This passage is very touching to me. This passage puts me in the mindset of what would Jesus do? Angelina is highlighting great teachings about Christianity. If anyone who read this was a true follower of Christ, they would have understood her argument and importance of fighting for the abolishment of slavery. When you pick apart peoples beliefs and religions, they get offended. Especially if they pick and choose when to put the bible into practice. All she did was basically point out the fact that their religion calls upon them to do something about slavery because it was conflicting with their beliefs.

I think with this statement Angelina was appealing to not only the peoples faith (Christianity), but also their respect for the founding fathers. She wanted to remind the people that the religion they follow tells them in Christ they are all one as well as equal according to their founding fathers.

As I read through annotations from people, I can't help but wonder if they actually read the entire passage and if they are aware of the time that this had taken place. Many people are commenting on how it was wrong for women and children to die but are casually forgetting the position these people were in. If they were not enslaved against their will, then women and children would not have died because there would not have been a need for a rebellion. Then people are saying its degusting to put God in it. Well was it right for white slave owners to use God you justify slavery, rape and murder of black men, women and children? Nat Turner could have heard from God. Slavery was not of God and what whites were doing to blacks was unacceptable. You have to be a evil person to think that anything that had to do with slavery was okay. I interpreted this piece as Nat Turner believing that the whites were the devil that he had to battle against for his freedom. In a sense, it was true, because I bet that of he would have asked nicely to be freed, he could have very well been beaten.

This portion of Jonathan Edwards sermon is what I feel he should have talked about more, the Love of God. I agree with him letting the people know their sinful ways will anger God. However, even sinners need to know the love of God., especially "newcomers" and children.

I understand what Johnathan Edwards was attempting to do with this sermon. He was sharing the hard truths about the wrath of God so that people would leave their life a sin. However, I do not agree with this statement he made towards children. Maybe it's just me, but I don't think children should be "scared" into believing in God. We are all born sinners and it is up to the parents to teach their children how to live according to their beliefs and religions. Furthermore, a lot of people didn't practice Christianity then as there are different religions and belief systems as it is today. So if there were people present at the revival who didn't believe in God or practiced Christianity, then a speech like this could possibly scare them away from a relationship with God. I believe a sermon of this manner is for Christians who may have fell off and needed to be reminded of what could happen if they didn't correct their sinful ways. Overall, it was a good sermon that can be preached today.