The bible never mentioned any east asian or blacks.

I think I'm done with this thread. There are a lot of stupid and ignorant commentators, and many things posted that are not true.

 

And your next Joke?

 

i thought it was an appropriate response given that you think anybody would believe a populations can stand still for 2,000 years. that said, the middle east is a new term and also a political designation rather than territorial one usually meaning, arab states.

 

i agree. goodbye.

 

The focus of the Bible is on culture, values and knowing God.... not race, which is a strong message in itself.

 

this is true, however this knowledge has been corrupted by the west who have relentlessly insisted and over promoted the notion over the last 500 years that the messiah was a white man and so too are gods chosen people.

 

Not that the color really matters, but maybe he wasn't the brown man so many academic progressives like to imagine him to be.

What I mean is, maybe a lot of the corrupted knowledge is actually the belief that the knowledge was corrupted (if that makes sense, in responding to what you stated).

 

Phooey. All extant art from the era clearly show them as black with other peoples are white or tan.

 

you said "colour is not important but he wasnt brown" lmao! if colour is not important he can be whatever we say he is right? right?

dude, just do as you said and leave the thread for your own sake.

 

Yes, and ancient cave paintings show there must have been white people in Australia.

(if you don't buy the symbolism argument)

 

Why would you think he was brown? Because people in that area look brown today?
Do you realize how illogical that is?

Don't believe everything from the so-called "bible scholars" in academics.

 

Biblically based Christians don't believe that. People of power might use any influential entity to twist words and take things completely out of context...twisting the words in the Bible happened in my own Southern Baptist denomination as an effort to keep power over slaves pre civil war.

But if you are true to the Bible the clear message is that all people, man and woman, were created in the image of God, and race is simply not a relevant factor. The Bible is "colorblind"....and we should be as well.

 

but if colour isnt important (your words) then he can be brown, right?

 

Revelations 1:14,15 ~ Messiah's hair was wooly and his feet like burnt brass. Thus, he is brown/black skinned. Mizrahi, Yemeni, and Sefardi Jews are dark, many with wooly hair.

 

irrelevant - let's stick to the topic and admit that what I wrote is the TRUTH

 

Hard to answer. I don't know what you meand by 'populations can stand still'. Culturally the Middle East is similar to that or 4000 years ago. Patriarchal. Even the intervention of Islam only brought many gods under one god - Allah. That's not the only population that consider their culture important. Africans and West Indians also like to be reminded of their own culture. That's why we see events in the UK celebrating this. Nothing wrong with that, unless it interferes with the Laws of the 'Host' Nation. The Middle East may use modern machinery and medicines but it still remains culturally behind modern times. Is that good or bad? That's for you to decide.

 

That isn't the Messiah. It's 'the Ancient One' - God. This verse, as with many in Revelations - has been taken out of the OT Daniel 7:9. Much of the imagery in Revelation is from the OT. It has been adapted to include Jesus. The Essenes used the same imagery and added Mother Earth in their 'Revelations'.

 

Contrary to your mistaken belief, that blurb is a reference to the Messiah ~ https://biblehub.com/commentaries/revelation/1-14.htm

Those commentators are experts on the subject.

 

That's your opinion. Is that why many of those commentators mention Daniel?
'
'thus, in the vision that appeared to Daniel Dan 7:9, it is said of him who is there called the "Ancient of Days," that "his garment was white as snow, and the hair of his head like the pure wool." It is not improbable that John had that representation in his eye, and that therefore he would be impressed with the conviction that this was a manifestation of a divine person. We are not necessarily to suppose that this is the form in which the Saviour always appears now in heaven, anymore than we are to suppose that God appears always in the form in which he was manifested to Isaiah Isa 6:1, to Daniel Dan 7:9, or to Moses and Aaron, Nadab and Abihu in the mount, Exodus 24:10-11. The representation is, that this form was assumed for the purpose of impressing the mind of the apostle with a sense of his majesty and glory'..

'His head and his hairs were white like wool, as white as snow: whiteness signifies purity; whiteness of hair signifies old age ordinarily, which commonly is attended with more prudence, as having most experience: hence this appearance of Christ may denote both his purity and wisdom, and that he is the Ancient of days; see Daniel 7:9,13,22; though there the term of Ancient of days belongs to God the Father, yet it also agreeth to Christ, who is equal with the Father, as to his Divine nature.'

'From the garments of the great High Priest, St. John passes on to himself. What he had seen as a momentary foretaste of glory at the Transfiguration, he sees now as the abiding condition of the Christ. In Daniel 7:9 "the Ancient of days" has "the hair of his head like pure wool." This snowy whiteness is partly the brightness of heavenly glory, partly the majesty of the hoary head. The Christ appears to St. John as a son of man, but also as a "Divine Person invested with the attributes of eternity." As a flame of fire. "The Lord thy God is a consuming fire" (Deuteronomy 4:24). "I the Lord search the heart, I try the reins" (Jeremiah 17:10). The flame purifies the conscience and kindles the affections'.. They simply transfer the OT Scriptures to Jesus - supposedly part of the Trinity.

There's very little in the New Testament that doesn't rely on the OT. Apart from Christian (Gospel writers) additions, most of Jesus - the Jewish Preacher's - teachings are found in the OT. He taught from the OT. He practised the OT. Even his baptism and supposed temptation accord with Jewish beliefs. That's why John Baptised people in the Jordan. The Beatitudes are taken from the OT - mainly Isaiah and the Psalms. Jesus was a good Jew well versed in the Scriptures - as all Jewish boys should have been, having been been schooled in them from the age of 5.

Matthews use of prophecies in the Nativity story are bogus, and combined with Lukes account make a mish mash of a story completely destroyed by the Laws and regulations - Jewish and Roman - of the time.According to Matthew Jesus was in Egypt until Herods death, while Luke puts him at home in Nazareth 40 days after his birth. Look at Jewish ritual. Who's right? They can't both be. Matthew uses Hosea 11 and switches the name Israel to Jesus, but ignores the rest of the chapter which fits Israel, but nothing to do with Jesus. Unless Jesus moved away from God and sacrified to images of Baal, etc. The other prophecies all relate to the Jews.

 

pretty bigoted for you to insist that NO Israelites were white or brown skinned people

 

oh so in 1500 there were no people in Egypt, Iran, Syria, Palestine, Lebanon, Iraq, Jordan, Saudi Arabia, Libya, Algeria?

your posts are ridiculously poor

 

racist nonsense.

most Arabs and Persians are not "black"

 

It was very difficult to classify Yul Brenner once they doused him with sunscreen.

 

Bible passage please? Apart from the fact that Moses is merely a character in the mythologicaLstory, Egypt was ruled by pharaohs of varying skin colour. The Nubian Pharaohs who sometimes ruled the upper Nile Egypt were dark brown skinned. The Egyptians were/are. as today. The Hyksos - a Semetic tribe were lighter skinned, like the Canaanites. The fact that the supposed Moses was brought up in Pharaohs Palace doesn't mean he was any different to the Canaanites/Hebrews. Pharaohs of Egyptian background had slaves of various colours in its court. It had Nubians as mercenaries in its army at various times. I've read all the Black Hebrew nonsense where they take things out of context and assume things that are not there. I love the idea that Miriam must have been black because her skinned turned white when God struck her with leprosy. Even the skin of a 'white' man turns white with leprosy..

 

it doesnt matter what colour the ancient egyptians were but they were definitely black. egypt was once

ruled by romans/greeks so at that stage they were brown/tanned and ppl with brains smaller than microchip
believe populations stand still and are identical to 2,000 years ago

even in a region that has seen more conquests than any nation on earth, yes ppl really are this dumb norwegians are white.


just thought id throw in this irrelevant detail.