Is It Wrong or Contrary To Be Black And Christian??

[SL8Rok]

you dont understand. youre the one who's ignorant. the thang that im sayin is why walk with the people who are enslaved. why not go against the people who are doing the enslaving. in the civil rights era why should you walk with people being persecuted? why not go up to the white people who were doing the persecution. you give all these white people props for walking with the niggaZ but dont want to criticize them for not going to the root of the problem. gtfohwtbs. you either a hunkey or a uncle tom. anyway you swing it you ll never understand.

Go against how? You don't think siding with the oppressed in their struggle for freedom isn't standing against the ones doing the oppressing? You don't think smuggling slaves to freedom isn't going against the oppressors? Go up to them and do what? Preach to them the evils of their wicked doctrine and wicked deeds? Tell them they need to repent of their atrocities? Guess what THEY DID, and often lost their lives because of it. Being a ****** lover in those days was almost as bad as being a ****** and being a ****** lover, especially openly would be a death sentence. I'm not giving them props for walking with blacks (and mind you they did much more than that) but I do think that there is an unequal and highly one sided hatred of white christians. What would u want them to go up to them and say? You think they would hesitate to kill whites who challenged the system any more than they would kill blacks? No and they have shown that they will kill whites as well.

I'm no hunkey or uncle tom just a person who doesn't harbor hate and a victim mentality toward all whites for the actions of a few.

 

[SL8Rok]

Modern day Christianity is the only religion that was ever called Christianity and it was formulated early in the 'first' millennium. I think first by Julius Caesar with Catholicism and then Constantine with Christianity. BC doesn't even really mean Before Christ, it means Before Caesar. Jesus Christ and Julius Caesar have the same initials and Constantine implemented that into his new power tool called Christianity. They took all the Biblical stories from Ancient Kemet and the original Hebrew Bible and twisted the story to fit their agenda. By the way, Western Civilization of today is still the Roman Empire, it never went anywhere, they just call it something else to throw us off.

Someone needs a history class.

 

[SL8Rok]

I said Christianity is the tool, not the Bible. Christianity mistranslates the Bible to fit their belief system.

Christianity as you know it was created out of Rome where they also had slaves. The Christian crusades used that christianity to conquer the moors and re-take Europe but they didn't stop there, the inquisition came next, and then the Slave Trade followed, and now you got the aftermath of people who can't let it go despite Religion not really being that important to the leaders who now rely mostly on TV and the media to brainwash the world.

1. No christianity as I know it comes from the bible. What you are talking about is catholicism and I whole heartedly agree that its a corruption of true biblical christianity.

2. The inquisition was catholics killing christians who wouldn't submit to the doctrine of the Pope and the vatican.

 

[Israelites]

anybody that feels or believes the Word of GOD has ANYTHING to do w/christianity has been misinformed..... the NT confirms the prophecy of the OT, the bible goes in on religion as a whole but folks to blind to see... Whatever was taken out by the roman catholics was done by the hand of the Most High, nothing they added or took away from HIS WORD changed any meaning that would throw us off of the true meaning of Christ & doing the WILL of the Father...

The LORD stated he would publish HIS WORD in everyone's language in order for ALL to receive HIS WORD, so for all that talk of learning Hebrew to understand it, is non sense (my people had the LORD in their presence when they had their OWN language & still was thrown into captivity do to their disobedience) & often used by those who DON'T UNDERSTAND the book in their own langauge.

True priest of GOD know & understand the book, & true priest of GOD should have some understanding of HISTORY before they try to defend any religion especially Christianity (mother whore), all other religions stem from them (they're the harlots of the mother whore)

The WORD was around before the gentiles /romans got their hands on it, THEY DIDN'T UNDERSTAND IT BECAUSE THE WORD WASN'T GIVEN TO THEM TO UNDERSTAND, but do to the disobedience of Israel, our ancestors went into captivity leaving the gentiles in charge of it...

what happens to people when they don't understand something? They MAKE UP stuff to fit their own beliefs & bring in false doctrine to feed to the masses (going to heaven or hell after one dies, praying over unclean foods,rapture, trinity, pagan holidays, "sun" day worship, etc etc.......these are the false doctrines brought in by the catholics)

the sad part is that EVERYTHING that they preach can not be found in the BIBLE nor is it backed by scripture & my people not wanting to "question" GOD, just follows right along with what's being told to them instead of the proper research for the answer.

The LORD is the author of HIS WORD, man just wrote it down for others to read & follow (it was given to Israel to give to the World).... It's up to the person reading HIS WORD to get UNDERSTANDING of it before one tries to say it's corrupt or has been mistranslated by the slavemasters to throw us off... (those slavemasters didn't know what to add or take out, because if they did, we would see christmas in the bible, the name of Zeus, Horus or any other pagan god they wanted us to follow, etc.... that's if they were in control)

the catholics were able to paint a picture of a suppose "christ" that everybody has been following since birth... but with the proper research you can find out who that suppose "christ" really is.

the folks on this board love to hear themselves talk & downplay the MOST HIGH, i feel for you but I can also understand where you coming from...if you had serious questions about the book & have been getting the same answers for years that doesn't make sense, I would question the Bible & the Most High as well.. But if you serious about wanting to know, it's up to you search the scriptures & find the answers out of the mouth of two or three witnesses using both the Ot & Nt.... the whole one verse out of a chapter isn't going to cut it or answer anything....

But again people just love to hear themselves talk & some just love to show how ignorant they are & will remain that way by choice.

What up Blue, you still arguing with folks I see...lol...

 

[ineedpussy]

Go against how? You don't think siding with the oppressed in their struggle for freedom isn't standing against the ones doing the oppressing? You don't think smuggling slaves to freedom isn't going against the oppressors? Go up to them and do what? Preach to them the evils of their wicked doctrine and wicked deeds? Tell them they need to repent of their atrocities? Guess what THEY DID, and often lost their lives because of it. Being a ****** lover in those days was almost as bad as being a ****** and being a ****** lover, especially openly would be a death sentence. I'm not giving them props for walking with blacks (and mind you they did much more than that) but I do think that there is an unequal and highly one sided hatred of white christians. What would u want them to go up to them and say? You think they would hesitate to kill whites who challenged the system any more than they would kill blacks? No and they have shown that they will kill whites as well.

I'm no hunkey or uncle tom just a person who doesn't harbor hate and a victim mentality toward all whites for the actions of a few.

man you crazy. them hunkeys need to be killing they own people if they love slaves like that. they would go up and say plz mr. hunkey stop enslaving these people its wrong. and if they didnt kill them. thats how they show they respect for us kill those hunkeys and die with em.

 

[Chike]

Someone needs a history class.

I'm not interested in HIS story.

 

[EvanR12]

Often when discussing my christian faith with friends, family and online the question commonly comes up, "how can you be black and christian that is the religion that was given to you by slave masters" or "how can you be black and christian that religion was used to enslave your ancestors". And while I cannot deny that many professing christians were indeed responsible for slavery and using parts of the bible to justify brutalizing other people, I would argue that these reasons are very short sided and obtuse in looking at the whole of christianity as practiced.

But first I would like to give a stab at the answer how can I be black and christian. The key points of about christianity that I'm looking at isn't its history or the people who supposedly practice it, however when examining any religion or epistemology, the key thing to look at is its teachings and message. And in that I find that christianity is the truth. Every religion and ideology has its black sheep. Surely the socialist wouldn't dare associate socialism with Hitler, Mao and Stalin and they would infact argue that they weren't true socialist. Likewise simply because people have taken christianity and twisted it to their own ends doesn't discredit or take away from christianity it only lends weight to the age old adage that where there is a will there is a way.

Now onto the idea that christianity is a slave religion. That is an obtuse take on the subject. Yes there were slave masters who used parts of the bible (out of context and interpreted FOR them seeing as how slaves couldn't read and therefore couldn't give said passages their context) to justify slaves being slaves and whites being masters, but this is also to ignore the large number of white christians in the abolition movement who risked life and limb to get blacks to freedom and all the while evangelizing them. I believe this argument is also ignorant of history because before the time of slavery, the rise of the catholic church or european colonization of the world there were christian churches in Africa. The Ethiopic Orthodoxy and Coptic/Alexandrian Church in Egypt where african churches, so to say that Africans were forced into Christianity is a complete and total lie. Africans had been accepting Christianity since the 2nd century. Now if we are going to apply this obtuse standard to christianity we must also do the same with Islam because Muslim slave traders took blacks from africa and sold them as slaves. In many instances converting blacks to islam for the purpose of going out to find other blacks to enslave. That would make Louis Farrakahn both the biggest coon/hypocrite in america because he is promoting a slave religion that supposedly helps black people.

To summarize I'd like to say that it is in no way problematic or contrary to be black and christian. While we can all agree the bible was used to justify the enslavement and kiling ofl black people in africa, where most people are unwilling to understand or compromise is that parts of the bible or any book taken out of context can be justified to do anything. The communist manifesto and subseuqent writers on communism have had their works used to justify the worst kind of human atrocities in the 20th century. Evolution was turned into a racist doctrine called social darwinism which stated that all non-whites were subhuman and attempted to put science behind that. And yet you ask any evolutionist if they believe this to be true and they would say no. Why then this one sided and often hypocritical and always hateful stance against christianity? The arguments blacks use against it are all based on fallacious points and normally facetious facts. Simply because Jesus is depicted as white in many churches has no bearing on what the bible says about Jesus skin color (note it doesn't say anything). Slaves being indoctrinated into christianity says nothing about the validity of christianity, at most that says (as I've said before) anything can be used to justify anything. And as much as people want to assert it, there is no evidence scholarly otherwise, to prove the bible was tampered with. So in all there really is no contradiction or problem, either philosophically or logically with being black and christian.

only read first small paragraph

Im no expert, but in that case, you should be against the government that was present during slavory because you could argue that was a reason for slavery's occurance, lets say everyone "voted" for slavery, are you against voting?

My point is that if there is a fringe element of any church, that follows the idea that one race is superior, or encourages violence, I am pretty sure we would all agree that, it is a bad church and has become corrupt. But if the church you are in, is against racism and violence and this church follows beliefs similar to yours do not shut it out just because of some title "christianity" etc. The churches that are responsible for the most violence, are radical Islam churches, not radical christianity(in this country).

At this moment, they currently are responsable for the encouragement of the most large scale violence. Some of the violence currently inflicted by the radical Islamics is just as bad as slavery was back then, but now it is against the "West" instead of the African Americans. I am not trying to smear Islam in any sense though I acknowledge that its only a small portion of them that are corrupt just as there may be a small portion of radical Christians that partake in a violent act that I would not support.

 

[kingblaze84]

Sad, just sad, Brothers trying to justify their slave religion because they just can't let go.

Tragic, really. He wouldv'e made himself a fine slave back in the day.

 

[tri3w]

although this would make the notion that Julius Caesar died in 44 BC really weird.

lmao........i caught that too lol

 

[janklow]

Or a lie. *shrug* I mean that's really not that many years difference. You do know they even changed the calendar too, right?

when your argument is basically "BC means Before Caesar and the logic is everything was secretly changed around to hide the fact that it means Before Caesar," it's still weird.

 

[VIBE]

anybody that feels or believes the Word of GOD has ANYTHING to do w/christianity has been misinformed..... the NT confirms the prophecy of the OT, the bible goes in on religion as a whole but folks to blind to see... Whatever was taken out by the roman catholics was done by the hand of the Most High, nothing they added or took away from HIS WORD changed any meaning that would throw us off of the true meaning of Christ & doing the WILL of the Father...

The LORD stated he would publish HIS WORD in everyone's language in order for ALL to receive HIS WORD, so for all that talk of learning Hebrew to understand it, is non sense (my people had the LORD in their presence when they had their OWN language & still was thrown into captivity do to their disobedience) & often used by those who DON'T UNDERSTAND the book in their own langauge.

True priest of GOD know & understand the book, & true priest of GOD should have some understanding of HISTORY before they try to defend any religion especially Christianity (mother whore), all other religions stem from them (they're the harlots of the mother whore)

The WORD was around before the gentiles /romans got their hands on it, THEY DIDN'T UNDERSTAND IT BECAUSE THE WORD WASN'T GIVEN TO THEM TO UNDERSTAND, but do to the disobedience of Israel, our ancestors went into captivity leaving the gentiles in charge of it...

what happens to people when they don't understand something? They MAKE UP stuff to fit their own beliefs & bring in false doctrine to feed to the masses (going to heaven or hell after one dies, praying over unclean foods,rapture, trinity, pagan holidays, "sun" day worship, etc etc.......these are the false doctrines brought in by the catholics)

the sad part is that EVERYTHING that they preach can not be found in the BIBLE nor is it backed by scripture & my people not wanting to "question" GOD, just follows right along with what's being told to them instead of the proper research for the answer.

The LORD is the author of HIS WORD, man just wrote it down for others to read & follow (it was given to Israel to give to the World).... It's up to the person reading HIS WORD to get UNDERSTANDING of it before one tries to say it's corrupt or has been mistranslated by the slavemasters to throw us off... (those slavemasters didn't know what to add or take out, because if they did, we would see christmas in the bible, the name of Zeus, Horus or any other pagan god they wanted us to follow, etc.... that's if they were in control)

the catholics were able to paint a picture of a suppose "christ" that everybody has been following since birth... but with the proper research you can find out who that suppose "christ" really is.

the folks on this board love to hear themselves talk & downplay the MOST HIGH, i feel for you but I can also understand where you coming from...if you had serious questions about the book & have been getting the same answers for years that doesn't make sense, I would question the Bible & the Most High as well.. But if you serious about wanting to know, it's up to you search the scriptures & find the answers out of the mouth of two or three witnesses using both the Ot & Nt.... the whole one verse out of a chapter isn't going to cut it or answer anything....

But again people just love to hear themselves talk & some just love to show how ignorant they are & will remain that way by choice.

What up Blue, you still arguing with folks I see...lol...

Why don't you post here more?

 

[Chike]

when your argument is basically "BC means Before Caesar and the logic is everything was secretly changed around to hide the fact that it means Before Caesar," it's still weird.

You don't think it's possible that they tyrants and elites changed the calender just like they changed 'religion'? They agenda is world domination, and they have pretty much achieved that. You think changing the calender is weird like they wouldn't do such a thing in order to benefit themselves? It's like they say, truth is stranger than fiction. Anything that is weird, you should gravitate towards it, to be honest. You know what else is weird? basing a time line off of someone that never existed.

 

[And Step]

when your argument is basically "BC means Before Caesar and the logic is everything was secretly changed around to hide the fact that it means Before Caesar," it's still weird.

Not weird at all. Many historians have made the argument that BC means before Caesar. Remember at that particular point in time, Romans ruled, not Christians. Christians were an insignificant fringe group with no power or clout whatsoever. What are the chances that a polytheistic Nation of people at that time the most powerful the world had ever seen would mark time based on a group hardly anyone had heard of? BC designation has only been in 1500 years in the western world.

It is not like Christians have not co-opted things and used them for their own benefit.(i.e sun worship, Easter, The Cross, etc)

 

[janklow]

You don't think it's possible that they tyrants and elites changed the calender just like they changed 'religion'?

what i mainly think is that it's convenient that your argument is based around "elites changed the calendar."

Not weird at all. Many historians have made the argument that BC means before Caesar. Remember at that particular point in time, Romans ruled, not Christians. Christians were an insignificant fringe group with no power or clout whatsoever. What are the chances that a polytheistic Nation of people at that time the most powerful the world had ever seen would mark time based on a group hardly anyone had heard of? BC designation has only been in 1500 years in the western world.

so are we saying that Romans ruled when the BC/AD term was developed? in this case i am not sure why they'd "hide" that BC means before Caesar; if it's done to celebrate Caesar (whichever Caesar)... why not just outright do it and be done with it?

and "many historians" have made EVERY kind of argument under the sun.

 

[Chike]

what i mainly think is that it's convenient that your argument is based around "elites changed the calendar."

.... um ok. I don't get how you came up with that, but sure...

so are we saying that Romans ruled when the BC/AD term was developed? in this case i am not sure why they'd "hide" that BC means before Caesar; if it's done to celebrate Caesar (whichever Caesar)... why not just outright do it and be done with it?
and "many historians" have made EVERY kind of argument under the sun.

That would defeat the purpose of creating the religion in the first place. BC was known as "Before Caesar" before they changed it to Before Christ around the time Constantine formulated Christianity. Why is that so hard to understand?

 

[busayo]

You don't think it's possible that they tyrants and elites changed the calender just like they changed 'religion'? They agenda is world domination, and they have pretty much achieved that. You think changing the calender is weird like they wouldn't do such a thing in order to benefit themselves? It's like they say, truth is stranger than fiction. Anything that is weird, you should gravitate towards it, to be honest. You know what else is weird? basing a time line off of someone that never existed.

oh come, you are grasping unto straws here

 

[Chike]

oh come, you are grasping unto straws here

No you

___________________________________________

 

[And Step]

The argument is not against the Romans, but against Christians who decided to co opted the terminology.

 

[judahxulu]

SMH. Its like Groundhog's Day up in this piece....

Concerning the thread subject : ITS ALL GREEK TO ME.

 

[janklow]

BC was known as "Before Caesar" before they changed it to Before Christ around the time Constantine formulated Christianity. Why is that so hard to understand?

i suppose i am disputing that there was a "BC" concept that was changed under Constantine. that's when people started with the Anno Domini concept?

The argument is not against the Romans, but against Christians who decided to co opted the terminology.

if it's meant to honor Caesar, what's the purpose of co-opting it and keeping the Caesar part a secret? and if it's been changed "Before Christ" and no longer refers to Caesar at all... does it really honor Caesar?