Jesus was black.
- Thread starter Lithp
- Start date
Nothing to do with this thread. Why did the chicken cross the road? To show the gopher it could be done.
It seems to me that the original argument doesn't really deal with all the suffixes of great, just the word itself: great. The argument seems to imply that there is something great that caused other stuff and that because we can imagine the concept, it must exist. That's the argument I always use with the agnostics ... that if they use the word, they acknowledge the concept and therefore can be nothing more than an atheist denying the definition of the word.
Pretty hard to see any fact in the book.One can understand Nostradamus writing cryptically, but why this? Again, there's nothing rational about it.
Even Nostradamus is nothing more than hindsight and fitting the pieces into a puzzle that's already built. I'm pretty sure that some of the stories are true, like the historical documentation of who went where and how many baby boys were killed to prevent some future vision from becoming true.
Get off your pedestals,live within yourself.
If you troubled yourself to read some history, you would know that racist slavery in the USA was 'justified' on the grounds that blacks were said to be born to be slaves. Had people bothered to read the Bible they would have known this to be nothing but lies and there would never have been slavery.
Therefore it is relevant to the discussion and if you had any sense you would realize it.
If you troubled yourself to read some history, you would know that racist slavery in the USA was 'justified' on the grounds that blacks were said to be born to be slaves. Had people bothered to read the Bible they would have known this to be nothing but lies and there would never have been slavery.
Therefore it is relevant to the discussion and if you had any sense you would realize it.
Just a point of clarification, but does the Bible say black skinned people, as in people with a lot of pigment in their skin that turns very dark in the hot sun, or Negroid people ... as I believe there is a difference. There was no distinction between darker skin and race like there is today. Furthermore, it would be interesting to see the original text and to know whether darker skinned or "black" skinned people referred to servants that took off their shirts to work in the hot sun, thereby becoming black skinned. You never know what euphamism were common 2000 years ago.
.......... and something written as science fiction a while ago is now fact. So? Nostradamus had a pretty solid reason for writing cryptically. But were all the writers of the bible in fear of their lives?
I think the reason that there are so many interpretations of the writings in the book is because the writers had a hard time expressing themselves in simple, concise, and cogent language. They couldn't write, "Jesus was such a nice guy, he offered some of his food to everyone else" instead of concocting some parable fulla bilgewater? Someone could always have concocted some form of bilge out of it later to make the idea of sharing entertaining to kids. Why say it took Yahweh 7 days to build everything? Why not just say it took a long time to build everything and once in a while the guy that was all powerful had to have a rest sometimes ( :roll: ) so he took Sundays off?
Just a point of clarification, but does the Bible say black skinned people, as in people with a lot of pigment in their skin that turns very dark in the hot sun, or Negroid people ...
There are many books on the subject such as:
http://www.blackpeopleinthebible.com/
There are many books on the subject such as:
http://www.blackpeopleinthebible.com/
Uhm, that fable about taking Sunday off has been seriously downplayed in Canada since they changed the rules and decided that people should work on Sunday. It would be better if it was rewritten again to allow the all powerful guy to sleep at night and get back to work when the sun rises - never mind that Sunday day of rest.
I will definitely have a better look at the site, but for starters: "Judge Randolph Jackson, Justice of the Supreme Court of the State of New York" is not an expert on anything but the courts and although a Brooklyn Baptist minister may think his ideas are inspiring, it's not exactly an indication of a scholarly work based on valid academic credentials.
Oh!!! and I just clicked on info about the author and lo and behold, he is black. I wonder if this law man has a hidden agenda ... I also have a very strong feeling that he's Baptist but I'll keep looking. For some reason, I generally believe that religious scholars are different from religious believers ... that is, scholars keep an open mind whereas believers think they have the answers.
And look at this: "He is an author, Bible teacher, empowerment consultant, motivational speaker and patron of the arts." Maybe he could start up his own religion and get rich like so many other motivational, bible speakers that empower the poor, sick and badly treated segment of the population. He could take their donations (worldly possessions, retirement savings, bank accounts) and live in a multimillion dollar mansion in the California hills. Do you think he's targeting Blacks? One thing he's got on his side is he knows the law, so he can probably stay above it.
Last edited:
When I was in law school several of my classmates were preachers. One of them (a very conservative guy from the Midwest) remains my closest friend.
I'm surprised anybody lets you get away with that bit of sophistry. Just because we can imagine something doesn't mean it must exist, that's completely illogical. I can imagine all sorts of things that don't exist and events that can't happen.
Hmmm. I musta missed that post or wasn't paying much attention. Anyway, it's not only illogical, it doesn't make any sense either.
I'd love for a leprachaun to give me his/her pot of gold. I can even imagine it. Same with me giving Regis Philbin a fat lip.
Well, that at least is possible, in principle. In fact I'd be happy to line up behind you for a shot at him. You get the first one because you thought of it first...Same with me giving Regis Philbin a fat lip.
The other annoying jerk is that velcro-headed exercise idiot who wears nothing but the shorts and tank top. I'm thinking something other than a fat lip for that one.
Alas, there's more than one of those. A fat ass might be appropriate...The other annoying jerk is that velcro-headed exercise idiot who wears nothing but the shorts and tank top. I'm thinking something other than a fat lip for that one.
Are you suggesting that you cannot imagine what the word great means?
Let's also try to keep in mind that I am discussing the writings of Thomas, not my own ideas.
Last edited:
