I have a question

[Asclepias]

When we see Christ, His hair will be white as lamb's wool. Even though His body is almost 2,000 years old, it is glorified and incorruptible. It's not aging. So why is His hair?

Maybe God is an old Black guy. Something like Morgan Freeman. The bible also said that Jesus hair was like wool.

 

[pacer]

When we see Christ, His hair will be white as lamb's wool. Even though His body is almost 2,000 years old, it is glorified and incorruptible. It's not aging. So why is His hair?

Maybe God is an old Black guy. Something like Morgan Freeman. The bible also said that Jesus hair was like wool.

I think it was after the resurrection...his hair was white as wool.

 

[Asclepias]

When we see Christ, His hair will be white as lamb's wool. Even though His body is almost 2,000 years old, it is glorified and incorruptible. It's not aging. So why is His hair?

Maybe God is an old Black guy. Something like Morgan Freeman. The bible also said that Jesus hair was like wool.

I think it was after the resurrection...his hair was white as wool.

Well the Canaanites were black and the original people of what is now Palestine. Jesus was supposedly born there in Bethlehem. Makes sense to me.

 

[Chuckt]

Maybe God is an old Black guy. Something like Morgan Freeman. The bible also said that Jesus hair was like wool.

I think it was after the resurrection...his hair was white as wool.

Well the Canaanites were black and the original people of what is now Palestine. Jesus was supposedly born there in Bethlehem. Makes sense to me.

The Canaanites were the people who lived in Palestine before the time of Joshua. They included the Phoenicians, and while some of them were dark skinned, they were not black as were those who later populated some parts of Africa. Ham, the father of Canaan, refers to those who peopled Africa and later became a name for the Egyptians. Ham means “hot” and not black, as some have asserted.

https://bible.org/question/are-canaanites-black

 

[Asclepias]

I think it was after the resurrection...his hair was white as wool.

Well the Canaanites were black and the original people of what is now Palestine. Jesus was supposedly born there in Bethlehem. Makes sense to me.

The Canaanites were the people who lived in Palestine before the time of Joshua. They included the Phoenicians, and while some of them were dark skinned, they were not black as were those who later populated some parts of Africa. Ham, the father of Canaan, refers to those who peopled Africa and later became a name for the Egyptians. Ham means “hot” and not black, as some have asserted.

https://bible.org/question/are-canaanites-black

What were they if they were not Black? That link doesnt even make sense.

[ame="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Z8XVILm-sn8"]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Z8XVILm-sn8[/ame]

Black Canaan: The first cities, the Amorite invaders

Fine Judaica | Male Hebrew Names and Meanings

CHAM (ח&#1501: Hebrew name meaning "blackness" or "heat." In the bible, this is the name of Noah's second son. The Anglicized form is Ham.

 

[Chuckt]

[Black Canaan: The first cities, the Amorite invaders

There are no credentials listed on that site and the site is just an attack on white people.
What do you call Italians in this country? They didn't own slaves and when did they immigrate? If I found different information in an Italian museum, what would you say about their evidence?

 

[Asclepias]

[Black Canaan: The first cities, the Amorite invaders

There are no credentials listed on that site and the site is just an attack on white people.
What do you call Italians in this country? They didn't own slaves and when did they immigrate? If I found different information in an Italian museum, what would you say about their evidence?

Why would you say that? its telling the truth not attacking anyone. What credentials does your link have that somehow top the multiple ones I have listed?

What do Italians have to do with what we are talking about? BTW can you answer my first question? If they werent Black then what were they?

 

[Chuckt]

[Black Canaan: The first cities, the Amorite invaders

There are no credentials listed on that site and the site is just an attack on white people.
What do you call Italians in this country? They didn't own slaves and when did they immigrate? If I found different information in an Italian museum, what would you say about their evidence?

Why would you say that? its telling the truth not attacking anyone. What credentials does your link have that somehow top the multiple ones I have listed?

What do Italians have to do with what we are talking about?

They are scholars on Bible dot org.

There is no evidence that I have found that Italians are racist against Black people.

Legitimate Black researchers, (as opposed to those who do it to gain favor with the Albinos and thus make money),

This quote is racially charged and it is found on the website you gave. I went to a University and it wouldn't pass English 101 because you can't make a claim like that without giving facts.

 

[Asclepias]

There are no credentials listed on that site and the site is just an attack on white people.
What do you call Italians in this country? They didn't own slaves and when did they immigrate? If I found different information in an Italian museum, what would you say about their evidence?

Why would you say that? its telling the truth not attacking anyone. What credentials does your link have that somehow top the multiple ones I have listed?

What do Italians have to do with what we are talking about?

They are scholars on Bible dot org.

There is no evidence that I have found that Italians are racist against Black people.

Legitimate Black researchers, (as opposed to those who do it to gain favor with the Albinos and thus make money),

This quote is racially charged and it is found on the website you gave. I went to a University and it wouldn't pass English 101 because you can't make a claim like that without giving facts.

I dont get how that makes them more credible because they are scholars. Scholars also told us Columbus discovered America.

I know from first hand experience some italians are racist against Blacks. However, I still dont get your point in bringing them up.

You have to admit there are some Black researchers that will not publish their findings because they know they will be called Afrocentric. So they go for the money instead of the truth. however I can see where that would be construed as racist. How about the other links that dispute your findings?

 

[Chuckt]

Why would you say that? its telling the truth not attacking anyone. What credentials does your link have that somehow top the multiple ones I have listed?

What do Italians have to do with what we are talking about?

They are scholars on Bible dot org.

There is no evidence that I have found that Italians are racist against Black people.

Legitimate Black researchers, (as opposed to those who do it to gain favor with the Albinos and thus make money),

This quote is racially charged and it is found on the website you gave. I went to a University and it wouldn't pass English 101 because you can't make a claim like that without giving facts.

I dont get how that makes them more credible because they are scholars. Scholars also told us Columbus discovered America.

I know from first hand experience some italians are racist against Blacks. However, I still dont get your point in bringing them up.

You have to admit there are some Black researchers that will not publish their findings because they know they will called Afrocentric. So they go for the money instead of the truth. however I can see where that would be construed as racist. How about the other links that dispute your findings?

The website is pandering to their audience.

The argument that people did something wrong so therefore your website must be true is a weak argument. AD HOC ERGO PROCTOR HOC.

Post hoc ergo propter hoc, Latin for "after this, therefore because of this", is a logical fallacy (of the questionable cause variety) that states "Since Y event followed X event, Y event must have been caused by X event." It is often shortened to simply post hoc. It is subtly different from the fallacy cum hoc ergo propter hoc, in which two things or events occur simultaneously or the chronological ordering is insignificant or unknown, also referred to as false cause, coincidental correlation, or correlation not causation.

Post hoc ergo propter hoc - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

 

[Book of Jeremiah]

Jesus walked around a corner and a demon almost walked right into Him. The demon was shocked to see Him, and asked Him what He was doing here before His time. Christ silenced the demon so the demon couldn't alert the others. 'Before His time' means the demons know He's coming after them, down here, on earth. They know how this all ends.

Did they not know about the cross? Was that an end around by God and Christ that the demons didn't even see coming? I'd love it if that's how it happened, the best strategic move ever! But I find it a little hard to believe that the demons didn't know the plan.

And:
God told Adam to replenish the earth.
Replenish means to make full or complete again. From the root word plenir - to fill. Adam was to refill the earth.
So what filled it before Adam was told to redo it?

No, Satan didn't know nor did his principalities or rulers know about it, Irish Ram. Satan is indeed the most subtle of all created beings ( Lucifer was first an angel created by God before he fell ) but he is not match for the Spirit of God who is eternal having no beginning nor end.

It is written:

We do, however, speak a message of wisdom among the mature, but not the wisdom of this age or of the rulers of this age, who are coming to nothing. No, we speak of God's secret wisdom, a wisdom that has been hidden and that God destined for our glory before time began. None of the rulers of this age understood it, for if they had, they would not have crucified the Lord of Glory, However it is written:

No eye has seen,
no ear has heard,
no mind has conceived
what God has prepared for those
who love him-

But God has revealed it to us by his Spirit. The Spirit searches all things, even the deep things of God. - 1 Corinthians 2: 6 - 10

And again, it is written:

For who among men knows the thoughts of a man except the man's spirit within him? In the same way no one knows the thoughts of God except the Spirit of God. We have not received the spirit of the world but the Spirit who is from God, that we may understand what God has freely given us.

This is what we speak, not in words taught us by human wisdom but in words taught by the Spirit, expressing Spiritual truths in spiritual words. The man without the Spirit does not accept the things that come from the Spirit of God, for they are foolishness to him, and he cannot understand them, because they are spiritually discerned. The spiritual man makes judgments about all things, but he himself is not subject to any man's judgment:

For who has known the mind of the Lord that he may instruct him?

But we have the mind of Christ.

-1 Corinthians 11: -16

Both of these are what Paul refers to as the meat of the Word and is not for babies although I have to tell you that I recently met a street preacher who is 3 yrs old in the Lord and the Lord has done such a quick work on this young man if I had not known I would have thought he were 20 yrs old in the Lord for the revelation the Lord has given him in the Word. I believe God is doing a very quick work in new Christians these days because the time is short, Irish.

As to the second question, replenish? I don't know. I never asked the Lord as it never mattered to me.

 

[IlarMeilyr]

WHY do any angels dance on the heads of pins?

 

[whitehall]

I love the forum but the religion forum is just an outlet for radicals to ridicule Christian values. Digging up Old Testament scripture for ridicule don't make you smart. It makes you a bigot.

 

[Book of Jeremiah]

You have a point, Whitehall, in that not everyone who is writing on the religion forum has the same motive. That is sad but true.

 

[Asclepias]

They are scholars on Bible dot org.

There is no evidence that I have found that Italians are racist against Black people.



This quote is racially charged and it is found on the website you gave. I went to a University and it wouldn't pass English 101 because you can't make a claim like that without giving facts.

I dont get how that makes them more credible because they are scholars. Scholars also told us Columbus discovered America.

I know from first hand experience some italians are racist against Blacks. However, I still dont get your point in bringing them up.

You have to admit there are some Black researchers that will not publish their findings because they know they will called Afrocentric. So they go for the money instead of the truth. however I can see where that would be construed as racist. How about the other links that dispute your findings?

The website is pandering to their audience.

The argument that people did something wrong so therefore your website must be true is a weak argument. AD HOC ERGO PROCTOR HOC.

Post hoc ergo propter hoc, Latin for "after this, therefore because of this", is a logical fallacy (of the questionable cause variety) that states "Since Y event followed X event, Y event must have been caused by X event." It is often shortened to simply post hoc. It is subtly different from the fallacy cum hoc ergo propter hoc, in which two things or events occur simultaneously or the chronological ordering is insignificant or unknown, also referred to as false cause, coincidental correlation, or correlation not causation.

Post hoc ergo propter hoc - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

The website you listed is pandering to its audience. Why is that one more credible than a website I listed? Why are you avoiding the question posed by the other links? Lastly please explain how you can be black but not "Black" in that area of the world during that time?

 

[LittleNipper]

WHY do any angels dance on the heads of pins?

Who said that they would?

 

[LittleNipper]

Maybe God is an old Black guy. Something like Morgan Freeman. The bible also said that Jesus hair was like wool.

I think it was after the resurrection...his hair was white as wool.

Well the Canaanites were black and the original people of what is now Palestine. Jesus was supposedly born there in Bethlehem. Makes sense to me.

The Hebrews were likely olive skinned. Of course there were Blacks, just like there are "red" skinned, "yellow" skinned, and "white" skinned people. But those that embraced the sunny hot climates likely interbred and produced humans who were darker in skin tone. Those that liked colder climates tended to get less sun and needed less skin protection ---- interbred lighter skin tones. And I really believe that this took only thousands of years and not millions....

 

[Asclepias]

I think it was after the resurrection...his hair was white as wool.

Well the Canaanites were black and the original people of what is now Palestine. Jesus was supposedly born there in Bethlehem. Makes sense to me.

The Hebrews were likely olive skinned. Of course there were Blacks, just like there are "red" skinned, "yellow" skinned, and "white" skinned people. But those that embraced the sunny hot climates likely interbred and produced humans who were darker in skin tone. Those that liked colder climates tended to get less sun and needed less skin protection ---- interbred lighter skin tones. And I really believe that this took only thousands of years and not millions....

Olives are black when ripe. If you mean lighter skinned that is possible but there are plenty of lighter skinned Africans. Black Africans come in all color shades despite what is shown to us. The reason I say this is because people act like the modern day image of Jews are representative of the true Jewish people. "Jewish" was a religion not a color. These modern day Jews are actually from Europe and not Palestine. That image gets stuck in peoples head and they cant take hearing that the original Jews were not white. Its well documented that Ethiopians have a longer history of being Jewish by about 500 years before the European Jews.

Face of a Canaanite man (fragment) from Beth Shan Painting on a jar (about 1300 BCE)

 

[LittleNipper]

Well the Canaanites were black and the original people of what is now Palestine. Jesus was supposedly born there in Bethlehem. Makes sense to me.

The Hebrews were likely olive skinned. Of course there were Blacks, just like there are "red" skinned, "yellow" skinned, and "white" skinned people. But those that embraced the sunny hot climates likely interbred and produced humans who were darker in skin tone. Those that liked colder climates tended to get less sun and needed less skin protection ---- interbred lighter skin tones. And I really believe that this took only thousands of years and not millions....

Olives are black when ripe. If you mean lighter skinned that is possible but there are plenty of lighter skinned Africans. Black Africans come in all color shades despite what is shown to us. The reason I say this is because people act like the modern day image of Jews are representative of the true Jewish people. "Jewish" was a religion not a color. These modern day Jews are actually from Europe and not Palestine. That image gets stuck in peoples head and they cant take hearing that the original Jews were not white. Its well documented that Ethiopians have a longer history of being Jewish by about 500 years before the European Jews.

Face of a Canaanite man (fragment) from Beth Shan Painting on a jar (about 1300 BCE)

Did you know that Jews with the name Cohen are related to the Levitical priesthood? Yes, anyone can convert to Judaism; however, Hitler wanted to stamp out what he considered a "race." I do not see people generally converting to that "religion" unless they happen to marry a Jewish spouse --- though it can happen. And I do realize that Moses married an Ethiopian woman. However, that in no way means that she was "black" or not "black."

 

[Asclepias]

The Hebrews were likely olive skinned. Of course there were Blacks, just like there are "red" skinned, "yellow" skinned, and "white" skinned people. But those that embraced the sunny hot climates likely interbred and produced humans who were darker in skin tone. Those that liked colder climates tended to get less sun and needed less skin protection ---- interbred lighter skin tones. And I really believe that this took only thousands of years and not millions....

Olives are black when ripe. If you mean lighter skinned that is possible but there are plenty of lighter skinned Africans. Black Africans come in all color shades despite what is shown to us. The reason I say this is because people act like the modern day image of Jews are representative of the true Jewish people. "Jewish" was a religion not a color. These modern day Jews are actually from Europe and not Palestine. That image gets stuck in peoples head and they cant take hearing that the original Jews were not white. Its well documented that Ethiopians have a longer history of being Jewish by about 500 years before the European Jews.

Face of a Canaanite man (fragment) from Beth Shan Painting on a jar (about 1300 BCE)

Did you know that Jews with the name Cohen are related to the Levitical priesthood? Yes, anyone can convert to Judaism; however, Hitler wanted to stamp out what he considered a "race." I do not see people generally converting to that "religion" unless they happen to marry a Jewish spouse --- though it can happen. And I do realize that Moses married an Ethiopian woman. However, that in no way means that she was "black" or not "black."

Europeans converted to that religion long before Hitler was around. Pretty good evidence Moses himself was Black and Ethiopians are definitely Black people. Have you ever thought how odd it was that if Moses was white why did no one would say anything about it in Egypt? I honestly think the only difference between the Egyptians and the Jewish was that of religion and not skin color.