PDA

View Full Version : Black people as the chosen people?



Joe King
Jan 18th 2011, 04:37 PM
I don't believe this but this is the belief of a co-worker of mine and would like to refute this. He believes that they are the tribe of Judah.

Should I point to the nation of Israel being formed in one day?

percho
Jan 18th 2011, 05:32 PM
I don't believe this but this is the belief of a co-worker of mine and would like to refute this. He believes that they are the tribe of Judah.

Should I point to the nation of Israel being formed in one day?

What day do you think they are formed on?

The Mighty Sword
Jan 18th 2011, 05:34 PM
I thought Black people were from the "Moor Tribe", no pun intended!!!

keck553
Jan 18th 2011, 05:43 PM
A simple DNA test is all it takes.

moonglow
Jan 18th 2011, 05:55 PM
I don't believe this but this is the belief of a co-worker of mine and would like to refute this. He believes that they are the tribe of Judah.

Should I point to the nation of Israel being formed in one day?

Were the people in Judah black? I don't get the connection of your post and the title..where do the black people fit in on this? :hmm: Jesus was descended from the tribe of Judah but I don't think He was black.

And yea how was Israel formed in one day? :confused

God bless

keck553
Jan 18th 2011, 06:13 PM
And yea how was Israel formed in one day? :confused

God bless

maybe it's a reference to Genesis where Jacob contended with God and God named him "Yisra'el?"

Reynolds357
Jan 18th 2011, 06:19 PM
I don't believe this but this is the belief of a co-worker of mine and would like to refute this. He believes that they are the tribe of Judah.

Should I point to the nation of Israel being formed in one day?

The nation of Israel was born in a single day, but that has absolutely nothing to do with the tribes. The tribe of Judah is not black. Ask him to show you where in scripture he bases this.
He is the one making an assumption. It is his burden to provide facts to support this position. His proposition is kind of like me saying "little green men from mars live in Gerogia." You ask me to prove it. I say, you prove they do not.
The tribe of Judah is not as a whole black. There are members of the tribe of Judah who returned from Africa that are black, but the tribe as a whole is not.

Reynolds357
Jan 18th 2011, 06:21 PM
Were the people in Judah black? I don't get the connection of your post and the title..where do the black people fit in on this? :hmm: Jesus was descended from the tribe of Judah but I don't think He was black.

And yea how was Israel formed in one day? :confused

God bless
Judah was not black and yes, Israel was formed in one day.The day was May 14, 1948.

Do not get me wrong here. I am friends with many black pastors and they get just as ticked off about this stuff as I do. All this Judah being black junk comes from the movement led by racists in the black churches to make Christ a black man. Historically, the Jews were not black. The ones that are black today are black because they traveled into Africa and intermarried. The Black skin color came from Africans they married into, not Jews.

Fenris
Jan 18th 2011, 06:50 PM
I used to see these characters on TV from time to time. Usually during the wee hours of the morning.

http://2.bp.blogspot.com/_uerCFAOUOzU/SnYwS8o6edI/AAAAAAAAAUA/mznh0oOWSo0/S269/tribes+photo.jpg

Joe King
Jan 18th 2011, 06:51 PM
Well he has all kinds of convuluted beliefs, like Christ isn't God so I know he is wrong.

Reynolds357
Jan 18th 2011, 06:56 PM
I used to see these characters on TV from time to time. Usually during the wee hours of the morning.

http://2.bp.blogspot.com/_uerCFAOUOzU/SnYwS8o6edI/AAAAAAAAAUA/mznh0oOWSo0/S269/tribes+photo.jpg

Where do you fall on that Chart Fenris? You do not look like any of them. I guess I must be from the tribe of Gad. Just can't figure out why the Seminoles are from Reuben and the rest of us Injuns are from Gad.

Fenris
Jan 18th 2011, 07:00 PM
Where do you fall on that Chart Fenris? You do not look like any of them.
Well, the folks who made that chart would say I'm not from the 12 tribes. :lol:

Some strange things on TV late at night, hey.

keck553
Jan 18th 2011, 07:05 PM
Hey, maybe you're like me......some missionary long ago tried to convince me I was descended from the tribe of Moroni from the planet of Golub, and therefore, a "chosen one."

My first question was how to become 'unchosen.'

notuptome
Jan 18th 2011, 07:09 PM
Sounds like something born from Herbert W Armstrong who taught British Israelism.

For the cause of Christ
Roger

Fenris
Jan 18th 2011, 07:09 PM
Hey, maybe you're like me......some missionary long ago tried to convince me I was descended from the tribe of Moroni from the planet of Golub, and therefore, a "chosen one."

There can be only one....

moonglow
Jan 18th 2011, 07:10 PM
The nation of Israel was born in a single day, but that has absolutely nothing to do with the tribes. The tribe of Judah is not black. Ask him to show you where in scripture he bases this.
He is the one making an assumption. It is his burden to provide facts to support this position. His proposition is kind of like me saying "little green men from mars live in Gerogia." You ask me to prove it. I say, you prove they do not.
The tribe of Judah is not as a whole black. There are members of the tribe of Judah who returned from Africa that are black, but the tribe as a whole is not.

Ok I see on the Israel thing...I thought he was talking about something God did in the OT that first made them a nation but I didn't see how that had a thing to do with being black or not..:hmm:

I know there are black Jews in Africa...which I thought was pretty neat actually. :)

God bless

Reynolds357
Jan 18th 2011, 07:47 PM
Ok I see on the Israel thing...I thought he was talking about something God did in the OT that first made them a nation but I didn't see how that had a thing to do with being black or not..:hmm:

I know there are black Jews in Africa...which I thought was pretty neat actually. :)

God bless

You are absolutely correct. Israel being born in a day has nothing to do with Judah supposedly being black.

Spike
Jan 18th 2011, 09:44 PM
Yeah, some interesting stuf out there...
I think the 'Jesus is BLACK!" thing comes from a possible description in the bible that mentioned Jesus having 'hair like wool' and dark skin. Conveniently, of course, this means he's positively black.

Forget about the notion that Africa is a continent with may countries, and a hot climate, so quite a few nations have dark skin, but aren't Negroes...

I'm trying to find the passage that came from; will get back to you. I could be wrong, though; my memory's kinda faulty since I thought that whole movement was the epitome of stupidity. I think the idea, originally, was to give black children an image that was more like themselves to look up to. A very GOOD idea, really, but sometimes these things can be carried much, much too far, as represented by the OP.

It's kinda MEH? to me as a black person, since I don't think it matters if I'm part of a particular 'tribe'....

Also, I'm not sure Jesus looked like the paintings we have of him now, either. BUt it's not something I really worry about.

TomH
Jan 18th 2011, 11:46 PM
John 3:16
For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have everlasting life.

Seems to me, the color of Jesus' skin is a moot point.

chad
Jan 18th 2011, 11:54 PM
I think I would give an answer like...Gods chosen people are those that believe in and Follow Jesus (Of course I am talking about NT times not OT).

Bandit
Jan 19th 2011, 01:26 AM
I used to see these characters on TV from time to time. Usually during the wee hours of the morning.

http://2.bp.blogspot.com/_uerCFAOUOzU/SnYwS8o6edI/AAAAAAAAAUA/mznh0oOWSo0/S269/tribes+photo.jpg

But what about the Eskimos? Don't they deserve equal billing?

lineman
Jan 19th 2011, 02:18 AM
Well he has all kinds of convuluted beliefs, like Christ isn't God so I know he is wrong.

This ^^^ is a very huge problem... The thought that blacks are Judah are the least of his problems...

Joe King
Jan 19th 2011, 03:33 AM
This ^^^ is a very huge problem... The thought that blacks are Judah are the least of his problems...

True but I want to use his own beliefs against him. He talks about the homeland being Israel and the gathering of the Jews from among all nations so I wanted to point out that they have been gathered and they are not blacks.

chad
Jan 19th 2011, 04:30 AM
You also have to remember, Gods chosen who did not accept Christ, were about to be cut off. See the verses that speak of the Pharisees and Saducees that did not accept christ as Saviour.

Joe King
Jan 19th 2011, 04:05 PM
He dismisses the whole New Testament. How do I combat that?

Fenris
Jan 19th 2011, 04:44 PM
But what about the Eskimos? Don't they deserve equal billing?

I guess their skin isn't "dark enough" for these guys?

Fenris
Jan 19th 2011, 04:46 PM
He dismisses the whole New Testament. How do I combat that?

What does that have to do with the skin color of the Jews?

Ta-An
Jan 19th 2011, 05:50 PM
Solomon son of David apparently had a child with the Queen Sheba (Ethiopia ) and they were Jews.... Fenris will say.... the Mother has to be a Jew for the offspring to be Jewish :D
There is also the Lemba in Southern Africa... with the specific Y chromosome of the Cohen. (Levi)
One can become a Jew through conversion also :idea:


Are ye not as the children of the Ethiopians unto Me,
O children of Israel, saith the Lord.
Have not I brought up Israel out of the land of Egypt,
And the Philistines from Caphtor,
And Aram (Syria) from Kir.

Amos 9: 7

Reynolds357
Jan 19th 2011, 06:38 PM
Solomon son of David apparently had a child with the Queen Sheba (Ethiopia ) and they were Jews.... Fenris will say.... the Mother has to be a Jew for the offspring to be Jewish :D
There is also the Lemba in Southern Africa... with the specific Y chromosome of the Cohen. (Levi)
One can become a Jew through conversion also :idea:


Are ye not as the children of the Ethiopians unto Me,
O children of Israel, saith the Lord.
Have not I brought up Israel out of the land of Egypt,
And the Philistines from Caphtor,
And Aram (Syria) from Kir.

Amos 9: 7


There are black members of the tribe of Judah. I do not think anyone has disputed that. However, the tribe of Judah is not black.
Take my people, the Cherokee Indians. We have intermarried with both blacks and whites. Because of this, there are Cherokee Indians who are black and Cherokee Indians who are white. Do we say that the Cherokee nation is black? Do we say that the Cherokee nation is White? Of course not. It would take an idiot to make that leap in logic. Likewise, saying Judah is black is taking that same faulty leap.

Fenris
Jan 19th 2011, 06:44 PM
The people in Africa claiming to be Jewish is a whole different subject. Opinions vary as to whether they are in fact actually Jewish. Probably the most pragmatic approach was from Rabbi Moshe Feinstein, a giant among Jewish rabbis. He concluded:

One should also know that even if in practical application of the law they are not Jews, nevertheless since they think they are Jews and sacrifice their lives for their Judaism, we are obligated to save them.

Ta-An
Jan 19th 2011, 06:48 PM
I hear you both :D

chad
Jan 19th 2011, 11:50 PM
Some people are foolish. It does not matter what you say to them, they will only believe what they want to believe.



He dismisses the whole New Testament. How do I combat that?

Spike
Jan 20th 2011, 12:29 AM
John 3:16
For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have everlasting life.

Seems to me, the color of Jesus' skin is a moot point.

It stems from a time when there weren't any positive black role models for black children. ON top of that, the european beauty standard is held by many as the ONLY standard, and black parents worry, quite a bit, about the effect of that on their children. We simply cannot fit that standard. Yes, it's ben carried way too far with this guy, but understand where it started.

gringo300
Nov 26th 2012, 10:00 AM
Well, there is the Beta Israel...

Noonzie
Nov 27th 2012, 02:19 PM
"And do not think you can say to yourselves, 'We have Abraham as our father.' I tell you that out of these stones God can raise up children for Abraham"

RabbiKnife
Nov 27th 2012, 02:35 PM
I used to see these characters on TV from time to time. Usually during the wee hours of the morning.

http://2.bp.blogspot.com/_uerCFAOUOzU/SnYwS8o6edI/AAAAAAAAAUA/mznh0oOWSo0/S269/tribes+photo.jpg

The question is, did you buy the Ginsu knife set at 3 a.m.???

Fenris
Nov 27th 2012, 02:42 PM
The question is, did you buy the Ginsu knife set at 3 a.m.???

It can cut through a tin can and still slice this steak!

Hannah
Nov 27th 2012, 02:45 PM
The people in Africa claiming to be Jewish is a whole different subject. Opinions vary as to whether they are in fact actually Jewish. Probably the most pragmatic approach was from Rabbi Moshe Feinstein, a giant among Jewish rabbis. He concluded:

One should also know that even if in practical application of the law they are not Jews, nevertheless since they think they are Jews and sacrifice their lives for their Judaism, we are obligated to save them.

Fenris, you know, don't you, that these people were Jewish enough to be accepted for aliyah and Israeli citizenship? Isn't that Jewish enough for you? I don't know the details, I heard they had Torahs in their posession when somebody "discovered" them, and prayed in a convoluted Hebrew . Remember that there was plenty of interaction between the Jews and Ethiopia in Biblical times! Many of them, when you see them in Israel, wear a kippa.

Compare that with the Russian "Jews" who arrived in the 1990s to Israel. Many of whom had next to no Jewish blood, and their non-Jewish spouses. They didn't know the first thing about Judaism, they were just people with some vague Jewish connection who wanted to leave the ex USSR area in the 90s, for greener grass. They are completely secular with almost no exceptions. Even looking at their names, it's mostly regular Russian names - I wonder who checked the authenticity of their claims to be Jewish, and how much Jewish blood was required. I met some such people in the 1990s and most of them couldn't have cared less about Israel, thought it was provincial and disappointing. They wanted to go to the USA or Canada. One guy had no idea what Yom Kippur was, for instance, and he'd just made aliyah... He got furious because some facilities were closed.

Another interesting point is that there are some Ethiopians who say they have in their possession the Ark of the Covenent. They refuse to show it to anyone, and say they will when the Messiah comes back. Apparently they almost gave it up at the time of Jesus' birth.

Fenris
Nov 27th 2012, 02:52 PM
Fenris, you know, don't you, that these people were Jewish enough to be accepted for aliyah and Israeli citizenship?I am aware. That is another complicated issue however.


Isn't that Jewish enough for you?
Regardless they are Jewish now since they had a Jewish conversion upon arrival in Israel.


Compare that with the Russian "Jews", many of whom had next to no Jewish bloodAnd you know this how, exactly?


and their non-Jewish spouses. Israeli law allows spouses of non-Jews to be granted citizenship.


Another interesting point is that there are some Ethiopians who say they have in their possession the Ark of the Covenent.
Who knows.


They refuse to show it to anyone, and say they will when the Messiah comes back. Apparently they almost gave it up at the time of Jesus' birth.Isn't that amazing.

Hannah
Nov 27th 2012, 03:04 PM
And you know this how, exactly?

I spent some time in Israel in the mid 90s and one of the things I did was attend something called an ulpan. Some Russians were staying there too and I started hanging out with them (I speak Russian). I remember one person who said that only his grandmother was Jewish and how he didn't know anything about Judaism, and that was completely obvious. He hadn't even learnt about it in school. It was completely 100% alien to him. The others chimed in and were very disrespectful (IMHO) towards Israel, which had actually paid for their immigration and much more. They didn't look Jewish either, for what it's worth. Probably they had a Jewish connection in their family, but they really couldn't have cared less and whinged about everything that was happening. They also were much more interested in learning English than Hebrew, and finding out how to make it to Canada, rather than actually settling in Israel.

Fenris
Nov 27th 2012, 03:12 PM
They didn't look Jewish either, for what it's worth. Oh and the Ethiopians "look Jewish"? (Whatever that means).


Probably they had a Jewish connection in their familyI have no doubt that some people skipped through the cracks, but the vast majority were supposedly vetted and found to be Jewish according to Jewish law.

Walley10
Nov 27th 2012, 05:14 PM
Oh I know I think what he believes. On the campus I go to there is a group which calls themselves "Hebrew Israelittes" or some others call them Black Hebrew Israelittes. They basically are at my college campus sometimes and make a lot of people angry. They have posters and open up a bible sort of shouting at people. They have some really strange beliefs. You're right, one of the things they believe I think it that they don't believe Jesus is God. And of course they believe they are the original tribe of Judah, or something like that.

Warrior4God
Nov 27th 2012, 05:54 PM
Black people being the chosen people of God is just as much of a lie as white people being the chosen people of God. :rolleyes:

Fenris
Nov 27th 2012, 06:31 PM
A piece I like by Rabbi Jacobovitz


Yes, I do believe that the chosen people concept as affirmed by Judaism in its holy writ, its prayers, and its millennial tradition. In fact, I believe that every people—and indeed, in a more limited way, every individual—is "chosen" or destined for some distinct purpose in advancing the designs of Providence. Only, some fulfill their mission and others do not. Maybe the Greeks were chosen for their unique contributions to art and philosophy, the Romans for their pioneering services in law and government, the British for bringing parliamentary rule into the world, and the Americans for piloting democracy in a pluralistic society. The Jews were chosen by God to be 'peculiar unto Me' as the pioneers of religion and morality; that was and is their national purpose.

gringo300
Nov 27th 2012, 06:36 PM
Oh and the Ethiopians "look Jewish"? (Whatever that means).



But do they look Ethiopian?

Wait, do all Ethiopians look the same?

RabbiKnife
Nov 27th 2012, 06:38 PM
But do they look Ethiopian?

Wait, do all Ethiopians look the same?

Only the cloned ones.

Hannah
Nov 27th 2012, 07:24 PM
People from Africa's horn have an easily recognisable look, particularly Somali, but Ethiopians and Eritreans too. They couldn't be mistaken with Africans from elsewhere. The Jews from there have the same look.

That said, there is something about Israel, everyone there tends to look better than average... Not joking! I think that goes for the these Ethiopian Jews too.

Here's a picture of what some Ethiopian Jews might look like.

In Israel:
http://www.toratropical.com/torah_14.jpg


But it seems like the Ethiopian Jews are not happy in Israel. When I looked for the picture I saw this article about how they are protesting against racism:

http://www.jpost.com/NationalNews/Article.aspx?id=282199


In addition, only 24 percent of respondents said they would allow their children to marry an Ethiopian Israeli and less than a quarter said they would be willing to live in the same neighborhood as Ethiopian immigrants.


Another thing I was not aware of, was that the operation to move the Ethiopian Jews to Israel was financed by American Jews. Hm, if they are so keen on Jews living in Israel, then what are they waiting for themselves?


Back on topic though: I suppose Adam and Eve might have been black?
They probably looked nothing like the pale English rose type couple you traditionally see in renaissance art, at least!

http://biologos.org/uploads/static-content/adam_eve_painting.jpg

Fenris
Nov 27th 2012, 07:33 PM
People from Africa's horn have an easily recognisable look, particularly Somalians, but Ethiopians and Eritreans too. They couldn't be mistaken with Africans from elsewhere. The Jews from there have the same look.
They look east African.


That said, there is something about Israel, everyone there tends to look better than average...
Yeah I noticed that too. :hmm:

Warrior4God
Nov 27th 2012, 08:52 PM
Back on topic though: I suppose Adam and Eve might have been black?
They probably looked nothing like the pale English rose type couple you traditionally see in renaissance art, at least!

http://biologos.org/uploads/static-content/adam_eve_painting.jpg

Oh, I definitely doubt that Adam and Eve were "white," too. However, I also refuse to believe they were black, like native Africans deep in the heart of Zimbabwe, either. I know it would be more politically correct to claim so, but I refuse to be politically correct. I'm sure Adam and Eve were similar looking to what you see with modern folks from the Middle East.

RabbiKnife
Nov 27th 2012, 08:58 PM
Oh, I definitely doubt that Adam and Eve were "white," too. However, I also refuse to believe they were black, like native Africans deep in the heart of Zimbabwe, either. I know it would be more politically correct to claim so, but I refuse to be politically correct. I'm sure Adam and Eve were similar looking to what you see with modern folks from the Middle East.

Eve was a definite upgrade from the rhino and hippo, that's for sure.

TomH
Nov 27th 2012, 09:03 PM
I think the chosen people look like Fenris.
He resembles that remark.

Although the "looking better" is kinda questionable.

I suppose while he's standing next to Mrs. Fenris, he'd have to look better.:rolleyes:

Fenris
Nov 27th 2012, 09:03 PM
But it seems like the Ethiopian Jews are not happy in Israel. I've met Israeli Jews from Ethiopia who described the experience as something akin to the Jews exodus from Egypt. They were very happy to be there.



Another thing I was not aware of, was that the operation to move the Ethiopian Jews to Israel was financed by American Jews. Hm, if they are so keen on Jews living in Israel, then what are they waiting for themselves?

I'm not sure what you are getting at here. Why can't American Jews give charity so that poor people can be brought out of Africa and into Israel?

Warrior4God
Nov 27th 2012, 09:35 PM
I think what's at the heart of some people, particularly white folks, saying, "Well, we know Adam and Eve couldn't have been white, so, they likely must have been black" is a sense of wanting to be politically correct and to atone for the wrongs that the white race have perpetrated on various non-white races. In other words..."white guilt." :2cents:

gringo300
Nov 27th 2012, 10:21 PM
"Well, we know Adam and Eve couldn't have been white, so, they likely must have been black"

I don't know about you, but I completely fail to see the logic in that, uhm, logic.

Warrior4God
Nov 27th 2012, 10:45 PM
I don't know about you, but I completely fail to see the logic in that, uhm, logic.

That's the problem. It's not "logic." It's political correctness. ;)

JudaicChristian
Nov 28th 2012, 03:57 AM
I don't believe this but this is the belief of a co-worker of mine and would like to refute this. He believes that they are the tribe of Judah.

Should I point to the nation of Israel being formed in one day?

Who is a Jew or the nation Israel: http://christianforum.boards.net/index.cgi?board=generalboard&action=display&thread=97

JudaicChristian
Nov 28th 2012, 04:04 AM
I think what's at the heart of some people, particularly white folks, saying, "Well, we know Adam and Eve couldn't have been white, so, they likely must have been black" is a sense of wanting to be politically correct and to atone for the wrongs that the white race have perpetrated on various non-white races. In other words..."white guilt." :2cents:
Noah was the first white man born. DSS and Book of Enoch. See also the table of nations in the bible.

-SEEKING-
Nov 28th 2012, 04:05 AM
Noah was the first white man born.

Hmm. So then, what was Adam?

gringo300
Nov 28th 2012, 05:44 AM
Hmm. So then, what was Adam?

Adam was an Australian Aborigine, of course. Everybody knows that.

Hannah
Nov 28th 2012, 11:37 AM
Adam was an Australian Aborigine, of course. Everybody knows that.
Well the question of races puts a bit of an interesting challenge on Adam and Eve.
If you take them literally, which I want to do, then surely they did not look like one distinct race today, rather like a mix, or somebody who could be the ancestor of everyone else. People like the Aborigines really challenge my belief in Adam and Eve.
How did they get to the Australian continent, for example, and how come their features and skin colour is so different. Does a people really change that dramatically in 6000, years, or migrate in small steps, that far a distance... Their culture when they first encountered white people did not even include boats, let alone anything that could have taken them to Australia.

JudaicChristian
Nov 28th 2012, 01:24 PM
Hmm. So then, what was Adam?

I'm not certain, but his name suggest that he had a redish color to his skin. That is my best guess based upon ancient text.

percho
Nov 28th 2012, 04:41 PM
What, "color," or lack thereof do you get if you mix all the colors together?

Hannah
Nov 28th 2012, 05:06 PM
What, "color," or lack thereof do you get if you mix all the colors together?
There is software for that sort of experimentation, LOL.
Basically you just throw in pictures of people of all races etc, etc and you get some kind of "median" face. People invariably find the end result a very attractive person, regardless of gender or age.

I remember reading in a magazine about a software that blended faces.
One interesting thing was that the more they wildly blended it together, the better looking people thought the "person" was when asked to judge their attractiveness. (The output was a new photo and you couldn't see that it was a composite picture).

The theory is that the reason people rate mixed race people as attractive is that they look more "healthy" than others for some reason. Adam and Eve in the garden where allegedly of perfect health so maybe this goes hand in hand with them having a little bit of all races in them. And naturally gorgeous, no makeup or workout required... ;-)



https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=I1x3DUep-eI

jesse
Nov 28th 2012, 05:53 PM
I don't believe this but this is the belief of a co-worker of mine and would like to refute this. He believes that they are the tribe of Judah.

Should I point to the nation of Israel being formed in one day?

I really don't see why their skin color makes a difference. Especially since the people I know who believe this stuff are not racist.

There is a guy at my work who reads a lot of David Icke Books and he goes into some detail about the Jews being black. I think it is a logical conclusion if you believe that life started in Africa (Africans generally being black) that the first people were black and possibly the Jews were too. That is of course if you believe that life started in Africa. Which I don't. I know that a lot of the belief about Jewish blackness is attributed in some way to the history of the Khazars which were the nobility of a country in ?Russia? that converted to Judaism and are believed (by some) to have lead many of the general populace to convert as well (thereby making many white Russians "jewish" and essentially a "white" race.) There is also the Ashkenazi Jew which accounts for about 80 percent of Jews in the world. There are some theories that say these guys are not real Jews and that they are "whitish." Yada yada yada. haha.


Here is a quote from Wikipedia:


The theory that the majority of Ashkenazi Jews are the descendants of the Khazar population was advocated by various racial theorists and both semitic and antisemitic sources in the 20th century, especially following the publication of Arthur Koestler's The Thirteenth Tribe.

This belief is still popular among groups such as the Christian Identity Movement, Black Hebrews, British Israelitists and others (particularly Arabs) who claim that they, rather than Jews, are the true descendants of the Israelites, or who seek to downplay the connection between Ashkenazi Jews and Israel in favor of their own.

My personal response is that Judaism is a religion you can convert to. (As far as I know) And although you could call people who descended from the tribe of Judah "Jews," in the Bible it tends to be a reference to the religion. Paul being both a Jew and a Benjamite. So why are these guys who are not religious so racist? I don't know.

Was God not mad at David when he slept with Uriah the Hittite's wife and had him killed?

Why didn't David quote Deuteronomy 20:17 "Completely destroy them, the Hittites.... as the LORD your God has commanded you." Instead God says speaking through the prophet Nathan "but the poor man had nothing except one little ewe lamb" and "You struck down Uriah the Hittite with the sword and took his wife to be your own. You killed him with the sword of the Ammonites."

My point being that God is not and never was a racist. But unlike those who are politically correct, God does discriminate based on faith.

ewq1938
Dec 2nd 2012, 02:22 PM
The theory is that the reason people rate mixed race people as attractive is that they look more "healthy" than others for some reason. Adam and Eve in the garden where allegedly of perfect health so maybe this goes hand in hand with them having a little bit of all races in them. And naturally gorgeous, no makeup or workout required... ;-)

That's about as racist as something can get lol

Attractiveness and healthiness has NOTHING to do with what race you are or what mix of races you are. It's as much nonsense as those who claim racial purity is more attractive and more healthy. It's all garbage, whether it's the "pure" race version or the perfect "blend" of races version. It boils down to racism though I know it wasn't intended.

adampjr
Dec 2nd 2012, 06:17 PM
That's about as racist as something can get lol

Attractiveness and healthiness has NOTHING to do with what race you are or what mix of races you are. It's as much nonsense as those who claim racial purity is more attractive and more healthy. It's all garbage, whether it's the "pure" race version or the perfect "blend" of races version. It boils down to racism though I know it wasn't intended.


If you take everyone's attractions and averaged them out, would you get an equal distribution among races?

Attractiveness has to do with appearence. health has to do with physiology. Race has to do with both of those.

ewq1938
Dec 2nd 2012, 06:30 PM
If you take everyone's attractions and averaged them out, would you get an equal distribution among races?

Attractiveness has to do with appearence. health has to do with physiology. Race has to do with both of those.

No! That's racist to think race has ANYTHING to do with attractiveness or physiology. ALL RACES HAVE BEAUTY AND ALL RACES CAN APPEAR HEALTHY LOOKING. I can't believe people think this way in 2012. We have apparently not progressed ethically at all. So much for being "color blind".

adampjr
Dec 2nd 2012, 06:38 PM
Is "that's racist" supposed to be a serious refutation or a joke?

Do you wish to make the claim that all races have the exact same distribution of susceptability to disease?

Do you deny physical attraction? If not, then you agree that people are attracted to each other based on appearance. Race is part of appearance. Color goes along with shape of nose, shape of face, facial proportions, etc (all of which are ALSO racial characteristics) - how would race not factor into attraction?

Vhayes
Dec 2nd 2012, 06:42 PM
I don't know if there is any human research or data collected on a "mixed" race thing but in the canine world there certainly is. Mutts are notoriously healthier than pedigreed animals.

adampjr
Dec 2nd 2012, 06:46 PM
I don't know if there is any human research or data collected on a "mixed" race thing but in the canine world there certainly is. Mutts are notoriously healthier than pedigreed animals.

There is a strength in having a greater mix. A "pure race" would be terribly susceptible.

ewq1938
Dec 2nd 2012, 06:57 PM
Is "that's racist" supposed to be a serious refutation or a joke?

Often people are unaware of the racist things they believe in and or say.




Do you wish to make the claim that all races have the exact same distribution of susceptability to disease?

Red herring?




Do you deny physical attraction?


Another red herring. I deny that ones race makes them more or less attractive.



If not, then you agree that people are attracted to each other based on appearance. Race is part of appearance. Color goes along with shape of nose, shape of face, facial proportions, etc (all of which are ALSO racial characteristics) - how would race not factor into attraction?

Because it doesn't unless you have a racial bias.

ewq1938
Dec 2nd 2012, 07:07 PM
Mutts are notoriously healthier than pedigreed animals.

Not as notorious as that claim.


http://blog.sfgate.com/pets/2010/08/24/are-mutts-healthier-than-purebreds/





You’ve heard other people say it, and maybe you’ve even uttered these words yourself: “Mutts are healthier than purebreds.” But is it really true?
Are mutts superior to purebreds when it comes to health?

ohmidog.com

Are mutts superior to purebreds when it comes to health?

As with most things, the answer isn’t so black and white. Cancer might be super common for some pure breed dogs (for example, 60% of golden retrievers die of it, which is more than twice the average rate for all breeds), while some mutts may enjoy a high quality of life well into their teens. Some studies that have compared purebreds to mixed breeds have found about a 10% increase in lifespan for comparably sized mixed-breed dogs. But what exactly makes mongrels more robust?

“Hybrid Vigor,” or “heterosity,” is a term that’s often used to explain the assumed “superior health” of mixed-breed dogs which is achieved by crossbreeding or outbreeding. If the offspring display characteristics superior to both parents, you’ve got a successful case of heterosity on your hands.

According to one hypothesis, heterosis occurs because of heterozygosity in crossbred offspring, which prevents pairs of damaging recessive alleles from matching up to cause defects and other health problems.

But there is, of course, one small catch. Outbreeding doesn’t automatically lead to heterosity. In fact, in some cases, the opposite, or “outbreeding depression,” can happen. For example, if a Basset Hound and a Mastiff were crossbred and the Basset passed on its long back while the Mastiff passed on its long legs and barrel chest, the resulting puppies would likely suffer from serious back problems. Generally speaking, close inbreeding is more detrimental than outbreeding or crossbreeding, but both types of breeding can have less than desirable results in terms of health and longevity.

adampjr
Dec 2nd 2012, 07:10 PM
Often people are unaware of the racist things they believe in and or say.




Red herring?






Another red herring. I deny that ones race makes them more or less attractive.



Because it doesn't unless you have a racial bias.

Not red herrings. You said race has nothing to do with healthiness. You aslo said it has nothing to do with physiology. Did you mean something other than "healthiness has nothing to do with what race you are" when you said "healthiness has nothing to do with waht race you are"?
the question about physical attraction was not a red herring. You are seriously (as far as I can tell) saying that race has nothing to do with attractiveness. Do you believe that jaw size, weight, facial proportions, etc influence attractiveness?

Vhayes
Dec 2nd 2012, 07:31 PM
Not as notorious as that claim.


http://blog.sfgate.com/pets/2010/08/24/are-mutts-healthier-than-purebreds/

This is from the article you posted:


According to one hypothesis, heterosis occurs because of heterozygosity in crossbred offspring, which prevents pairs of damaging recessive alleles from matching up to cause defects and other health problems.

But there is, of course, one small catch. Outbreeding doesn’t automatically lead to heterosity. In fact, in some cases, the opposite, or “outbreeding depression,” can happen. For example, if a Basset Hound and a Mastiff were crossbred and the Basset passed on its long back while the Mastiff passed on its long legs and barrel chest, the resulting puppies would likely suffer from serious back problems. Generally speaking, close inbreeding is more detrimental than outbreeding or crossbreeding, but both types of breeding can have less than desirable results in terms of health and longevity.

If two parents carry a genetic defect, the odds in their children inheriting that defect are pretty high. If only one carries it, the odds go way down.

ewq1938
Dec 2nd 2012, 07:36 PM
Not red herrings. You said race has nothing to do with healthiness.

Not quite. The healthiness from the other poster was being related to attractiveness. We aren't talking strictly health issues related to one's race like we have been talking about with animals.

Hannah said, "The theory is that the reason people rate mixed race people as attractive is that they look more "healthy" than others for some reason."

I disagree wholeheartedly with this notion.




Did you mean something other than "healthiness has nothing to do with what race you are" when you said "healthiness has nothing to do with waht race you are"?

No I mean that. It's true by and large. Every race of people and mix race of people have healthy attractive people. It's racist to believe a certain "group" is more healthy and more healthy looking and therefore more attractive than other races or races with no or little mixing.



You are seriously (as far as I can tell) saying that race has nothing to do with attractiveness.

That's correct. Race is not an issue unless there is a racial bias.




Do you believe that jaw size, weight, facial proportions, etc influence attractiveness?

I don't care about that. What I am opposing is the idea that a certain race or mix of race is more attractive or more healthy looking (don't need makeup or to work out because they are somehow born perfect above all others) than others.

ewq1938
Dec 2nd 2012, 07:37 PM
This is from the article you posted:



If two parents carry a genetic defect, the odds in their children inheriting that defect are pretty high. If only one carries it, the odds go way down.

The point of the article (all of it not one small part) is that there are benefits and negatives to mutts and pure-breeds.

Vhayes
Dec 2nd 2012, 07:43 PM
The point of the article (all of it not one small part) is that there are benefits and negatives to mutts and pure-breeds.

And the point I am trying to make is when you have two parents who have the same defective gene, the child will inherit it. If you have two parents and only one of them have the defective gene, the odds go way down that the child will have the defective gene. Do the odds go to zero? No - but they are certainly more optimum when only one parent has that genetic flaw.

adampjr
Dec 2nd 2012, 07:49 PM
The point of the article (all of it not one small part) is that there are benefits and negatives to mutts and pure-breeds.

Yes there can be negatives and benefits either way, but it conceded that one way is generally better especially when done thoughtfully. There being "pros and cons" to both does nto mean that they are equal. One way is generally better. Mixed races have less susceptibility to disease, generally, than purebreds - in all animals, humans not excepted.

ewq1938
Dec 2nd 2012, 07:50 PM
And the point I am trying to make is when you have two parents who have the same defective gene, the child will inherit it. If you have two parents and only one of them have the defective gene, the odds go way down that the child will have the defective gene. Do the odds go to zero? No - but they are certainly more optimum when only one parent has that genetic flaw.

Yeah well make a point about the other side of it then so you have presented a fair and balanced presentation of the issue as I have done.

What is a side effect of being a "mutt" in the dog world?

ewq1938
Dec 2nd 2012, 07:51 PM
Yes there can be negatives and benefits either way, but it conceded that one way is generally better especially when done thoughtfully. There being "pros and cons" to both does nto mean that they are equal. One way is generally better. Mixed races have less susceptibility to disease, generally, than purebreds - in all animals, humans not excepted.

Not it is not conceded and no that is not generally accurate. There is no one-way is the only right way.

adampjr
Dec 2nd 2012, 07:59 PM
Well, the article you cited said one way was generally better.
This has nothing to do with one way being the only "right way" but you are denying that physiology and healthiness have nothing to do with race. But stock has everything to do with health. Some races are generally healthier and withstand diseases better than other races do. You are saying they don't, but when I directly asked you about it, you said it was a red herring.
Maybe, instead of casting off a direct question about health and race when you denied healthiness having anything to do with race, you should define what precisely did you mean when you said healthiness has nothign to do with race?

ewq1938
Dec 2nd 2012, 08:04 PM
Well, the article you cited said one way was generally better.
This has nothing to do with one way being the only "right way" but you are denying that physiology and healthiness have nothing to do with race. But stock has everything to do with health. Some races are generally healthier and withstand diseases better than other races do. You are saying they don't, but when I directly asked you about it, you said it was a red herring.
Maybe, instead of casting off a direct question about health and race when you denied healthiness having anything to do with race, you should define what precisely did you mean when you said healthiness has nothign to do with race?

It doesn't have anything to do with race. There is no white or black or yellow disease for the whole race.

We should steer this back to the original post I disagreed with about mixed raced people being more attractive and healthier looking than other races. There are attractive and healthy looking people in every race of people and in every mix of peoples and races.

Hannah
Dec 2nd 2012, 08:13 PM
On this racial thing; nobody's made any racist comments, so let's not derail the discussion with a modern day witch hunt of racists!
If anyone reading this feels personally insulted, by all means speak up though!

I think it's just an extension of a desirability of avoiding inbreading.

Americans are quite mixed up in terms of genes; perhaps not between the major races, but between different groups within the races. Just look at how gorgeous lots of black American women are. Yet, an African person would not be able to place them as any particular African nationality because their ancestors were from all along Africa's west coast and probably have a bit of white blood too in some cases..

Same with some white Americans. They are white, but you can't see any regional characteristics with most, because they are not pure *anything*. With white Europeans you can usually make quite a good guess based on facial features. I think this makes the Americans look better. Many have a bit of Indian blood it seems from what I read in interviews with people that mention their ethnic background. The exact same thing is true with Russians because they have such a large territory with several races; people move around a lot and there is no stigma with marrying other races.

Then travel to some isolated village in Europe and take a look. I've experienced this.... You won't find any Miss World contestants, because in many cases they've been marrying their first and second cousins for centuries with only a tiny bit of fresh blood arriving from outside. Sometimes you notice it when you talk to such people too; they are slow and sometimes they have minor handicaps. Some regions in Northern Scandinavia have very high instances of extremely unusual genetic conditions.

Whereas in cities obviously, that is not a problem in the same way.

This quite far from the topic though!

There was a 1970s cult figure in Africa called Hailie Selassie who was the emperor of Ethiopia. Some thought he was Jesus returned, or something like that.
Perhaps that's who you are thinking of?

https://worldofblackheroes.files.wordpress.com/2011/02/haile_selassie.jpg

Per Wikipedia:

Haile Selassie I (Ge'ez (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ge%27ez_language): ኃይለ፡ ሥላሴ, "Power of the Trinity"[1] (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hailie_Selassie#cite_note-1)) (23 July 1892 – 27 August 1975), born Tafari Makonnen,[2] (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hailie_Selassie#cite_note-2) was Ethiopia (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ethiopia)'s regent (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Regent) from 1916 to 1930 and Emperor of Ethiopia (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Emperor_of_Ethiopia) from 1930 to 1974. He was the heir to a dynasty that traced its origins to the 13th century, and from there by tradition back to King Solomon (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/King_Solomon) and Queen Makeda, Empress of Axum, known in the Abrahamic tradition as the Queen of Sheba (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Queen_of_Sheba). Haile Selassie is a defining figure in both Ethiopian (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_Ethiopia) and African (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_Africa) history.[3] (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hailie_Selassie#cite_note-3)[4] (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hailie_Selassie#cite_note-babylon148-4)

At the League of Nations (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/League_of_Nations) in 1936, the emperor condemned the use of chemical weapons (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chemical_weapons) by Italy against his people.[5] (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hailie_Selassie#cite_note-safire-5) His internationalist views led to Ethiopia becoming a charter member of the United Nations, and his political thought and experience in promoting multilateralism and collective security (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Collective_security) have proved seminal and enduring.[6] (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hailie_Selassie#cite_note-6) His suppression of rebellions among the nobles (mekwannint), as well as what some perceived to be Ethiopia's failure to modernize adequately,[7] (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hailie_Selassie#cite_note-7) earned him criticism among some contemporaries and historians.[8] (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hailie_Selassie#cite_note-hrw-8)
Among the Rastafari movement (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rastafari_movement), whose followers are estimated at between 200,000 and 800,000, Haile Selassie is revered as the returned messiah (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Messiah) of the Bible, God incarnate (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Incarnation).[9] (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hailie_Selassie#cite_note-9)[10] (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hailie_Selassie#cite_note-10) Beginning in Jamaica (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jamaica) in the 1930s, the Rastafari movement perceives Haile Selassie as a messianic figure who will lead a future golden age of eternal peace, righteousness, and prosperity.[11] (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hailie_Selassie#cite_note-11) Haile Selassie was an Ethiopian Orthodox (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ethiopian_Orthodox_Tewahedo_Church) Christian throughout his life.

adampjr
Dec 2nd 2012, 08:22 PM
It doesn't have anything to do with race. There is no white or black or yellow disease for the whole race.

We should steer this back to the original post I disagreed with about mixed raced people being more attractive and healthier looking than other races. There are attractive and healthy looking people in every race of people and in every mix of peoples and races.

well you need to be somewhat more precise than that, because when I asked a direct question about disease and race you called it a red herring. Neither myself, Hannah, nor V made the claim taht there is a white or black or yellow disease nor did we say that there are no attractive black people or anything like taht. Hannah said something about mixed races being healthier, whcih you are dsiputing. But you are not only saying that the question of whether racial mixing, over time, tends to lead to healthier individuals or not is not yet settled, you are sayign that to even suggest on answer to that question is racist and are categorically asserting that it has nothing to do with health.

ewq1938
Dec 2nd 2012, 08:30 PM
On this racial thing; nobody's made any racist comments, so let's not derail the discussion with a modern day witch hunt of racists!

uh huh...That must mean there is zero chance of any racist or racial stereotyping in this post right?



If anyone reading this feels personally insulted, by all means speak up though!

Not that it would do much good if someone did------*raises hand*




Americans are quite mixed up in terms of genes; perhaps not between the major races, but between different groups within the races. Just look at how gorgeous lots of black American women are. Yet, an African person would not be able to place them as any particular African nationality because their ancestors were from all along Africa's west coast and probably have a bit of white blood too in some cases..

So do you feel these people are more attractive than other Africans that never mixed outside their race?




With white Europeans you can usually make quite a good guess based on facial features. I think this makes the Americans look better.

Guess what? That's racial stereotyping! You know who else liked to use facial features to distinguish some people from other people? They even measured the size of everyone's skulls.





Many have a bit of Indian blood it seems from what I read in interviews with people that mention their ethnic background. The exact same thing is true with Russians because they have such a large territory with several races; people move around a lot and there is no stigma with marrying other races.

So what do you think of those who have not intermixed with others like some African tribes or various other peoples around the world?




Then travel to some isolated village in Europe and take a look. I've experienced this.... You won't find any Miss World contestants

At the worst this is racism. In the least it's pure ignorance.




, because in many cases they've been marrying their first and second cousins for centuries with only a tiny bit of fresh blood arriving from outside.

Stated as if this is absolute fact...how wonderful!



Sometimes you notice it when you talk to such people too; they are slow and sometimes they have minor handicaps.

Great, so they are ugly AND stupid?





Some regions in Northern Scandinavia have very high instances of extremely unusual genetic conditions.

Whereas in cities obviously, that is not a problem in the same way.

This quite far from the topic though!

I was afraid how much further you were going to go with this nonsense! I am happy you have stopped where you have.

Hannah, you have some very odd beliefs about people in the world.

adampjr
Dec 2nd 2012, 08:49 PM
Facial features are part of race. Hannah is saying that genetic stock contributes to physical markers which are externally discernable by eyesight. It is not "racist" to suggest this fact, it is an objective and dispassionate fact. It's also not at all a personal insult to suggest that physical qualities follow race other than just color. This is true. this all she is saying. And its somethng that has nothing to do with anyone personally.
Also, attractiveness is a subjective quality. Saying some people are more attractive than others is to say that more people find such a personal more appealing than some other type of person. That is what she is saying, she is talkng about how people are more attracted to certain traits than others. If it so happens that more people find traits that tend to appear in mullatoes more than white people or black people, that means that generally mulattoes are more attractive to more people than unmixed peoples. Whether that attraction (if its true overall - but it would be somewhat odd if attraction was evenly distributed among the races - I don't think it is) exists, the question of whetehr there is soem correlation between that an health is an open question.
But she is making propistions, not value judgements. A proposition either true or false, regardless of whehter or not the implications have something to do with race. There might not be enough information availabe to rate the proposition as true or false, but it can't be dismissed simply because there racial implications. The question is whether or not certain traits that correlate with race or certain racial mixtures are more attractive to more people or not. I don;t know the answer to it, but it can't be settled as being false simply because we might not like it if it were true. that is an argument from final consequence, adn does not address the veracity of a claim.

Warrior4God
Dec 2nd 2012, 08:51 PM
I will reiterate....black people are no more special than any other race, and they are not the "chosen people of God." If anybody is offended at that statement, first, get over yourself, second, prove me wrong if you believe I am.

Hannah
Dec 2nd 2012, 08:55 PM
@ewq1938 (http://bibleforums.org/member.php/51997-ewq1938)
http://bibleforums.org/images/statusicon/user-offline.png
I am stating my opinion, not saying that everyone has to agree with me, or claiming to be right. Obviously what is beautiful is subjective.

So what if I think the average American black person is great looking, perhaps more so than some Africans? Did I say that the Africans were ugly? Certainly not, and that is not my opinion. Neither did I say that the American was in any way a better person than the African.

But sure we can play the PC game and pretend that we don't notice what people look like, what gender or race they are etc, etc! But I don't enjoy such phony discussions, plus I'd opt out anyway as several people here already dislike me and the last thing I need as some trumped up charge of racism. But just to clarify:

I am myself Swedish, (Sweden is a country in Scandinavia, in Northern Europe). Part of my family is from the North. That's why I gave this example.

The brunt of what I was saying was against my very own race and nationality. Surely a realistic perspective on ones own background passes the PC scrutiny?

It's well known in Sweden that there are some areas where the genes are not 100% where they should be. This has been in media and the subject of lots of research papers. It's even worse in another Nordic country which I will not name to avoid further offense. The people concerned know that they are in a risk group and the problem is resolving itself as people move more now than they did in the past, and don't marry the boy from the farm or cottage next door anymore.

adampjr
Dec 2nd 2012, 08:59 PM
right, but you made a stronger claim earlier, which was about overall attractiveness. As far as beauty goes though, Arab women take the cake IMO.

ewq1938
Dec 2nd 2012, 09:00 PM
I see you didn't mention the other part of your post where you talk about inbred ugly morons...why don't you elaborate on that part for us please? Allow me to remind you:


Then travel to some isolated village in Europe and take a look. I've experienced this.... You won't find any Miss World contestants, because in many cases they've been marrying their first and second cousins for centuries with only a tiny bit of fresh blood arriving from outside.
Sometimes you notice it when you talk to such people too; they are slow and sometimes they have minor handicaps.




I am stating my opinion, not saying that everyone has to agree with me, or claiming to be right. Obviously what is beautiful is subjective.

So what if I want to say that I think the average American black person is great looking? Did I say that the Africans were ugly? Certainly not and that is not my opinion. Neither did I say that the American was in any way a better person than the African.

But sure we can play the PC game and pretend that we don't notice what people look like, what gender or race they are etc, etc!
But I don't enjoy such phony discussions, plus I'd opt out anyway as several people here already dislike me . But just to clarify:

In case you did not know, I am myself Swedish, which is in Scandinavia.
Part of my family is from the North.That's why I gave this example.

The brunt of what I was saying was against my very own race and nationality. Surely a realistic perspective on ones own background passes the PC fanaticism?

It's well known in Sweden that there are some areas where the genes are not 100% where they should be. This has been in media and the subject of lots of research papers. It's even worse in another Nordic country which I will not name in to avoid further offense. apparently. The people concerned know that they are in a risk group and the problem is resolving itself as people move more now than they did in the past.

Hannah
Dec 2nd 2012, 09:22 PM
I see you didn't mention the other part of your post where you talk about inbred ugly morons...why don't you elaborate on that part for us please? Allow me to remind you:

There are villages that have this problem. It is a fact. It is not their fault and it's an unfortunate problem from the past. People make vicious jokes about it, I am not one of them. However I will not, to give into your PC agenda, deny that the problem exist, or claim that malformed features are beautiful, when in fact, there is a health risk involved. Authorities are now trying to help such communities and I wholeheartedly support that.

The problem is ironically also present in European royal families because they could not marry outside royal circles. It's simply a fact that any relatively small group must get some fresh genes in, or things start going wrong. There are plenty of jokes about this, particularly in countries (which I will not name) where the monarchs are known to be dyslexic, could not follow the regular curriculum in school etc. They are also plagued by certain "royal diseases". I am against joking about such matters, regardless who the target is.

Now, please clarify in no uncertain terms what it is that you are accusing me of, and what it is that I have said that is factually incorrect, or alternatively drop your little flame war and allow the discussion to progress!

adampjr
Dec 3rd 2012, 12:59 AM
I see you didn't mention the other part of your post where you talk about inbred ugly morons...why don't you elaborate on that part for us please? Allow me to remind you:

Which are you disputing? That in some Scandanavian villages people marry their cousins or her claim that such breeding leads to generally disliked physical traits?

ewq1938
Dec 3rd 2012, 04:59 AM
Which are you disputing? That in some Scandanavian villages people marry their cousins or her claim that such breeding leads to generally disliked physical traits?

I didn't care for the casual tone as if it's completely acceptable to talk like that here. But I said what I felt needed to be said and hopefully people will be more mindful when they speak.

Warrior4God
Dec 3rd 2012, 01:10 PM
I'd like to figure out how many white folks buy into the "blacks are a special and chosen race" due to their feelings of white guilt and wanting to attain political correctness appeasement. :hmm:

adampjr
Dec 3rd 2012, 01:34 PM
I'd like to figure out how many white folks buy into the "blacks are a special and chosen race" due to their feelings of white guilt and wanting to attain political correctness appeasement. :hmm:

Probably 0.....

Warrior4God
Dec 3rd 2012, 03:01 PM
Probably 0.....

Oh, I don't know about that. We live in a pretty PC climate now. ;)

tea
Dec 4th 2012, 06:57 PM
Well, the folks who made that chart would say I'm not from the 12 tribes.

Do you think you are from one of the 12 tribes?

Warrior4God
Dec 4th 2012, 09:02 PM
My take? Blacks that advocate that their race is a "chosen people of God" are guilty of racial arrogance. Oops! I'm sure I just "offended" somebody. ;)

ewq1938
Dec 4th 2012, 09:11 PM
My take? Blacks that advocate that their race is a "chosen people of God" are guilty of racial arrogance. Oops! I'm sure I just "offended" somebody. ;)

Does that apply only to one race or any?

adampjr
Dec 4th 2012, 09:55 PM
I assume he means all race, but that type of movement doesn't exist equally in all racial subcultures.

Warrior4God
Dec 4th 2012, 10:08 PM
Does that apply only to one race or any?

I would apply that to any race, including the white race, which I'm part of, but, seeing as how this thread is discussing the black race, that's why I made the comment.

jesusislord
Dec 5th 2012, 08:49 AM
lol.
really crazy that people are allowed to even post these kinds of questions; talk about trying to divide.
Believers wake up (if there are any here) on this one.

If all creation is made by GOD, and we are in the image of HIM!!! lol, color doesn't matter.

Never forget all is made by GOD, Jesus, the devil, angels, humans, nature, and the universe.
So, relax this question.

CHOSEN are those that believe with FAITH IN THEIR HEARTS ( and thats a great place to put the CHOSEN, because the heart is the only place GOD knows. No humans knows another humans' full heart. GOD was very beautiful to do that. )

Now the CHOSEN can do their best to try to be obedient ( but perfection is not possible).
But the CHOSEN will be assisted by GOD in their faith walk.

BUT, still, it's the heart that matters.

AGAPE
MARK 12:29-31:hug:

Warrior4God
Dec 5th 2012, 01:01 PM
lol.
really crazy that people are allowed to even post these kinds of questions; talk about trying to divide.

I don't see it as "trying to divide." Just trying to figure out answers to questions is how I see it. Who is is trying to divide who in your opinion?

Hannah
Dec 5th 2012, 01:51 PM
Probably 0.....

Exactly. Hardly anyone here, right? And probably only a tiny fraction of black Christians as a group. But so what if someone did - it would be along the lines Jehovas Witnesses etc or just some groups that comes up with the idea that certain people within their own ranks are "chosen".

A topic for the areopagus, I'd say! The bible is quite clear on who was the chosen people. The only question up for debate is whether they still are, or not!

I am assuming some of the people who decided to comment here are black. But nobody so far has said that they support this idea, because it's clear to sensible people that this idea has practically no merit. It's just a skin colour, it means nothing, particularly not to God! It's us humans that sometimes get hung up on it!

Warrior4God
Dec 5th 2012, 06:43 PM
I am assuming some of the people who decided to comment here are black. But nobody so far has said that they support this idea, because it's clear to sensible people that this idea has practically no merit. It's just a skin colour, it means nothing, particularly not to God! It's us humans that sometimes get hung up on it!

It's nice that we don't have any black folks here espousing this ridiculous racial arrogance. However, that doesn't mean it isn't espoused outside this forum, though. ;)

jesusislord
Dec 6th 2012, 08:10 AM
I don't see it as "trying to divide." Just trying to figure out answers to questions is how I see it. Who is is trying to divide who in your opinion?

Just the fact you use the word " black" people is a division, who are actually " black" or " white" PEOPLE. Let's look for the purple, yellow, and green ones as well. lol.
So, there is a division just in the calling.


Grace and peace,
MARK 12:29-31

Warrior4God
Dec 6th 2012, 01:21 PM
Just the fact you use the word " black" people is a division, who are actually " black" or " white" PEOPLE. Let's look for the purple, yellow, and green ones as well. lol.
So, there is a division just in the calling.


Grace and peace,
MARK 12:29-31

Interesting way of seeing things. Don't know that I see it the same way as you, though.

adampjr
Dec 6th 2012, 03:36 PM
Interesting way of seeing things. Don't know that I see it the same way as you, though.

Yea, I'm with W4G. Additional descriptors have their place.

jesusislord
Dec 7th 2012, 06:18 AM
Yea, I'm with W4G. Additional descriptors have their place.

We all are a part of the ONE BODY.
So, some are the same part of the BODY ( so they will understand each other easier), and some are another part and it will take time to understand it's function in the ONE BODY!!

Either way, we all will bow and confess that HE is LORD!!
Doesn't make a difference.

Prophets, 12 disciples, saints, ministers, pastors, devil, etc.........they all play their role.

TO ALL,
Those spiritually wise, humble, and loving of all will definitely have to learn to just love/enjoy this process that GOD has already told you about, preach what HE tells you to preach, and know there will be eventual change.

Maybe you wont see it, but only GOD gets the glory, and HE will take care of you

Spiritual wise and all loving people, do what the LORD says, enjoy, be thankful to know what you know, and praise HIS holy name till the time comes.

AGAPE
MARK 12:29-31