Jesus Christ

I am considered white, and am against no race, or religion... Apologize for giving that impression, just looking for understanding... No meaning to be misleading... I am anti lies, anti deceit... I will leave this discussion for those who know better, I can only trust my own history anyhow... Peace

Star Forge wrote: I'm a racialist white person who fully admits that Isa/Jesus was a Semite, not an Aryan/white.

that's why when you aren't talking about beating your wife or boasting about "ass" you are actually pretty smart. At least in this aspect of history

Llama Su wrote: So he (Jesus)has Jewish culture and Jewish heritage, being born in Israel/Palestine...
He was dark skinned... If it even matters...
The uneducated need to be taught, This is why I say the "real" Hebrew Israelites, because some claim this heritage, and are not...

Also where did I say he was " light skinned"?

I said he was arab, arabs often have dark skin but the ethnic group of arabs are actually considered white. You weren't talking about " dark skin" you blatantly said black...which isn't arabic or semitic, ethnically. Now granted there can be arabs and semites who are black but they would not be of the original lineages of palestine.

I don't think what race Jesus was matters, you only have to look at the bible...

Galatians 3:28. (KJV).
"There is neither Jew nor Greek, there is neither bond nor free, there is neither male nor female: for ye are all one in Christ Jesus."

and then jump to

JEDI BELIEVE
"In a society that does not discriminate on the basis of sexual orientation or circumstances of birth such as gender, ethnicity and national origin."

Both the Christian and Jediist teachings say the same thing, we are ONE and the same all bound within the force (or christ) as you will.

Leandros Von wrote: I don't think what race Jesus was matters, you only have to look at the bible...

Galatians 3:28. (KJV).
"There is neither Jew nor Greek, there is neither bond nor free, there is neither male nor female: for ye are all one in Christ Jesus."

and then jump to

JEDI BELIEVE
"In a society that does not discriminate on the basis of sexual orientation or circumstances of birth such as gender, ethnicity and national origin."

Both the Christian and Jediist teachings say the same thing, we are ONE and the same all bound within the force (or christ) as you will.

I'm not doing this because I have to or feel the need to lol. I do it because this interests me and I like history.

sidvkili wrote: I'm not doing this because I have to or feel the need to lol. I do it because this interests me and I like history.

You mistake me Sidvkili, I was not questioning anyone's motive, merely stating an observation of my own, I thought this was the point of a discussion ??

Leandros Von wrote: I don't think what race Jesus was matters, you only have to look at the bible...

Galatians 3:28. (KJV).
"There is neither Jew nor Greek, there is neither bond nor free, there is neither male nor female: for ye are all one in Christ Jesus."

and then jump to

JEDI BELIEVE
"In a society that does not discriminate on the basis of sexual orientation or circumstances of birth such as gender, ethnicity and national origin."

Both the Christian and Jediist teachings say the same thing, we are ONE and the same all bound within the force (or christ) as you will.

I don't either. But you have to consider the context. I could say "Jesus was a Middle Eastern Jew," which is my belief, and that's just an objective statement to me. I don't attach any special significance to the fact that he was a Jew.

On the other hand, a Christian Zionist, of the kind that are in no short supply here in the USA, would say "Jesus was a Jew so we need to support Israel no matter what," or even "Jesus was a Jew so we need to kill all Muslims, because one of the Five Pillars of Islam is the extermination of Jews." I wish I was kidding.

One could say "Jesus was white because he had Amorite heritage." And another could say "Jesus was white because Jews are the scum of the earth and are all swindlers and only whites have souls, and whites are the true Israelites," as is preached in the Christian Identity Movement.

I'm a Muslim, so this is not an extremely heated debate for me. Isa is one of my most revered prophets, but as a Muslim living in America, I've had to learn not to get angry over religious discussions, or I would have lost it by now

Leandros Von wrote:

sidvkili wrote: I'm not doing this because I have to or feel the need to lol. I do it because this interests me and I like history.

You mistake me Sidvkili, I was not questioning anyone's motive, merely stating an observation of my own, I thought this was the point of a discussion ??

one already given before in the very discussion, old son

Star Forge wrote:

Leandros Von wrote: I don't think what race Jesus was matters, you only have to look at the bible...

Galatians 3:28. (KJV).
"There is neither Jew nor Greek, there is neither bond nor free, there is neither male nor female: for ye are all one in Christ Jesus."

and then jump to

JEDI BELIEVE
"In a society that does not discriminate on the basis of sexual orientation or circumstances of birth such as gender, ethnicity and national origin."

Both the Christian and Jediist teachings say the same thing, we are ONE and the same all bound within the force (or christ) as you will.

"Jesus was a Jew so we need to kill all Muslims, because one of the Five Pillars of Islam is the extermination of Jews." I wish I was kidding.

none of the five pillars says to kill all jews

sidvkili wrote: one already given before in the very discussion, old son

But by someone else, not me, I wasn't throwing it in there to open it for discussion, just stating that the overall impression I get from it is that it doesn't matter so why is it that we care so much about it ??

The question we should be asking ourselves is not "what colour was jesus", but "why do we place such importance on his ethnic origin".

To me the answer is a simple one, because we have been raised in a society that has not yet learned to be tolerant of other races, sure we are making progress in this regard but take America for example, there were still folk who thought it outrageous that a Black Man should be President... you may think yourself not racist but if your own daughter come home wearing a Burka and introducing her new Islamic boyfriend I'm sure there would be a pang of "wait a minute this isn't right" this is not what I had intended for my daughter, I myself know that this is the case for me at least, there would be a point of me feeling racial hatred born of my ego, this is due to me growing up in a time where anyone of color was still looked upon as different, I can't believe looking back now that my gran / grandad / stepfather would without thinking answer "she's run away with a darkie" when I questioned where my mother was.

I can acknowledge this though, this racist seed planted in my persona when i was younger allowing myself insight into where I am wrong in my thinking, giving me the opportunity to adjust my attitude towards the subject to the one where I judge the man on his character and the way he treats my daughter, not his creed or the color of his skin.

I think sometimes to do the right thing we have to admit to ourselves that our thinking is wrong, it's only when we stop to reflect that we see the bigger picture.

But this however has veered of topic so I'll leave you guys to your discussion.

Offending posts removed...

Please keep it clean gentlemen...

I recognize the spirit in which it was said, but this is still a public forum...

Leandros Von wrote:

sidvkili wrote: one already given before in the very discussion, old son

But by someone else, not me, I wasn't throwing it in there to open it for discussion, just stating that the overall impression I get from it is that it doesn't matter so why is it that we care so much about it ??

The question we should be asking ourselves is not "what colour was jesus", but "why do we place such importance on his ethnic origin".

To me the answer is a simple one, because we have been raised in a society that has not yet learned to be tolerant of other races, sure we are making progress in this regard but take America for example, there were still folk who thought it outrageous that a Black Man should be President... you may think yourself not racist but if your own daughter come home wearing a Burka and introducing her new Islamic boyfriend I'm sure there would be a pang of "wait a minute this isn't right" this is not what I had intended for my daughter, I myself know that this is the case for me at least, there would be a point of me feeling racial hatred born of my ego, this is due to me growing up in a time where anyone of color was still looked upon as different, I can't believe looking back now that my gran / grandad / stepfather would without thinking answer "she's run away with a darkie" when I questioned where my mother was.

I can acknowledge this though, this racist seed planted in my persona when i was younger allowing myself insight into where I am wrong in my thinking, giving me the opportunity to adjust my attitude towards the subject to the one where I judge the man on his character and the way he treats my daughter, not his creed or the color of his skin.

I think sometimes to do the right thing we have to admit to ourselves that our thinking is wrong, it's only when we stop to reflect that we see the bigger picture.

But this however has veered of topic so I'll leave you guys to your discussion.

What? Okay... I want you to look into the debate of the ethnicity of christ, find me one of the participating scholars, priests etc and point out his racism for me.... You want to know why the main reason it gets argued? Because you seem to think it's this giant sociological issue, as a social worker and a far leftist myself... it ain't. The debate started and has maintained as a debate of validity of HISTORY, lol. This is just another debate along with Mark's record versus Phillup's, neomarcion critique of the volumes to Theolophilus etc etc.

They usually deal with if Christ existed at all or if events pertaining to said sod ever happened at all. The ethnicity of christ is just a factor.

If somebody came up to me and said " you're a black guy", I'd say " sorry, nope." Is it because I don't like black people? Or that I'm intolerant of them? Or is it just clearing up facts?


Oh and I get the example but islam wouldn't bother me lol. I've been to several prayers at a masjid during College lol. Still friends with one or two.

sidvkili wrote:

Star Forge wrote:

Leandros Von wrote: I don't think what race Jesus was matters, you only have to look at the bible...

Galatians 3:28. (KJV).
"There is neither Jew nor Greek, there is neither bond nor free, there is neither male nor female: for ye are all one in Christ Jesus."

and then jump to

JEDI BELIEVE
"In a society that does not discriminate on the basis of sexual orientation or circumstances of birth such as gender, ethnicity and national origin."

Both the Christian and Jediist teachings say the same thing, we are ONE and the same all bound within the force (or christ) as you will.

"Jesus was a Jew so we need to kill all Muslims, because one of the Five Pillars of Islam is the extermination of Jews." I wish I was kidding.

none of the five pillars says to kill all jews

Of course not. I'm just playing on the ignorance of Evangelical Christian Zionists.

Rickie The Grey wrote: Would the Cathloc Churches be any different today or have a different relationship with the other Middle East Faiths if the image of Christ reflected his DNA heritage?

Absolutely. While Senan has the point that it shouldn't make a difference, being human, it would make a difference. It's likely that Jesus had dark skin and black hair. Not the general visual you find in paintings of Jesus, who looks like an American white guy.

Do ya think it would help the reliigions get along better? I do.

I know I'm a few days late to the party, but I don't think it would help religions get along better. I do think it would help race relations, though.

I don't think it would help either. The church would be having internal conflicts of its own because Abrahamic religions and racism (as in tribal, in- and out-group thining) kind of go hand in hand to an alarming degree (just like misogynism, narcissism and egocentrism, misanthropy, somehow still self-hatred along with several other unhealthy or evil notions - again, to a degree; an alarming one, mind you, but not all the way, I guess...).

Besides, there are core doctrinal issues between the three (or four, if you count Baha'i in) that couldn't be reconciled even if the Christians' favourite scapegoat were depicted in the way he most likely would have been. If the unbeliever is not an enemy of God or an agent of Satan by definition, then what remains of the religion whose only appeal is salvation from the evil that being a non-believer supposedly results in?
If you build an intrinsicly hostile religion like that, there will not come the point at which the religion remains in place but the conflicts it commands the religious to have would go away.

I would like to politely disagree with you on most of those points, Gisteron, because the description of Abrahamic faiths as present in your post present problems that are not inherent to the teachings of those faiths inherently, and are the result of the darkness potential in human social interactions twisting and corrupting said teachings.

Long time no see Gist. Good to see you again. Now that this is all done, let's murder your argument


Also how is racism, ego centrism, misogynism, narcisism, misanthropy and etc evil notions are inherent to Christianity? If you're going to make a statement, provide evidence otherwise I'm going to treat this like angry biased subjectivity. Which going by context, isn't far off. Taking into account apathetic theological evangelism which is the second largest accountable form of evangelism in Christianity has no traits of racism or race elitism. The issue on misogyny is hardly existent in Christianity as it is portrayed. I covered that in the pope thread, btw
Also, the abrahamic ecumenical relationships? They always say " keep theology out of it, we will never agree" and they build their relationship on the doctrine and mission they have in common, which has been demonstrated greatly in recent relations between wesleyan christians and sunni muslims. So the doctrine isn't the problem for one thing, it's the theology. For another they will not let theology get in the way of ecumenical relationships and build it on the vast dogma and doctrine they do share in common.

Also the religion of Christianity was actually built upon the eucharist which was a symbol of devotion and sacrifice, not penal substitution btw. It was actually very similar to " sacrifice and bliss".

I didn't follow this thread story either. . . .

Although . . . .i have been told three stories, from three different wise men, in different years, in different circles and with different lineage, about this name . . .

The first wise man, was a woman raised in a christian family of teachers and masons. . she said "it is best think of Christ as meaning "spirit" not as a last name

The second wise man was Jewish lineage, raised in Judaism and indoctrinated in the traditional Kabbalah ways . . he said to me: Christ is not his last name. . . .christians were around thousands of years before he was born or before a church was made. . . . the meaning of christ awareness and the thousands and thousands of name equal to it are beyond what gets limited to "christians"

The third wise man of native american descent, a trained and anonymous shaman, historian, veteran, and devotee/teacher to the disadvantaged. . . . said. . . "look at the time of the romans and the first E. Council and the founding of their church, they gave him a new name. . .his name was Jesus of Nazareth. . that says a lot"

interesting . . .

thanks steamboat, these stories as one . . inspired by your post
for me personally. . .am seeing aquaducts like sithy veins lol
more importantly is this era . . .what is transmitted and what is left to find