Abraham Lincoln: God's Providence, Natural Law, Liberal Democracy - A Conversation with Allen Guelzo

[@raymondswenson1268]

Dr Guelzo teaches The Great Courses and they are great. Informative and entertaining.

[@kaycurrie9356]

Thank you President Mohler - 1859 fact. ✅ Learned so much. Grateful . . . for both of you!

[@trudareynolds8592]

I love hearing about how these men struggled seriously with the issues of their day, and how Lincoln saw that God was definitely working something through these difficult times.

[@SimonKHoak-ec6cc]

He's the same God today , doing the same work.

[@lexhawkins7442]

Thank you for putting this together. Extremely interesting and a refreshing departure from our current political banter.

[@HigherInfluence]

Thoroughly enjoyed this interview and your guest. The book sounds like a must read.

[@PaulGentryK4BWG]

Oh how we need homespun intellectuals in politics today if nothing else but to offset Mark Twain's quote: "Suppose you were an idiot, and suppose you were a member of Congress. But I repeat myself."

[@virtualpilgrim8645]

I read a comment the other day, "Abraham Lincoln didn't end slavery, he just expanded it to everyone."

[@dylanfriend2766]

“If there be those who would not save the Union, unless they could at the same time save slavery, I do not agree with them. If there be those who would not save the Union unless they could at the same time destroy slavery, I do not agree with them. My paramount object in this struggle is to save the Union, and is not either to save or to destroy slavery. If I could save the Union without freeing any slave I would do it, and if I could save it by freeing all the slaves I would do it; and if I could save it by freeing some and leaving others alone I would also do that. What I do about slavery, and the colored race, I do because I believe it helps to save the Union; and what I forbear, I forbear because I do not believe it would help to save the Union. “ -Lincoln 1862 letter to Horace Greeley

[@cranmer1959]

If you read the Lincoln/Davis debates, Lincoln referred to blacks as the n word when ridiculing the idea of racial intermarriage or miscegenation.

[@KRGruner]

This is a pretty good discussion, but totally misconstrues what Darwinism is about. I am not sure what the deal is with religious people insisting there is a conflict between Darwinism and the Natural Law. It is the NATURAL Law, after all! The natural framework is the only one all humans have in common. Darwinism is NOT about randomness. It is about randomness AND non-random selection. Not sure what is so hard to understand here. And it applies not only to biology, but just as well to human CULTURE (although here, it is possible that a Lamarkian aspect might apply - but that is still Evolution). We have enough knowledge today from game theory, praxeology (science of human action), evolutionary psychology, complexity theory, and probability/statistics to actually understand the basics of the Natural Law, and in fact to do so better that Christianity does (I mean, look at the current Pope or all the woke "Christian" churches everywhere. Pathetic!). Lincoln did not have that advantage, so he was doing his best for the time. But today, we have no excuses.

[@davidoslin7760]

kzbin.info/www/bejne/h6Omqml3ncafh7c&ab_channel=CreationMinistriesInternational

[@virtualpilgrim8645]

The problem with Darwinism is that it goes too far in trying to explain the origin of the species. The best evolution can do is change the expression of the genes that already exist such as we find in dog breeding. For example, some breeds are faster, some smarter, some better smelling, digging... This can explain why there are different races of humans such as blacks, Indians, and Caucasians. We are all human but have differences in the expression of our genes. Some smarter, some taller, some better at creativity...

[@KRGruner]

@@virtualpilgrim8645 Excuse me, but that is complete bullshit. Please, get educated before you spew utter nonsense in public. Darwinism has ZERO problems explaining the origin of species. Not even worth debating.