Whirlwind

[waterproof]

Doggy you talmbout male bodyparts, nh B.

that's your homo gene that provoke you to think like that, im talking about lungs, kidneys, liver, throat, behind the ears, ribs, chin. it doesnt matter how big you are, i will break you down

 

[fiat_money]

Bible prophecy stated that only Hebrews would go into captivity by ship. The Africans (Hamites) and Arabs (Ishmaelites) sold Negros (Biblical Hebrew Israelites) to Europeans (Edomites)... The reason you dont know ur true heritage is cuz it was prophecy for us to forget that knowledge...

This is interesting. Are you referring to Deuteronomy 28:68? I don't see where it says Hebrews will be the "only" to be taken by ships into slavery, but it does indeed say that the Israelites shall be taken on ships back to Egypt and sold as slaves.

That's not too surprising of a statement though, since they supposedly had to cross the Red Sea to leave Egypt; and typically (miracles excluded), seas are traversed by ships. So that's pretty much the primary way one would expect slaves-to-be to be taken back into Egypt.

Also interesting is that the same Red Sea--along with the Indian Ocean and even the Atlantic Ocean--was one of the bodies of water the Arabs used to transport millions of Africans from North and East Africa to be enslaved centuries before the Trans-Atlantic Slave Trade.

Certainly, if Europeans taking Africans across the Atlantic Ocean counts as satisfying Deuteronomy 28:68, then Arabs taking Africans across the Red Sea--a sea quite relevant to the biblical exodus story--centuries earlier satisfies Deuteronomy 28:68 even better.

Therefore, without a modifying adjective/adverb such as "only", a number of slave transports can satisfy Deuteronomy 28:68 by your standards. Of course, since Deuteronomy 28:68 explicitly states the Israelites will be taken to Egypt, the Trans-Atlantic Slave Trade does not actually satisfy the verse.

So if Deuteronomy 28:68 is the basis for your argument, it does nothing to support the claim that all Sub-Saharan Africans are descendants of Hebrews/Israelites.

Besides, it's not like Sub-Sahara, North, and East Africa were unpopulated prior to the supposed biblical exodus of the Israelites; so it's no stretch to think that Sub-Saharan, Northern, and Eastern Africans are likely just descendants of many generations of other Sub-Saharan, Northern, and Eastern Africans.

 

[One Spliff]

This is interesting. Are you referring to Deuteronomy 28:68? I don't see where it says Hebrews will be the "only" to be taken by ships into slavery, but it does indeed say that the Israelites shall be taken on ships back to Egypt and sold as slaves.

That's not too surprising of a statement though, since they supposedly had to cross the Red Sea to leave Egypt; and typically (miracles excluded), seas are traversed by ships. So that's pretty much the primary way one would expect slaves-to-be to be taken back into Egypt.

Also interesting is that the same Red Sea--along with the Indian Ocean and even the Atlantic Ocean--was one of the bodies of water the Arabs used to transport millions of Africans from North and East Africa to be enslaved centuries before the Trans-Atlantic Slave Trade.

Certainly, if Europeans taking Africans across the Atlantic Ocean counts as satisfying Deuteronomy 28:68, then Arabs taking Africans across the Red Sea--a sea quite relevant to the biblical exodus story--centuries earlier satisfies Deuteronomy 28:68 even better.

Therefore, without a modifying adjective/adverb such as "only", a number of slave transports can satisfy Deuteronomy 28:68 by your standards. Of course, since Deuteronomy 28:68 explicitly states the Israelites will be taken to Egypt, the Trans-Atlantic Slave Trade does not actually satisfy the verse.

So if Deuteronomy 28:68 is the basis for your argument, it does nothing to support the claim that all Sub-Saharan Africans are descendants of Hebrews/Israelites.

Besides, it's not like Sub-Sahara, North, and East Africa were unpopulated prior to the supposed biblical exodus of the Israelites; so it's no stretch to think that Sub-Saharan, Northern, and Eastern Africans are likely just descendants of many generations of other Sub-Saharan, Northern, and Eastern Africans.

your trying to be smart but you just exposed your stupidity once again...

u dont need a ship to from israel to egypt u DAMN FOOL...look on map before u make such stupid comments.

the israelites never went into eypt the first time by ship THIS IS BIBLE 101, moses split the red sea (gulf of suez) and they crossed over, that was the paictular route they took.

theres no history of them going back into egypt, let onlone ON SLAVE SHIPS...they could walk from israel into egypt.

the egypt is talking about a modern day egypt, or qa future land of slavery.... thats why your physical whiteman bullshit doesn't fly over here, because the bible wasn't given to every body especially coons like you, take your bullshit somehwere else....the egypt is referring to america, and so does babylon in propecy...

egypt was a land of slavery for israel, same way america was also...that doesn't take a genius to figure out.

and yes the negroes of the arab slave trade were israelites, it tells u that in joel 3 and psalm 83...

nice try tho.

 

[fiat_money]

...the israelites never went into eypt the first time by ship THIS IS BIBLE 101, moses split the red sea (gulf of suez) and they crossed over, that was the paictular route they took...

I never said the Israelites left Egypt by ship or that they were taken back to Egypt by ship in the biblical exodus story. If they had to use some form of miracle to split the Red Sea before crossing, that means they crossed the Red Sea; which is what I said. I also did not say that by sea was the only way to take the Israelites back to Egypt, I said that's "the primary way one would expect"; which means that there are alternatives--such as slower, more difficult land routes--but the main way would likely be the faster sea route.

And although Ancient Egypt isn't exactly the same geographically as present day Egypt, it was definitely not located in North America. So it's no stretch to think that a verse mentioning going back to "Egypt", referring to a people that left Ancient Egypt--written at a time when Ancient Egypt was a known place--would probably be referring to Ancient Egypt as opposed to The United States of America.

So, while your post was quite emotional, it did nothing to refute any of my statements.

 

[One Spliff]

I never said the Israelites left Egypt by ship or that they were taken back to Egypt by ship in the biblical exodus story. If they had to use some form of miracle to split the Red Sea before crossing, that means they crossed the Red Sea; which is what I said. I also did not say that by sea was the only way to take the Israelites back to Egypt, I said that's "the primary way one would expect"; which means that there are alternatives--such as slower, more difficult land routes--but the main way would likely be the faster sea route.

And although Ancient Egypt isn't exactly the same geographically as present day Egypt, it was definitely not located in North America. So it's no stretch to think that a verse mentioning going back to "Egypt", referring to a people that left Ancient Egypt--written at a time when Ancient Egypt was a known place--would probably be referring to Ancient Egypt as opposed to The United States of America.

So, while your post was quite emotional, it did nothing to refute any of my statements.

no u fucking clown...theres stories in the bible of certain israelites walking into egypt during the time they were invaded by the babylolians.

they traveled from jerusalem to egypt ON FOOT...not by ship u stupid clown, u cant USE A SHIP to cross the gulf of suez u dumb ass, LOOK ON A MAP...lol i thought u were supposed to be intelligent ?...

the same body of land moses split by a miracle is NOT possible to cross by ship u idiot...lol...nobody is this stupid.

the israelites never went back into egypt into slavery, notice how u AVOIDED that simple fact...

ok genuis...explain this...

joel 3:1For, behold, in those days, and in that time, when I shall bring again the captivity of Judah and Jerusalem,

3And they have cast lots for my people; and have given a boy for an harlot, and sold a girl for wine, that they might drink.

4Yea, and what have ye to do with me, O Tyre, and Zidon, and all the coasts of Palestine? will ye render me a recompence? and if ye recompense me, swiftly and speedily will I return your recompence upon your own head; 5Because ye have taken my silver and my gold, and have carried into your temples my goodly pleasant things: 6The children also of Judah and the children of Jerusalem have ye sold unto the Grecians, that ye might remove them far from their border. 7Behold, I will raise them out of the place whither ye have sold them, and will return your recompence upon your own head: 8And I will sell your sons and your daughters into the hand of the children of Judah, and they shall sell them to the Sabeans, to a people far off: for the LORD hath spoken it.



^^ what is this describing ?

lets see u make a fool of yourself again.

 

[fiat_money]

no u fucking clown...theres stories in the bible of certain israelites walking into egypt during the time they were invaded by the babylolians.

they traveled from jerusalem to egypt ON FOOT...not by ship u stupid clown, u cant USE A SHIP to cross the gulf of suez u dumb ass, LOOK ON A MAP...lol i thought u were supposed to be intelligent ?...

the same body of land moses split by a miracle is NOT possible to cross by ship u idiot...lol...nobody is this stupid.

the israelites never went back into egypt into slavery, notice hwo u AVOIDED that simple fact...

I never said that people never left Egypt on land; I never said the Israelites were taken back to Egypt as slaves; and I never said the "same body of land" that the Israelites supposedly crossed miraculously was the only path in Red Sea that the Israelites could be taken back in ships across.

Perhaps your emotions are impeding your reading comprehension, because you seem to be responding as though I typed things that I did not.

 

[One Spliff]

I never said that people never left Egypt on land;

you said and i quote "That's not too surprising of a statement though, since they supposedly had to cross the Red Sea to leave Egypt; and typically (miracles excluded), seas are traversed by ships. So that's pretty much the primary way one would expect slaves-to-be to be taken back into Egypt."

why make this comment if there is NO history of it every happening and if its the most inconvenient route of travel ?

clearly u have no idea where the red sea is located on a map, lol.

I never said the Israelites were taken back to Egypt as slaves;

lol YES U DID...

u said "So it's no stretch to think that a verse mentioning going back to "Egypt", referring to a people that left Ancient Egypt--written at a time when Ancient Egypt was a known place--would probably be referring to Ancient Egypt as opposed to The United States of America.

^^ lol...dont try back tracking just because u are getting murdered...we are debating deu 28:68...so obnviously we are talking about israelites going back into the land of egypt, which u clearly imply here.

and I never said the "same body of land" that the Israelites supposedly crossed miraculously was the only path in Red Sea that the Israelites could be taken back in ships across.

yes u did...you said:

"Certainly, if Europeans taking Africans across the Atlantic Ocean counts as satisfying Deuteronomy 28:68, then Arabs taking Africans across the Red Sea--a sea quite relevant to the biblical exodus story--centuries earlier satisfies Deuteronomy 28:68 even better."

how exactly is this relevant when the red sea is geographically impossible to cross when coming from israel to egypt LOL !!!!

what does th arab slave trade have to do with anything ?

were u asleep during gerogprahy class ?

u failed miserably...

 

[Bodhi]

spliff I see you're still losing outchea

 

[One Spliff]

spliff I see you're still losing outchea

did'nt you confess to having 'learnt' alot from me ?

stay in your place.

not about to go bk n forth with u...fiat_money is already making a fool out of himself with his embarrasing geographical errors, the same way u did last week.

 

[Bodhi]

did'nt you confess to having 'learnt' alot from me ?

stay in your place.

not about to go bk n forth with u...fiat_money is already making a fool out of himself with his embarrasing geographical errors, the same way u did last week.

I did learn a lot about your religion. Didn't say I believed any of it to be true.

 

[VIBE]

Fiat is toying with his prey...

 

[waterproof]

I did learn a lot about your religion. Didn't say I believed any of it to be true.

You aint learned shit!!! Because we have no religion.

I thought i was well verse in the Tanach and The Bible until i came into this forum, Brothers like Judahxulu, One Spliff, Sounds of Isarel, Isarelites and others have Hebrew Knowledge and not to be boasting i haven't not seen a Hebrew lost a debate once in this forum.

that's because you cant no defeat truth!!!!

if yall niggas dont want to believe yall Hebrews but some Hamites, that's fine with me

 

[Hyde Parke]

this could take awhile.

 

[waterproof]

And what get me about you 2/3rd's aka 85'ers negro's is that the Whiteman done got yall lost. Yall dont beleive yall Hebrews but the white man show yall, that yall are hebrews in all his movies and that shit fly over your head.

Im about to show yall niggas something since yall never believe yall Hebrew brothers but yall will listen to the white man and jew all the time. The Jew know yall Hebrews he produced AMISITAD AND FIANCE ROOTS.

On Amisitad they showed yall niggas that when was on the Slave Ship we was still singin in Joy to YAHUWAH (even though it say Yahweh, for they cant stand the name of the Most High so they changed it) we on the ships rockin turbans, didnt the scripture say's the hebrews wore turbans, And praying like real Hebrews face to the ground palms up.

[video=youtube;zFYuOE_gp5I]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zFYuOE_gp5I[/video]

Yall niggas done watch ROOTS a million times with your father and grandparents over the years and the Hebrew Customs flew right over your heads, but yall niggas is smart and shit, the white man love making yall look STUPID.

[video=youtube;j7lvg8jdCuU]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=j7lvg8jdCuU[/video]

 

[Bodhi]

You aint learned shit!!! Because we have no religion.

I thought i was well verse in the Tanach and The Bible until i came into this forum, Brothers like Judahxulu, One Spliff, Sounds of Isarel, Isarelites and others have Hebrew Knowledge and not to be boasting i haven't not seen a Hebrew lost a debate once in this forum.

that's because you cant no defeat truth!!!!

if yall niggas dont want to believe yall Hebrews but some Hamites, that's fine with me

both of ya'll lost in our last debate

 

[Bodhi]

And the 4 of you can't even agree with each other about the scriptures which you claim to be "the truth". If it were truly the truth, there would be no disagreement between all of you. What you follow IS a religion by definition and you can go look it up. Once you do, I just won another debate against you.

 

[One Spliff]

A lot of the Bible is written in code and parable so no it does not say America or United States.

The Israelites never went back into Egypt on ships... Remember during the Exodus the Most High destroyed Egypt?

Why do you make it so hard to understand the truth?

Christ wasnt born on December 25 yet you dont give the white man a hard time when he have you celebrating Christmas, Easter, and etc etc.

whats the point in even debating people like fait_money ?

hes whiteman knowledge is futile in this debate thats why he ran away with his tail tucked between his legs.

look @ jaded righteouness...dude has never even read the bible, yet he thinks he can hold down a debate, lol.

im not guna waste my time with these clowns anymore.

ask them to break down joel 3, and notice how they IGNORE IT.

 

[One Spliff]

this could take awhile.

lol exactly, because you cant show any physical or historical evidence of israelites going back into egypt in ships...therefore this can go on forever...

clowns like vibe calling himself american yet his father is mexican...shows u how stupid people in the SL really are...

fait money calles himself afircan american by 'political' terms...in other words hes claiming to be two nationalities at once LOL...yet i asked him what his ancestors were called n watch language thye spoke etc...and he had no idea.

im delaing with fucking reprobates right now, so its pointless even debating.

you are probably the same, another coon with no identity, no knowledge or wisdom..just scoffing on internet forums.

why not actually read the bible before u actually debate, it will save u looking like idiots.

 

[Hyde Parke]

One Spliff;3429945

you are probably the same, another coon with no identity, no knowledge or wisdom..just scoffing on internet forums.

why not actually read the bible before u actually debate, it will save u looking like idiots.

man, chill on all that, and stop actin like niggas do when they get a hold of a little self discovery. I aint scoffn here in this flimsy ass thread, you doing that on your own. I wont go in on you, because readin back on my posts in here, i can see how you could think that, but im not about that. You can be the most read nigga on the planet, but that dont mean nothing if your mind and spirit not in the right place, so spare me with that read the bible mess. Get back to teaching and getting higher learning, instead of thinkin you know what others niggas do and dont know.

 

[fiat_money]

you said and i quote "That's not too surprising of a statement though, since they supposedly had to cross the Red Sea to leave Egypt; and typically (miracles excluded), seas are traversed by ships. So that's pretty much the primary way one would expect slaves-to-be to be taken back into Egypt.";

why make this comment if there is NO history of it every happening and if its the most inconvenient route of travel ?

clearly u have no idea where the red sea is located on a map, lol.

Where in that statement does it say that people never left Egypt on land? In the biblical exodus story, the Israelites left Egypt by miraculously crossing the Red Sea, correct? This means that in the biblical exodus story, as a means of escape, the Israelites needed to cross the Red Sea to leave Egypt.

lol YES U DID...

u said "So it's no stretch to think that a verse mentioning going back to "Egypt" referring to a people that left Ancient Egypt--written at a time when Ancient Egypt was a known place--would probably be referring to Ancient Egypt as opposed to The United States of America."

^^ lol...dont try back tracking just because u are getting murdered...we are debating deu 28:68...so obnviously we are talking about israelites going back into the land of egypt, which u clearly imply here.

Where in that statement does it say the Israelites were taken back to Egypt by ship? As I mentioned, I was talking about what the verse in question was referring to; and the verse was referring to how the Israelites--in the future--will supposedly be taken to back to Egypt by ship. Me saying that a bible verse is talking about Israelites going back to Egypt by ship is not the same as me saying that the Israelites went back to Egypt by ship. There's a clear difference in tenses.

yes u did...you said:

"Certainly, if Europeans taking Africans across the Atlantic Ocean counts as satisfying Deuteronomy 28:68, then Arabs taking Africans across the Red Sea--a sea quite relevant to the biblical exodus story--centuries earlier satisfies Deuteronomy 28:68 even better."

how exactly is this relevant when the red sea is geographically impossible to cross when coming from israel to egypt LOL !!!!

what does th arab slave trade have to do with anything ?

were u asleep during gerogprahy class ?

u failed miserably...

I never said the Israelites had to be taken by ship directly from Israel. There are numerous routes that could be taken from Egypt across the Red Sea to land and then into Israel, or even across the Mediterranean. So there are in fact multiple sailable sea routes by which Israelites could be transported into Egypt. Sure, depending on Egypt's size and their relations with the nations/states around them at the time this "prophecy" is supposed to be fulfilled, it may be much less convenient to take the Israelites by sea to Egypt. However, it would be even more inconvenient to take them all the way to the United States of America.

Don't blame me if you think it doesn't make sense for the Israelites to be taken to Egypt by ship to be sold as slaves, I'm not the one who wrote the verse.

It's impressive though; you seem to be reading my posts, yet somewhere in between you reading my posts and responding, you conclude things were typed that were not.