Thousands of mainstream denominational Christians have literally lost their lives in a vain attempt to bring the Gospel of Christ to the Third Word.
We can find no better an example of this vanity than in the 1951 Hollywood movie, The African Queen, where Christian missionaries — played by Katharine Hepburn and Robert Morley — comically attempt to teach African natives to sing Christian hymns:
Remarkably, this film depicted Africans as they were — not in some remote colonial past — but rather as recently as World War II — and it is still accurate for much of Africa today.
No doubt this “racist” film will soon be demonized and disappear down the memory hole of political correctness.
After 500 years of proselytizing the natives, very little has come of these efforts — as the natives backslide into their own cultural traditions without constant supervision and oversight of White missionaries and supervisors.
Many Christians continue to justify this missionary work based on their misunderstandings of the meaning of certain verses in Scripture that they believe command them to bring the gospel literally to “all nations” and “all people,” such as Luke 2:31, Mark 11:17, and Mark 16:15.
Of course, this is a very easy mistake to make when you approach every verse in the Bible literally and superficially — as if the Bible were originally written in modern English — or even more preposterously — that the King James Version is the only translation on which God personally put His imprimatur.
The apostles surely did not understand the term “all nations” and “all people” the same way we do today — which is as a secular, geographical political entity with internationally recognized borders.
The apostles understood “the nations” in a biblical context — not a secular one as we do — and the biblical context is quite clear — it refers only to “the nations” described in Genesis 10 descended directly from Noah — along with the Israelite nations descended from Jacob-Israel — the Twelve Tribes of Israel.
And the idea that all “races” could have somehow descended from Noah and his family — or from Adam and Eve — who were all of one Adamic people or family is completely irrational.
These Genesis “nations” were literally tribes — extended families — not confined in fixed geographical boundaries.
The Greek word “ethnos” has been arbitrarily mistranslated in our modern Bibles as both “gentiles” and “the nations” — depending on which context will allow for it not to sound absurd.
Christians further compounded this problem when they redefined “gentile” not to mean just “the nations” but rather any “non-Jew” — widening the scope of “the nations” to the furthest recesses of the African jungles and Asian rice paddies.
This one mistranslation has caused tens of thousands of White people to lose their lives taking the gospel to peoples that were never meant to be part of “the nations” — in their zeal to prove their worthiness to the Lord.
Africans have had their own tribal beliefs handed down to them for eons — and who are we to think that we are doing them any favors by imposing our God upon them — a “racist” religious colonialism at its most egregious?
Who are we to deprive them of — and demonize — their cultural gods which exist outside the narrow scope of the Bible?
If our God considered them among His nations, Paul would have written an epistle to them, but he didn’t — and it wasn’t an oversight on his part.
Every people that Paul did write epistles to — whether the Colossians, Corinthians, Thessalonians, or Ephesians — can easily be shown to be legitimate descendants of those Genesis 10 nations.
That’s because Paul knew what “the nations” actually meant — unlike most modern denominational Christians — to their own personal detriment.
Quartermaster
A number of denominations have successful works in sub-Saharan Africa. The Assemblies of God, Church of God (Cleveland, TN) have works that are run by black Christians there. the UMC work in Africa has saved the denomination from the radical leftists, who are raging about the fact the evangelical’s work in Africa has managed to successfully oppose the leftist weenies who don’t like what scripture has to say about their pet depravities.
This has been the case for nearly 50 years and is not going away.
westwins
Define or explain what you mean by “successful”?
To me the whole idea seems like one giant waste of time.
Dan
It’s pointless evangelising if you don’t know what the book truly means, with 100% certainty.
It’s even more pointless to evangelise to people who never even invented the wheel, who then go on to corrupt whatever you taught them into some voodoo-Islamic hybrid.
https://biblehub.com/matthew/10-6.htm
https://www.biblehub.com/matthew/15-24.htm
How could this ever be interpreted as a metaphysical assembly amongst all peoples when the rest of the OT continually talks about physical seeds and inheritance? It can’t just change from a promise to physical people and their descendants, to a bunch of random people who think they know best, that is deceit.
John
What do you think of this?
https://protestia.com/2021/01/28/charismatic-prophet-arrested-after-viral-video-shows-him-performing-naked-money-making-ritual-in-river/
CHRIST IS KING
I think that’s absolutely fascinating! He’s just a witchdoctor.
For many shall come in my name, saying, I am Christ; and shall deceive many. Matthew 24 verse 5
I would love to see some proof of that fellas claim that he can raise the dead LOL. Thanks for shareing 🙂
CFT
Raising the dead is much more common in Africa than it is in White nations:
https://christiansfortruth.com/sa-president-ramaphosa-wants-to-stop-black-pastor-from-resurrecting-the-dead/
Johan
Raising the dead was far too “mainstream” for this one…
https://www.iol.co.za/news/south-africa/limpopo/limpopo-pastor-farts-on-congregation-to-heal-them-with-gods-power-c9fbae67-375c-4df8-a411-6e2ab5938eda
CHRIST IS KING
What in the world!? Bizarre! That’s sexual deviency. There’s a sucker born every minute lol
Jason
So we should leave the Africans be, with their African gods? I don’t think we should cast pearls before swine, but those African gods are indeed demons, and should be cast out of people. Also, fully half of Africa is Christian, at this point, which might even be more Christian than Europe!
Ottify
You seemed to have completely missed the oft repeated understanding as to WHY that is neither prudent nor Scriptural…
westwins
“………..fully half of Africa is Christian……………………”
What is your definition of “Christian”?
I know there are still a few Adamic Men in South Africa. Other than that ………… I don’t see a whole lot of Adamic Peoples in Africa.
You say “Half”? It looks to me the majority of Adamic Peoples are in South Africa which would certainly not constitute “half”.
CHRIST IS KING
Gidday there Jason, I understand what you’re saying. I agree with the other comments though.
You wrote:
“So we should leave the Africans be, with their African gods?”
I say: Yes. Leave them be. Their demons are something that they must learn to deal with, no matter how ghastly their methods may be. The blacks have had eons to sort out their own lives, who are we to interfere? I do not try to change the habbits of my own cats, let alone wild beasts.
No good has come from the africans converting to Xtianity; they still massacre each other; they still rampage; they show their Xtianity on the outside for most of the time, but when push comes to shove they just revert to their natural ways and mingle heathen witch doctor nonsense in. Hell, they still can’t fix a broken water pipe that some well-meaning White Xtian has installed for them, so they go back to walking for ten miles carrying buckets to the nearest river. They just don’t have the Holy Ghost written in their hearts, and they most certainly don’t have the Breath of Life.
It’s works, not words, that make the difference. This is what I believe Works are: doing good for no reason when no one is looking or expecting. Blacks are always expecting. When something can be gained, they make a big song and dance, but when their is no expectation and you meet them just by and by, they reveal their true colours and are generally untrustworthy. This is my experience. A European for the most part does not do this. We do not seek to please and make a show. We have natural Works, but we do not seek Works for approval. I hope that makes sense…?
Anyway,
Yes, I know that Europeans have a history of killing etc too, but we progress, and build, and invent, slowly but surely, whereas blacks do not. Europeans have blood on their hands, but Jesus is our God, for us.
If I was observing wild animals, say lions for example, and those lions are intent on fighting another pride of lions and killing each other and killing their cubs, who am I to interfere? I can’t stop it, I will be killed trying to stop it, I am observing nature… something God intended to happen. It may sound cruel, but that’s natures way.
Canice Morris
This is so true that Africans don’t progress, and the reason is that they are believing, and hoping in something that is not real, but fake(Jesus Christ) which they were brainwashed to believe.
Your quote; “It’s works, not words, that make the difference. This is what I believe Works are: doing good for no reason when no one is looking or expecting.”
Who does things for no reason?(Read what your brother wrote about Cause and Effect).
Why do you believe in your Jesus if you can work?
Why can’t your Jesus stop the killings of innocents people in Ukraine?
It is true that your Christ is King, but for this evil world.
John Irwin Reston
Nice thoughts Jason, but blacks world wide tend to mix Biblical Christianity with long held beliefs that are antithetical to Christian dogma. I would quickly wager that the great majority of blacks world wide are demonically possessed and that their hatred of everything that isn’t black is so deeply rooted in their psyches that deliverance to the point of accepting an entirely different way of living within society would not be possible.
I tend to think that blacks, rather than desiring Jesus and the Holy Spirit, alone and above all other things, desire a Moses type of character that will lead them from the imaginary land of their travails and into some obscurely undefined promised land where they can live and congregate and do whatever they desire without restraint or penalty. They want to be a special people where they can nurse their hatreds and permit whatever guides them internally to have free reign and behave and live much like they do now. Black culture is the most toxic societal element that I’m familiar with, at least in the United States.
You can see the evidence for this in everything they do and in the leaders they choose. MLK, Stokley Carmichael, Jessie Jackson, Barak Obama, black mayors of Democratic Party ruled cities and everything in between. All of those guys are just black Moses-like figureheads who blacks have eagerly and without any kind of analysis, trusted and elected to change their lives for them, push all other forms of society along with its nagging foundations and rules out of the way, rewrite history and crown each negro with praise, honor and respect along with unlimited funding provided by others.
The greatest mistake any white nation has ever made has been to try to elevate blacks to status or to a primacy that each individual within the race has earned by following well defined and established rules for all of society or worse, to bow to threats of or actual black violence and hateful rhetoric out of some ill conceived fear within white society that it may lose something if it resists and forcefully relegates blacks to segregation within lands and homes of their own with facilities that are equal but exclusive of those owned, controlled and managed by non-black races.
There is no question that the world has intelligent and capable blacks but when they are permitted to form and promote their own anti-societal agendas with tax payor money and to have those agendas become elements of wide spread law or accepted practice, the nation that does so will fall, and that fact is evident in America every day.
westwins
“….. I would quickly wager that the great majority of blacks world wide are demonically possessed …..”
Are you implying that if they were not demonically possessed they would be docile human beings?
Are Grizzly Bears demonically depressed? Just curious.
John Irwin Reston
Demonic forces have enjoyed thousands of years of possessing and influencing blacks and much has been written and detailed to point that out. Full accounts of who and what they are can be found in the diaries and biographers of African hunters, explorers and missionaries who had direct and extended contact with them
And yes, I am not just implying but emphatically stating that a human who is not under demonic influence or control would be more of a man, as man was created to be, rather than otherwise. Barring a man having a mental illness that afflicted him (without that illness being the result of a demonic influence), a man would still require social training and an education if he wanted to live and contribute positively to any aspect of his own growth and betterment or that of a civilized nation.
As for grizzly bears, lions or crocs or any other wild predator that sits at the top of the meat eating hierarchy the idea of demonic influence just isn’t on the table.
Demons are only interested in the souls of men from birth until after death where it may be, that even then, they will argue for our souls by virtue of a first claim upon us a sinners.
Christ Is King
Intriguing ideas, good fellow.
However I pose this for your theory to explain: What if the blacks aren’t men at all but are in fact animals? What if the Bible classed them as beasts?
westwins
John,
Where did the black man come from in your understanding of a biblical world view?
Do the blacks, yellows and reds all emerge from the loins of Adam and Eve?
You seem to be placing black man along side White Adamic man as being from the same bloodline.
Dan
You have a very loose definition of “Christian,” I doubt what they believe protects them from those beings, but they may improve over generations in comparison to the hedonistic r-selection way of life.
God selected the Israelites, out of Abraham, for a reason, I assume he knows what he is doing, and I assume that they were the best fit for what was necessary and despite that they still failed to live up to expectations- if even they failed, do you really think others will do better? Not just that, but the most backwards and impulsive people?
So they are going to adopt the book of the people who are now largely encouraging them to be narcissistic, immoral & apathetic? – Not without severely altering it to fit their background and nature.
What do you think about how God dealt with the Canaanites?
westwins
What is striking to me about this clip — and I hope it is preserved forever — but the unadulterated reality of the African before miscegenation .
They roll out the likes of Candace Owens or Halle Barry and our people get lulled to sleep believing if we just minister to them and give them money and educate them, they will eventually be like us.
It is surprising to me that this has not yet happened, but probably it will —- a time will come when christian ministers and teachers will preach to us that “race-mixing” is needed so that they can have the “intelligence” to come to know Jesus Christ. Clearly, the mulatto’s are far more intelligent than their ancestors.
Right now the righteous act is to Adopt black babies. Soon the message will be to have mulatto babies.
John Irwin Reston
You’re right about the righteous act of adopting black babies. I tend to think that the practice is more likely the idea of a young wife rather than her spouse. She’s probably a stay at home type who adores herself for her compassion and generosity as she dotes over someone’s little illegitimate that she believes she can raise to be white. When it goes that far, who really cares about what the white beta-male husband, who is the real stooge in the mix, thinks anyway?
I think the idea to flood the white population with mixed children is already a hit in some circles. White women mostly, buying into the idea that mating with negro men is a way for them to state their opposition to their own race. And probably to provide a visual shout-out to their independence.
Fortunately, you don’t see a lot of white males going after black women and those that do are typically effeminate soy-boy types who have been rejected by women of their own color. I’ve though a little about it and I’ve concluded that mixing races is probably a form of mental illness but if I’m wrong about that, I’ll just concede and just admit there is no accounting for taste.
Christ Is King
“I’ve concluded that mixing races is probably a form of mental illness”
Here, here!
I think it’s an act of rebellion against God, either consciously, unconsciously, or with the added assistance of devils!
P.A.Semi
Maybe such Epistle was just not included in the Canon ?
You seem to be overlooking Coptic version of Evangelium of Thomas, found in Nag Hammadi, and other texts found there, and other not found yet…
(But an Epistle could be written only to people who could read and write, which the retarded sub-Saharans weren’t…)
Otherwise – anti-racism and race-mixing is grave hereditary sin of race-treason…
It’s even second most important commandment:
Mt22:39 »Love your neighbour similar to you.«
with reference to Lv19:18-19 – in full context showing that it is foremost meant against race-mixing:
»You shall not avenge and you shall not bear grudge against sons of your people, and you shall love your neighbour similar to you.
I am Lord, you will guard my commandments.
You shall not let your cattle copulate together mixtures, you shall not sow your field with mixtures, and treason of mixtures of gallop-jumping will not ascend upon you…«
(or “… garment of linen-wool will not ascend upon you”)
And that Marxist-Freemasonic mantra “All people are born Equal” – is a grave heresy and absurd lie… Where is written in Scripture about Equality ? Nowhere…
We are not “Equal”, which means Zero Difference and Zero Meaning, but we are instead “Unique”, as they are also… Both on personal and macroscopic (ethnic) levels… And our Difference is our main Meaning, because thus we cannot be replaced by them and they cannot be replaced by us. Those “Equal” are completely vain and freely replaceable…
The Diversity is marvelous, but Diversity foremost means Difference, and it may be forever lost by Mixing. And to defend and appreciate our Difference from them, we need to admit their Difference from us – it’s as a coin with two sides…
That “Equality” is the Leaven of the Pharisees (Lk12:1). The Lie of Equality of straight and perverse, of right and wrong, of beneficial and harmful, of healthy and ill, of advanced and retarded… This is the Root of most of today’s Evil…
Instead of “Equality” we should demand “Mutual Respect”, on personal and ethnic and international levels…
We are not Equal, but we should Respect the Different ones in their Difference, and demand they Respect our Difference also…
πα½
Dan
Proverbs 5 is overtly about race mixing with foreign women.
The laws regarding mixing fabric and breeds must be for a purpose beyond the act, to repeatedly reinforce the idea of segregation and being “Set-apart” through a strict habit.
“Ereb” means ‘mixed multitude’ but is also linked to interwoven fabrics. https://biblehub.com/hebrew/6154.htm
“For just as the blood of the conqueror, who was a conqueror, not only in body, but also in spirit, got submerged in the blood of the subject race, so the substance disappeared, out of which the torch of human culture and progress was kindled. In-so-far as the blood of the former ruling race has left a light nuance of colour in the blood of it’s descendants, as a token and a memory, the night of cultural life is left less dim and dark by a mild light radiated from the products of those who were the bearers of the original fire. Their radiance shines across the barbarism, to which the subjected race has reverted, and might often lead the superficial observer to believe that he sees before him an image of the present race, when really, he is looking into a mirror, where-in only the past is reflected.”
Whether or not we can respect their differences depends on their differences, but you are right about mutual respect. It’s just that some only understand respect in response to the threat of superior might, which is a shame.
The belief in Equality is cemented in the doctrine of Gnosticism (Freemasonry is Eclectic Gnosticism as well as Kabbalah), and belief of Shekinah & the Supreme Androgyne. So everyone who is not a “Hylic,” is equal in being divine, as they believe they all have a spiritual part of the original deity (as in before the creator of the physical realm or the Demiurge). Some Freemasons seem to worship Baal/ the Demiurge too.
Genetic recessiveness/ dominance exists, and it exists for a reason.
If it did not exist, you would not be able to tell who is descended from who.
Other races can not really relate, there is a benefit to them mixing with us or other races, and their children will look a lot like them no matter what, but there is no logical, collective benefit for us to mix with them as it is essentially self-ethnocide- and people may think that it’s harmless, but it’s not, the child grows up innately confused, outcast and rootless, but long-term, eventually, whites who retain their genetics will become a minority everywhere, not just disenfranchised but an openly despised diaspora, and one day they will hunt down the surviving remnants who refuse to mix, to extinction.
Canice Morris
https://www.bbc.com/news/world-africa-56949003#:~:text=Germany%20has%20agreed%20to%20return%20to%20Nigeria%20priceless,up%20in%20museums%20and%20private%20collections%20across%20Europe.
Hahahaha…they couldn’t read, but they had the ability to document.
Chesterton
The word “race” is simply not in the Bible as we use it today. But it entered the English language in the 16th century through the French word “racine” which means “root”. Thus the English word “deracinate” or “uproot”. Ultimately, “racine” or “razza” in Spanish may have derived from the Hebrew word “rosh” which means “origin” or “head”.
Applied to people, their “root” can be understood metaphorically in terms of a tree, a family tree obviously, of common birth. The “root” of all “nations” in the Bible is Adam. In English, by the 19th century “family” and “race” were used inter-changeably.
That genealogical tree of Adam, however, does not include all people on earth, and it makes no sense to try to “graft” other peoples into that tree.
Godless evolutionists and Jewish anthropologists invented the preposterous idea that all humans belong to this one evolutionary “family” tree — and Christians have fallen for it.
We do know what people who belong to that original “root” of Adam look like — God chose Adam’s name for a very particular reason — his name provides us with a blueprint to identity those “of Adam” or “Aw dam” in Hebrew, which means “to show blood in the face” or “to blush”, also known as “ruddy” in the Bible, one of the descriptors of King David, who is an ancestor of Christ.
Matthew 1 shows us that Christ directly descends from ruddy King David, who comes from the “root” of Jesse, and back to the “root” of Adam — and we therefore do know what Christ physically looked like — he had white, pinkish skin like Adam and King David, as does everyone of that “root” or extended family or “nation”.
Chesterton
And when we go back to the “root” Adam, we read one of the most misunderstood and abused verses in the Bible, Genesis 1:27:
“So God created mankind in his own image, in the image of God he created them; male and female he created them.” NIV
“So God created man in his own image, in the image of God created he him; male and female created he them.” KJV
Literal translation would be more like this:
“So God created Adam in his image, in the image of God he created him; male and female he created them.”
https://scripture4all.org/OnlineInterlinear/OTpdf/gen1.pdf
The Hebrew word here translated as “man” and “mankind” is Adam. Why did none of the translators just leave Adam in this verse as Adam? God created Adam in His image, not all “people” who fall under the modern “Enlightenment” concept of “men” or “human” or “races”.
The Bible is the history of Adam and his family of legitimate descendants only. The Bible is not a history of all the humanoid bidpeds who inhabit the planet.
Aldous O
Whilst it’s easy to question the efficacy of third-world missionary work – perhaps it serves God’s purpose. Maybe the percentage saved will vary greatly across ethnicities? But then maybe not, as caucasians may be judged more severely for the ‘greater light’ we have been given’? God may simply say in the end, ‘I had my servants take the gospel to the ends of the earth and you lot were all that believed’. Only then will we find out what he meant by *all* below?
Revelation 7:9 KJV
After this I beheld, and, lo, a great multitude, which no man could number, of *all* nations, and kindreds, and people, and tongues, stood before the throne, and before the Lamb, clothed with white robes, and palms in their hands;
Johan
Why would we believe that Revelation 7:9 is referring to “races”?
Christ Is King
That is an interesting idea. However, I would ask:
Can Whites be all nations, kindreds, peoples, and tongues?
Yes, says I.
Nations must surely be Genesis 10 nations which are all White.
Kindreds are familys and people like each other… maybe stragglers from the nations of Genisis 10 that aren’t large enough to be classed as a nation anymore… a remnant of a tribe, clan, group etc…?
Peoples, well, only Whites are people, as all other bipeds are classed as Beasts in the Bible, so that to me is self explanatory.
And tongues… yip, we Whites speak a multitude of languages.
That’s my thoughts on the matter, for what it’s worth 🙂
westwins
“……That’s my thoughts on the matter, for what it’s worth……”
It means a lot CIK!!! Because this thought makes the most sense — common sense and Scriptural sense. And it brings ‘peace’ to my spirit.
Cheers. 🙂
Dan
It did occur to me that those who are given more of a blessing will not only have more responsibilities but also be judged harshly, but then again, why are there other peoples like that in the first place and how could it possibly be that there would be such a double standard in place?
Imo, people are the products of their ancestors collective choices, desires and habits. They weren’t created as they are now, with all the flaws and genetic entropy, but God did design the reproductive/ inheritance mechanisms, and he ultimately decides what is universally beautiful or appealing to mankind, etc, like symmetry for instance.
So a people who have done nothing but the most immoral, unhealthy, dysgenic practices for thousands of years will not end up as the same calibre as a people who have generally tried to avoid those same practices over that period.
You have to ask why the moral requirements for escaping the second-death are there. There has to be some logical reason, right? I would say, in God’s kingdom, with Christ serving as king, only certain types of people are capable of being apart of it, and it’s not hard to find out which types of people will not inherit the Kingdom of God- unless they repent of their sins (which means to understand why it’s a sin, accept forgiveness, and eventually stop doing it.)
In Rev 7:9
“Pantos” could be translated as “the whole” and a single “ethnos” means all the divergent cultures/ tribes within a single “ethnic group”/ race. I guess multiple “ethnos” would be all the peoples.
Although, I think Christ makes it clear his first and foremost goal, which then passed on to his disciples, was to fulfil this-
Eze 37:19 say to them, ‘Thus said the Master YHWH, “See, I am taking the stick of Yosěph, which is in the hand of Ephrayim, and the tribes of Yisra’ěl, his companions. And I shall give them unto him, with the stick of Yehuḏah, and make them one stick, and they shall be one in My hand.” ’
Eze 37:20 “And the sticks on which you write shall be in your hand before their eyes.
Eze 37:21 “And speak to them, ‘Thus said the Master YHWH, “See, I am taking the children of Yisra’ěl from among the nations, wherever they have gone, and shall gather them from all around, and I shall bring them into their land.
Eze 37:22 “And I shall make them one nation in the land, on the mountains of Yisra’ěl. And one sovereign shall be sovereign over them all, and let them no longer be two nations, and let them no longer be divided into two reigns.
Mat 15:24 And He answering, said, “I was not sent except to the lost sheep of the house of Yisra’ěl.
Without first fulfilling this aim, there is no point even concerning yourself about the other peoples. Even if the intention is to save as many of other peoples as possible, you can not do so by coercion, or ceremonial baptism, the only way to do it properly is by having a concrete & truthful understanding, and leading by example, and on the world-scale, that requires a set-apart nation-unit that has reached the heavens, figuratively.
It was the Jesuits who wanted to convert the world, and then passed this quality on to Evangelicals. It is using God’s word as a vehicle for pursuing worldly power, nothing more.
There is also this:
TESTAMENT OF SIMEON
6 “1, 2 Behold I have told you all things, that I may be acquitted of your sin. Now, if ye remove from you your envy and all stiff-neckedness, As a rose shall my bones flourish in Israel, And as a lily my flesh in Jacob, And my odour shall be as the odour of Libanus; And as cedars shall holy ones be multiplied from me forever, And their branches shall stretch afar off. 3 Then shall perish the seed of Canaan, And a remnant shall not be unto Amalek, And all the Cappadocians shall perish, And all the Hittites shall be utterly destroyed. 4 Then shall fail the land of Ham, And all the people shall perish. Then shall all the earth rest from trouble, And all the world under heaven from war. 5 Then the Mighty One of Israel shall glorify Shem, For the Lord God shall appear on earth, And Himself save men. 6 Then shall all the spirits of deceit be given to be trodden under foot, And men shall rule over wicked spirits. 7 Then shall I arise in joy, And will bless the Most High because of his marvellous works, [Because God hath taken a body and eaten with men and saved men].”
Wilfred
I’ve never understood why Blacks accepted the “White man’s” religion, especially after the post-colonial period and the counter culture revolution, and the African roots movement. How is there any legitimate Afro-identity without a rejection of the White man’s God? Instead, they try to convince themselves that Jesus or the Israelites were Black, or somehow one of Noah’s sons was Black. It’s very odd….
John Irwin Reston
I suspect that if blacks actually accepted anything related to religion or belief in the teachings of Christianity, it was for self preservation purposes in an essentially all white world and it had little to do with an interest in the actual actions that occur during Christian conversion.
Like I mentioned in an earlier post I’m not at all convinced that blacks, instead of desiring the Lord Jesus and the Holy Spirit for who they are, are more interested in a Moses like figure who will lead them triumphantly from the white man’s world into whatever it is they have in mind that would make an ideal kingdom, here on earth, for the negro and his kind.
And you’re right about that black Israelite thing. Many of them hold the profound belief that the black race is descended from ancient Egyptian pharaonic lines and from some lost tribe of black Israelites. I have no doubt at all that God loves all men but He didn’t create them all equally and he didn’t endow them equally and that is one lesson that the negro will not accept and live with.
America/Europe is Israel
Thanks to the Judaizers in the American pulpits, plus due to the mutant Jews themselves such as the Scofield Bible with it’s brain washing doctrines funded by Baruch and others of his tribe, Whites have been deluded, brainwashed or whatever synonyms you prefer to use that non-whites are just like us. The Jew has taken advantage of the innate altruism of Whites in their attempts to destroy us. In my personal opinion I have always referred to it as “hard headed altruism”. No matter how much the kike and their savage minions crap on us; we just keep going back for more, and more, and more until we are killed. There are no redeeming qualities in those savages. All one has to do is take a look at our American cities. Almost 60 years of federal funding of taxpayer welfare has not brought the negro savage to any so-called enlighted status.
Edward I
I prefer to call it “pathological altruism”…..
Johan
It’s interesting to look at the Ethiopian eunuch of Acts 8, who had a chariot, was reading Isaiah and had specifically come to Jerusalem to worship.
By colonial times, the denizens of Ethiopia were not able to build so much as a wheel and had no written language to speak of. Yet we are supposed to believe that the Ethiopian of Acts 8 is the same as those Ethiopians from colonial times? It’s equally as irrational.
Rather than come up with fanciful theories about how those Ethiopians somehow lost their ability to build and write, people should consider that those in Ethiopia during colonial times are completely different from those who were in Ethiopia in Bible times and even hundreds of years after.
Naturally, the modern history books are very quiet about the kingdoms which existed south of Egypt for hundreds and thousands of years. Here is a restored painting from the 8th century AD. It was found in Ethiopia and represents its people during that time: “The Six Kings”
How quickly this quandary with the Acts 8 Ethiopian gets resolved…
CHRIST IS KING
That’s a great picture!
But, I’ll have you know that, speaking of Bantus, this French speaking black sheila here on Twitter, no doubt after a ton of research, reckons that Latin is derived from ancient Bantu language. So, well, there ya go. Ya learn something new everyday hahaha!
https://mobile.twitter.com/DeludedShaniqwa/status/1380185081994678276/photo/1
ReformingBoomer
“Rather than come up with fanciful theories about how those Ethiopians somehow lost their ability to build and write, people should consider that those in Ethiopia during colonial times are completely different from those who were in Ethiopia in Bible times and even hundreds of years after.”
This makes sense to me on one hand, just as Ancient India was ruled by Whites as otherwise Cleopatra’s son–who she claimed was Julius Caesar’s byblow–would never have been able to have hidden out there from his political enemies (in addition to the other historical evidence of Whites ruling ancient india)
But the question arises in my mind of how do we square the Acts 8 Ethiopian being White with Jeremiah 13:23’s “Can the Ethiopian change his skin, or the leopard his spots?”
Similarly, how do we know that the Acts 8 Ethiopian was an Ethiopian; If he were White, how could he have been identified as an Ethiopian? Is this a case of mistranslation?
Johan
Josephus also says in Antiquities 12,5,1,
And when he had given them leave, they also hid the circumcision of their genitals; that even when they were naked they might appear to be Greeks. Accordingly they left off all the customs that belonged to their own countrey, and imitated the practices of the other nations.
This is when the Antiochus IV Epiphanes was trying to Hellenize the second temple Judeans. They looked so similar, that if only they could hide their circumcision, they could pass as Greeks.
ReformingBoomer wrote, “But the question arises in my mind of how do we square the Acts 8 Ethiopian being White with Jeremiah 13:23’s “Can the Ethiopian change his skin, or the leopard his spots?””
The Egyptians and those living down the Nile river — like the Ethiopians, were wont to tattoo themselves. This is confirmed by their own art works and mummies. The Israelites are commanded not to do what was done in Egypt (Leviticus 18:3), which included the tattooing of the skin (Leviticus 19:28).
Note that the “Ethiopians” in the OT Scripture is actually a translation from Cush, son of Ham (Genesis 10:6). So the Ethiopians were in fact Cushites. Just like Egypt is actually Mizraim, son of Ham (also Genesis 10:6).
Naturally, a tattoo cannot be undone. A very appropriate comparison is a leopard covered in spots — as if they were tattoos. Equally, the leopard is unable to undo its spots. It has become permanent.
Jeremiah 13:23 continues,
Then you as well can do good who are accustomed to doing evil.
The Cushites put their spots upon themselves, and likewise the Israelites have brought evil upon themselves. As with the Cushite’s tattoos which cannot be removed, the Israelites are unable to remove their own evil which they themselves have wrought. The condemnation of the metaphor is found in the leopard, in which this condition is seemingly natural… As if from birth.
We who grew up in evil times have many “hangups” when we read the Scripture. Our consciences are seared by Satan to see things which aren’t there. Or there are “trigger words” which make us automatically associate it with a specific thing which Satan wants us to associate it with. There’s nothing in Scripture or history suggesting true Cushites were non-white, yet because of these “hangups” we ignore all of that and assume it means the Cushites had black skin. I did it myself.
The realization of this metaphor of Jeremiah is found in our very selves in these modern times when we give in to those “hangups” tattooed into our minds. For many, they simply can’t let go of them, just like a tattoo cannot be removed, and a leopard cannot change its spots… As if from birth.
ReformingBoomer wrote, “Similarly, how do we know that the Acts 8 Ethiopian was an Ethiopian; If he were White, how could he have been identified as an Ethiopian? Is this a case of mistranslation?”
I believe the answer is rather simple: The eunuch told Phillip. How else could Phillip have known that the eunuch was a court official of (the) Candace, and in charge of all her treasure? I assume Luke reduced the interaction down to the details pertinent to the reader.
Aside from that even, as little as an eccent or style of dress would have been more than enough to identify the location someone came from. Peter, being in Judea, was even identified as a Galilean by his accent (Matthew 26:73).
CHRIST IS KING
That is very interesting and informative, Thanks Johan.
I presume most of it was accent, style of speech and was dress related regarding how Philip knew he was an Ethiopian. Also, Paul was mistook for an Egyptian by a Roman officer. I presume this was due to the same things.
Johan
Perfect example… I can’t see or hear you and your ozziness is tangible 😀
I read your comment like this: “Oi preesume moast awv eet wahz ehksent…” LOL
CHRIST IS KING
LOL! Yup, that’s great Ozzy talk Johan, but I’m in New Zealand, or as we say, Knew Zeelind.
I sound like this: “Eye prashume mowst awv itt whas akk-sent… 🙂
Johan
Hah, my apologies! I need to work on my ability to tell Kiwis from Ozzies.
“Knew Zeelind” That’s funny…
Dan
I didn’t ever consider the possibility of tattoos, it’s not really something inherent, and it’s not unique to ‘Cushites’. You could say “Can a man remove his scars?”
A leopard has spots because of it’s genetic makeup, it’s coded in there and can’t be changed. If someone shaved it’s fur, the spots would be lessened, but the genetic coding for those markings would always be there. I guess the reverse of tattooing is also the same point, even if they scar it with ink, it’s still the same skin, it has not really been changed.
“just like a tattoo cannot be removed”
Well, you can now, but just in those times? Technically, they could flay the section of skin, and it would grow back, but I doubt they’d want to go through with that.
Johan
Dan wrote, “I didn’t ever consider the possibility of tattoos, it’s not really something inherent, and it’s not unique to ‘Cushites’. You could say “Can a man remove his scars?” A leopard has spots because of it’s genetic makeup, it’s coded in there and can’t be changed. ”
The need for it to be “inherent” or “genetic” or “unique to Cushites” is a requirement of your own view, not the Scripture.
Leopard’s spots and negro skin don’t even look the same. Leopards have fur and negros don’t. Leopards are gold and white, while negroes are dark brown. There’s really nothing comparable between the two. Therefore, assuming that it must be genetic doesn’t support the argument that it is genetic. Rather, it only assumes that it must be genetic.
The lesson is being unable to refrain from evil after being “accustomed to doing evil”. The lesson is that it is unchangeable, which is the case with tattoos and leopard’s spots. A white man with tattoos would be comparable to a creature that has black marks on it with a gold and white backdrop.
Yet because our conscience is seared to expect Jeremiah to refer to negro skin — because that’s what our agenda demands that it says, we imagine that his metaphor is about something which doesn’t actually make sense.
Chesterton
Dan, if Jeremiah wanted a certain animal to represent a Black person in Scripture, would he choose a leopard or a panther? There is nothing about a leopard that metaphorically conveys the image of a black African, surely.
Dan
If all the descendants of the three progenitors were white in appearance, then how do you explain this scripture-?
Jer 13:23 Does a Kushite change his skin and a leopard its spots? You who are taught to do evil are also unable to do good!
It’s not fanciful, it’s just more complex, certain whites are dysgenic in comparison to others, due to the make-up of their ancestry or what their ancestors did. The divergence between those ethnic sub-groups is insignificant when compared to the distance between the thousands of years of genetic divergence between Europeans and African tribes.
Johan
Jeremiah 13:23 is referring to tattoos, which makes a lot more sense than it referring to non-whites:
https://christiansfortruth.com/why-the-apostle-paul-did-not-write-an-epistle-to-the-bantus/#comment-47989
https://christiansfortruth.com/why-the-apostle-paul-did-not-write-an-epistle-to-the-bantus/#comment-49079
Your “dysgenic” theory doesn’t exist in the Scripture, especially given Ezekiel 18 and Jeremiah 31:29-30,
“29 “In those days they will no longer say, ‘The fathers have eaten sour grapes, But it is the children’s teeth that have become blunt.’ 30 But everyone will die for his own wrongdoing; each person who eats the sour grapes, his own teeth will become blunt.”
I don’t believe in “genetic divergence”, as that doesn’t exist in the Scripture either.
My goal is to believe what the Scripture tells me to believe, not to try to find my own view/agenda inside the Scripture.
Ottify
That’s one of my favorite points to bring up when defending the exclusivity of the Bible – where’s Paul’s letters to the Chinese, the Zulus, or the Mexicans?
CHRIST IS KING
Yes! Exactly! I always ask univeralists why Paul went where he did, and then went there again; why did he not go through Egypt and down thru Afrika? Why did he first choose to go where he chose, then instead of going to preach somewhere new, he then returned to see how everyone was getting on.
ReformingBoomer
Have you heard the accounts of Jesus manifesting to the heathens and preaching the gospel to them so that they can understand it?
I have long heard of these tales, specifically with the American Indians (feather-not-dot) and I wonder where they came from. One thing that has puzzled me is that many of the same people who tell me of their certainty that Jesus appeared to the non-White savages also tell me that I need to donate money to various missions to preach the Gospel to non-White savages.
If these Churchianity types believe that Jesus Himself has appeared to these savages then how can they believe that mere mortal White men need to go to these savages too?
Johan
That sounds exactly like the Mormon myth, where they believe after the Lord ascended in Acts 1, He went straight to the North American Indians to found the Mormon religion. Like you say, they believe the Lord could appear to them, and yet somehow they would fail completely and utterly to retain any of His teaching…
Chesterton
Yes, the Mormons agreed with the Jews that the North American Indians — and all the Indians in the New World — were literally the lost tribes of Israel….because they were still literally living as “tribes”. It shows you the Jewish mentality that someone can look nothing like you but still be in your “tribe”. In other words, Jews don’t take race mixing as a disqualifier for membership in the tribe…only white people do that.
Christ Is King
Yes, most odd, eh. The Blessed Virgin Mary also has a really good habit of showing up to poor South American catholics all over the place too.
robert
Yeah, the original Fatima sighting occurred in one of the least white countries in Europe: Portugal. The Fatima was allegedly seen by three “shepherd” children, who were told by the apparition to pray for the end of WWI on their rosaries, a very banal message for the “Catholic” mother of Jesus. See what these “shepherd” children looked like here:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Our_Lady_of_F%C3%A1tima#/media/File:ChildrensofFatima.jpg
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Our_Lady_of_F%C3%A1tima
CHRIST IS KING
You’re dead right. Those kids were sure nuggety, alright.
I’ve read swags of books on the Fatima sightings with theorys ranging from the visions were Mary, to Jesus in disguise, to mass hallucinations, to space aliens, and all I’ve really gleened from the accounts is that all who saw the visions were super-catholics prior to the sightings… did they see what they wanted to see? I don’t know, and as I wasn’t there at the time, I couldn’t say. Why them, what is was, and the real purpose for the “visitation” is still a mystery, really. I doubt very strongly that it was the Blessed Virgin Mary, however.
Christians For Truth
The Catholics merely transposed worship of the mother goddess of Babylon into the worship of Mother Mary. Alexander Hislop explains the babylonian basis for the Mary cult in his book “The Two Babylons” in the chapter, “The Mother and the Child” on page 73 here:
https://christiansfortruth.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/10/The-Two-Babylons.pdf
Dan
Fatima/ Holy Mother is synonymous with Shekinah & Anahita in some circles.
Ottify
It’s as simple as: Any teachings regarding Christ’s ministry that does not come from the Scriptures COMES FROM SATAN.
Dan
Mormons believe the human avatar of Quetzalcoatl was Christ, because he was apparently blonde and may have taught them a better way of living (I think?)
Personally I think the Martyrdom aspect has become perverted.
When people saw martyrs dying for what they believed in, and dying for their sake (as fellow Shemites or Israelites), it touched their hearts, appealed to their sense of heroism, honour and empathy, and they grew curious about their strange beliefs.
I do not think Cannibalistic tribesman are pondering why the white Christian didn’t fight back, whilst enjoying their ‘meal’…