OF THE CHURCH

I am mesmerized by the truth in bible prophecy that the Spirit of God has been revealing over the recent years. Secret things belong to God and those that are revealed belong to us and our children... (Deut 29: 29).

1. King Cyrus the great ruled his country 555 years Before Christ i.e. from 576 BC to 530 BC and authorised the rebuilding of the second temple in Jerusalem. Cyrus of the Old Testament is hence associated with the number 555 and is the shadow figure of incoming Cyrus II of the New Testament. You may learn more about his history from the internet and scriptures. This new truth enables us to identify the leadership of the world that will rebuild the temple in Jerusalem as prophesied in book of Isaiah before the rise of antichrist. Cyrus II is coming to revive the evangelical/Pentecostal church in Jerusalem and restore the headquarters of the church in same city where the church was born. He is set to strip Babylon of the vessels of the temple and the name of the Lord God and transfer that crown back to Jerusalem thus leaving Babylon naked. Cyrus will rebuild the temple in Jerusalem in fulfilment of the prophecy of Jesus as written in the book of John 2:18-23 and the prophecy of Isaiah as written in chapters 40, 41, 45 and 47 of the book of Isaiah. Jesus regarded the temple as the symbol of his own body while saying that he had the power to lay it down on the first day (1st millennium) and rebuild or raise it up on the 3rd day (3rd millennium). Remember that one day in the eyes of God is the same as one thousand years (millennium) as stated in book of 2 Peter 3:8. Rebuilding of the temple is thus associated with unification of the church.

Cyrus II will rebuild the temple in honour of our lord Jesus Christ. The temple will be the unifying (rallying) point of the world wide evangelical church as the original headquarters of the church. Psalms133 denotes that there is such a powerful anointing that comes along with unity among brethren. Unification of the whole body of Jesus Christ will make the church so powerful that she will overrun the world within a short time before the return of our lord Jesus Christ. A divided church is a powerless church whereas a united church is a powerful church. The church can only be able to fulfil her ultimate mission of revealing Jesus to the world once we get united as one body of Jesus Christ following his last prayer for his disciples as written in John 17:20-23.

Cyrus II will erase that false image of Jesus that the counterfeit and Idolatrous state church of Babylon has been projecting around the world and revive the original church that projects the true brilliant image of Jesus Christ. Haggai 2:9 says that the glory of the latter church (temple) will be greater than the glory of the former church (temple).The rise of Cyrus will also usher in the ultimate fulfilment of the prophecy of Joel 2:28 where God intends to pour out His Spirit on all flesh in these last days. The era of Cyrus brings the gentile period of grace to its close and leads to the restoration of the Jewish period of grace and salvation.




2. King Manasseh was the shadow figure (forerunner) of the antichrist in the Old Testament who ruled over Jerusalem exactly 666 years Before Christ i.e. from 697 BC to 642 BC. (2 chronicle 33: 1-2 and 2 kings 21: 1-17). Antichrist is associated with the number 666 as written in the book of Revelation 13:18. Manasseh was the most evil king to have ever ruled over the city of Jerusalem and kingdom of Judah.

Manasseh is reported to have killed so many innocent people in Jerusalem that the streets of Jerusalem were flowing with blood; he worshiped pagan idols and stars; he built pagan alters for idols and stars in the very courtyards of the temple; he sacrificed his sons to idols; he consulted diviners and mediums; he even set up an abominable pagan image at the temple that causes desolation just as the incoming antichrist will do. It was on that basis that God decided to have that first temple destroyed completely since Manasseh had desecrated it.



3. Prophet Jonah was the shadow figure (forerunner) of Jesus Christ in the Old Testament who undertook his prophetic ministry around 777 B.C. Prophet Jonah is hence associated with the number 777. He arose from the shadow and demise of Prophet Elisha. His preaching radiated such great power and authority that turned the city of Nineveh as the rising super power of that time up side down within 3 days only (read the book of Jonah). Jonah was the prophetic force behind the restoration of the lost territories of Israel in the reign of King Jeroboam II of Israel between 782 BC and 741 BC as written in II Kings 14:25. Jonah related with God more or less as his own father and God loved him more or less as His own son. He volunteered to die save occupants of the ship and was raised to life after three days just like Jesus Christ. Jesus compared himself with Jonah as his forerunner in the Old Testament as far as his earthly ministry, death and resurrection was concerned in Mathew 12; 38-41, Luke 11; 29-32. Jesus will also oversee the restoration of the lost territories of Israel just like prophet Jonah when he comes to rule as the king of kings and Lord of Lords. We can therefore correctly associate Jesus Christ with the number 777 just like Jonah as our commander-in-chief, Lord of the Sabbath and fountain of life.

The more we know where we came from the more we know where we are going. You are cordially invited to visit my face book home page for more information and messages. Feel free to share this truth with other brethren just as I received it free of charge from God.

Your brother in Christ 

Eporu Ronald
Scientist & Minister of Bible Prophecy

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 hours ago, Just_A_Guy said:

God seems to disagree.

But in fairness, there’s a good chance God doesn’t know what he’s talking about.  He was never manly enough to date a porn star, for example.

As for Shapiro, his sin is quite clear.

God didn't choose a person who dated a porn star.  Rather, He chose somebody who persecuted Christians.

It is always wise not to assume who God will and will not call to His service unless the call is made through Priesthood Authority.  Especially when we are talking about the President of the USA who has the power to raze the Philippines at whim.

Edited by anatess2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, anatess2 said:

God didn't choose a person who dated a porn star.  Rather, He chose somebody who persecuted Christians.

It is always wise not to assume who God will and will not call to His service.  Especially when we are talking about the President of the USA who has the power to raze the Philippines at whim.

Even assuming arguendo that the rise of various ancient monarchs/dictators reflected God’s Plan A (as opposed to simply being all God had left to work with given the masses’ skewed perceptions of “power” and how it was supposed to operate):  the issue here is not about what God does; it’s about what He has specifically told us to do in a democratic republic.

Further, it’s about faithless cynics who believe the personal righteousness of a society has no relation to its overall health; and/or that societies can remain virtuous whilst deliberately seeking and elevating evil men (or women) to be their leaders.

Further, the issue also includes the presence of certain moral degenerates in our society who think that dishonesty, sexual profligacy and violence are actually signs of strength; and who vote accordingly.

Edited by Just_A_Guy

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 minutes ago, Just_A_Guy said:

Even assuming arguendo that the rise of various ancient monarchs/dictators reflected God’s Plan A (as opposed to simply being all God had left to work with given the masses’ skewed perceptions of “power” and how it was supposed to operate):  the issue here is not about what God does; it’s about what He has specifically told us to do in a democratic republic.

Further, it’s about faithless cynics who believe the personal righteousness of a society has no relation to its overall health; and/or that societies can remain virtuous whilst deliberately seeking and elevating evil men (or women) to be their leaders.

Further, the issue also includes the presence of certain moral degenerates in our society who think that dishonesty, sexual profligacy and violence are actually signs of strength; and who vote accordingly.

YOUR judgment of morality, like the judgment the press promotes, falls in the same category as ideologues.  It's why Republicans are so easy to defeat because all you have to do is pull a skeleton out of your closet and any other good deeds you might have done or any teeming qualifications you might have had gets knocked out of consideration.  It's the exact same scenario I presented with Marco Rubio.  The ideology trumps anything else.

The bolded above is what an ideologue would say.  The accusation of "You voted for the skeleton somebody pulled out of the closet" instead of the good deeds and teeming qualifications especially in the accomplishment of dire objectives couldn't possibly be why you voted.  I am, for one, very glad that this stupidity finally got stamped out of the Republican party for the next 2 years, possibly 6.  Could you imagine if your wish would have been granted to put Clinton in office?

Edited by anatess2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, anatess2 said:

YOUR judgment of morality, like the judgment the press promotes, falls in the same category as ideologues.  It's why Republicans are so easy to defeat because all you have to do is pull a skeleton out of your closet and any other good deeds you might have done or any teeming qualifications you might have had gets knocked out of consideration.  It's the exact same scenario I presented with Marco Rubio.  The ideology trumps anything else.

The bolded above is what an ideologue would say.  The accusation of "You voted for the skeleton somebody pulled out of the closet" instead of the good deeds and teeming qualifications especially in the accomplishment of dire objectives couldn't possibly be why you voted.  I am, for one, very glad that this stupidity finally got stamped out of the Republican party for the next 2 years, possibly 6.  Could you imagine if your wish would have been granted to put Clinton in office?

*Shrug* I’m just citing to scripture showing that when it comes to the American political system, God’s an idealist.  If you don’t like the scripture, I suggest you take it up with Him.

But, you know what’s interesting, Anatess?

Even though you call out my statement, you haven’t denied that a significant number of Trump supporters think the way I said they think.  All you’ve done is to clutch at moral relativism to try to suggest that I can’t say for certain that such a thought pattern is objectively wrong.  

The embrace of moral relativism by Christians who should know better, has wrought (and will wreak) far more long-term damage to this country than another leftist President would have.  

Trump’s people have blown the side off an already-floundering ship, but you’re telling me I should be happy about it because they’ve also brought an old, torn Dixie cup to help us bail out. 

Edited by Just_A_Guy

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Just_A_Guy said:

*Shrug* I’m just citing to scripture showing that when it comes to the American political system, God’s an idealist.  If you don’t like the scripture, I suggest you take it up with Him.

But, you know what’s interesting, Anatess?

Even though you call out my statement, you haven’t denied that a significant number of Trump supporters think the way I said they think.  All you’ve done is to clutch at moral relativism to try to suggest that I can’t say for certain that such a thought pattern is objectively wrong.  

The embrace of moral relativism by Christians who should know better, has wrought (and will wreak) far more long-term damage to this country than another leftist President would have.  

Trump’s people have blown the side off an already-floundering ship, but you’re telling me I should be happy about it because they’ve also brought an old, torn Dixie cup to help us bail out. 

You can think of Trump supporters how you want.  That's your judgment - unrighteous as it may be.  That's where the religious folks gets the negative flack is when they claim God is on their side and so the other side has got to be Satan so they can claim some  moral superiority.  You play that game.  I'm not playing it.  Especially after you claimed you'd rather see Clinton run the country for the next 4 years.

Edited by anatess2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, anatess2 said:

You can think of Trump supporters how you want.  That's your judgment - unrighteous as it may be.  That's where the religious folks gets the negative flack is when they claim God is on their side and so the other side has got to be Satan so they can claim some  moral superiority.  You play that game.  I'm not playing it.  Especially after you claimed you'd rather see Clinton run the country for the next 4 years.

Oh, not all Trump supporters are alike.  I’ve acknowledged that ever since the primaries were done back in 2016.

But the scripture is what it is.  You want us—Mormons—to ignore our own scripture.  You want us to trust a man, rather than God and ourselves, to save the country.  Very well.

But then what, pray tell, is “unrighteous” about my concluding that a certain caliber of Trump supporter couldn’t give a flying flip about God’s instructions for selecting elected officers in a representative democracy?

You get on your own moral high horse about my supposedly “unrighteous” judgment of Trump and/or some of his supporters; which is certainly your prerogative.  But remind me, @anatess2—in the past two years of discussing Trump, have you ever used that word to describe anything that Trump did?  Did you use it when he talked about groping women?  Did you use it when we learned he’d raped his own wife?  Did you use it when we talked about the creditors he had stiffed, or the lies he had told about opponents, or the fairy tale he invented about the Cruz family and the Kennedy assassination?

Having openly embraced Trump’s unrighteousness, you have positioned yourself poorly to criticize my own or anyone else’s.  In that sense, you face the same problem in this forum as the Trumpling Republicans face on the national stage:  a lack of moral foundation and moral credibility has rendered them impotent in confronting the true threats to this country.

Edited by Just_A_Guy

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
44 minutes ago, Just_A_Guy said:

Did you use it when we learned he’d raped his own wife?

Wasn't Trump cleared of that spurious charge by his own ex-wife?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, Vort said:

Wasn't Trump cleared of that spurious charge by his own ex-wife?

She said she regretted the use of the word “rape”, but also stuck by her story of a forcible and nonconsensual sexual encounter.  See this article, in which the enchanting Michael Cohen makes an appearance. 

Edited by Just_A_Guy

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Just_A_Guy said:

Oh, not all Trump supporters are alike.  I’ve acknowledged that ever since the primaries were done back in 2016.

But the scripture is what it is.  You want us—Mormons—to ignore our own scripture.  You want us to trust a man, rather than God and ourselves, to save the country.  Very well.

But then what, pray tell, is “unrighteous” about my concluding that a certain caliber of Trump supporter couldn’t give a flying flip about God’s instructions for selecting elected officers in a representative democracy?

You get on your own moral high horse about my supposedly “unrighteous” judgment of Trump and/or some of his supporters; which is certainly your prerogative.  But remind me, @anatess2—in the past two years of discussing Trump, have you ever used that word to describe anything that Trump did?  Did you use it when he talked about groping women?  Did you use it when we learned he’d raped his own wife?  Did you use it when we talked about the creditors he had stiffed, or the lies he had told about opponents, or the fairy tale he invented about the Cruz family and the Kennedy assassination?

Having openly embraced Trump’s unrighteousness, you have positioned yourself poorly to criticize my own or anyone else’s.  In that sense, you face the same problem in this forum as the Trumpling Republicans face on the national stage:  a lack of moral foundation and moral credibility has rendered them impotent in confronting the true threats to this country.

In our 2 years of arguing over this there was never a time when I promoted Trump as a Godly person.  I don't describe Trump by what I don't find relevant to the US Presidency in the next 8 years.

Now, here's my question to you.  Did you vote for both Bush's?  Did you vote for McCain?  If you were old enough would you have voted for Reagan and Nixon?  Did you viciously condemn their immorality the same way you viciously attack Trump and his voters?  

 

1 hour ago, Just_A_Guy said:

Trumpling Republicans face on the national stage:  a lack of moral foundation and moral credibility has rendered them impotent in confronting the true threats to this country.

And this is EXACTLY my point on this thread.  A person who puts ideology over every other consideration is a useless, even dangerous, President of the USA.  They would act like Marco Rubio - or JAG - in condemning Saudi royals for women's rights violations, Duterte for extra-judicial-killings, China for child labor, etc etc with ZERO regard for the real world effects their condemnation would have on people's lives.  Because, all that matters is that "they lack moral foundation".

 

Edited by anatess2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, anatess2 said:

[1]In our 2 years of arguing over this there was never a time when I promoted Trump as a Godly person.  I don't describe Trump by what I don't find relevant to the US Presidency in the next 8 years.

[2]Now, here's my question to you.  Did you vote for both Bush's?  Did you vote for McCain?  If you were old enough would you have voted for Reagan and Nixon?  Did you viciously condemn their immorality the same way you viciously attack Trump and his voters?  

 

[3]And this is EXACTLY my point on this thread.  A person who puts ideology over every other consideration is a useless, even dangerous, President of the USA.  They would act like Marco Rubio - or JAG - in condemning Saudi royals for women's rights violations, Duterte for extra-judicial-killings, China for child labor, etc etc with ZERO regard for the real world effects their condemnation would have on people's lives.  Because, all that matters is that "they lack moral foundation".

 

1.  In a Mormon forum, suggesting that what God says about an issue is not “relevant”, or suggesting that allegiance to a politician should transcend the plain text of scripture, is going to earn you some pushback.

2.  You’ve asked me this before.  To recap:

—I was too young to vote for Bush I.  

—I was out of the country in 2000 and couldn’t vote.  I voted for Bush II in 2004 on the belief that he had repented of the indiscretions I was then aware of (same reason I voted for Romney in 2012).  

—I did *not* vote for McCain on 2008, because I had trusted contacts in positions to confirm that McCain was as much an evil SOB then as he had been in his Annapolis days.  

—I would not have voted for Nixon knowing what I now know.  Reagan would have been a harder sell; and it would have depended on whether he had acknowledged the wrongfulness of some of his past actions.  But of course, neither of their elections represented instances of the country deliberately selecting individuals they knew to be wicked.  Trump’s did; and as such, it represents a far more dangerous bellwether for the country.  

3.  You presuppose that the power of divine protection over a righteous people counts for nothing; and that morally bankrupt practitioners of realpolitik like Trump (or Zedekiah or Hoshea or Pilate or Amalickiah or Martin Van Buren) always achieve the optimal outcomes.

Second off, even barring the divine/moralistic element:  there are at least strategic considerations making it nearly impossible for the US to compel China and Saudi Arabia reform.  There are no such considerations for Duterte; there’s just the fact that you, personally, like what he’s doing.

Edited by Just_A_Guy

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
23 minutes ago, Just_A_Guy said:

1.  In a Mormon forum, suggesting that what God says about an issue is not “relevant” is going to earn you some pushback.

That's what YOU said.  That God said Trump is too immoral to be President.  I never made such a claim for or against what God said on the matter.  The fact that you paint me as unGodly for supporting Trump (and Duterte for that matter) is your own judgment and not God's.

Everything else you said is "I wouldn't have voted for...".  Yeah, you keep doing that.  Other people take actions to direct their country instead of abstaining over ideology.  Maybe if people would have learned to pay more attention to Ceasar qualifications instead of concentrating on Priest qualifications you might not have put a warmonger in that chair.  It is a lot easier to pretend you're this straight-laced Christian person than it is to pretend you're an effective Ceasar.  The guy who doesn't bother pretending they're straight-laced, of course, is better than the crooked one pretending they are.  That's the reality of American (and Philippine) politics.  The press, of course, paints people as Saints or Sinners as they see fit regardless of its reality.  All with impunity.  When the fact of the matter is - they are all sinners.  As we are.

This is a debate 2 years in the making.  It's old and tired.  If you think all you got out of Trump is a "tax cut" like @Godless said, then I am happy you lost and will be happy if you continue to do so.

Edited by anatess2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, anatess2 said:

[1]That's what YOU said.  That God said Trump is too immoral to be President.  I never made such a claim for or against what God said on the matter.  The fact that you paint me as unGodly for supporting Trump (and Duterte for that matter) is your own judgment and not God's.

[2]Everything else you said is "I wouldn't have voted for...".  Yeah, you keep doing that.  Other people take actions to direct their country instead of abstaining over ideology.  Maybe if people would have learned to pay more attention to Ceasar qualifications instead of concentrating on Priest qualifications you wouldn't have put Bush in that chair.

1.  I just quoted scripture, Anatess.  Though I confess, it isn’t an act of brain surgery to determine whether Trump meets the scriptural criteria of being “honest”, “wise” and “good”.  

But at any rate, you were the one who replied with some bizarro-world tangent about who God had supposedly “called” to be POTUS.  

2.  No, that’s not “everything else I said”.  I answered your specific question and then offered the “why”, which you completely and (I can only assume) deliberately ignored; choosing instead to offer a reductionist summation of my position that you knew to be false.

I don’t remember you engaging in those kinds of tactics before you went all in for Trump.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
19 hours ago, Just_A_Guy said:

1.  I just quoted scripture, Anatess.  Though I confess, it isn’t an act of brain surgery to determine whether Trump meets the scriptural criteria of being “honest”, “wise” and “good”.  

But at any rate, you were the one who replied with some bizarro-world tangent about who God had supposedly “called” to be POTUS.  

2.  No, that’s not “everything else I said”.  I answered your specific question and then offered the “why”, which you completely and (I can only assume) deliberately ignored; choosing instead to offer a reductionist summation of my position that you knew to be false.

I don’t remember you engaging in those kinds of tactics before you went all in for Trump.  

Meh.  Old argument.  Too much history.  You hate Trump.  I like Trump.  Done.  Trump is President.  Move on.  Let history judge whether you're right or wrong in your vitriol against his supporters.   Or if 100 years from now people will be trying to erase him from history like they're trying to do to Jefferson, that disgusting slave owner adulterer.

Edited by anatess2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now