Skip to main content

MELESI WE ARE TALKING ABOUT THE BIBLE AND ITS ORIGINS HE DOES NOT NEED SCIENCE TO SUPPORT HIS CLAIM

Melesi either you want to address the Bible or you do not. You say a lot of meaningless things that is in CONTRADICTION to the Bible and that is from someone claiming to uphold what the Bible teaches and telling people to obey it. This is one of the reasons I called you a fake. I call myself a Christian so if one challenges my beliefs I have only one source to turn to which is the book of my beliefs to support my case i.e. The Bible - no more no less.

You on the other hand grab at everything available (writers and scientistists) to try and support your case when you should know the views expressed by these writers and scientists change as more knowledge is discovered. If you look for such props to support your beliefs that my friend means you hardly know the Bible and therefore makes you a fake Christian. To give an example here you are quoting some popular science which is so fickle it changes with every new discovery.
A case in point.
quote:
Originally posted by Melesi:
This was a long time ago, however, somewhere around 50,000 years ago. We know of at least one group of mitochondrial DNA people who spread from northwest Africa through north Africa and into Eurasia. But a long itme later--about 30,000-17,000 years ago, the descendents of these people came back to north Africa. 20,000+ years is a long time, and by that time these people were different. So were the Africans, for life doesn't stand still.

The original inhabitants had been destroyed by the Ice Age and the flooding that occurred at the end of it, and the returnees were the direct ancestors of the people living there now.

They were not related to the more southern, the sub-saharan, peoples. Closer are the Ethiopians, but closer still are the Arabs and Berbers. The further east in north Africa one traces the genes, the less related the people are. This replacement of the original peoples came from the east, nad by the time that this happened, they were a different folk.

This migrating ("demic movement" is one technical term for it) left its mark on the peoples it met, including the Ethiopians, which means that they and a few others--the Lemba--would also bear some of the genetic marks of this traipsing east and west across the top of Africa, but it is clear that this is the movement, not a north-south movement, that peoples did.


If you knew the Bible well enough you would have known everything you have said is in direct contradiction with the knowledge in the Bible. As far as the Bible is concerned mankind has only been here for 6000 years and also mankind's own KNOWN recorded history testifies to that. Everything else is guesswork and speculation by scientists so for you to start talking about something happening 20- 30,000 years ago has no foundation whatsoever and there are no records to prove anything beyond 5000 years. What you have said is ALSO not in the Bible and as I said we do not have any known records that go beyond 5000 years in mankind's history so why resort to talking about things that contradicts the Bible. So you see for you to start to quote this spurious figures to me make your claim to be a Christian a joke.

Anyway back to the case under discussion which is unearthing the identity of the originators of the Bible. I asked you earlier about the Falasian Jews being in Africa for nearly 4000 years. Do you identify them as Africans or not? Please try to make your answers brief so that we can get somewhere quickly.

Also remember stick to the Bible or you are wasting my time

_____________________________
Is it just talk or are you for solutions? If you are GENUINELY interested in solving black problems? Then join us at http://www.theguidedog.com/BlackNation.html

[This message was edited by henry38 on January 23, 2004 at 05:35 AM.]
I have come to the realization that most Europeans know exaclty whats going on, they understand white supremacy and why it arised. When you have people who will come to forums faking like they are one of us only to spread lies and propaganda, like the europeans are so great at. But from now on fuck these imposters, they are not interested in the truth, they only want to justify the savage behavior so common in their nature. No other people in the history of the entire world is as savage and no remorseful as the european. I mean all the european nations including the US got wealthy through genocide and slavery. Then these people have the audacity to say they are representative of freedom, after they have wiped out entire populations and displaced others. Their is no way these people could have been anywhere close to any righteousness or real civilized nations. Remember how moses found these people , what he had to do to civilize these people and now look at his work, they are worse than ever. Now i know all white people are not racist savages, there are some good noble people, but on the average, its very discouraging . I just dont think they have humanity in them.

"I AM BECAUSE WE ARE"
Seeker and everyone else interested in the truth,

I ask you to have faith in the Bible. At the end of this discussion I intend to show that the people wo wrote the Bible were people who started out as Africans then became known as the Israelites and ended up as Africans all over again. This is all in the Bible so please let the Bible do what it's best at which is telling the truth.

Anyway Melesi back to you. I asked you earlier about the Falasian Jews being in Africa for nearly 4000 years. Do you identify them as Africans or not? If they are why not the other Hebrews? Please try to make your answers brief so that we can get somewhere quickly.

Also remember stick to the Bible or you are wasting my time

_____________________________
Is it just talk or are you for solutions? If you are GENUINELY interested in solving black problems? Then join us at http://www.theguidedog.com/BlackNation.html
Henry,

Where does the Bible say that we have been here for 6000 years? (I hope you're not going to count the names in the genealogical tables and extrapolate from there)

As for there being no foundation for any other number, I beg to differ. Look around you. Use your eyes and your head. There is nothing contradictory in saying that the Bible is true and that the earth is something over 4 billion years old. There's nothing wrong with dating rocks and judging sedimentary layers and determining the rate of genetic mutation. This is only discovering how God works in his world. The only difference between this and the Bible is that the Bible tells us abot God directly. The world tells us about God indirectly. Both tell us about God.


The 5000 year old records you seem to refer to are historical records (and extrabiblical, too, by the way), and of course there are none of those older than that since we hadn't started writing things down before then.

You may think that my saying these things makes my claim to be a Christian a "joke." There's nothing that I can do about that, apparently. Fortunately I do not have to answer to you about my spiritual life, and so far God has seen fit to lead me in this direction.

Believing the Bible is one thing. Believing in the style of one of the writers of the Bible is quite another. That's why God had many people write the Bible, so we'd look at the whole thing and not just at one or two parts and "proof text" our way through life. "A relationship, not a religion," isn't that what we say? Then let's have a relationship with God, and not limit his Word as you are doing.

Come on, Henry--you can give the Biblical texts that you say show Israel in Africa without sidetracking the conversation with the Falasian Jews who aren't in the Bible anyway.

Just tell me what the references are.
Melesi I am not going to play your game of chasing after everything to sidetrack and create confusion I would take up how long mankind has been here according to the Bible account in another thread. Right now I am focusing on the originators of the Bible so back to the question I asked. Incidentally this is the fourth time I am asking this question, can you answer it please

"About the Falasian Jews" They have been in Africa for thousands of years. Jews around the world recognize them as Jews. Recently during the civil war in Ethiopia the state of Israel airlifted about 20, 000 of them to the modern Israeli state.

So Melesi the question remains. The world knows these are Jews who have been in Africa for thousands of years. ARE THEY AFRICANS OR NOT?


Don't worry about where the Bible says the Israelites went back to Africa because that is exactly where I am heading with this discussion.


_____________________________
Is it just talk or are you for solutions? If you are GENUINELY interested in solving black problems? Then join us at http://www.theguidedog.com/BlackNation.html

[This message was edited by henry38 on January 23, 2004 at 11:29 AM.]
um, henry,

You made the subject part of this discussion by objecting to it. If you don't want to talk about it, fine, but don't object to it and then say that you don't want to talk about it.

Sigh. Are they Africans or not? That depends. Did Ethiopia accept them as Ethiopians? Did they want to be Ethiopians? In that case, sure, why not? If everybody said that they were Ethiopians--which they appeared to do--both the people themselves and the country they lived in, then they were Ethiopians.

Now what?
Let me get this right, because I notice you keep saying it and anytime I hear it the word insane comes to mind. You keep implying that if one group does not recognize the other as fellow country men then they are not. It is like saying if native Americans do not recognize the european settlers then they are not Americans. European settlers in Australia owe their being being Australians to the acceptance of the Aborigines accepting that they are Australians and so on and so forth. Is that what you are saying? If it is, I hope you know how nonsensical that argument is because then nobody is from any place as we all migrated to wherever we are today.

Bearing in mind that the foregoing if pursued is a nonsense, if we accept that the Falasians are Africans then logic dictates that if other Hebrews like the Falasians lived somewhere else in Africa for 500+ years they are also Africans due to the fact that they can not call anywhere else home. Are you with me so far?

_____________________________
Is it just talk or are you for solutions? If you are GENUINELY interested in solving black problems? Then join us at http://www.theguidedog.com/BlackNation.html
henry,

You're only hearing half the argument. No wonder you're having trouble understanding it.

The problem that you have posed is not as easy to answer as you apparently would like to think. That's why the question, "What is an American?" or for that matter, "What is Jew?" have not realy been answered. They are not easily answered.

This summer I met a German student who, while ethnically German, had been born in Russia where his parents had lived for some time. Henow lives in Germany. So is he German? Was he always German? What about the Koreans who live in Canada but are not citizens? And isn't citizenship a legal fiction that is accepted by the adoptive country does not erase the citizen's genetic history?

Yes.

So the problem is a bit more convoluted than you are portraying it to be. Who was it who said, "To every complex problem there is a simple answer, and it's wrong"?

Americans only become Americans by the legal decision of the republic to accept them as citizens. The country has decided--arbitrarily--that those born here are citizens. So are those who live here for ten years and take classes and pass a test.

Other countries have other requirements. Part of becoming a "member" (for lack of a better term) of another country is meeting the requirements of that country.

That is part of the argument that you are not considering. You are concentrating only on the length of time someone stays in a country or region. But that is not the only consideration in deciding if someone "belongs" to that country or not. In the case of America and Australia and Canada, it is not the native peoples now who decide that, for right or wrong, those peoples were supplanted by the incoming colonists who formed their own country, generally a mroe thechnologically advanced country, and displaced the native dwellers. So one did not have to get the permission or acceptance of the aborigines, say, in order to become an "Australian." There was no "Australia" before the whites settled there. It was a different kind of place with a different name (I'm sure that the aborigines did not use a Latin-derived name to designate their homeland). They would have had to have recieved the permission and acceptance of the aborigines in order to become aboriginal, if indeed they ever wanted to do so, but they did not.

So you are confusing a couple of things in your attempt to argue your point. You are considering only the time that someone spends in a region. That is not the only factor in deciding if someone actually "belongs" to that place. The people who already live there and who form the community of the place in which they live and to which the newcomers wish to join also must be considered.

If either condition is not met, then they are not "of" that place or that people. The American Indian is a case of interest, for America says that they are both of and not of America, as do they. They can vote, but they have privileges that other Americans do not have. They have their own police forces, they have their own untaxed income, they have their own lands. They are also under the control of the Bureau of Indian Affairs and they can be drafted, so they are in a rather unsatisfactory--I would imagine--state of affairs. But you see the point. They say that they are a separate people, the country says that they are a separate people, and so they are, however long they have lived here.

The Israelites did not meet either condition as the Bible points out, therefore they were never Egyptians. As for the Falasians, they were Ethiopians only if they wished to be, and only if Ethiopia agreed that they were.
Did the Falasians meet YOUR conditions of citizenship before you accepted they were Africans? I am guessing you accepted they were Africans due to the fact that they as a people know no where but Africa is their home..

Say for argument sake the Israelites being in Egypt for 500+ years did not make them Egyptians. Since they lived as a nation in Africa for those 500 years do you think they saw themselves as anything other than being Africans as they could not see anywhere else as home? This makes a mockery of YOU saying the people are only from the place if they wished to be. To give an example almost all African tribes migrated to whereever they occupy today. Do you think we sit there wishing or not wishing we are Africans? Where did you get that criteria for determining who is a native or not? I can only guess you made it up and I am guessing you have not travelled in the world to see diverse people making up the citizenship of a country or you would not be coming up with such ridiculous assertions.

The fact is many people have lived in Africa for millennia and that is their home. It is not up to anyone to tell them whether any part of Africa is their home or not. The same logic applies everywhere else. People like you that find problems with that logic are generally known as fascists and evil men.

Now you can see why I said to you earlier that it is not because people can not debate with you it is your reasoning which is NOT NORMAL and it makes someone talking to you uneasy with your intellect and generally question your level of understanding even the basics.

_____________________________
Is it just talk or are you for solutions? If you are GENUINELY interested in solving black problems? Then join us at http://www.theguidedog.com/BlackNation.html
Henry,

Why must you insist on making this personal? I said nothing about MY criteria for THEIR citizenship. That's your interpolation, adn it shows how you are thinking about this subject--or more precisely not thinking about it.

I said that it was up to them and to Ethiopia.

And you who has said to me that you wanted no argument but a Biblical one, you are putting your own idea of "common sense" into the argument by saying "Do you think they saw themselves...?" "Do you think we...""

It doesn't matter what I think they thought about themselves. What matters is what they thought and what Egypt thought, and as I pointed out to you--which you have ignored so far--is that the both of them never saw the Israelites as Egyptian. The Egyptians saw them as a foreign people, and so did they.

So they were never Egyptian, no matter how much you want them to have been. It doesn't matter what you or I want. It's what was, and they never were Egyptian. They were Israelite and their land was Canaan, not Africa. That's where God took them: to the Jordan, not to the Nile or the Congo.

Those are facts. What you are doing is asking me to use your intuition and to believe your conclusions, when they are not supported by Scripture, which you still have not used to support your argument.

I'm sorry, but the Bible says that they went to Canaan, and they stayed there until they were conquered, Israel by Assyria and Judah by Babylon, when they were exiled to those respective lands.

Where in the Bible does it say anything else about their location?

It doesn't matter where I have traveled or haven't. But for your information, I have been to Europe--Britain and Germany, each for a year--and then to Egypt (six months) and to The Republic of Congo (when it was still called Zaire). I stayed with some missionary friends of mine who were officially based in Kinshasa on the Congo River, but we travelled in the field quite a bit. It's where I learned to like fookoo.

So you are wrong about my not having traveled, but I will guess that it will mean nothing to you. It won't make you any more careful in making your assumptions and charges.

YOu say that my charges are "ridiculous" but you do not show why they are. You only state.

Have you no reasons except your own intuition?

People who say what, exactly, are generally "fascists and evil men," that it takes both a country and a people to say that they are of a certain land? Is that what makes a fascist?

H'm, forgive me, I thought a fascist was a discredited Italian socialist of the middle of the twentieth century. But all it takes to be a fascist (from the Italian "fascine" from the Latin word meaning a rod of authority) is to believe that a people has the right to determine their own nationality and that countries have reserved to themselves the right to decide who belongs in their land. Well, if that don't beat all.

I'm sorry. I believe you now. You have the right to decide what nationality a people is. Eveyone waits with mounting anticipation to hear where you have decided they belong. How else could it have been, after all?

Good grief, henry. Now you're being silly.

You really are going nowhere with this line of argument. You still haven't said where in the Bible it says they went to Africa. Didn't you say to me, "Stick to the Bible or you are wasting my time"? You are wasting two people's time now.
quote:
Originally posted by Melesi:
Henry,

Why must you insist on making this personal? I said nothing about MY criteria for THEIR citizenship. That's your interpolation, adn it shows how you are thinking about this subject--or more precisely not thinking about it..
Melesi you are the one making this thread VERY PERSONAL. Look back and see how you have pissed everyone off with your lack of understanding. Some have given up talking to you and others have called you names and what do you do? You get smug and think you are so clever. You remind me of a dog in the manger. You know what a dog in the manger does don't you? It barks loudly and stop the true occupants of the manger like the horses and cattle from coming into their own home. This is what you are doing, you have positioned yourself with an insane outlook on people's identity that has stifled the real truth and now you blame me for making this thread personal. If you mean personal it means I intend to drive you out of the manger and get the truth out then yes because when you got others to give up posting to this thread I noticed your smugness and it really annoyed me. Therefore I am back on this thread to show conclusively that the Hebrews were Africans before they became Israelites and then finished as AFRICANS. If we are having trouble getting there it is because of your limited understanding of people's identity based on GEOGRAPHICAL LOCATIONS.
quote:
I'm sorry, but the Bible says that they went to Canaan, and they stayed there until they were conquered, Israel by Assyria and Judah by Babylon, when they were exiled to those respective lands.
Why don't you do yourself and everyone else the favor by stop being the dog in the manger and we can see what the Bible says on the matter. If this was a court room you must know proceedings would be severely disrupted from proceeding to a logical conclusion if one of the participants carried on like you are doing. So if we are not getting anywhere blame yourself for turning the thread into whether something is called tomato or tomatoe, potato or potatoe etc
quote:
You really are going nowhere with this line of argument. You still haven't said where in the Bible it says they went to Africa. Didn't you say to me, "Stick to the Bible or you are wasting my time"? You are wasting two people's time now.
Okay Melesi do us all a favor and stay out of this discussion and I PROMISE YOU I WOULD SHOW YOU WHERE IT SAYS IN THE BIBLE THE ISRAELITES WENT BACK TO EGYPT AND AFRICA and this time they STAYED PERMANENTLY and never went back

_____________________________
Is it just talk or are you for solutions? If you are GENUINELY interested in solving black problems? Then join us at http://www.theguidedog.com/BlackNation.html
Please excuse my ignorance but #1 why is the bible so important to Africans at all? Why so much moaning and arguing over it's validity? Neither the bible nor its authors are of any value whatsoever to African people. "When you accept the divinity assigned to you by a conquering people you become the spiritual prisoners of that people". (John Henrik Clarke) Isn't is obvious that the worship of his image,his bible,his jesus and everything else that comes from him has not been in the best interests of African people all over the world? Release yourselves from this terrible bondage and return to the ancient ways of your people. When the european came to Africa we had Kingdoms and riches he had the bible and his jesus. Now he has the kingdom and the riches and we have islam and christ. You can have them both back,return to me what is mine and mind. ASHE-O

Iwori take a critical look at what affects you.
quote:
Originally posted by Fagunwa:
Please excuse my ignorance but #1 why is the bible so important to Africans at all? Why so much moaning and arguing over it's validity? Neither the bible nor its authors are of any value whatsoever to African people.
Why don't you hang around and maybe you might learn a thing or two. We are looking at the Bible because believe it or not it is the ONLY source for us to understand all the suffering, the degradadion, slavery and etc that has befallen black people. At the end of this discussion I am confident any black person with slave ancestry would know a little bit more about themselves than they ever did. Despite some black people opposing the Bible the irony of it is that that we can only get to the truth of our TRUE identity by information coming from the Bible. So take a pew, pay attention and learn a few truths.

_____________________________
Is it just talk or are you for solutions? If you are GENUINELY interested in solving black problems? Then join us at http://www.theguidedog.com/BlackNation.html
Henry,

That's right, blame someone else. It isn't my "lack of understanding" that has angered a few (not "everyone else") people, but only that I have facts and they don't and I refuse to believe anything other than facts.

They have had a tendency to quote other "authorities" without really understanding them because they refuse to do any real research of their own. Then, when I show the flaws in their "authorities" that's when they decide (it is their decision to be angry, not my somehow "making" them angry. They could just as easily decide not be) to stoop to name-calling and show their minds for the disorganized heaps that they really are.

It's not my fault if they--and you--refuse to think.

As a result, I'm not the one making this personal. I answer the personal attacks first made on me, but I do try to bring the discussion back to the subject. If there is a personal attack, I am not the one who makes it. I answer it sometimes, and ignore it at others, but I do not start it. So stop blaming me. I didn't do it. You capitalized "YOUR" (Jan 23rd); you called my argument "insane" (more than once). You started out with a certain smug confidence (remember your saying that I had better "run for the medicine cabinet"?). So come on, get away from the personal comments and get onto the subject finally.

I am not "smug." Once again you are assigning motives on no evidence. You may remember that Jesus would occasionally catch people in their own contradictions and point out to the the silliness of their positions. I take from that that sometimes it is perfectly all right to do so with someone who ought to know better but simply will not.

Those who have stopped posting on this thread are free to do so. They may have given up because I did not agree with their faulty logic of methods or sources. Not finding a convert, they left. It happens. But that's up to them, and if you are going to bring them up in a conversation to present them as evidence, then you had better talk with them first to find out just why they left. You didn't, did you? So you are assigning motives again without really knowing what they were. When sunnubian charged me with quoting from racially-prejudiced sites, I asked sun. to show me where they were prejudiced. That request was ignored. There was no racial prejudice in what I quoted, yet the truth of that meant nothing to sunnubian. Facts then mean nothing to some of the posters here. I asked knowledgeseekerto present the scientific proofs for his claim (which he sternly declared existed). He did not. Am I to blame for that? Or should I feel bad about their leaving in the huff that you described, if indeed they did so? Yet you assigned motives to them and to me without knowing the truth.

There's a pattern here, henry, one that you should really stop.

Yes, you keep saying that will show from the Bible that the Israelites went back to Africa, but you never do.

The first time I said that I wanted to know about the evidence for Israel going back to Africa was on Jan 7. I asked you directly on the 13th, said that there was no Biblical proof on the 14th, asked you on the 21st, discussed it again on the 22nd, asked you again on the 23rd (and asked you to present the Biblical proofs that we have been here for only 6000 years, which you have not yet done, either--there's that pattern again), and you have failed to produce the evidence that you keep saying you will show us. For over two weeks you have failed to do so in spite of my requests that you do. And you blame me for your not showing where the Bibile says these things? Even in your last post to me you talk about wanting to deal with the Bible and yet you refuse to do so, blaming me for your not doing it.

Are you sure that it's my argument that's the insane one here?

Why should I stay out of the discussion when it was your response to me that prompted your saying that you would show the Biblical evidence to begin with? Why shouold I stay out of the discussion when you keep bringing me back into it? You really are being very illogical.

Now, will you show us that evidence?
Henry,

You are blaming me for your own decisions, you know.

I did not "make" this personal. You did. You started out confidently claiming that I was going to have to "run for the medicine cabinet" because you had Biblical evidence that Israel went back to Africa. I said that I was not familiar with that evidence and that I was "listening" for it 'way back on Jan 7. Since then I have asked you more than once to present that evidence, and each time for the past two weeks and more you have refused to do so.

You say that you want to base your argument on the Bible yet you have yet to deal with the Bible. Instaed you concentrate, even demand that we agree on, an issue not in the Bible buit one that you really, really want us to agree on--that time in a land makes foriegners in that land natives to that land. You refuse my argument with personal attacks (calling it "insane"), then you attack my motives ("Did the Falasians meet YOUR conditions of citizenship...?"), and then you say that I'm the one making the argument personal.

You're still not listening, not even to yourself.

You mistake for "smugness" a stand on fact. If I have a reason for having the opinion that I do, and if I show that I have that reason, that is not "smug." It isn't "smug" even if I show others the contradictions and the flaws in their arguments and their sometime authorities.

It is smug if I call their arguments "insane," however.

YOu keep saying that you want to deal with the Bible. So why don't you? You cant't really have been saying what you seemed to say in your last post to me, could you, that it is my fault if you do not post the references to the Biblical passages that support your claim? That's just silly, illogical, and untrue. You could have posted them at any time. You simply did not. For over two weeks you have not.

Don't drag other people into our discussion, ok? Why they left is up to them. I can't chase anyone away, I wouldn't want to, and people are free to come and go as they wish. Why they wished to leave can be for any one of several reasons, including being angry that they couldn't give any opposing facts because they haven't bothered to do any research. So until you actually go and ask them why they left (you didn't do that, did you?) don't presume to know their minds and present your presumption here as fact.

By the way, talk about smugness, why don't you reread your response to Fagunwa?

And why don't you give us that Biblical proof finally?
Fagunwa,

It's not quite like that when it comes to the Bible. The Bible is not a creation of Europe. The Scandinavian gods were a European creation. Druidism was a creation of Europe, but Christianity is quite something else.

The Bible was written over a long time by something over 40 people on three continents. IT speaks of the works of God in his world and on behalf of those who obey him, which are not limited to Europeans. People on every continent have believed in him and obeyed him, and he has his hand on them, too.

The Bible is important because it is true, because it has God's truth in it that will change our minds for the better. Europeans, too, have to have their minds changed by the Bible. They, too, resist God's teaching just as much as anyone else. It is foreign to them just as it is to us because it is foreign to all of us. God's thoughts are not ours, nor are his ways, so of course they are going to be strange to us in places. And we must learn together.

The Bible is important to us because it is important to all people. God is the God of all, and the Bible tells us about him and his world. By it we know how to live.

I'm sure that this does not answer all of your questions. While I won' tbe able to answer all of them, I'd be glad to answer what I can. Do you have any other questions?
I'm not sure what happened to my post to Henry. When I posted it ""post now") it simply disappeared, and I waited for two minutes for it to appear on the post, which it did not do (I do not suspect the board. I suspect my computer, if that's any help) So I reentered an abridged version of it. When I posted it, the other one appeared, too, only with the original time stamp on it.

Dunno, but I didn't mean to double post. Sorry.
Melesi edit the post you do not want and press delete and it would disappear.

About not posting the information you asked for what's the hurry? This is a message board it is not going anywhere and besides I have a life outside of here you know.

Anyway I promise to find time tomorrow and end your misery.
You are a strange one Melesi. If I were you I would not be asking for this information as it would make you look foolish and eat humble pie in front of Afroman and Prophetessofrage. Why would you like to give them the satisfaction to know they WERE RIGHT and you have been WRONG all along? That is humiliation man! Well you asked for it and you are going to get it and get it good.

_____________________________
Is it just talk or are you for solutions? If you are GENUINELY interested in solving black problems? Then join us at http://www.theguidedog.com/BlackNation.html
quote:
Originally posted by Fagunwa:
Please excuse my ignorance but #1 why is the bible so important to Africans at all? Why so much moaning and arguing over it's validity? Neither the bible nor its authors are of any value whatsoever to African people. "When you accept the divinity assigned to you by a conquering people you become the spiritual prisoners of that people". (John Henrik Clarke) Isn't is obvious that the worship of his image,his bible,his jesus and everything else that comes from him has not been in the best interests of African people all over the world? Release yourselves from this terrible bondage and return to the ancient ways of your people. When the european came to Africa we had Kingdoms and riches he had the bible and his jesus. Now he has the kingdom and the riches and we have islam and christ. You can have them both back,return to me what is mine and mind. ASHE-O

Iwori take a critical look at what affects you.

I agree with you Fagunwa. This debate has become lost. We sound like slaves in the plantation so attached to our oppressors ideologies. If we continue to hold up everything the West forced on us, to enslave and colonize us, what future could we possibly have? The disdain we have towards our original spirituality is truly perverse! Why aren't we debating own cultures' myths??!!

To think the colonizers and enslavers are worried about reasoning with us is completely ridiculous. I for my part, judge the quality of a tree by its fruits, and the fruits I see and read in their speech, writings and actions are rotten. Melesi is of European descent (though a true liar she still denies and avoid this fact), her opinion is mute!!

Henry Don't waste your valuable time replying to her. Their only retorts emanate from their bigots establishments whose aptitude is to rationalizes denial!! Wait to read Melesi's asinine rely to my post. Her and other plantation defenders will always defend whites "studies" that in their own racist interpretation judge as the "sole authority"! This attitude displayed by them has been one that continues to plague this world..


AfroMan.

[This message was edited by Afroman on January 25, 2004 at 12:08 AM.]
Melesi the information on the fact that the Israelites returned to Africa is in Jeremiah chapter 43.

There are other Bible verses that talked about their continued presence in Africa but I am not going to talk about that now.

So from this account you see the Bible clearly showed people who were Africans wrote the the foundation books of the Bible. Later these people became known as the Israelites then after a short time in the promised land they came back to Africa and have lived there since.

I told you earlier that my own tribe of Africans have always known and used the name of God YAHWEH. This name was deemed as lost because even the current Jews do not know the name of God. How did my people know this name? Because we are part of the true Israelites, we can only have come from the priestly line of Levi to have such crucial information at our disposal. Our names, tradition and oral history testifies to that. Earlier in Afroman's post he mentioned the name of this tribe who are known as Ewes. Why is this information important? The Bible account confirms that the Israelites ended up as Africans which backs up the claims of people like the Ewes. The Ewes are important to anyone of slave ancestry because the main culprits who sold people into slavery, the Ashanti Empire and the Kingdom of Dahomey MAINLY SOLD EWES into slavery. This being the case means many people of slave descent are true Israelites.

Another reason why this information is important to people of slave descent is for them to understand that what they were told by the white man that they came from Noah's cursed son is a COMPLETE LIE. As you can see from the Bible accounts it is the children of Shem or Semites that have always been enslaved and not the children of Canaan as the white man has lied about. The Bible again explains why the children of Shem have suffered such tragedy but I can not go into that now, when I do you would understand why there is so much misery for people from this ancestry line.

I wanted to write and explain more but circumstances have overtaken me. My father died a few hours ago and I am I am quickly writing this to keep my promise to you. I would not be posting for many weeks so don't be surprised if you post any information and I do not respond.

When I get back and you or anyone else is interested I may provide you with a bit more information about your ancestry if your ancestors were slaves from West Africa, that is if you are interested. Until then please understand that due to ignorance (which is understandable because of the ravages of slavery) many of you do not realize how important the Bible is to understanding your history and your roots.

_____________________________
Is it just talk or are you for solutions? If you are GENUINELY interested in solving black problems? Then join us at http://www.theguidedog.com/BlackNation.html
Alafia
I will wait for the promised information from Henry38 hoping that it wont be as weak as his admitidly hurried answer,which is understandable considering that his father is now egun (ancestor).Ibae
AFROMAN. Thanks for the backup Bro.
Melesi. One of those continents wasn't AFRICA was it? Each culture and people is entitled to its own way of expressing and understanding the mystries of life. I find that my culture and people have a deep understanding and a rich cultural view of these mysteries. It appears that other cultures have the "my way or the highway view" .It only proves the youth of such peoples cultures and the ignorance of their views. Lacking true understanding they attack truth as lie. Lacking a real historical perspective they beleive the lies of their propagandists. Your answers have no weight. Try using the violence that your culture is famous for.

Iwori take a critical look at what affects you.
Fagunwa,

Yes, one was north Africa for a small portion of the book. But it was written there by Hebrew, not African author(s).

I find your portrayal of African cultural response to other cultures interesting. I do not think that all Africans have quite as inclusive or tolerant a view of other cultures as you have alluded to. I remember an artical in an old Psychology Today issue in which the author was in Africa, and as she told some of her cultural stories and legends, she was corrected by the village elders. Not understood, not tolerated, but corrected.

Africa has it's own intolerances, too. I mentioned recently in another context an NPR interview with Stella Chiwese, an mbira player from southern Africa who was told sternly by her family and village that she should not play the mbira but instead do "woman's work" (her words) like keeping the home, raising children, and working in the fields. Apparently her desire to have a different cultural value for herself was not tolerated by her village. She had to marry a German in order to be free enough to pursue her love of the mbira.

That was most certainly a "my way or the highway" attitude to music and gender roles in society.

In the west, there are many religions and explanations for the "mysteries of life," and all of them are tolerated. Look at all the religions. Climb Mount Shasta some time around the summer solstice and see all the different beliefs represented there. And no one is telling them to leave. They are tolerated.

So I'm not so sure that you can be as confident in your statements about culture as you were.

The Bible is not limited to one culture or even two. It is a book that has relevance and meaning to all cultures. In the book of Acts, Philip spoke to an Ethiopian who believed and went back to Ethiopia as a Christian. It wasn't foreign to him. So just where am I wrong in what I say?

If you would be so kind, would you point out to me just why you say that my arguments "have no weight"?
quote:
Originally posted by Afroman:
BLACK AFRICANS OF ANCIENT EGYPT WROTE THE HOLY BIBLE-AND THE CATHOLIC CHURCH IS HIDING AND SUPPRESSING THIS TRUTH.

African Man and Woman: "And Ye Shall Know The Truth, and The Truth Shall Make You Free." Holy Bible-John 8 : 32. According to a Ghanaian writer and researcher based in the United States of America (USA), Nana Banchie Darkwah, Ph.D., emphatically states this as fact in his book: 'The Africans Who Wrote The Bible-Ancient Secrets Africa and Christianity Have Never Told', Aduana Publishing Co., 2000, P.O. Box 2781, Russellville, AR. 72802, USA. " However, the worst lie and sin of the Church was the premeditated transformation of the racial and ethnic identities of Jesus Christ, his mother and the entire people of the Bible from black people they were to white people to satisfy emerging European racist sentiments against black people"(Nana Banchie Darkwah, ibid. introduction, page i).

First of all, for one to understand the truth of the above statement and accept it as a fact, that Black Africans of Ancient Egypt Wrote The Holy Bible, thus, one must dispel the erroneous notion and fabricated lies that Christian Europe, particularly the Catholic Church, have done in painting the Ancient Egyptians as pagans, heathens and devils. Also, one must understand that Christian Europe's and the Catholic Church's motives for attacking Ancient Egypt in such a negative vein, is due to the fact that Ancient Egyptian Priests were the Scribes who wrote what we have come to know today as the Holy Bible. Moreover, Ancient Egypt from its pre-dynastic period up to its Golden-Age of pyramid building was a an unadulterated predominately Black race of people (3500-2100 B.C.E.).

The descendants of these Ancient Egyptians are living throughout Sub-Saharan Africa, today, particularly in the nations of Ghana, Nigeria and Cote d'Ivoire. The very first "Bible" or "Scroll" on record produced by man, with regards to paying honour and divine respect to a "Creator of all Mankind" was that of African people of the Nile Valley and Great Lakes regions of Central, East and Northeast Africa. The Book was called by its African Creators and developers..."The Book of The Coming Forth By Day and Night." It was translated from its original hieroglyphic text into the English language by several Europeans since the latter part of the 19th Century A.D. The easiest one to read is called.."The" (Egyptian) "Book of the Dead." This work was translated by British Egyptologist Sir Ernest A. Wallis Budge, London, 1895 A.D. This Original Bible was produced by Black Africans approximately 3,400 years before the Old Testament, and more than 4,200 years before the New Testament, and countless Versions of it have been written and published (Dr. Ben Jochannan, A Chronology of the Bible-Challenge To The Standard Version, USA.).

-NKWA(ANKH)-

"This Ancient Egyptian cross is the earliest and most ancient sacred symbol of religion. Egyptologist that believe they have successfully deciphered Ancient Egyptian hieroglyphics say it is called the ANKH, meaning LIFE. The meaning is correct, however, that is not what the Ancient Egyptians called it. The original Ancient Egyptian word that Egyptologists tried to decipher was NKWA. The language from which this word originated is Akan and it actually means LIFE. This symbol was the Ancient Egyptian sacred religious symbol that reinforced the cross on which Jesus was crucified, as a sacred Christian symbol. How did this happen? The early Christian Church of Ancient Egypt adopted the NKWA symbol as the symbol of their Church and called it Crux Ansata. From here, it was taken to Rome, and there it became a Christian symbol with only a slight variation in design. The symbol of NWKA below was excavated from the tomb of the Akan King Tutu Ankoma, the boy king of Ancient Egypt whose name Europeans have corrupted to Tutankhamun. He ruled from 1336-1327 B.C." (Nana Banchie Darkwah, Ph.D.). Picture of The NKWA (ANKH-CROSS) -Picture of Akan King Tutu Ankoma-Boy King of Ancient Egypt(Name Europeanized to Tutankhamun)- -Ethnic (Tribal) Groups and Intelligentsia of Ancient Egypt- Nana Darkwah (The Africans Who Wrote The Bible) says that the intelligentsia of Ancient Egypt was headed by such ethnic groups as the Akan, Ewe, Ga-Andangbe, Hausa and Ibo. However, he asserts that the Akan was the main ruling class in Ancient Egypt since the majority of Ancient Egyptian kings had Akan names. He gives an example of the Egyptian king of the fourth dynasty who built the Great Pyramid was "Akuffu" and not "Khuffu". Also, Nana Darkwah gives the correct Akan name of the younger son of Akuffu as "Dade Afre" and not "Djedefra", and his elder son was"Okyere Afre" and not "Chephren". He goes on to cite the western scholars incorrect naming of the Ancient Egyptian city Memphis. He says Memphis was an ancient African city and it is still a modern African city called Mamfe. He says Mamfe is located today in the eastern region of Ghana of the Akuapem people. "These are the people of Ancient Egyptian kings Akuffu, Dade Afre, and Okyere Afre and others" " (Nana Darkwah, The Africans Who Wrote the Bible, page xii). -Ga-Adangme In Ancient Egypt & Israel-

The history of Ancient Egypt also has numerous Ga-Adangme names, confirming that the Ga people were in Ancient Israel (Kanaan) and Ancient Egypt. Also, one can find Ga names amongst today's so-called Jewish people. "The most popular of the Ga-Adangme names used by today 's so-called Jewish people is the name of the former Prime Minister of Israel, called Netanyahu. This name was derived from the two Ga-Adangme names "Natey" and "Nyaho"-Neteynyaho" (Nana Darkwah, The Africans Who Wrote The Bible, page 31). -Ewe People In Ancient Times- Around 2700 B.C.E., the Ewe people were among the African ethnic groups that lived in the region of modern day Syria, stretching down to the estuary of the Tigris and Euphrates Rivers. In the book Civilization Before Greece and Rome, H.W. F. Saggs stated that Egyptian documents mentioned a major international power in north Syria called Kheta, and the cuneiform inscriptions knew of a land of Hatti linked to Carchemish on the Euphrates in north Syria. Hatti and Kheta were evidently the same name .(1989, page 10). Incidentally, the ancient name Carchemish on the Euphrates River in north Syria reveals that the Ga ethnic group lived in this region. The name Carchemish derives from the Ga language. It is derived from the Ga words Kaa Kee Mi-meaning do not tell me. Note: "Mi" in the Ga language is the same semantically and phonologically as the English word "M" (Nana Darkwah, The Africans Who Wrote The Bible, page 123). Now, the Ewe ethnic group. The international power that was in the region of north Syria was the Ewe people.

This fact can be discerned because they left their language. The words and names Hatti and Khetta are from the Ewe language. These are names that are still used by Ewe people, today. Ancient Kheta was a geographical location of a place of the Ewe people in North Syria. Today, the Ewe people have established a city named Keta located in the Volta Region of Ghana. The Ewe people were later in Ancient Egypt where they were also Kings and Priests along side the Akan and Ga-Adangme. "They were linked to the El Amarna Letters found in 1887 in modern Egypt. These letters are believed to have been the correspondence between Amenofe III (an Ewe name) and his son Akenten from 1370-1349 B.C. The name Amenophis is the Greek corruption of the modern Ewe name Amenofe (ending pronounced with an aspirant p)." "The Ewe people were therefore not only established in the region of the Tigris and Euphrates Rivers, they were also established in Ancient Egypt and their story was part of Ancient Egyptian history, literature, and folklore. It was from there that their story also became a part of the biblical story" (ibid. page 124).

"The early apostolic fathers of Christianity and the Church knew of many things that they did not want Christian masses to know about the background history, content and people of the Bible. As a result, the very design of Christianity was based upon protecting the Bible from the lay masses. Until the Reformation, therefore, the Bible was secretly guarded and its content was known to only a few in the Church. Because of the perceived need to protect the Bible from the masses, the earliest design and practice of Christianity was based upon placing a cadre of priests between the Bible and the people" (ibid. page i). -Aryan-Whites Know Well of The Black African Origin of Judaism & Christianity- The African origin of Christianity was common knowledge among western scholars and early apostolic fathers of the Church long before the European Renaissance. This was common knowledge known by Aryan-Whites in the past and is still known, today.

There have been numerous European scholars who have known and written about the falsehoods, fabrications and false assumptions in the foundation of Christianity. One such European-American researcher and writer was Gerald Massey, Volume 1 of 'The Natural Genesis: A Book of the Beginnings (1883). Massey called the story and practice of Christianity the legendary lying lore. In 'The Aryan Myth: A History of Racist and Nationalistic Ideas in Europe, Leon Poliakov revealed that knowledge of the people of the Bible as Black people was common in Europe and in early European scholarship. James Cowles Prichard, by far the most popular anthropologist of the first half of the 19th century, elaborated around 1810 implying that Adam and Eve were Blacks (1996, page 211 see also Histoire Naturelle, pages 146-7, 151). In 1836, a knighted and renowned British orientalist, Sir Godfrey Higggins wrote 'The Anaclypsis, or an inquiry into the Origin of Languages, Nations, and Religions. He pointed out that the people of the Bible were Black and that in all the early Catholic Churches of Europe: "the God Christ, as well as his mother, are described in their old pictures to be black (peoples). The infant God in the arms of his black mother, his eyes and drapery white , is himself perfectly black" (1836 page 7, see also Was Jesus Christ A Negro and The African Origin of the Myths and Legends of the Garden of Eden, page 14). -More Proof of Black Jesus and His Mother Mary- In 1875, Kersey Graves wrote a book entitled 'The World's Sixteen Crucified Saviors'. Graves pointed out from clear evidence in Europe, that Jesus was Black and the people of the Bible were originally Black people. He wrote the following below:

There is as much evidence that the Christian Savior was a black man, or at least a dark man, as there is of his being the son of the Virgin Mary, or that he once lived And moved upon the earth. And that evidence is the testimony of his disciples, who had nearly as good an opportunity of knowing what his complexion was as the evangelists who omit to say anything about it..In the pictures and portraits of Christ by early Christians he is uniformly represented as being black (from The World's Sixteen Crucified Saviors, cited in Was Jesus Christ A Negro.reprinted in 1987 by Curtis Alexander, ed.) Note: Jesus (Christ) said before his execution by the Romans that "Whatsoever Is Bound On Earth Is Bound In Heaven-And St Peters Has The Keys To Heaven." The statue of St. Peters inside St. Peter's Basilica in Rome, Italy is a Black man. St. Peters was a Black man. Thus, Jesus' last words before his execution was that a Black man has the keys to Heaven. This statement implied that all humanity must come through the Black race to enter Heaven. A similar statement was said by the Muslim Prophet Mohamed. Mohamed saw the feet of Bilal enter Heaven before himself. In Islamic teachings, Bilal was a Black Ethiopian slave before being liberated and subsequently becoming one of the 'first' converts to the Islamic faith. . -European Hatred of Jews And Blacks-Deeply Rooted In Religious Jealousy- Historically, the aristocracy of Europe has always shown hatred against the so-called Jewish people, since it was well known in their socio-political and economic circles that these people were of a Black African origin, who migrated out of Ancient Egypt up into Europe.

Due to the negative anthropological ideas and theories of early European scholars against Black Africans, thus, the knowledge and reality that Judaeo-Christian foundations of Europe actually originated from African theosophy and philosophy, has surely been a major source of social-political embarrassment for Europeans. The racist and extremist Europeans had always seen the so-called Jewish people with suspicion and contempt vis-à-vis their same contempt and ill-feelings they had towards Sub-Saharan Africans. That is to say, historically, the Europeans had no genesis of religion to claim as their own, other than what came up 'out of Africa', Christianity, which was brought to them by the so-called Jews. This fact has left the European (Aryan-Whites) with bitterness, enmity and jealousy against the so-called Jewish peoples and Africans.

Also, this fomented ill feelings among Europeans that the so-called Jewish people had deliberately deceived them so that the Jews would dominate Europe. "This is also the reason no credible reason has been given for the most atrocious massacre of blacks and Jews in human history" (Nana Darkwah, ibid. page 23). Finally, one must know that Aryan-White (European and American) tradition, Apostolic fathers of the Church, theosophical teachings and writings, as well as the Arabs, have all laboured over the past 500 years, trying to disconnect Black Africans from Ancient Egypt, in order to hide the true identity of the original authors of the Bible and the origin from whence the Bible originated, which was Ancient Egypt. In essence, what the Aryan-White race has attempted to do by 'high-jacking' Ancient Egypt: The strategy has been to kill the "Messenger" (Black Ancient Egyptians), but save and embrace the "Message" of the messenger for themselves (the Holy Bible text). It is important to know that Western curiosity and interest in Ancient Egypt, wanting it to be recognized at its genesis as an Aryan-White or Asian Civilization, thus induced Western scholarship to create the discipline science called Egyptology.

The Aryan-White race's main objective in establishing Egyptolgy is to destroy the Black African genesis of Ancient Egypt, and give the world a counterfeit analysis of this Great Civilization as being a creation of the Aryan-White race. However, the late Dr. Cheikh Anta Diop (Senegalese), who was a Physicist-Scientist, Egyptologist, Palaeo-anthropologist and World Historian, eloquently sums up the essence of the Aryan-White race's futile attempts to 'white-wash' Ancient Egypt. Diop: "Mankind trying to destroy the Black African genesis of Ancient Egypt, is like trying to drown a fish in the vast ocean!" BY THE MASTER TEACHER H.M. MAULANA.





quote:
Originally posted by Prophetessofrage:
AfroMan this is a powerful truth you are revealing. Of course, Africans wrote the Bible as that's all that were in that region.

Neither of you know $#** about $#** about genetics. The Middle East is populated by SEMITES which are NOT "Africans" even though they can be dark skinned. They are about as "African" as the Australian Aborigines. C'mon.[/Tom Leykis]

God wrote the Bible, man was merely taking dictation. As such, it does NOT matter WHO did the actual writing.

quote:
Originally posted by Prophetessofrage:
And the fact is, even the Bible acknowledges that Africans were what Israel was comprised up of.
where?

quote:
Originally posted by Prophetessofrage:
We have the Bible defining the ethncity of the Egyptians as 'The land of HAM' which of course, is purposely translated wrong, in that it should have been KHEM/KAM (Psalms 78:51; 105:23,27; 106:21-22).

What? Where be your proof?[/ebonics]

quote:
Originally posted by Prophetessofrage:
We also have the Bible verifying that HAMITES/KHEMITES were they who inhabited the Middle East, which I'm sure you already know is nothing more than NORTH EAST AFRICA also known as Al-ke-bu-lan or AFrica (1 Chr. 4:40; Gen. 17:8).

Hamites were there, no problem. The Canaanites were Hamites. Technically speaking, the Middle East is mostly Asia, not Africa. (in terms of continents). The Hebrews were SEMITES.

quote:
Originally posted by Prophetessofrage:
We have Abraham married the Egyptian woman Hagar and so producing the African Arabs (Gen. 16; 17).
He didn't marry her, he concubinized her. Such as that is. Anyway, that doesn't mean anything to the line of the Jews.

quote:
Originally posted by Prophetessofrage:
His Black/Egyptian mother Hagar married Ishmael off to an Egyptian/Khemite so producing a solid African line (Gen. 21:21).

Are you totally ignorant of genetics or what?

quote:
Originally posted by Prophetessofrage:
We have Joseph the son of Israel marrying an Egyptian daughter of the High priest (Genesis 41:45). We have this Black/African woman producing 2 sons of Israel who became two tribes Ephraim and Manassah (Gen. 41:52).

yeah, okay. Skin color was probably darker rather than lighter. However, if you look at Egyptian art, you will see that the skin color depicted (If intended to be accurate) was rather more red than black. This indicates a myriad of shades in-between and rather than being "black-as-we-know-it", they were more diverse than people give credit for. Sure, some of the people depicted in the art do look black-as-we-know-it--including rulers (including if you study the facial features of some statues that show no color). You've got to remember that this is thousands of years ago and there has been DNA lost since then and comparing them to today's African inhabitants in any absolute terms would be difficult without thorough DNA analysis of mummies, for instance. Long story short, Egypt had EVERYTHING, not just "black-as-we-know-it." Studying the appearance of today's Arabs does not leave much indication of significant "African" DNA contribution on the surface. Again, DNA testing would have to occur to nail this down. But we should not be afraid of what we find out by science--not anybody.

quote:
Originally posted by Prophetessofrage:
After the Exodus we have proof that the 70 who went down into Africa/Egypt populated to over 400,000 through marriage with African/Egyptians. They were called a MIXED MULTITUDE who left Egypt/Africa (Lev. 24:10; 1 Chr. 2:34; etc. Ex. 12:37-38).

This is true.

quote:
Originally posted by Prophetessofrage:
The Bible also calls the Egyptians Wise men. In fact, when seeking to explain the greatness of Solomon's wisdom they likened it to the Egyptians and various African/Canaanite kings (2 Kings 7:6) 'God's children who will return to him) (Isaiah 19:21). Acts 7:22 speaks of Moses obtaining his wisdom from the Egyptians.

This is true.

However we should be careful about our reasonings here. All blacks are not necessarily egyptian. And all egyptians are not necessarily black. Don't let geography fool you. To give you an example, the indigenous people of Japan, the Ainu, are very caucasoid in appearance, very white, yet they live in a land populated by Asians. Just because a certain ethnic-group resides in a certain geographical location does not mean other groups were necessarily excluded or not present.

quote:
Originally posted by Prophetessofrage:
The Black/African nation was truly semitic in that it was Semi-Khemite and Semite/Semite and all of it was basically Black/African men, women and children.


Historically incorrect. Black/Africans, at least in that area, were descended mainly from Cush, Ham's son. The area called Ethiopia today was formerly called Cush for that reason.

quote:
Originally posted by Prophetessofrage:
So in other words, the Bible is teaching all with 'eyes to see and ears to hear' that we are dealing with a solely Black/African people including Yeshua Hamashiach.


Solely is not the right word. It isn't even the correct concept. The amount of "Black/African" DNA in the Hebrew people is STATISTICALLY INSIGNIFICANT.

quote:
Originally posted by Prophetessofrage:
Also, the Caucasoids who identify themselves as Japhethites were had been scattered to the cave regions of the Caucasas mountains and are no where to be found in the establishing of the Hebrew nation (Gen. 10:2-5). They are the Greeks/Romans who were Israel's enemies.


This is pretty much true, although we can't say for sure that NO Japethites made it to the Middle East. However, any contribution would be statistically insignificant anyhow.

quote:
Originally posted by Prophetessofrage:
There is also the Gnostics 'Gospel of the Egypitans' and a multitude of obvious evidence that Black/AFricans wrote the Bible and were the Hebrews of the Bible.


Look, the Gnostics have their own problems. They accept revelations that are questionable (at least, in terms of how to gain salvation and what practices are acceptable).

quote:
Originally posted by Prophetessofrage:
http://www.earlychristianwritings.com/text/gospelegyptians.html

http://www.earlychristianwritings.com/gospelegyptians.html

Anyway, this is a dynamite post worth passing around. Thanks for sharing.


Yes it is worth passing around, as some myths definitely need discussing and dispelling.

"You liberals with your conspiracy theories are starting to sound like your own version of the John Birch Society"-Rush Limbaugh
quote:
Originally posted by Afroman:
I will make it abundantly CLEAR I do not want a discussion with you Melesi. Do you think you have something to say? Leave me alone with your propaganda messages. They are no more than embarrassment and offense to my ancestors!!


Dude your ancestors are DEAD, they don't f***ing CARE one way or the other.

quote:
Originally posted by Afroman:
Again your so-called Christian ideologies are African ideologies in disguise, which you Christians stole from us and made them a God of vengeance and fire and brimstone indorsing murder and incest characteristic of your culture.


ROFLMFAO! Christians stole African ideologies? I don't f***ing think so!

Endorsing murder? Murder by definition is UNJUSTIFIED killing, and you can't prove that whatever you're calling "murder" was in fact unjustified.

Your reference to incest is crazy talk. You're crazy, "Marge"![/homer]

quote:
Originally posted by Afroman:
Are you suffering from mental amnesia Melesi, a kind of forgetfulness brought about by your neurotic drives for superiority and supremacy?

Why have you got this paranoia that she or anyone else automatically have "neurotic" drives for "superiority"?! This has nothing to do with "superiority."

quote:
Originally posted by Afroman:
Now we Africans have the ANCESTRAL KEYS to free ourselves from your bondage with foreign ways.

Freedom of a kind that does not free you from the bondage of sin. That's kind of an eternal thing...the consequences are unchangeable upon death...and those consequences are not good.

quote:
Originally posted by Afroman:
WE DO NOT WANT TO PLUG TO YOUR THE EUROPEAN MATRIX ANYMORE!!


Christianity is NOT European.

quote:
Originally posted by Afroman:
Furthermore, do you think you can escape calling the Truth falsehood and over looking your predecessors? I find you ungrateful assisting your government in mentally enslave us. You will reap what you sow, in the meantime go away!!

Nmaginate give thanks for your words in this thread. I permit you to talk and to exchange views on my behalf because you are smart not SPOON FED, you are real!! The Anglo-American woman Melesi can loathe our BLACK BROTHERHOOD, inexorably her scheme to divide and rule us won't play any role here. No, for the Great Spirit of our ancestors guides us, impel us to slash evil spirituality and history. _ONE AFRIKAN LOVE!!_

AfroMan.


I find your racist exclusionism disturbing. ANd dude, those aren't your ancestors...

"You liberals with your conspiracy theories are starting to sound like your own version of the John Birch Society"-Rush Limbaugh
Shebakoby,

Oops--you're being logical again. Dealing in facts. What are we going to do with you?

Incidentally, there has been DNA work with mummies, and it has shown that their DNA has been passed down to the modern Egyptians. That is, modern Egyptians are the descendents of the 6000-year-old mummies of the pyramid builders.

Asking Profiterfromrage to show her sources...what got into you?
quote:
Originally posted by Prophetessofrage:
Hi Afroman, now that you and Imaginate have well expelled the disease back to her psych Thorazin shot appointments of which it professed to needing to keep, let's get down to some serious discussion on the true Black/African origin of the Bible.

I am pulling this passage from your 'Gospel of Egypt' post. The Akhetaten/Moses connection is the key to understanding the African origin of the Bible. As the article points out Hebrews got their style of writing and disposition from Egypt. The Bible verifies this reality, when it states "Moses was trained in all the wisdom of the Egyptians" (Acts 7:22). Now this coupled with the Biblical profession that Moses married an Ethiopian woman whose father was the priest of Midian, Jethro by name, is the link to the Akhenaten connection (Numbers 12:1; Ex. 18:1-12). Zipporah his Ethiopian wife had 2 sons by Moses, Gershom and Eliezer by names (Ex. 2:23; 18:4). Jethro was the High Priest of Midian.

Now couple this with the 600,000 mixed multitude comprising of solely Black/African peoples. Canaanites, and all else who dwelled among the Hebrews. Remember the 'Gibeonites' were a Black/African, Hamitic/Khemetic group incorporated into the Hebrew's nation (Joshua 10; 1 Chr. 12:4; Neh. 3:7; etc.). We also had the original Egyptians that came with Abraham into the land of Canaan now called Israel (Genesis 12:15-20: 16:3; etc.).

In fact, what is to be understood is that these Nomad Hebrews travelled in caravans and picked up various African allies along the way. That's how their armies were established (Gen. 14). The 'servants' were not 'servants' let along 'slaves' in the barbaric way of the Caucasoids. Rather, one could be a 'servant' and rise to King. In other words, it was not enslavement or thought of as inferior. The word was more akin to ally, compatriot, friend as these people married Hebrews and so caused the Hebrew line to be more of the stronger Africoid stock than Semitic.

At any rate, the ideology of monotheism that came with Akhenaten adds up to the same spiritual roots that the Hebrews adhered to. Remember also, Joseph married Asenath whoses father was the High Priest of On, Poti-Phera by name (Genesis 41:45).

Okay, It is these facts that leads us straight into the findings in the article below. With the result being Bible origin African. The Hebrew spiritual origin African. The nation itself intermarrying with Africans and retaining Africoid stock, and appearance.

Basically, the below article is the Egyptian version of the origin of the Hebrew's African spirituality. What say you?
================================================
Moses

"In the latter half of the third decade of his reign, Amenhotep III proclaimed his decision to make his son Amenhotep IV his successor and gave him the status of coregent.(13) Amenhotep IV was married to the presumed heiress Nefertiti,(14) and with his father's blessing and protection he built three more temples to the Aten in Thebes adjacent to the Karnak temple of the state god Amun.(15) Probably in an attempt to win over the priests of Amun, Nefertiti (whose name is a close variant of Nefertari)(16) took a prominent role in both the art and ritual of the temples of Aten at Karnak.(17) However, the building of additional temples to the Aten in Karnak was perceived by the priests of Amun as only one more intolerable affront. (In the 19th Dynasty these temples were dismantled and used as fill for other building projects).(18)

If Nefertiti was a daughter/grand-daughter of Yuya and Tuya,(19) and not entirely of Egyptian blood, this would have only further incensed the priests of Amun. Regardless of her parentage, the enmity between Amenhotep IV and the religious establishment had become extreme and possibly by now was irreconcilable. Five years into the coregency, Amenhotep IV changed his name to Akhenaten and left Thebes to establish a new Egyptian capital city, which he called Akhetaten (meaning the resting place or horizon of the Aten). The change in name indicated that he no longer considered himself to be the son of the god Amun, but of Aten. On the monuments marking the four corners of the new city, Akhenaten referred to the hateful words spoken about him and his forefathers by the priests of Amun.(20) Obviously, he had hoped that the city of Akhetaten would be his resting place as well.

At the city of Akhetaten, the ancient religion of the Aten received a make-over. Aten temple design, ritual, and symbolism (by a falcon-headed man and a sun disc referred to as Re-Herakhty) derived originally from the traditional solar god Ra whose center of worship had been from very ancient times at Memphis and On (Heliopolis). By the end of the coregency, the falcon-man had been removed from the Aten's symbol. The Aten had in essence become a god without human or animal image.(21) The disc of the sun was now considered to be the single physical representation of the invisible and eternal god, Ra,(22) and a deity in its own right. (The sun disc was used later as a royal "lamelech" seal by the Kings of Judah).(23) The cartouche of Akhenaten's god and heavenly father, the Aten, bore the name Imram. In the Bible, Moses is referred to as the son of Amram, the Hebrew equivalent.(24)



The name of the Egyptian deity Aten transliterates into the Hebrew word Adon.(25) Adon, which is translated by English Bibles as "the Lord" (and Adonai, translated as "my Lord") is used along with Jehovah (Yhwh) in the Bible as the exclusive personal names of God. Moreover, in ancient times, the name Jehovah (Yhwh) was written, but never spoken. Whenever the written name Jehovah (Yhwh) was to be read out loud, Adon (Aten) was voiced instead.(26) The written form of Adon is infrequent, however, its limited usage is significant, especially in the first six books of the Bible (See under "LORD" in Strong's Exhaustive Concordance), where it is reserved for the following applications alone: Moses addresses God using the title Adon/Aten (Exodus 4:10,13; 5:22; 34:9; Numbers 14:17; Deuteronomy 3:23; 7:26; 10:17); Moses, himself, is addressed both by Aaron (Ex.32:22; Num.12:11) and by Joshua (Numbers 11:28) using the title Adon/Aten; and Joshua also addresses God using the title Adon/Aten (Joshua 5:14 b; 7:7). As mentioned above, there is an established relationship between the literature of the Egyptian 18th Dynasty and the Bible. Psalm 104 is an embellishment of the Hymn to the Aten which was found by archaeologists at the city of Akhetaten.(27)

The religious reforms of Akhenaten included the rejection of traditional Egyptian magic and astrology associated with the cult of Amun,(28) and the rejection of the cult of Osiris with its version of belief in eternal judgement and the afterlife as well.(29) The site chosen for the new capital of Egypt further demonstrated Akhenaten's desire for a new balance as it was located at the exact geodetic center of the country.(30) The inhospitably hot and arid plateau overlooking the Nile on which the city of Akhetaten was built was not occupied at that time, nor would it be again after the end of the 18th Dynasty.(31) The austerity of the location was no deterrent to Akhenaten, and he rapidly constructed a magnificent city there. The finished stonework of the ancient city was taken away to be used in other building projects shortly after the end of the 18th Dynasty,(32) however the site was never again reoccupied and remained largely undisturbed up until the time of its excavation about 100 years ago. Archives containing Akhenaten's political correspondence, known as the Amarna tablets were not taken away, and they have provided a great deal of insight into the reigns of both Akhenaten and his father Amenhotep III.

The Amarna tablets have generally been used to depict Akhenaten as apathetic toward the Egyptian empire, and preoccupied exclusively with religious reforms at home. Closer scrutiny of the Amarna letters, e.g., EA 256 from Mutbaal discussed in the introduction, indicates that he knew the proponents of the Habiru personally, and was either condoning their actions, or simply unwilling to suppress them. Another researcher has concluded that Akhenaten was in fact orchestrating the movement.(33) A letter from the Canaanite governor of Jerusalem, also among the Amarna tablets, expressed outrage after an Egyptian official had been murdered at Sile by Hebrews, and Akhenaten had done nothing about it (Exodus 2:11-14).(34) Early in Akhenaten's reign, a letter to Egypt's Syrian vassal Aziru reads, "... the king does not fail when he rages against all Canaan." Later in Akhenaten's reign, and presumably after the Habiru capture of Jerusalem, a letter to Aziru reads, "you know that the king does not wish to be hard with the land of Canaan."

The tomb of a formerly unknown vizier of Akhenaten was discovered in 1989.(35) The name of this vizier, Aper-el is decidedly Semitic/Hebrew. It is not surprising then, that the repeated and pitiful pleas from Akhenaten's Canaanite and Philistine vassals at Jerusalem and other cities in Palestine for help against the surging tide of Habiru elicited no assistance from Aper-el, or from Akhenaten's other minister, Aye, the son of Yuya.

Although the city of Akhetaten was never rebuilt, there is a village on the opposite side of the Nile which has retained the name Mal-lawi (or Mallevi, meaning "city of the Levites") to this present day!(36) The Levites are identified by Osman as that select group of nobles and close relatives of Akhenaten and Yuya who made up the newly formed priesthood of the Aten and served in the temples of Aten at Thebes and at the new capital city of Akhetaten.(37) (In the Sinai, the Levites were Moses' primary supporters when trouble broke out.) While Akhenaten was still in power, the majority of Hebrews/Israelites would have remained either at Zarw(38) in the Nile delta, or at Akhmin, and would have continued to worship their own god(s) in their own native tongue. This later caused Akhenaten (Moses) some consternation (Exodus 4:10).(39)

In the twelfth year of the coregency Amenhotep III died, and Akhenaten was in a lavish ceremony at the city of Akhetaten coronated as sole ruler of Egypt.(40)

Upon the death of Amenhotep III, Akhenaten had complete power to deal with the priesthood of Amun, and this power was exercised to the fullest extent. The temples of Amun were closed and the very name of Amun was expunged throughout Egypt.(41)

The names of other gods were also attacked, however to a somewhat lesser extent.(42) This act of suppression was precipitated by a number of factors, including Akhenaten's self-imposed isolation, the influence of his Asian/Semitic relatives, a national crisis brought on by a growing epidemic, and the venom of the priestly establishment of Amun. It is clear that what began as a reaction to the excesses of the reign of Amenhotep III and an attempt to reform and simplify the religion of Egypt had now, itself, become a movement characterized by extremism. This edict of Akhenaten echoes the Bible verse, "against all the gods of Egypt I will execute my judgement (Exodus 12:12)."(43)

Akhenaten's reforms may have succeeded had they not coincided with a terrible plague that was spreading throughout the entire Middle East.(44) The rapid growth of trade and exchange among nations of the Middle East made possible by the political stability of the times also facilitated the spread of disease. Amenhotep III had made 700 idols of Sekhmet, the goddess of pestilence, in order to ward off the plague, which must have started to take hold on Egypt by the end of his reign. Two statues were made for every day of the year providing a "double spell" against the spreading disease.(45)

The late author and authority on the life of Akhenaten, Cyril Aldred, suggested that the zealousness with which Akhenaten eradicated the name of Amun was a similar, however, more desperate attempt to stop the devastation of this very same plague which during his reign had become a terrible epidemic in Egypt.(46) When the plague did not relent, the thousands of unemployed priests and servants of Amun's temples had all the more reason to blame Akhenaten's reforms and his rejection of the god who had brought Egypt so much prosperity in the past. In ancient times, such plagues were invariably attributed to the anger of the gods.(47) A personal idol of Amun found at the city of Akhetaten is an indication of the reluctance that must have existed to abandoning the security of the old forms of religion.

Contrary to the picture painted by the Bible, Egyptians of this period adhered to a well-defined system of morality and justice.(48) Regular bathing, good hygiene and a varied diet was also the norm.(49) A mural found in the city of Akhetaten depicts the world's first toilet, and reflects an understanding of the need to properly dispose of human waste.(50) Plague induced hysteria undoubtedly raised the consciousness of diet and sanitation to even greater levels as reflected by the Laws of Moses in the Bible. According to the Bible, Moses told the Israelites that if they would observe all his commandments they would be free of the diseases that had inflicted them in Egypt (Deuteronomy 7:15; 28:60).

Moreover, the practice of medicine was not primitive in Egypt as was once believed, especially for ancient times. Drawing upon centuries of investigation, the Egyptian physician could skillfully diagnose many types of injuries, illnesses and diseases, and was entirely pragmatic regarding the likelihood with which a patient could be cured. Both physical and psychological treatments were prescribed to promote healing. The practice of circumcision is entirely of Egyptian and African origin,(51) and was only adopted later by the Semitic followers of Moses. An overview of the ancient Egyptian's knowledge of medicine and science is found in the references.(52)

In his third year of sole rule Akhenaten named a younger brother (or half-brother) Semenkhare as his coregent.(53) This only occurred after what appears to have been a desperate attempt to bear a royal son of his own had failed. Akhenaten is known to have had six daughters by his wife Nefertiti. As the coming of age of Semenkhare approached, Akhenaten married and had children through his three eldest daughters. These unions produced three additional daughters, and ended the life of his second eldest daughter in child birth.(54) In this respect also Akhenaten seemed to be cursed.

After his appointment as coregent, Semenkhare was dispatched to Thebes to reopen the temple of Amun,(55) but this concession to Amun and his priests proved to be fruitless. Finally, there is evidence that Akhenaten himself had become seriously ill.(56) Two years after Semenkhare's appointment, Akhenaten's reign came to an end. It is commonly presumed that Akhenaten died at this time, but this cannot be proven. On the contrary, there are strong indications that Akhenaten did not die, but chose instead to escape death from plague or assassination by abdicating and seeking exile in the Sinai.

Akhenaten's mummy is the only one of the 18th Dynasty Thutmosids (Thutmose I through Tutankhamun) which has not been found. There is no conclusive evidence(57) that anyone was buried in the tomb chamber that was being prepared for him in the hills behind the city of Akhetaten.(58) Funerary items originally made for Akhenaten's burial there were modified and used in the Valley of the Kings burials of the following two Pharaohs instead.(59) There is also evidence that some officials continued to date articles and events to the beginning of his reign even after he was clearly no longer in power.(60) Moreover, documents and tomb inscriptions dating from the 19th Dynasty describe Akhenaten as "the rebel," "the heretic," and "the fallen one of Amarna (Akhetaten)," providing further proof that his government ended with his fall from power, and not more conventionally upon his death.(61)

The description of the rod of Moses found in the Bible is another indication that Akhenaten was living in exile in the Sinai desert. Pharaohs possessed many types of scepters representing various aspects of their sovereignty. The staff topped by a brazen serpent was the scepter symbolizing pharoanic authority.(62) We are told that this scepter was later destroyed by Hezekiah because it had become a cult fetish (2 Kings 18:4).(63)

The Talmud relates that Moses had indeed been a king (of Ethiopia) for a time, but had abdicated in favor of a son sired by an elderly Queen Mother Adonith (Egyptian Aten-it) through her husband the previous king.(64) Pharaohs of the 18th Dynasty were also considered to be the rulers of Ethiopia (Kush). One, and possibly the only, military action of Akhenaten took place in Ethiopia (Kush) where he confirmed his kingship over the region.

Surviving excerpts from two Egyptian histories provide even more clues regarding the true identity of Moses. The History of Egypt (Aegyptiaca) written in the 3rd Century B.C. in Greek by the Egyptian High Priest of Heliopolis known as Manetho recorded details about Moses and the Exodus.(65) Also, the five volume History of Egypt written by Apion in the first half of the 1st Century A.D. contained a passage about Moses that was quoted by the Jewish historian Josephus.(66) Josephus (circa 70 A.D.) transmitted from Apion's work that Moses had constructed temples in Egypt which were oriented eastward, had roofs open to the sun, and made use of a modified obelisk. These were all distinctive characteristics of Akhenaten's many temples.

Excerpts from Manetho's history quoted by Josephus and the Christian historian Eusebius (chronicler to Constantine) place the Exodus specifically under Moses during the reign of Amenhotep IV (Akhenaten) following a 13 year period marked by pestilence, rebellion and the violation of Egyptian temples and their gods.(67) This is an accurate description of the traumatic 13 year period during which Akhenaten ruled Egypt from the new city of Akhetaten.(68) Josephus, who was also a Jew, took great offence to the accounts of both Manetho and Apion. Lacking any hard evidence to contradict these sources, Josephus resorted to simply denouncing the accounts as "ridiculous" and "silly." Fortunately, he quoted enough verbatim from Manetho and Apion to now prove otherwise!(69)"


There's a problem with this analysis. The Pharaoh of Moses' time did indeed have a Firstborn Son, who died in the last of the ten plagues.

Akhenaton more closely parallels the pharaoh who was living during Joseph's time--especially considering the religious makeover of the times of Akhenaton. Pharaoh in Joseph's time had some pretty compelling dreams and interpretation was only possible through God who used Joseph to accomplish this. It is then entirely likely that Pharaoh went mono (-theistic) on everyone, to the chagrin of the priests of the day, no doubt.

You've got to remember, the dreams are of significance when reading about the bad things happening in Egypt during the time of Joseph. Seven years of plenty were followed immediately by SEVEN years of FAMINE. That's pretty freaking bad.

No, I'm afraid if you want the pharaoh who was around during Moses, you're looking for a different Pharaoh. Most authorities picked one of the Ramses' (I forget which one).

"You liberals with your conspiracy theories are starting to sound like your own version of the John Birch Society"-Rush Limbaugh
quote:
Originally posted by henry38:
Melesi the information on the fact that the Israelites returned to Africa is in Jeremiah chapter 43.


That is not where they are originally from though. They are from the Sumerian/Chaldean/Bablyonian area.

quote:
Originally posted by henry38:
There are other Bible verses that talked about their continued presence in Africa but I am not going to talk about that now.


It is true that Israelites did hang out in Africa.

quote:
Originally posted by henry38:
So from this account you see the Bible clearly showed people who were Africans wrote the the foundation books of the Bible. Later these people became known as the Israelites then after a short time in the promised land they came back to Africa and have lived there since.


Incorrect analysis. Abraham was not an African. The Israelites had partial Egyptian in them after awhile but statistically became insignficant as to contribution.

quote:
Originally posted by henry38:
I told you earlier that my own tribe of Africans have always known and used the name of God YAHWEH. This name was deemed as lost because even the current Jews do not know the name of God. How did my people know this name? Because we are part of the true Israelites, we can only have come from the priestly line of Levi to have such crucial information at our disposal. Our names, tradition and oral history testifies to that.

That is very interesting. Now, was there talk in your tribe's stories about the coming of a Messiah to have victory over Death and Sin?

I don't know how much validity there is to the idea that the lost tribes of Israel moved to Africa--they were taken by the Assyrians deeper into Asia. Proselytization of ancient Judaism (back in Jesus' day) was common and even Ethiopians had converted to what is now Judaism. It has no bearing on who the people were nor their origins or DNA. Don't try to read too much into that. Levite knowledge was hardly a secret.

quote:
Originally posted by henry38:
Earlier in Afroman's post he mentioned the name of this tribe who are known as Ewes. Why is this information important? The Bible account confirms that the Israelites ended up as Africans which backs up the claims of people like the Ewes. The Ewes are important to anyone of slave ancestry because the main culprits who sold people into slavery, the Ashanti Empire and the Kingdom of Dahomey MAINLY SOLD EWES into slavery. This being the case means many people of slave descent are true Israelites.


Let's get out the DNA tester and find out for sure.

quote:
Originally posted by henry38:
Another reason why this information is important to people of slave descent is for them to understand that what they were told by the white man that they came from Noah's cursed son is a COMPLETE LIE.


Actually it's more of a misunderstood distortion although some people would be guilty of actual lying in this regard. First of all, Ham was not cursed, it was Canaan. Secondly, Canaan was not the father of Africans, it was Cush--another son of Ham, who was not cursed.

Hamites are incredibly diverse as a group and include not only black africans but also Asian orientals, the North American and South American "Indians" and many others.

quote:
Originally posted by henry38:
As you can see from the Bible accounts it is the children of Shem or Semites that have always been enslaved and not the children of Canaan as the white man has lied about.


Well if they said the black slaves were children of CANAAN and KNEW DIFFERENTLY, they sure as hell WERE LYING, YES. But the skin color of the liars doesn't mean $#**.

quote:
Originally posted by henry38:
The Bible again explains why the children of Shem have suffered such tragedy but I can not go into that now, when I do you would understand why there is so much misery for people from this ancestry line.


Dude there's misery among the entire human race.

quote:
Originally posted by henry38:
I wanted to write and explain more but circumstances have overtaken me. My father died a few hours ago and I am I am quickly writing this to keep my promise to you. I would not be posting for many weeks so don't be surprised if you post any information and I do not respond.


Frown

quote:
Originally posted by henry38:
When I get back and you or anyone else is interested I may provide you with a bit more information about your ancestry if your ancestors were slaves from West Africa, that is if you are interested. Until then please understand that due to ignorance (which is understandable because of the ravages of slavery) many of you do not realize how important the Bible is to understanding your history and your roots.

Some people certainly are ignorant, but I am open to previously unrevealed information.

_____________________________
Is it just talk or are you for solutions? If you are GENUINELY interested in solving black problems? Then join us at http://www.theguidedog.com/BlackNation.html[/QUOTE]

"You liberals with your conspiracy theories are starting to sound like your own version of the John Birch Society"-Rush Limbaugh
melesi
Your agreeement with the ignorant rants of shebakoby is all the answer I need to give you. Your own answers give weight to my replies and your replies to the aforementioned moron reveal your true character. I salute you you are firmly in the traditions of your ancestors. There is no reason for Africans on the continent or in the diaspora to have, what to me is, a foolish longing to either be a part of or justify a belief in Xtianity or the Xtian "litle book". I will await Henry38 and ignore your responses and any other ignorant replies. I am only interested in being enlightened. You and your ilk,who hide behind a false face of Xtian love while destroying cultures around the world, them blaming them for being in a debased condition, have no light to offer.There are enough of us who are on to you and each day we enlighten more and more.

Iwori take a critical look at what affects you.
fagunwa,

Since you were merely looking for an excuse to presume yourself good, you did so. You did not have a reason for doing so, however.

You have no examples to give of my being wrong, no arguments, no proof. You call shebakoby "ignorant" but without showing why you think that he is.

Shebakoby and I are different. we approach matters from a somewhat different perspective, but we agree on some things, too.

You, however, do not want to believe that two people with whom you disagree can be different. You want to believe that all who disagree iwth you are wrong, even deliberately and maliciously so.

You speak against an accused facade of Christian love, but you do not define what that love is supposed to be nor what it is that I may have done against it.

All you do is accuse. Fagunwa, a child can do that. You have done no more than a child does.

You did not even try to answer my questions to you, which means that you were not serious about your conversation here. If people don't agree with you, then you write them off as less than you, as not worthy of your attention.

Fine, but that's just what bigots do. Think about that.
I have stumbled on this site , perhaps as an act of God, or just dumb luck. At any rate, I have read some of the messages and I am somewhat disturbed by them.Let me explain, I am a person who was brought up to despise racism in any form, and yet what I have read pertains to things that have a form of racism added. How do we as a people stop this from happening if we ourselves don't change our own way of thinking. It is not about black or white unless you choose to make it so. It is just science, period. I live every day trying to teach people that color means nothing, and yet even by accident I find ignorance. This is a great dissapointment. White, red, yellow, brown, black, or tan. WHO CARES! Don't you think it is time to get past this. Those of us who would like equality for all people can't fight the fight alone. We need people to step up out of narrowmindedness and grow up. Otherwise we are fighting a loseing battle. It just makes me sick to know that there are people out there not willing to look at the whole person as just that, a person(nothing more or less).

Add Reply

Post
×
×
×
×
Link copied to your clipboard.
×