Lifestyle > Train of Thought
JESUS' LINEAGE (JESUS WAS AN AFRICAN) THE PROOF
Doggystylin:
--- Quote ---Who gives a shit what color God is? What are you fools really arguing about? How is GOD even a color? GOD can't even be a man because he CREATED MEN... you said "Jesus and his father are black"... how stupid.
Now Jesus... He coulda been Black I guess, Or maybe just not as white as he is in those pictures.. But still who cares? Does God being black makes you closer to being like God? Or does it just upset you to see people claim he's White? And now you're all excited "Ha! Crackers! God was black, I Got Proof.. na na na na na na"... cuz no matter how good your vocabulary is, you come off like a lil kid arguing over dumb shit.
--- End quote ---
exactly, and godbody is nothin but a racist dumbfuck who needs to be banned
infinite59:
I wouldn't be upset in the least if Jesus was black. I just don't like racist muthafucka's like GODBODY. Moreover, like Malcolm X said, "If anyone ever tries to get you to believe in a God that doesn't look like you, you give them that God back." Following that same logic, I would never believe in a man as G-d, nor a black man at that as G-d.
I don't believe in Jesus as God, Jesus was a prophet, a man. (PBUH) And G-d (Allah) is above all colors and creeds, he is the creator of all things, and there is no like unto him.
Trauma-san:
Jesus was a jew. Jews aren't black, and they aren't white. Simple as that. He walked around in the sun all day, and was a laborer (carpenter) by trade. He probably had very dark brown skin, partially by heritage and partially by the sun beating down on his face, and curly jewish hair. His hair was probably cut above the shoulders, because in Corinthians the disciple Paul teaches 11:14
Doth not even nature itself teach you, that, if a man have long hair, it is a shame unto him?
11:15
But if a woman have long hair, it is a glory to her: for her hair is given her for a covering.
Jesus also was probably a large man, tall, and muscular. First, he was a laborer, and second, he threw a fit in the temple, and threw all the money changers out on their head, a skinny guy couldn't have gotten away with that. Jesus was also forced to carry the beam his cross was made out of, which was probably an insult to his muscularity (oh, make the big guy carry his own beam if he's that strong). The old testament testifies of Jesus (the lamb) being Crucified, without a bone in his body being broken (In the days, it was customary for crucifiction victims to have their legs broken, it sped the death process)... the new testament reads that was true, no bone in his body was broken (which is further testament that he was a strong, large, well-bodied man, not a weak, fragile john lennon like shown on most paintings).
we know Romans were white. Surely you won't argue against that. If Jesus were black, that would have been brought up against him by the Romans occupying the area at the time, and it would have been mentioned in his trial. Ditto about his maritial status, Jesus was probably married, because if he wasn't, jewish customs would consider him an outcast to be unmarried at 34. It wasn't brought up against him at his trial, so you can probably assume, 1. he wasn't an outsider (Black, or White, or Asian, or whatever), and 2. He was in most aspects your 'average' jewish man (married, employed, etc.). Jesus also had brothers, and sisters! Most people don't realize that. One of Jesus's best friends at the end of his life was apparently John. They loved each other so much John went to sleep on Jesus's shoulder at the famous last supper. Jesus even made special mention to Peter, after being resurrected, about John.
Another interesting note, is that most people don't realize the rulers of Egypt were Black. The Egyptian Pharoah's were ALL black. The jewish people they enslaved were not black! That said, it *IS* possible that all humankind traces back to black origins, and that goes hand in hand with the bible. There's nothing in the bible that says Adam and Eve were white, and there's nothing that says Jesus was white. What's it matter anyways? LOL. If he was black, great!
In the end, Jesus was a regular man, while on earth, in almost all regards. He was the son of God, but while on earth, he lived as we do, had the same struggles we do, had a mom, a father, brothers, sisters, friends, probably a wife, had a job, a home, etc. etc. etc. Read the bible, you can learn a *TON* of stuff about him just by what's in there.
The absolute *best* story describing what jesus was like in the bible is found when Jarius comes to him telling him his daughter is dead. Jesus sneaks over to Jarius' home, with Simon Peter, James, and John (his 3 best friends), walks in the room, and says "Talita Cumi" ("Wake up, little lamb"), and the dead girl rose, then he left, and told them all not to mention it, LOL. I think that one story pretty much sums up everything he stood for, and tells you a lot about his life, his love, etc... Peace~
This is a recent picture showing what Anthropologists consider a more accurate depiction of Christ.
P.S., if you're going to respond, respond intelligently, and respectfully.
Trauma-san:
By the way, Mary's lineage traces back to SETH, not CAIN. Ham was a descendant of Cain, not of Seth.
By having us all look up Luke, all you did was prove that Mary was a descendant of Seth! If she was a descendant of Cain, she would be black. Basically, you proved you're wrong about the whole thing, using your logic. Ham was a descendant of Cain, and Ham is nowhere in her lineage.
And Joseph's Lineage, to me, is irrelevant, since he wasn't even his natural father, but if you want to go line by line, Even in the Islamic tradition, Jesus was a descedant of King Solomon! That's why he was considered the King of the Jews, through Joseph's ancestry, he was literally the King of Jerusalem, although nobody knew it. The passage you gave did nothing but confirm that. Joseph was a descendant of Solomon, and Mary's lineage was traced all the way back to Seth, son of Adam. Ham was a desendant of Cain, not of Seth. Mary is not a descendant of Ham. It's kind of mind boggling that you would shoot yourself in the foot like that, but whatever floats your boat and finds your lost remote.
Cliftone_Santiago_909:
--- Quote ---By the way, Mary's lineage traces back to SETH, not CAIN. Ham was a descendant of Cain, not of Seth.
By having us all look up Luke, all you did was prove that Mary was a descendant of Seth! If she was a descendant of Cain, she would be black. Basically, you proved you're wrong about the whole thing, using your logic. Ham was a descendant of Cain, and Ham is nowhere in her lineage.
And Joseph's Lineage, to me, is irrelevant, since he wasn't even his natural father, but if you want to go line by line, Even in the Islamic tradition, Jesus was a descedant of King Solomon! That's why he was considered the King of the Jews, through Joseph's ancestry, he was literally the King of Jerusalem, although nobody knew it. The passage you gave did nothing but confirm that. Joseph was a descendant of Solomon, and Mary's lineage was traced all the way back to Seth, son of Adam. Ham was a desendant of Cain, not of Seth. Mary is not a descendant of Ham. It's kind of mind boggling that you would shoot yourself in the foot like that, but whatever floats your boat and finds your lost remote.
--- End quote ---
Good Work, OOHEAVEN. (double-o-heaven).
Navigation
[0] Message Index
[#] Next page
[*] Previous page
Go to full version