PDA

View Full Version : Why Did Joseph and Mary Take Jesus to Africa?



deepjagga
Dec 20th 2007, 04:19 AM
Joseph (Yosheph) and Mary (Mariam) were told to take the baby Jesus to Africa-Egypt. Why did God choose Egypt of all places?

pnewton
Dec 20th 2007, 04:20 AM
Joseph (Yosheph) and Mary (Mariam) were told to take the baby Jesus to Africa-Egypt. Why did God choose Egypt of all places?It was out of reach of Herod.

deepjagga
Dec 20th 2007, 04:21 AM
It was out of reach of Herod.

Well, that's true. It was way out of reach from Herod.

Naphal
Dec 20th 2007, 04:22 AM
This is just another one of Jagga's threads that tries to promote that Moses and Jesus were black and that the Jews of today are fakes and that blacks should leave Christianity. It's all racist. One of his threads was just erased by the mods. I plan to warn them of this thread as well.

pnewton
Dec 20th 2007, 04:26 AM
Well, that's true. It was way out of reach from Herod. Sometimes the simplest answers are the best, especially since this is what the angel said the reason was.

ddlewis86
Dec 20th 2007, 04:27 AM
Stop it!


Everyone has caught onto the real agenda here!

Please stop this non-sense!

Sherrie
Dec 20th 2007, 04:28 AM
I was wondering why all the threads are about black vs white.

ddlewis86
Dec 20th 2007, 04:29 AM
I was wondering why all the threads are about black vs white.

Me too. Well actually I think we know the answer.

MLC
Dec 20th 2007, 04:37 AM
Seeing as Egyptians are not even Black Africans, I don't even really understand his point. But as others have said, there is no use getting in some big debate.

humbled
Dec 20th 2007, 05:11 AM
Joseph (Yosheph) and Mary (Mariam) were told to take the baby Jesus to Africa-Egypt. Why did God choose Egypt of all places?This is why:

Matthew 2:13-15
13 When they had gone, an angel of the Lord appeared to Joseph in a dream. "Get up," he said, "take the child and his mother and escape to Egypt. Stay there until I tell you, for Herod is going to search for the child to kill him." 14 So he got up, took the child and his mother during the night and left for Egypt, 15 where he stayed until the death of Herod. And so was fulfilled what the Lord had said through the prophet: "Out of Egypt I called my son."

It was to fulfill Scripture. To prove that Jesus is the Messiah.

Hosea 11:1 "When Israel was a child, I loved him,
and out of Egypt I called my son.

Israel was the "type" of son while Jesus was the TRUE Son. Just as many things in the OT foreshadow the real (read Hebrews about sacrifices), this is just another example.

Kahtar
Dec 21st 2007, 03:01 PM
This thread has been re-opened and moved to Contro...

always
Dec 21st 2007, 03:23 PM
Actually it is not racist, to discuss that which is truth,

I myself have been criticized because of posting the fact that Jesus had to have been wrapped in flesh that had color.

No he was not an African American, but he was a man of color, as is the majority of the world,not blonde hair and blue eyes as he has been depicted here.

Early depictions of the Madonna, showed her being a woman of color.

Annnnd when Joseph's brothers bowed before him in Egypt, and DID NOT recognize him, is also proof that they bowed before a man the same complexion as the Egyptians, the same complexion as THEM.

The Israelites depicted today are not the true Israelites that the bible speaks of.

Fenris
Dec 21st 2007, 03:41 PM
Annnnd when Joseph's brothers bowed before him in Egypt, and DID NOT recognize him, is also proof that they bowed before a man the same complexion as the Egyptians, the same complexion as THEM.
The descendants of the pyramid-building Egyptians still live in Egypt. They are known as 'Copts' and are Christian non-Arabs. They are not black.




The Israelites depicted today are not the true Israelites that the bible speaks of.
Well, then what are we?

always
Dec 21st 2007, 04:16 PM
The descendants of the pyramid-building Egyptians still live in Egypt. They are known as 'Copts' and are Christian non-Arabs. They are not black.

That is correct, Joseph would have been akin to the pyramid-building Ancient Egyptians.




Well, then what are we?

Turn to Galatians 4 verse 5 - ...“that we might receive the adoption of sons.”

Fenris
Dec 21st 2007, 04:18 PM
That is correct, Joseph would have been akin to the pyramid-building Ancient Egyptians.
Right. And they were semitic middle eastern. Not black african.





Turn to Galatians 4 verse 5 - ...“that we might receive the adoption of sons.” Uh. Clue me in, please.

always
Dec 21st 2007, 04:21 PM
Right. And they were semitic middle eastern. Not black african.



Uh. Clue me in, please.


Not ignoring you, have to go to work, will get back with you. Love you

David Taylor
Dec 21st 2007, 04:24 PM
Actually it is not racist, to discuss that which is truth,

I myself have been criticized because of posting the fact that Jesus had to have been wrapped in flesh that had color.

No he was not an African American, but he was a man of color, as is the majority of the world,not blonde hair and blue eyes as he has been depicted here.


Where is 'here'? I haven't noticed anyone on BibleForums.org depicting Jesus as being a blonde-haired, blue-eyed person of light coloring.

It seems that most everyone here recognized Jesus as being of Semetic ancestry in his human incarnation....similar to those living with and around him in 1st century Judaea. Right?





Early depictions of the Madonna, showed her being a woman of color.

What 'color' are you referring to? Mary was a Jew.



Annnnd when Joseph's brothers bowed before him in Egypt, and DID NOT recognize him, is also proof that they bowed before a man the same complexion as the Egyptians, the same complexion as THEM.

The Israelites depicted today are not the true Israelites that the bible speaks of.

Joseph's brothers did not recognize Joseph, because years had passed, and they thought he would never been seen again. The fact that he was robed in Egyptian royalty, (not a change of skin color), would have been why they didn't recognize him.

What is the point you are trying to make here...because I can't really see it clearly....

always
Dec 21st 2007, 04:41 PM
Where is 'here'? I haven't noticed anyone on BibleForums.org depicting Jesus as being a blonde-haired, blue-eyed person of light coloring


It seems that most everyone here recognized Jesus as being of Semetic ancestry in his human incarnation....similar to those living with and around him in 1st century Judaea. Right?

oh goodness I really have to go but here is here in America




]What 'color' are you referring to? Mary was a Jew.
ancient art depicted Mary as black





Joseph's brothers did not recognize Joseph, because years had passed, and they thought he would never been seen again. The fact that he was robed in Egyptian royalty, (not a change of skin color), would have been why they didn't recognize him.

What is the point you are trying to make here...because I can't really see it clearly....

I don't care how Joseph aged, or what he was robed in, if not recognized as their brother, they would have recognized him as not being Egyptian, this was not the case because he was a man of color (dark skinned) as the Egyptians were and as they were.

jeffreys
Dec 21st 2007, 04:42 PM
Joseph (Yosheph) and Mary (Mariam) were told to take the baby Jesus to Africa-Egypt. Why did God choose Egypt of all places?
One other factoid that may have been overlooked is that Herod would have had no jurisdiction in Egypt. Thus, it was safe. Had Joseph & Mary gone just about any other direction, they might have found the same problems.

But more than that, this whole argument about the race of Moses, of Jesus, etc., is really absurd. They were not white, nor were they black. They were of semitic racial origin. Why should I - as a white man - really care? It just is what it is.

jeffreys
Dec 21st 2007, 04:47 PM
I don't care how Joseph aged, or what he was robed in, if not recognized as their brother, they would have recognized him as not being Egyptian, this was not the case because he was a man of color (dark skinned) as the Egyptians were and as they were.

There is a marked difference between the Semitic/Arabic race and the Negro race, correct?

Where we used to live, there were many Southern Sudanese refugees. They were black as coal, very tall, beautiful people with distinct features. There were also Ethiopians and Somalians - very close in proximity to the Southern Sudanese, but looking absolutely nothing alike. These are people of Arabic origin - much shorter, a lighter olive skin, and markedly different facial structures.

Different races are just that - different. And there's nothing wrong with acknowledging that.

always
Dec 21st 2007, 06:25 PM
There is a marked difference between the Semitic/Arabic race and the Negro race, correct?


Different races are just that - different. And there's nothing wrong with acknowledging that.

Actually there are some that believe that the original Semitic Race was the Negro(misnomer),Edenic Race, and that the ancient maps were manipulated to down play the significance of the continent of Africa/Eden.

There is but one race on this earth and that is the HUMAN race, our differences are our cultures.

It does not matter the flesh my saviour was wrapped in, if HE were green, I would still be in love with Him.




Uh. Clue me in, please.

When we accept Jesus as our Saviour we are grafted in? You are my brother

Fenris
Dec 21st 2007, 06:32 PM
When we accept Jesus as our Saviour we are grafted in? You are my brother

I accept the brotherhood of all mankind. What does that have to do with the race of the ancient Hebrews?

always
Dec 21st 2007, 06:55 PM
I accept the brotherhood of all mankind. What does that have to do with the race of the ancient Hebrews?

I don't accept the brotherhood of ALL mankind, just those who acknowledge that Jesus Christ is Lord.

because of geographical issues it is logical to state that the ancient Hebrews were people of color, it does not matter if one believes that or not, because of the events that occurred through Jesus, but for those of us who love truth it fulfills a void.

threebigrocks
Dec 21st 2007, 07:12 PM
I don't accept the brotherhood of ALL mankind, just those who acknowledge that Jesus Christ is Lord.

This is why I am not fond of this issue. It's a cause of division from the first keystroke of the OP. Least, that's what I"ve seen in my days. I'd love to have this one change to a binding instead of a line drawn discussion.

We have a brotherhood now through faith, and because of that faith, thru grace, we are called to take our brandnew clothed in Christ selves back to those who do not acknowledge Christ as Lord. Give them a chance to have the hope of adoption some day as well as yourself.

I do not know if you intended this statement as I have interpreted it or not, but as a one line statement in a thread of htis nature it will be taken as such. Correct me if I'm wrong in your intent.

The reason that God sent Joseph with Mary and Jesus to Egypt was a political thing, to fufill prophecy. Period. How skin color has a drop of weight in this is beyond me.

Kahtar
Dec 21st 2007, 07:47 PM
Let's see. God created each and every one of us. He loves each and every one of us. We each, saved or not, are endowed with the 'likeness of God' and it is His desire that we all (regardless of our foolish fleshly divisions based on skin tone) display His glory in the earth.
There is only ONE division He recognizes, and that is the division between Himself and us, and He has provided us all (reglardless of skin tone, which is here today, gone tomorrow) with a way to get past that wall of division, and that is the Christ, Who took upon Himself the flesh of man (skin tone plays no part in that) to provide that way.
He did that for all of us children of Adam and Noah. Who really gives a rip what color our stupid skin is? It's all flesh, it's all going back to the dust that it came from.
In our spirits, we all have, or will have, one color, and that will be the same as Christ's, for we shall be like Him, and that color is 'bright'!
So how about we all be 'bright' and just love each other like we're commanded to do.
Like I tell the Navajo, a horse is a horse, regardless what color he is.

always
Dec 21st 2007, 08:42 PM
This is why I am not fond of this issue. It's a cause of division from the first keystroke of the OP. Least, that's what I"ve seen in my days. I'd love to have this one change to a binding instead of a line drawn discussion.

We have a brotherhood now through faith, and because of that faith, thru grace, we are called to take our brandnew clothed in Christ selves back to those who do not acknowledge Christ as Lord. Give them a chance to have the hope of adoption some day as well as yourself.

I do not know if you intended this statement as I have interpreted it or not, but as a one line statement in a thread of htis nature it will be taken as such. Correct me if I'm wrong in your intent.

The reason that God sent Joseph with Mary and Jesus to Egypt was a political thing, to fufill prophecy. Period. How skin color has a drop of weight in this is beyond me.

My statement is backed by 1John 3:10

In this the children of God are manifest, and the children of the devil: whosoever doeth not righteousness is not of God, neither he that loveth not his brother.

does this mean that I don't have a love for mankind, and a desire to see them saved? NO! it means there is a difference between saved and unsaved.

skin color does not bear any weight in it, because it was not an issue at that time, because of sin and lies it became an issue,

I don't know if some will ever see why it is important that the truth should not be brought in a wheelbarrel of lies

always
Dec 21st 2007, 08:44 PM
Let's see. God created each and every one of us. He loves each and every one of us. We each, saved or not, are endowed with the 'likeness of God' and it is His desire that we all (regardless of our foolish fleshly divisions based on skin tone) display His glory in the earth.
There is only ONE division He recognizes, and that is the division between Himself and us, and He has provided us all (reglardless of skin tone, which is here today, gone tomorrow) with a way to get past that wall of division, and that is the Christ, Who took upon Himself the flesh of man (skin tone plays no part in that) to provide that way.
He did that for all of us children of Adam and Noah. Who really gives a rip what color our stupid skin is? It's all flesh, it's all going back to the dust that it came from.
In our spirits, we all have, or will have, one color, and that will be the same as Christ's, for we shall be like Him, and that color is 'bright'!
So how about we all be 'bright' and just love each other like we're commanded to do.
Like I tell the Navajo, a horse is a horse, regardless what color he is.

A horse is a horse, of course, of course and since no one can talk to a horse, of course, unless the horse is touch of God, the truth has got to stand

(in the tune of Mr Ed)

Naphal
Dec 22nd 2007, 02:46 AM
No he was not an African American, but he was a man of color, as is the majority of the world,not blonde hair and blue eyes as he has been depicted here.


Even this is racist because ALL MEN are men of color. There is no colorless human being.

MLC
Dec 22nd 2007, 03:00 AM
No he was not an African American

Well, all black people are not American , but I understand what you meant. ;)

always
Dec 24th 2007, 12:07 AM
Even this is racist because ALL MEN are men of color. There is no colorless human being.


Well praise the Lord!!!!!!!!!!! all of us are a shade of black????????? Amen!

it's our cultures that set us at odds at times, it should not be our complexions

Naphal
Dec 24th 2007, 12:17 AM
Well praise the Lord!!!!!!!!!!! all of us are a shade of black????????? Amen!

All shades of different colors.


it's our cultures that set us at odds at times, it should not be our complexions

Cultures and religions and skin color seems to be most of what causes issues alright.

pnewton
Dec 24th 2007, 03:19 AM
it's our cultures that set us at odds at times, it should not be our complexions How right you are. Culture can be a far greater factor than race. I know where I work we are far more unified by our common profession than we are by race. We have a saying that we are all brown (our unform color). This is one of the great things about integration, at school, work or church. Having even one cultural element in common unites all people.

Fenris
Dec 27th 2007, 01:07 PM
I don't accept the brotherhood of ALL mankind, just those who acknowledge that Jesus Christ is Lord.The bible commands us to love the stranger. Since he is a stranger, I presume we don't know his religious beliefs. Nor should we care. The point is that the stranger is another human being, created in the image of God.


because of geographical issues it is logical to state that the ancient Hebrews were people of color.If it's so logical why are you the only person who believes it?

ProjectPeter
Dec 27th 2007, 01:39 PM
My late Christmas present to the Contro folks... we'll call this closed. While it took a good turn... let's not push our luck! :lol: