posted
''what are the similarities between British Israelism and BHI'' ====
By BHI i presume you mean the 'Black Hebrew Israelites', who are a bunch of lunatics with a membership of about 500.
In contrast British Israelism during its heyday had millions of supporters and many academics or scholars, as well as prestige patrons even including members of the British monarchy.
British Israelism is also multi-denominational and has members or proponents from Baptist, Calvinist, Methodist, Anglican etc backgrounds, while the Black Hebrew Israelites in contrast are an idiotic cult, filled with wierdos and cranks.
Regarding scripture, British Israelism is theologically and Biblically justified, while in contrast the Black Hebrew Israelites have zero understanding of the scripture and they just twist it whereever they can to demonise whites.
- BI has it origins thousands of years ago, or can at least be traced to the early medieval period. Later becomming an established movement in the 17th, 18th and 19th centuries.
- BHI in contrast has its origins in american ghettos in the last few years. Basically only dumb black people subscribe to BHI to attack whites. Its pathetic.
Posts: 1575 | From: - | Registered: May 2011
| IP: Logged |
posted
LMAO at this fool trying to make one set of bible thumpers more legitimate than the other. The bible is a fuking myth, anybody can use it to justify whatever bullshyt movement they are a part of. BHI, British Israelism, Catholics, Branch Davidians, Jim Brown, Snake handlers and poison drinkers, Hasidic Jew cults with their nasty Talmudic shyt, Pentecostals, etc, all the same lunatic bunch.
posted
Israelism is the notion that one's own people are the true Israelites, descending from the people of the Bible. To me it's baffling that anyone would wish to prove themselves the descendants of the least charming and most bigoted desert tribe of all the levant. It's astonishing that anyone would buy into the notion that the creator of the universe would have a 'chosen race', and especially that it would be the Hebrews of all people! (The Egyptians would make much better candidates for a chosen race. The Scots had a better idea making up an ancient connection to Egypt! Who wants to descend from the Egyptians' runaway slaves?)
The roots of British Israelism (and French Israelism) are the medieval myths that have the apsotles (including Joseph of Arimathea and Mary Magdalene) coming to Western Europe. British Israelism also involves the legends that the young Jesus came to England, with his uncle Joseph of Arimatheam and hung out in Glastonbury. The idea that Joseph was a tin-trader is conjured up from nowhere. Although not impossible there is really very little early evidence for the notion.
The Bible is completely focussed on the Jews and their world in the Middle East, which is one of many reasons to be suspicious of it. There is no evidence in the Bible that its parochial authors knew or cared anything about either Britain or about Sub-Saharan Africa beyond Nubia (Ethiopia). Both Britons and Africans were active in early Christianity, but the idea that either represent true Israelites is quite absurd.
Posts: 870 | From: uk | Registered: Apr 2011
| IP: Logged |
posted
''The idea that Joseph was a tin-trader is conjured up from nowhere'' =====
No it comes from the Latin Vulgate (Mark 15: 43) -
''venit Ioseph ab Arimathia nobilis decurio''
The term Decurio has multiple meanings in Latin but was commonly used to designate an official under Roman authority who was in charge of metal mining. The term for example is found in Roman inscriptions in Spain relating to a 'minister of mining'. The apocrypha and early Church Fathers also described Joseph as a merchant or trader.
Therefore there is a lot of evidence Joseph was a metal or tin trader. The most renowned mines in classical antiquity were the Cassiterides (cornwall) and many legends further connect Joseph to Cornwall (as well as Glastonbury).
There is also evidence tin from cornwall was used for Solomon's temple. Note that the 'tin isles' are found in early Assyrian, Phoenician and Hebrew inscriptions.
Here is an Assyrian tablet from the 8th century BC (Keilschrifttexte aus Assur verschiedenen Inhalts 1920, No. 92):
"...the Tin-land country which lies beyond the Upper Sea (or Mediterranean)."
Posts: 1575 | From: - | Registered: May 2011
| IP: Logged |
posted
''The Bible is completely focussed on the Jews and their world in the Middle East, which is one of many reasons to be suspicious of it.'' =======
For starters you should look up Two House Theology. Jacob had 12 tribes descend from him, yet only the Jews sprung from Judah (and the Levites who were mingled with all the tribes). After the fall of the united monarchy of Israel, Judah split and was set up as an independant kingdom (with Levites and some from the tribe of Benjamin). In fact the first place the word 'jew' appears in scripture, the jews are at war with the Israelites (10 tribes who became the 'house of Israel' as opposed to Judah).
- The other 10 tribes (which later became 'lost')were never Jewish, nor are their descendants today.
In fact Jewish rabbis themselves have never claimed descent from the 10 tribes or house of Israel.
The Jewish Chronicle of May 22nd, 1879:
''the Ten Tribes are certainly in existence, all that has to be done is to discover which people represent them.''
Chief Rabbi - Dr. H. Adler:
"You are quite right to assume that the Ten Tribes did not return to the Holy Land."
Rabbi Aaron Werner of Spokane, U.S.A., when asked by the late Dr. Schiffner -
"Do the Jews represent all Twelve Tribes?" replied:
"No, the Ten Tribes of Israel were carried away by Sennacherib King of Assyria and have become LOST. The Jews of today are but a remnant made up of the Tribes of Judah, Benjamin and Levi."
Posts: 1575 | From: - | Registered: May 2011
| IP: Logged |
posted
Anglo_Pyramidologist - Before you get yourself wound-up into a religious and racial frenzy. Your very own British museum, has some really great Assyrian reliefs depicting Hebrews. I guarantee you really, really, want to take a look at them before running your mouth further.
Here is a taste for you - don't bother thanking me.
posted
The idea that the British Israelites are more Authentic than the BHI is a matter of opinion. The BHI can find scriptures to prove their points as the Brit.Israel can. Thats the point of using the bible as your sole source.
The only similarity between the BHI and BritI is they both believe their "Race" should rule the world because "God" said so, and they both believe they are the chosen people.
The Hebrews were more than anything a Multiracial/Multiethnic people with Eurasians, and Kushites(Both East and West) type people.
To add onto Mike's collection Christian art from the Roman Jewish Catacombs
Posts: 8804 | From: The fear of his majesty had entered their hearts, they were powerless | Registered: Nov 2007
| IP: Logged |
posted
''Your very own British museum, has some really great Assyrian reliefs depicting Hebrews'' ====
I'm not sure how those pictures help you. I presume you have wrongly interpeted their hatwear and helmets as being their hair texture, which is incredibly clear on the black obelisk:
Note also the hatwear of Phoenicians:
Its not hair texture. Nice try though. You must be desperate.
Posts: 1575 | From: - | Registered: May 2011
| IP: Logged |
Anglo_Pyramidologist - Before you get yourself wound-up into a religious and racial frenzy. Your very own British museum, has some really great Assyrian reliefs depicting Hebrews. I guarantee you really, really, want to take a look at them before running your mouth further.
Here is a taste for you - don't bother thanking me.
Another Assyrian Ashur-dan III King of Assyria from 773-754 BC
Mike were the Assyrians also black or just the Persians and Hebrews? They do seem to have curly hair and all curly haired people are black right?
Posts: 42919 | From: , | Registered: Jan 2010
| IP: Logged |
posted
Dont you guys love when the BHI new testament dudes use Acts 13.1 to prove that the disciples were Black and were being called "Niger" but conveniently ignore the mention of white disciples (when you use their methodology) in that same passage.
Posts: 1340 | Registered: Apr 2010
| IP: Logged |
quote: Dont you guys love when the BHI new testament dudes use Acts 13.1 to prove that the disciples were Black and were being called "Niger" but conveniently ignore the mention of white disciples (when you use their methodology) in that same passage.
Can you please post the scripture that talks about white disciples?
"White" as in skin color in the bible is a curse called leprosy.
2 Kings 5 27The leprosy therefore of Naaman shall cleave unto thee, and unto thy seed for ever. And he went out from his presence a leper as white as snow.
Hebrews were of multiethnicity but israelites/judahites were always referred to and grouped with Kushittes, Canaanittes, "Ethiopians"
Alot of those images imo show people with nappy hair. But there is no need to picture spam with the Skulls that were found at Lachish in the above thread.
Posts: 43 | Registered: Aug 2010
| IP: Logged |
posted
^^^ Dude the Hebrews def. had black among their ranks. please see the Images I provided above from Roman Jewish Catacomb art of Early Christians. Remember the Early Christians were mainly Jews.
Anglo Pyramid can run be he cant hide from what the Jews left in the Catacombs. His Jews are supposed to be Racially Pure but they have Images of Moshiach with an Afro and Brown to Black skin, years before Ethiopia converted.
Me and Altakruri already adressed this, The Jews were a Multiethinic bunch with blacks in their ranks. Both BHI and British Israel and Zionists have to deal with those facts.
The Ethiopian Jews probably represent an authentic branch of Jews.
Posts: 8804 | From: The fear of his majesty had entered their hearts, they were powerless | Registered: Nov 2007
| IP: Logged |
posted
I'll only pop in this rubbish of a thread to make clear somethings associated with my name. Jews are a late phenomena in the development of Hebrews to Children of Israel to Israelites & Judahites.
There was marriage with everyone around them from their inception as offspring of Jacob's twelve sons.
In the era of Judaea, the birth of the Jews, we have Dio Cassius, Roman History 37:17:1, writing "other men, who, although of a different race, have adopted the laws of the people." These are converts of non-Hebrew origin not descended from Jacob. Hebrew law recognizes them as Jews but not as Israelites until marrying into Israelite stock whereupon their offspring, being raised by a parent of Israelite ancestry, were able to fully inbibe the everyday culture and mores and thus fully identify as Israelite.
In this same Roman era the majority opinion of the writers of the time as left on record by Tacitus was that were Egyptians expelled due to disease (leprosy) with many having the mindset that"they were a race of Ethiopian origin,"History 5.2-3.
A reflection of this is the Roman era mishnah laws on leprosy declaring Israelites not as black as Kush but the shade of boxwood.
Nakh itself compares Israel to Kushiym and only recognizes Egypt, Ethiopia, and Seba as equals of Israel.
quote:Are ye not as the children of the Ethiopians unto Me, O children of Israel? saith the LORD. Amos 9:7
quote:For I am the LORD thy God, The Holy One of Israel, thy Saviour; I have given Egypt as thy ransom, Ethiopia and Seba for thee. Isaiah 43:3
As in another thread this isn't something I'm going to debate. All are free to take it or leave it as your concerns are something other than what has been handed down by people who either saw these early Jews or who were themselves members of that community.
Posts: 8014 | From: the Tekrur in the Western Sahel | Registered: Feb 2006
| IP: Logged |
posted
For the record, I do not subscribe to that BHI approach to Acts 13.1. However, I will use the same methodology that they use. Pay attention to bold faces...
Act 13:1 ¶ Now there were in the church that was at Antioch certain prophets and teachers; as Barnabas, and Simeon that was called Niger, and Lucius of Cyrene, and Manaen, which had been brought up with Herod the tetrarch, and Saul.
There ya have it! Black and White disciples, based on the spurious BHI innovation.
quote:Originally posted by Zioncity: Can you please post the scripture that talks about white disciples?
"White" as in skin color in the bible is a curse called leprosy.
2 Kings 5 27The leprosy therefore of Naaman shall cleave unto thee, and unto thy seed for ever. And he went out from his presence a leper as white as snow.
Hebrews were of multiethnicity but israelites/judahites were always referred to and grouped with Kushittes, Canaanittes, "Ethiopians"
Alot of those images imo show people with nappy hair. But there is no need to picture spam with the Skulls that were found at Lachish in the above thread. [/QB]
posted
2 Kings 5.27 says the following in part - "...metsora kashaleg" and translated as LEPROS AS SNOW. So the particular white color is likened to snow. How did you determine that white skin in the general sense is leprosy when the description does not say that?
quote:Originally posted by Zioncity: "White" as in skin color in the bible is a curse called leprosy.
2 Kings 5 27The leprosy therefore of Naaman shall cleave unto thee, and unto thy seed for ever. And he went out from his presence a leper as white as snow.
posted
''So you are saying that civilian Hebrews wore hair-like hats and helmets which completely covered their cheeks and chins so as to look like hair?'' ====
posted
''"White" as in skin color in the bible is a curse called leprosy.
2 Kings 5 27The leprosy therefore of Naaman shall cleave unto thee, and unto thy seed for ever. And he went out from his presence a leper as white as snow.'' =========
Not in the original manuscripts. The colour became added by the Vulgate. This was already debunked before.
Posts: 1575 | From: - | Registered: May 2011
| IP: Logged |
posted
''Act 13:1 ¶ Now there were in the church that was at Antioch certain prophets and teachers; as Barnabas, and Simeon that was called Niger, and Lucius of Cyrene, and Manaen, which had been brought up with Herod the tetrarch, and Saul.'' ====
These reflect hair colours or something abnormal on the skin, never used to describe negroes.
Here is an example from my refuting afrocentric collection:
‘‘Romans with Niger as their surname were Black men’’ (Joel A. Rogers, Nature knows No Color Line)
***
One of the biggest claims by Afrocentrics is that the name ‘‘Niger’’ was given to Romans who were Black Africans, based on the fact Niger meant black or dark. Many notable Roman historical figures had Niger in their name i.e.: Pescennius Niger, Aquilus Niger, Brutidius Niger, now were these men Black? No of course they weren't, as ancient Roman writings themselves prove. In the Historia Augusta, it is explained how Pescennius got his name :
‘‘His countenance was dignified and always somewhat ruddy; his neck was so black that many men say that he was called Niger on this account. The rest of his body, however, was very white..’’
Clearly Pescennius derived his name because he had an unusual black neck, but note how the text states the rest of his body was completely white.
Posts: 1575 | From: - | Registered: May 2011
| IP: Logged |
posted
^^^You are correct that the original passage does not contain the word "white" and that it was added in the vulgate. However, white is implied because of the description on how to identify and treat leprosy found in leviticus. The word "laban" is used in Leviticus.
Posts: 270 | Registered: Jan 2011
| IP: Logged |
posted
I'm sorry but I can't sit by and read flagrant intentional twisting of Hebrew literature and law without demonstrating its ignorance.
White is understood from the context of Leviticus 13. One mishnah era Rabbi decided to be lenient toward white people lest they all be accounted lepers.
Mishnah describes the white of leprosy as 1 - white like snow (undertones of wine) 2 - white as Temple lime (milk & blood) 3 - white as an egg's skin 4 - white as wool
Thus the congenital leprosy of Gehazi was type 1 but either type skin leprosy is the colour of true blanco white Europeans, a colour not natural in the region where the biblical Israelites lived.
Upon encountering the reddish white and other white Europeans in the Roman era, rather than stigmatize them all as leprous descendants of Gehazi one Rabbi thought to re-interpret the law leniently as favor to supra-Alpine Europeans.
Being white from head to foot classified them as clean lepers as per Leviticus 13:12-13 --
quote: And if the leprosy break out abroad in the skin, and the leprosy cover all the skin of him that hath the plague from his head even to his feet, as far as appeareth to the priest; then the priest shall look; and, behold, if the leprosy have covered all his flesh, he shall pronounce him clean that hath the plague; it is all turned white: he is clean.
Neither is the blond hair an exception nor accepted:
quote: And when a man or woman hath a plague upon the head or upon the beard, then the priest shall look on the plague; and, behold, if the appearance thereof be deeper than the skin, and there be in it yellow thin hair, then the priest shall pronounce him unclean: it is a scall, it is leprosy of the head or of the beard.
This is not to disparage any white person but to uncover the illogic of concluding "leprous white as snow" was not the intention of 2 Kings 5:27 as spouted by BI's and their self-hating "black" sycophant supporters.
Posts: 8014 | From: the Tekrur in the Western Sahel | Registered: Feb 2006
| IP: Logged |
That guy is dumb. 7: 04 he claims the Picts were naked savages who covered themselves in 'clay' (didn't he mean woad?). The rest of the video further demonises white northern europeans all out of his own self-hatred and insecurity. According to 4: 36 he's married to a chinese woman and admits himself he's racially mixed. Anyone who is pro-white preservation he therefore is going to attack hence he calls white seperatists in his broadcasts as 'racists'. As for him attempting to debunk CI/BI he clearly hasn't researched anything.
He misses the main point about the history of 10 lost tribes of Israel. If they were practicing the Hebrew religion, continued their language and culture then they would never have become lost. Isaiah and Jeremiah however are very clear the Israelites lost their language (Hebrew) and turned to idolatry (losing their religion).
Posts: 1575 | From: - | Registered: May 2011
| IP: Logged |
posted
Anglo_Pyramidologist - By your own words and examples, you have classed yourself a degenerate idiot like Lioness - congratulations!
Posts: 22721 | Registered: Oct 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Anglo_Pyramidologist: I'm not sure how those pictures help you. I presume you have wrongly interpeted their hatwear and helmets as being their hair texture, which is incredibly clear on the black obelisk:
Its not hair texture. Nice try though. You must be desperate.
Look who is calling someone else desperate when he himself is the one up to his neck, swimming in desperation. Take a good look at the images Mike showed you. If you need glasses to see better, it can be arranged, you know.
Going by your plain distortion of the obvious truth, I take it you want us to believe those Hebrews are wearing head-covering that extends from the crown of their heads to their beards huh? Going by your LIES, it must be. Because it is not only the hair on their heads that is depicted as afro-textured but their beards are afro-textured as well.
So tell us; are those special covering they have for their afro-textured looking beards as well?
And you had the nerve to call Mike desperate. Geeez!
posted
You do not know what you are babbling about. A person whose leprosy has spread from head to toe is not a "clean leper." Such a statement is an oxymoron, as one cannot be a leper and clean simultaneously. Once the leprosy takes its course and either spreads over the entire body or is stopped then that person's basar [flesh] is considered tahaer [clean]. No where in torah is anyone called a "clean leper." People are clean from leprosy (not clean with leprosy as you suggest) and are tahaer to mingle in the camp.
Just to give you an example of this, consider the following new testament narrative (in part):
Mar 1:42 And as soon as he had spoken, immediately the leprosy departed from him, and he was cleansed.
Notice it says "leprosy departed..." This is why your statement is an oxymoron. If leprosy either spreads all over the body, stops its spread or the raw flesh turns white then that person no longer has leprosy.
Being white from head to toe is called "laban" (white) and that is it. Stop interpreting your prejudices and hangups into the law. If you had an iota of understanding of leprosy you would know that adamdam ve'laban (white and reddish) is a required symptom if one is to diagnose that the basar is indeed infected with the plague. A person with white skin bears no resemblence to a leper. Take that pseudojudaism to the other board and peddle it there buddy.
quote:Originally posted by alTakruri: Being white from head to foot classified them as clean lepers as per Leviticus 13:12-13 --
And if the leprosy break out abroad in the skin, and the leprosy cover all the skin of him that hath the plague from his head even to his feet, as far as appeareth to the priest; then the priest shall look; and, behold, if the leprosy have covered all his flesh, he shall pronounce him clean that hath the plague; it is all turned white: he is clean.
posted
What gets me about his who Black Israel, White Israel, China Israel is that the only reason why people claim to be Israel in the first place is two reason, 1)Because of Christianity, 2)because the Jews are supposed to Rule the world in some Communist opressive "Mellenial Age". The Jews were a bunch of backward bigot nomads until they migrated to Egypt and developed some sort of civilization. They incorporated many Traditions from Mesopotamia and Egypt into their Traditions and turned around and mocked the same people they copied demonizing them as "Satan" or the Enemy. Why people want to fight over their ancestors being Jews, when the Jews in the context of the Levant and Mesopotamia were Historically insignifigant. The Egyptians controlled their asses yet they utter not a peep about Tuthmose 3 wrecking shop on that ass. The only reason why people even care about the Jews is because of Christianity plain and simple.
And the idea that the New Jerusalem or New Kingdom where the Jews will rule and usher back in the Levitical laws is non sense. So in the future is someone eats pork or shrimp will be unclean(Despite Modern Medicine and Modern ways of cleaning Pork and Shrimp) or pick up sticks on the Sabbath(Despite Modern Laws and the fact that Billions of people don't even subscibe to the Bible or even know a Bible and Levitical Law exists)
Are the people and Tribes in the Amazon gonna be tracked down and Killed for Working on the Sabbath??
A bunch of Madness. Its just a racist ideology that was first created by history's most famous Bigots, who ritually mocked the mass slaughter of Egyptians every passover.-to say the Jews were jealous of the Greatness of Egypt is an understatement.
Posts: 8804 | From: The fear of his majesty had entered their hearts, they were powerless | Registered: Nov 2007
| IP: Logged |
posted
^^^ The reasons you outlay are not the reasons for identifying the Hebrews bro.
Also it is no more a madness if you understand, there are a BILLION people in Africa. Out of that number in Sub-Sahara African; half are the Hebrews. Notwithstanding those from among them who were taken as slaves to the Americas
Understanding this huge numbers of Hebrews in Africa and elsewhere explains the many problems affecting the continent and the black race. This is because of the curses that God himself put on the Hebrews and he dispersed them around the world pending their repentance and their return to him.
Thus identifying the Hebrews is not done for the reasons YOU think. Rather it is to help uplift the black race by getting them to return to their roots.
Posts: 620 | From: London | Registered: Mar 2009
| IP: Logged |
posted
Give me a break. Black people are not cursed. Are Indians Hebrews?? The Indian has been subjugated just like Africans, look at South Africa and Ghandi etc.
Are the Irish Hebrews, they were shipped in "Cargo Slave Ships" to the Americas fulfilling Deut. 28. So are the Irish Hebrews.
The main problem with black people is we have out face in the sand, turning to Mecca, Jerusalem, Bhudda etc. when we should be focusing on ourselves. In America you have Ignorance, Violence, Glorifying the scurge of our community known as "Thugs", Drugs etc. Now all of a Sudden we are Moors, We are Hebrews, We are Arab(NOI), we are this and that.
Our Roots are in Africa and our pantheon of gods consisted of Pagan gods, and animist traditions. The Greatest Temples our Brothers created was Waset to an Animist Pantheon, and to Amun the Hidden Ram God of the Nile. Why are people like you ashamed of that, Waset goes back thousands of years before the so called Jew knew that you can create temples, It was animist Africans that developed the idea of building in stone and Freestanding Columns.
Who made you ashamed of the Animist gods your forefathers worshipped??
What has the Jewish Religion done that is so great??
If the Jews were Gods Chosen why Was Egypt, Persia, Greece, Assyria, China, Sumer, etc. etc. etc. etc. More Advanced than anything the Jews Created??
There are many reasons why Africans live in poverty and none of it has to do with being cursed.
Posts: 8804 | From: The fear of his majesty had entered their hearts, they were powerless | Registered: Nov 2007
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Just call me Jari: Give me a break. Black people are not cursed. Are Indians Hebrews?? The Indian has been subjugated just like Africans, look at South Africa and Ghandi etc.
I take it, you see everything is OKAY with the black race. If it is not WHY. What is cause of of our numerous problems?
And yes, a huge chunk of Indians are also part of the Hebrews.
Posts: 620 | From: London | Registered: Mar 2009
| IP: Logged |
posted
As I said Earlier the only reason people even care or know about the Jews is because of Christianity. If it was not for Christianity neither Africans(Out side Ethiopians and Egyptians) or Northern Europeans would be claiming to be Jews nor would anyone consider them great.
Now all of a sudden the BHI and Brit. Israel want to disrespect Christianity, the same movement that introduced them to the Torah and Tenakh and history of the Jews in the First place.
The only thing great the Jews ever did was the Christian movement and that involved a mass number of Gentile Converts. So it blows any credibility of the Jews who always needed so called "Goyim" to do anything Great.
If you are so worried about worshiping Yahweh Africans created our own Jerusalem in Ethiopia.
Posts: 8804 | From: The fear of his majesty had entered their hearts, they were powerless | Registered: Nov 2007
| IP: Logged |
posted
^^^ Are you going to answer the questions I posed to you?
IS EVERYTHING OKAY with the black race? Why are blacks at the bottom in EVERYTHING on this earth?
Despite having the second biggest continent on the planet and it is overflowing with natural and mineral resources, why is Africa the poorest place on the planet? Why is it that black people wherever you find them are at the bottom of the rung and the laughing stock of the world?
WHY?
Answer these questions before you try to deny over half a billion people the RIGHT to know their history and thus UPLIFT themselves from their suffering by the knowledge gained.
posted
Dude I never said everything was O.K. In the Modern World Blacks have alot stacked against us.
Our Problems began when we started to trade with and let Europeans and Arabs into our Empires, treating them like Kings and accepting them.(We should have killed en masse any of them that stepped onto our soil that was not there for Fair Trade). Jean-Jacques Rousseau said that the African Empires in West Africa should be hanging every European on African soil trying to Trade what was European Trash for Human Cargo.
Our Problems began when we relied on European made Junk selling Human Cargo for that insead of developing other Industry like our Forefathers did Earlier.
Europeans and Arabs never had the intention of accepting others. Their goal was simple: Domination.
Now we sit up in the modern world talking about how the Original this was black, and the original that was black.
Our Brothers on the Nile developed Surgery, Free standing Columns, Stone Architecture etc. and yet all we care about is if they were black, never mind studying their Laws and Culture.
We need to go back to using Logic and Reason. We have to adopt ideas from the Enlightenment and other Philosophy(Both African and non African) and incorporate in back to what our forefathers and our brothers on the Nile did. As far as Im concerned Black people for the most part are a lost Cause. Turning to Jerusalem, Mecca and every other place on Earth yet at the same time trying claim being an African.
Show me the Egyptians Praying to Mecca and Arab Gods.
The Greatest Temples erected in Ancient Times was erected by Animist Africans not Jews or Arabs. The Arabs were Illiterate Barbarics all the way til the 7th century...Yet a grip of our people following Muhammed...
Like I said madness..
quote:Originally posted by Energy:
quote:Originally posted by Just call me Jari: Give me a break. Black people are not cursed. Are Indians Hebrews?? The Indian has been subjugated just like Africans, look at South Africa and Ghandi etc.
I take it, you see everything is OKAY with the black race. If it is not WHY. What is cause of of our numerous problems?
And yes, a huge chunk of Indians are also part of the Hebrews.
Posts: 8804 | From: The fear of his majesty had entered their hearts, they were powerless | Registered: Nov 2007
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Just call me Jari: If you are so worried about worshiping Yahweh Africans created our own Jerusalem in Ethiopia.
This is a prime reason to know your history before you challenge these things. Just to let you know; Ethiopia is the proper name of the African continent. That is how sub-Sahara Africa was known in ancient times. The demarcation of Africa is what led to a small part of Africa in the East being called Ethiopia. In the proper sense, Ethiopia is the name of the Sub-Sahara African continent.
Posts: 620 | From: London | Registered: Mar 2009
| IP: Logged |
That's straight Hebrew Torah. Quoting from the Greek gospels is no substitute for Torah law nor it's Hebrew&Aramaic mishnaic interpretations. Hebrews neither use nor need Greek scripture but on the other hand Greek scripture relies on the Hebrew which it is not faithful to in the least.
The Greek scriptures have no bearing on Hebrew literature be it Tanakh or Mishnah&Gemara. We go to the Hebrew literature for statute law (Torah) and case studies (Mishnah&Gemara) for application of the statutes. This is beyond understanding of racial cultist untrained in any authentic mainstrean traditional Judaism, such as the "teachings" of the BI/CI or the BHI.
Quite clearly the one who is white from head to toe "the leprosy have covered all his flesh" and though "he is clean" he still "hath the plaque." He can become unclean again if "quick raw flesh" later becomes noticeable in his skin.
Again for the ignorant rabble there are four colours of leprosy as explained in mishnah: 1 - white like snow (undertones of wine) 2 - white as Temple lime (milk & blood) 3 - white as an egg's skin 4 - white as wool; they are not all reddish-white as distorters pushing racialist agendas would make believe.
Gehazi is an example of a clean leper, white from head to toe as was the Syrian captain Naaman who though a leper was clean (all turned white) not with reddish-white spots which would be unclean.
quote: But if the raw flesh again be turned into white, then he shall come unto the priest; and the priest shall look on him; and, behold, if the plague be turned into white, then the priest shall pronounce him clean that hath the plague: he is clean.
And when the flesh hath in the skin thereof a boil, and it is healed, and in the place of the boil there is a white rising, or a bright spot, reddish-white, then it shall be shown to the priest. And the priest shall look; and, behold, if the appearance thereof be lower than the skin, and the hair thereof be turned white, then the priest shall pronounce him unclean: it is the plague of leprosy, it hath broken out in the boil. Lev 13:15-20
We see that the clean leper could be subject to bouts when his status could revert to unclean for a while until it returned to a clean state.
It is because of the inanities like the post I'm replying to, that you don't find rabbis or morehs teaching Hebrew law and principle to non-Jews but let them go merrily on their way down the wrong road since after all the Hebrew laws, principles, interpretations, and literature still stand intact as they have a good 2400 years at the least.
For those truly wanting to learn without racialist motivation as their reasoning I suggest a study not a mere reading of the entire 13th chapter of Leviticus even from a Christian bible.
quote:Originally posted by Confirming Truth: You do not know what you are babbling about. A person whose leprosy has spread from head to toe is not a "clean leper." Such a statement is an oxymoron, as one cannot be a leper and clean simultaneously. Once the leprosy takes its course and either spreads over the entire body or is stopped then that person's basar [flesh] is considered tahaer [clean]. No where in torah is anyone called a "clean leper." People are clean from leprosy (not clean with leprosy as you suggest) and are tahaer to mingle in the camp.
Just to give you an example of this, consider the following new testament narrative (in part):
Mar 1:42 And as soon as he had spoken, immediately the leprosy departed from him, and he was cleansed.
Notice it says "leprosy departed..." This is why your statement is an oxymoron. If leprosy either spreads all over the body, stops its spread or the raw flesh turns white then that person no longer has leprosy.
Being white from head to toe is called "laban" (white) and that is it. Stop interpreting your prejudices and hangups into the law. If you had an iota of understanding of leprosy you would know that adamdam ve'laban (white and reddish) is a required symptom if one is to diagnose that the basar is indeed infected with the plague. A person with white skin bears no resemblence to a leper. Take that pseudojudaism to the other board and peddle it there buddy.
quote:Originally posted by alTakruri: Being white from head to foot classified them as clean lepers as per Leviticus 13:12-13 --
And if the leprosy break out abroad in the skin, and the leprosy cover all the skin of him that hath the plague from his head even to his feet, as far as appeareth to the priest; then the priest shall look; and, behold, if the leprosy have covered all his flesh, he shall pronounce him clean that hath the plague; it is all turned white: he is clean.
Posts: 8014 | From: the Tekrur in the Western Sahel | Registered: Feb 2006
| IP: Logged |
posted
^^^^ Son, I know everything about the BHI and its teachings. Ethiopia is the name of Abbysinia or the Hebesh Empire. You know what Im talking about stop playing games dude.
Posts: 8804 | From: The fear of his majesty had entered their hearts, they were powerless | Registered: Nov 2007
| IP: Logged |
posted
The only curse that arguably fits Blacks to the T and, this is assuming that you regard the Bible as the inerrant word of God, is the curse of Ham: Gen 9:25 And he said, Cursed [be] Canaan; a servant of servants shall he be unto his brethren.
Of all races, the Negro is the only one to have been subjugated by all at some point in history. Admittedely, the Bible does not even consider the geneology of man south of the Sahara. So even that argument falls short. There is no Negro in the Bible. The people viewed humanity beyond their known world as "Beasts."
Posts: 1340 | Registered: Apr 2010
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Just call me Jari: Our Brothers on the Nile developed Surgery, Free standing Columns, Stone Architecture etc. and yet all we care about is if they were black, never mind studying their Laws and Culture.
We need to go back to using Logic and Reason. We have to adopt ideas from the Enlightenment and other Philosophy(Both African and non African) and incorporate in back to what our forefathers and our brothers on the Nile did. As far as Im concerned Black people for the most part are a lost Cause. Turning to Jerusalem, Mecca and every other place on Earth yet at the same time trying claim being an African.
Show me the Egyptians Praying to Mecca and Arab Gods.
The Greatest Temples erected in Ancient Times was erected by Animist Africans not Jews or Arabs. The Arabs were Illiterate Barbarics all the way til the 7th century...Yet a grip of our people following Muhammed...
Like I said madness..
First of all the Hebrews are not the same as the ancient Egyptians That is something you need to understand. Because the two people are in Africa does not mean they see themselves as the same people. They do not and have never done so.
Your problem is you assume because something is on the African continent it is a shared glory. Africans don't operate like that. Ancient Egypt and everything to do with it belongs to north Africa and not to the rest of the African continent. How you manage to lay claim to Egypt when me a continental African would not dream of doing so is beyond my comprehension. Therefore, I am not even going to bother discussing AE with you.
When we talk about Hebrews in Africa I am talking about the people in Sub-Sahara Africa. This my history and thus what interests me.
We don't relate to those civilisations you lay claim to in north Africa. Hebrew is who we are, not Egyptians. We need to know who we are as Sub-Saharan Africans so we can uplift themselves.
Posts: 620 | From: London | Registered: Mar 2009
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Energy: ^^^ Are you going to answer the questions I posed to you?
Despite having the second biggest continent on the planet and it is overflowing with natural and mineral resources, why is Africa the poorest place on the planet?
So let me get this straight, First you are a Jew now all of a sudden your problems have to do with a land the Jews never lived on except in the Nile Valley.
Second the reason Africa remains poor despite the Natural Resources is because of Corrupt African Stooges side stepping for European and Arab powers.
African have the potential and have created sophisticated Nations.
quote:Originally posted by Energy: Why is it that black people wherever you find them are at the bottom of the rung and the laughing stock of the world?
WHY?
Because black people made selling our Human cargo the #1 export when the rest of the world was putting a stop to the enslavement of their own people. You expect people to respect you when you are making your greatest industry slaves..??
Also your notion dismisses all the achievements Africans have made in the 19th-21st Century. Our people have made invention and developed Industry. Stop thinking in a slave mindset.
quote:Originally posted by Energy: Answer these questions before you try to deny over half a billion people the RIGHT to know their history and thus UPLIFT themselves from their suffering by the knowledge gained.
Dude our History is in Africa, some of us might be Jews or Arabs but majority were Africans who worshiped Animals and nature and Voodoo and ancestor worship.
Get over it.
Posts: 8804 | From: The fear of his majesty had entered their hearts, they were powerless | Registered: Nov 2007
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Confirming Truth: The only curse that arguably fits Blacks to the T and, this is assuming that you regard the Bible as the inerrant word of God, is the curse of Ham: Gen 9:25 And he said, Cursed [be] Canaan; a servant of servants shall he be unto his brethren.
Of all races, the Negro is the only one to have been subjugated by all at some point in history. Admittedely, the Bible does not even consider the geneology of man south of the Sahara. So even that argument falls short. There is no Negro in the Bible. The people viewed humanity beyond their known world as "Beasts."
WRONG! In case you are not aware, HAM had other children which include the ancient Egyptians. Why did the curse not affect them? ANSWER THAT!
Since you acknowledge the Negro had been subjugated by ALL since ancient times. Can you explain HOW this was even remotely possible taking into consideration the Negro is not WEAK. Maybe we are genetically mentally inferior huh. Is that what you are inferring?
Posts: 620 | From: London | Registered: Mar 2009
| IP: Logged |
posted
You are doing gymnastics with scripture there buddy. The law is quite clear on the matter, one who has the leprosy spread from head to toe and meets certain other criteria, he or she is no longer infected with the plague.
Again, show us a scripture of a "clean leper." You put your foot in your mouth dude. The term is an oxymoron... There is no such thing as a clean leper -- there are lepers who became clean from their leprosy but not a clean leper.
Post up a passage to a "clean leper." BTW... neither Naaman or Gehazi were clean of their leprosy.
quote:Originally posted by alTakruri: Being clean does not entail being free of leprosy.
That's straight Hebrew Torah. Quoting from the Greek gospels is no substitute for Torah law nor it's Hebrew&Aramaic mishnaic interpretations. Hebrews neither use nor need Greek scripture but on the other hand Greek scripture relies on the Hebrew which it is not faithful to in the least.
The Greek scriptures have no bearing on Hebrew literature be it Tanakh or Mishnah&Gemara. We go to the Hebrew literature for statute law (Torah) and case studies (Mishnah&Gemara) for application of the statutes. This is beyond understanding of racial cultist untrained in any authentic mainstrean traditional Judaism, such as the "teachings" of the BI/CI or the BHI.
Quite clearly the one who is white from head to toe "the leprosy have covered all his flesh" and though "he is clean" he still "hath the plaque." He can become unclean again if "quick raw flesh" later becomes noticeable in his skin.
Again for the ignorant rabble there are four colours of leprosy as explained in mishnah: 1 - white like snow (undertones of wine) 2 - white as Temple lime (milk & blood) 3 - white as an egg's skin 4 - white as wool; they are not all reddish-white as distorters pushing racialist agendas would make believe.
Gehazi is an example of a clean leper, white from head to toe as was the Syrian captain Naaman who though a leper was clean (all turned white) not with reddish-white spots which would be unclean.
quote: But if the raw flesh again be turned into white, then he shall come unto the priest; and the priest shall look on him; and, behold, if the plague be turned into white, then the priest shall pronounce him clean that hath the plague: he is clean.
And when the flesh hath in the skin thereof a boil, and it is healed, and in the place of the boil there is a white rising, or a bright spot, reddish-white, then it shall be shown to the priest. And the priest shall look; and, behold, if the appearance thereof be lower than the skin, and the hair thereof be turned white, then the priest shall pronounce him unclean: it is the plague of leprosy, it hath broken out in the boil. Lev 13:15-20
We see that the clean leper could be subject to bouts when his status could revert to unclean for a while until it returned to a clean state.
It is because of the inanities like the post I'm replying to, that you don't find rabbis or morehs teaching Hebrew law and principle to non-Jews but let them go merrily on their way down the wrong road since after all the Hebrew laws, principles, interpretations, and literature still stand intact as they have a good 2400 years at the least.
For those truly wanting to learn without racialist motivation as their reasoning I suggest a study not a mere reading of the entire 13th chapter of Leviticus even from a Christian bible.
quote:Originally posted by Confirming Truth: You do not know what you are babbling about. A person whose leprosy has spread from head to toe is not a "clean leper." Such a statement is an oxymoron, as one cannot be a leper and clean simultaneously. Once the leprosy takes its course and either spreads over the entire body or is stopped then that person's basar [flesh] is considered tahaer [clean]. No where in torah is anyone called a "clean leper." People are clean from leprosy (not clean with leprosy as you suggest) and are tahaer to mingle in the camp.
Just to give you an example of this, consider the following new testament narrative (in part):
Mar 1:42 And as soon as he had spoken, immediately the leprosy departed from him, and he was cleansed.
Notice it says "leprosy departed..." This is why your statement is an oxymoron. If leprosy either spreads all over the body, stops its spread or the raw flesh turns white then that person no longer has leprosy.
Being white from head to toe is called "laban" (white) and that is it. Stop interpreting your prejudices and hangups into the law. If you had an iota of understanding of leprosy you would know that adamdam ve'laban (white and reddish) is a required symptom if one is to diagnose that the basar is indeed infected with the plague. A person with white skin bears no resemblence to a leper. Take that pseudojudaism to the other board and peddle it there buddy.
quote:Originally posted by alTakruri: Being white from head to foot classified them as clean lepers as per Leviticus 13:12-13 --
And if the leprosy break out abroad in the skin, and the leprosy cover all the skin of him that hath the plague from his head even to his feet, as far as appeareth to the priest; then the priest shall look; and, behold, if the leprosy have covered all his flesh, he shall pronounce him clean that hath the plague; it is all turned white: he is clean.
UBBFriend: Email this page to someone!
Printer-friendly view of this topic