| Anti-black Racism in Religion!
Posted: 1/23/2006 7:32:32 PM | Slavery has been around since Biblical times, it wasn't the white man that invented it.
And I won't back down from the fact that there were some very brave white people that went against common thought patterns of the time, and defended the black man/womens right to be treated as a human being.
And to say something like You people, really does lump ereryone together, Personally when slavery was going on in American my "people" were in Scotland. And trust me they didn't own any slaves. Besides we have always been Northerners...again no slaves. | |
|
| Anti-black Racism in Religion!
Posted: 1/23/2006 7:46:58 PM | There`s only once that I`ve felt predudiced against. Being white , I was on a northern island , I`m not going to say which one , in B.C.
The natives there referred all there answers to my boyfriend, who looked native , even tho it was me who asked the questions. They would not have eye contact with me and even tho I was staying at the chief`s house I was completely ignored.
That lasted for a week , while I was there and it was the worst feeling to be put down for no reason than that`s what they wanted to do. Strange experience. | |
|
| Anti-black Racism in Religion!
Posted: 1/23/2006 9:53:17 PM | I know "malice" is the word you used. But which post was it that you thought was malicious?
The original post was about exactly what Chocolate was referring to. Are you saying you felt there was something malicious about the original post? I am trying to get you tell me which post you feel was malicious.
I'm trying to make sure that something I have said is not being interpreted as malicious. | |
|
| Anti-black Racism in Religion!
Posted: 1/23/2006 10:18:11 PM | NOTHING can be done about the past, but to contiune to have an in your face stance, only will prove to those that are racist, that maybe they are right*************
**************************************************************************That is not possible... | |
|
| Anti-black Racism in Religion!
Posted: 1/23/2006 10:22:18 PM | Jesus was a man like any other man, he had skin that covered the bones and muscles...also helped to keep the blood from falling on the ground.
He had hair that covered his head, as far as I know he had fingers and toes and arms and everything else most humans have.
Since they didnt' have cameras back then, we have no way of knowing what he looked like, but since he spent a lot of time out in the sun walking around...he was probably dark. | |
|
| Anti-black Racism in Religion!
Posted: 1/23/2006 10:31:14 PM | Jesus could have looked like Hitler (and vice versa), and it wouldn't have altered the reality we know today.
SFL, your first statement there reminds me of a joke: a skeleton walks up to a bar and says, "Bartender, I'd like a beer... and a mop." | |
|
| Anti-black Racism in Religion!
Posted: 1/23/2006 10:36:56 PM | | I think..Jesus was white. Why? Welll.. Im white...my moms white...my brothers white...my dad was white...my relatives are white.. it's what I identify with. Now....my cousin is white and has 3 black children (1/2 black & 1/2 white) They think Jesus is black. Why? Simple...it's because they are black they said. They identify with being black..so they assume Jesus is black..Santa is black, etc. Well...except the youngest..he thinks Jesus is a "Chocolate Vanilla Swirl" becuase he's 1/2 black & 1/2 white LOL So cute! So yeah..I think people feel Jesus looked however they can Identify with him. Leave it to a kid to simplify things eh? | |
|
| Anti-black Racism in Religion!
Posted: 1/23/2006 10:49:41 PM | | Jesus' own disciples didn't recognize Him after the resurrection. His appearance appears to be changeable. | |
|
| |
| Anti-black Racism in Religion!
Posted: 1/24/2006 3:19:00 AM | 1st off the initial post on this topic and the fact that it has gotten so many responses in so little time seems to give loads of credence to the OP's assertion of "defensiveness". The OP was attacked by many PERSONALLY! In fact few Christian proclaiming posters ever even addressed the FACT that the OP was attacked PERSONALLY (as Brian and Dave have pointed out). Most never even answered the question.
But I do not take kindly to people who don't even knowing me accusing me of such a thing. Interesting .....I read all previous post and not 1 mention or reference to the poster was made! How could that poster find a personal accusation in the OP's post? The OP said "most" not ALL.
Some have claimed not to be concerned about race ONLY to subsequently SHOW that they in fact have bias.
All races were created on the 6th day, Adam was created after God rested on the 7th day. Some say adamic means ruddy complected(sp?)....sounds like it could be a Indian...I believe Jesus was light skinned because of this.... I really doubt anyone could talk me out of what the bible says.
This is a funny post. Its based upon nothing more than misinformation and misuderstanding.Yet the FOLLOWING IS THE KICKER!!!
Jesus has appeared to friends of mine just like He appeared to the apostles, and He is not black.
Now THAT is the gem of the post 
To the OP's question,I would not care what complextion Yeshua Ben Yosef was. I differ from the opinion of the OP in that I find the whole question of "what race" to be in of its basis misconstrued. "Race"(as is refered in this thread) is a SOCIAL construct not a morphological/genetic 1. The concept of "black Africans" itself is based upon antiquited misinformation as is the concept and misnomer of "white" as a "race".The fact is that Yeshua Ben Yosef(lets not use the English name) could have looked like QABOOS bin Said Al Said, Anwar Al Sadat,Hallie Salasie,Sheik Zayed bin Sultan Al Nahyan,Ali Abdullah Saleh and a host of others of similar heritage and morphology. The FACT is that there is NO reason to believe that he looked anything like the most common western depictions of him any more(or less) than there is to believe that he looked like actor Bill Duke(actor Jim Caviezel,although closer than most previous western actors morphologically is still most likely a good stretch from a more accurate depiction). I'd say its more likely that the morphology of Yeshua Ben Yosef was more like that of Qaboos Bin Siad.
The MOST important thing is that what Yeshua looked like in earthly form should have no major importance to any Christian since if it does they are NOT true Christians.If he did what he did,and you believe.....be blessed.
I must say that Brian has made some EXCELLENT post here and Dave,Flyguy,Sparda,cry,e,Halft and Chinua have made valid points. | |
|
| Anti-black Racism in Religion!
Posted: 1/24/2006 4:53:50 AM | Marathon,
You jump into a thread that is 6 pages long, and I give you credit for reading the thread first.
What you don't seem to be missing, is the fact that there are a few posts missing.
The OPer wasn't being attacked, there was someone in here that was purporsly stirring the pot. And openly admited to coming in just to pi$$ people off.
There was a lot of very good converstation on the topic at hand up untill then. So you might want to go re-read yesterdays posts, look at the quotes, which are taken from the *trolls* posts who claimed to be black. Now we all know how easy it is to make a profile, slap up a picture of anyone and claim to be that person. | |
|
| Anti-black Racism in Religion!
Posted: 1/24/2006 5:50:37 AM | The OPer wasn't being attacked....there are a few posts missing
Yes, he CLEARLY was.
Perhaps you might want to re-read my post and then the 1st page.If you do,you will see CLEARLY that SOME attacked the OP on a very personal level(Robert,Rose,ect.). Also,you'd see that any deleted comments from posters are irrelevant to my post. I, knowing that there were deleted comments couldn't/didn't attempt to address THEM nor any reaction to them, so that point is moot.BTW,the deleted comments didn't occur until after the 3rd page,this is apparent by the msg#.
Like I said Brian has made some EXCELLENT post here and Dave,Flyguy,Sparda,Any1real, cry,e,Halft and Chinua (and a few others)have made valid points.
Now the system rules are to stay OT so I'll just repeat my previous post:
I would not care what complextion Yeshua Ben Yosef was. I differ from the opinion of the OP in that I find the whole question of "what race" to be in of its basis misconstrued. "Race"(as is refered in this thread) is a SOCIAL construct not a morphological/genetic 1.
The concept of "black Africans" itself is based upon antiquited misinformation as is the concept and misnomer of "white" as a "race". The fact is that Yeshua Ben Yosef(lets not use the English name) could have looked like QABOOS bin Said Al Said, Anwar Al Sadat,Hallie Salasie,Sheik Zayed bin Sultan Al Nahyan,Ali Abdullah Saleh and a host of others of similar heritage and morphology. The FACT is that there is NO reason to believe that he looked anything like the most common western depictions of him any more(or less) than there is to believe that he looked like actor Bill Duke(actor Jim Caviezel,although closer than most previous western actors morphologically is still most likely a good stretch from a more accurate depiction). I'd say its more likely that the morphology of Yeshua Ben Yosef was more like that of Qaboos Bin Siad.
The MOST important thing is that what Yeshua looked like in earthly form should have no major importance to any Christian since if it does they are NOT true Christians.If he did what he did,and you believe.....be blessed. | |
|
| Anti-black Racism in Religion!
Posted: 1/24/2006 7:09:05 AM | Marathonman11x7,
I assume when you complemented Brian...you were referring to Brain-in-a-Vat...in which case I say thanks. [For simplicities sake, some POF'ers have shortened my name to BIAV).
I am thankful that Chocolate was given the boot from POF...and also I tip my hat to those that challenged her less then well worded arguments.
With respect to Marathonmans previous posts...what is a 'true' christian... | |
|
| Anti-black Racism in Religion!
Posted: 1/24/2006 1:04:00 PM | My bad   I meant BrainIAV not brian.
A true Christian is a believer who deligently tries to follow ALL of the teachings of Yeshua Ben Yosef. Liars,cheaters,racist,theives,murderers and ALL others who adopt philosophical AND actual stances contrary to the teachings of Yeshua are not "true" to his word,therefore not true Christians or practicing Christians.A true Christian subjugates his/her will for that of the spirit. This obviously does not apply to those who follow the philosophy and have a misjudgement. | |
|
| Anti-black Racism in Religion!
Posted: 1/24/2006 1:26:58 PM | I am aware that most whites and other non-blacks get highly defensive when it comes to light that the one known as "Jesus" was a black man. They refuse to see one of the greatest spiritual teachers of all time coming from a race that they deem to be inferior! It is also apparent that most people do not even realize that most of the characters in the Bible in the Old Testament were of black African descent. This is because society has been raised to believe that anything of value has to come from whiteness, or if not white, certainly not from anyone black!
There are alot of sources that prove that the original biblical doctrines had come from black African people (the original hebrews). But the people have a hatred for black people that goes beyond human comprehension. So let me ask you "christian" people one honest question.... if you KNEW, 100% that the one you know of as "Jesus Christ" was a black man and that the Israelites whom he descended from were a black African people, would that affect your religious beliefs enough to make you change them? Yes or no? There is the OP's post in its entirety.
There are a lot of presumptions here.
Here is a list:
"They refuse to see one of the greatest spiritual teachers of all time coming from a race that they deem to be inferior!"
1) All white people are a racial collective with the same opinion.
2) All white people think that black people are inferior.
3) All white people refuse to acknowledge that Jesus was black (which is a silly assumption because while he was certainly not white, we don't know if he looked arabic or african because there are no contemporary portraits or photos of him)
"It is also apparent that most people do not even realize that most of the characters in the Bible in the Old Testament were of black African descent."
4) Most people (race not specified) are not aware that a large percentage of characters in the Bible were black or dark skinned.
And with a single statement I can prove most of these points wrong: I am white and I think he was probably black (which is not an inferior race) and that a large number of characters in the bible were also black.
I am not part of a collective; I have an independent mind. Please don't judge my character by what persons who also happen to be white do.
So let me ask you "christian" people one honest question.... if you KNEW, 100% that the one you know of as "Jesus Christ" was a black man and that the Israelites whom he descended from were a black African people, would that affect your religious beliefs enough to make you change them? Yes or no?
So let me ask you a question....if you knew Jesus was a nordic white man with blue eyes and curly blonde hair, would that affect your religious beliefs enough to change them?
And if you can answer that then try this one....what if you knew Jesus was a 5 foot oriental man with slanted eyes, would that affect your religious beliefs enough to change them?
| |
|
| Anti-black Racism in Religion!
Posted: 1/24/2006 1:58:13 PM | Marathon...
And there in lies the pickle. The teachings of Jesus will differ based on the person interpreting them. So, the question regresses -
Who has the best interpretation? | |
|
| Anti-black Racism in Religion!
Posted: 1/24/2006 2:01:17 PM | | What a silly argument this is. That anyone cares one way or the other is the product of ignorant racism. Like Lizard said, what if he was an Asian? What if he was Nordic, Arabic, or any other arbitrary race? What possible bearing does that have on his philosophy? Here's a fact that should shed some light on the emptiness of this entire issue- any two human's DNA, from any part of the world, is less dissimilar than the DNA between two chimpanzees. We are more alike as a species than chimpanzees are as a species. Our differences are so trivial, that they can be ignored for all practical purposes. Add to that the fact that races are somewhat arbitrary distinctions anyway, because we all share ancestors, and you need not go back much more than 200 generations to find an ancestor that everyone alive today shares. If you round out the numbers for the sake of parsimony and we assume that everyone at the age of twenty gives birth to a new generation that about takes us back to the times of ancient Egypt. Humans have not really been isolated from one another for long enough periods of time to develop profound differences in structure or morphology. We are all remarkably similar except for trivial differences in skin tone or slightly different bone structure. Our brains are indistinguishable, so who cares if Jesus was frickin' purple? Odds are, from anthropological and archaeological evidence, he was dark skinned. Who cares? | |
|
| Anti-black Racism in Religion!
Posted: 1/24/2006 2:22:05 PM |
Who cares?
Evidently, Sparda cares:
And to the guy that asked me, what if 'Jesus' came back as a white man, I wouldn't care as long as he had love for me. Besides, blacks have been force-fed the image of a white jesus for centuries anyway. But it seems to me that most people can accept an arab (white-like) Jesus as opposed to the image of a strong, black, man. This is because the people have a desperate need to see black people as leaches on world society and not huge contributors. Not in giving spiritual knowledge or otherwise.
Or maybe he doesn't care, or he cares that "the people" care, whoever they may be?? | |
|
| Anti-black Racism in Religion!
Posted: 1/24/2006 2:44:23 PM | That's what I call reactionary racism. It's no different than a white person judging all black people, because he was mugged by a black guy. Because SOME white people are ignorant racists does not justify sweeping statements like:
"This is because the people have a desperate need to see black people as leaches on world society and not huge contributors. Not in giving spiritual knowledge or otherwise."
I don't have a desperate need to see any race in that light. I don't even have a slight need to, and, from what I've seen of these posts, neither does most anyone else in this thread. I'm sure this guy has encountered racism, but his painting everyone else with a broad brush as a result is no different than what the people who may have mistreated him did. Instead of reacting with equal racism, we should concentrate on uniting those who are not racists against those who are, regardless of race. That's where the true divide lies. | |
|
| Anti-black Racism in Religion!
Posted: 1/24/2006 2:53:55 PM | I agree with you, Wonka. You pretty much said the same thing as Rose44 did back on page 1:
If anyone is a racist, it would be you[Sparda]. You just painted everyone with the same brush...except the black race.
But it seems as though Marathonman doesn't appreciate the sentiment:
you will see CLEARLY that SOME attacked the OP on a very personal level(Robert,Rose,ect.).
(my bolding) | |
|
| Anti Black Racism in Christianity
Posted: 1/24/2006 3:04:45 PM | | The thread topic is about black racism in religion. Whereas the OP is actually harping on about Jesus, so really its, is there "Anti Black Racism in Christianity" | |
|
| |
| Anti-black Racism in Religion!
Posted: 1/24/2006 4:02:09 PM | Marathon:
Simple,case closed! I seem to remember you using that line to attempt to win an argument in another thread. It is innapropriate and rude for you to tell people in the thread what they can and cannot talk about and how much time is allowed for a discussion (unless of course they are breaking a rule of conduct or you happen to be a moderator, neither of which are the case in this context).
What I accurately pointed out was that the OP did NOT paint all who consider themselves "white" with the same brush. He did NOT say ALL,he said "most". This is clear to anyone who can read with a clear mind. He started by saying "most" and then quickly changed his wording to "they" which is a blanket generalization. Even using "most" rather than "they", its still an irrational presumption. He doesn't know what "most" or "all" non-black people think, he just arrogantly presumes. People are not racial collectives, or even "mostly" racial collectives. They are individuals and should only be judged on their individual merits. The letter of an argument is not so important as the spirit and direction of it in the first place.
I'm just curious. Is it your position that I have attacked the OP? | |
|
| Anti-black Racism in Religion!
Posted: 1/24/2006 4:03:29 PM | | Marathon- Even saying "most" is a broad sweeping statement. In this day and age, I honestly don't think most white people are racists. I think racists are the exception. That's not to say that a lot of people don't do or say racist things without even realizing it, some do. Those people need to be gently reminded of their biases, but it is intent that really makes the difference here. Progress toward a colorblind society is not furthered by lashing out with statements like "most" white people are racist. Maybe because I live in SoCal I'm not seeing a true cross section of the American populace, but, from my experience, most white people are not racist. Of course, like I said, it's a silly distinction anyway. Frankly, I'm sort of a light brown with tints of olive and red. I'm a mutt, with diverse lineages. Truth is really that everyone is. People who consider themselves "racially pure" are misguided. As for racism in Christianity, I can't speak to that, as I don't hang out in churches and such, so I don't really know. | |
|
| |
Home
login 
jk