Wot'S up with JZ?

[UrbanLegend]

Originally Posted by Istlota

Yeah, individuals who happened to be christians. What, you think it was just mere coincidence that the klan chose to burn _crosses_ in the yards of black people? What, you think it is just mere coincidence that christian pastors not only condoned, but also participated in the lynching of our ancestors? What, you think it is mere coincidence that the man who is responsible for more deaths of non-white people than any other human being on the planet also happens to enjoy the political support of _most_ protestants and catholics in America?

Like I said before anyone who acts contrary to ''Christ'' cannot be a ''Christian''!

If you are a murderer, rapist, enslaver, etc you cannot be a ''Christian''!

Christian is a Latin word meaning ''Christ-like'', so to be a ''Christian'' your actions must be ''Christ-like''. If your actions are not ''Christ-like'' then your not a Christian, you are anti-Christ.

Individuals have hijacked popular movements to justify their own wicked ends from time immemorial. The actions of the KKK, lynchers or mass murderers are ABSOLUTLY ''anti-Christ'', therefore it’s impossible to for them to be ''Christians'' (Christ-like).

Napoleon said he was a Christian (Christ-like). Was he (Christ-like)? No!
Leopold II of Belgium said he was a Christian (Christ-like). Was he (Christ-like)? No!
Hitler said he was a Christian (Christ-like). Was he (Christ-like)? No!
George W Bush says he is a Christian (Christ-like). Is he (Christ-like)? No!
You get the picture.

Being a follower of ''Christ'', the Messiah, and his actions requires actions NOT words (1 Jn 2:3-5/1 Jn 2:6/ Jms 1:22-27). If you live your life in an unrighteous way, contrary to the example set by the Messiah, you are not a ''Christian''. Simple.

The Messiah talked about the people (hypocrites) who draw near to Him with their mouths and honor Him with their lips but who’s hearts are far from Him (Mt 15:7-9). Relatively few people in this world of ours are actually ''Christian'' (Christ-like). I wouldn’t be surprised if so-called ''Christians'' were the majority in hell (that’s another thread though).

Originally Posted by Istlota

Even Dr. King --- who called himself a Christian, but expressed and lived by some distinctly hindu spiritual beliefs ---

Really? What beliefs are they? I’m seriously interested. No joke.

Originally Posted by Istlota

Sunday morning was the most segregated hour of the week.

Anyone who would segregate a house of worship based the hue of person is anti-Christ, NOT ''Christian'' (Christ-like).

Note: Sunday has nothing to do with the Messiah! He worshipped on the Sabbath (Saturday) (Luke 4:16). SUNday is merely the day the Romans/Constantine worshipped the Sun.

Originally Posted by Istlota

And, dare I mentioned Pope Nicholas V's papal bull which blessed the _perpetual_ [his word, not mine] slavery of West Africa?

Popes For Slavery - Romanus Pontifex by Pope Nicholas V

These people draw near to Me with their mouth and honor Me with their lips but their heart is far from Me and in vain do they worship Me. Teaching as doctrines the commandments of men (Mt 15:8-9).

Originally Posted by Istlota

How much worse does it have to get before black people wake up and stop drinking Massa's koolaid? Even to this day, _most_ black americans are still walking around thinking christianity is the religion of Jesus. It ain't. Christianity is the religion of Constantine.

''Christianity'', being Christ-like (observing the law/Torah) has nothing to do with Constantine it proceeds him by hundreds of years. Catholicism is the child of Constantine.

Worshipping on the SUN-day is Catholic.
Praying to a wooden cross is Catholic.
Celebrating the winter solstice (Dec 25th) is Catholic.
Worshipping the fertility/Sun Goddess ''Astarte'' (Easter) is Catholic.

The Messiah did none of these things so they are therefore not Christ-like (Christian).

Like you brother, I too wish black people (and all people) would wake up and stop following the Satan inspired mess that is ''Catholicism'' and it’s offshoots, Protestantism, Methodism, Anglicism, Bapistism, etc.

All these movements are anti-''Christ'' and full of deception. That fact in itself should show you they are not of ''Christ'' or the Father because as scripture says Satan is the father of lies/liars (Jn 8:44) and to be sober and vigilant of Him (Ptr 5:8-9).

Originally Posted by Istlota

If Jesus were alive today as a mortal man, Pat Robertson [a white christian] would be calling him a heretic and Obama [a black christian] would be holding press conferences to denounce Jesus for making "any statement that disparages our great country or serves to divide us from our allies."

Neither Pat Robertson (white supremist) or Barack Obama (conceited, political opportunist) are ''Christians'' (Christ-like). Other than that I agree with you, lol.

Peace!

[Juice.]

Your distinctions are tenuous. And none of what you say detracts from the fact that Blacks were given a message in the form of Christian doctrine which was designed to hasten our subservience. I think you have strained to make a distinction, the Pope was/is Christian - he had ships with darked-skinned people in their holds. The Ku Klux Klan was Christian. Hunger and famine in Africa was/is Christian. The slave trade was Christian.







When all this came as a direct result of the Christian faith, how do you then separate the family? The only way, is if you're equating 'religion' and 'spirituality' to Jesus. But that's a mistake. Jesus was a Jewish revolutionary. He was an inspiration to the progression of Jewish people. That history, in no way, aligns Jewish to any other people. It in no way proves, or suggest, that Jesus should be the guiding light for all groups of people on Earth. To make the suggestion that Jesus, a Jew, is the guiding light for all of us, falsely implies that Jews, who descend from that belief system, are God's chosen people.

Christianity was re-written by white people. That's how Christianity's seat came to be in the heart of the Roman empire. When the slave master thought it was possible to use Christianity as a doctrine of white-supremacy, they did so. They used the spiritualistic mindset of Black people, in such a way, to make them subservient to the people who brought them this modern day religion.

How come one day reading and writing was incompatible in the relationship between slave and slavemaster, and then the next day, reading scripture out a Christian Bible was compatible? Because with the Christian religion came instructions on how to forget your culture and your people and develop an inferiority complex. The slaves preached the messages they were allowed to preach. "Turn the other cheek". "Pray for those who despitefully use you." And because Black people fell into the habit of preaching 'safe', they also fell into the habit of being a whitewashed tool for the Plutocratic Oligarchy that is America, and not being an enlightened people.

[UrbanLegend]

Originally Posted by Juice.

Your distinctions are tenuous. And none of what you say detracts from the fact that Blacks were given a message in the form of Christian doctrine which was designed to hasten our subservience. I think you have strained to make a distinction, the Pope was/is Christian - he had ships with darked-skinned people in their holds. The Ku Klux Klan was Christian.

Like I said before, being a ''Christian'' requires actions not words. Being Christian is a way of life, being ''like-Christ'', being righteous, loving your neighbor as yourself, not killing, raping or enslaving. If you do not live your life ''like-Christ'' it's IMPOSSIBLE to be Christian. It’s a contradiction. An oxymoron.

It clearly states in Scripture anyone who walks contrary to ''Christ'', is not of ''Christ'' but of the Adversary, Satan.

The Ku Klux Klan are Satan inspired and are like-Satan, not Christ.
A Catholic Pope financing slavery is Satan inspired and like-Satan, not Christ.
ANYONE (white, black or yellow) who enslaves another human being is Satan inspired and like-Satan, not Christ. Therefore it's IMPOSSIBLE for them to be ''Christian'' (like-Christ).

Show me ONE passage from Scripture where the Messiah condones slavery????
Show me ONE passage from Scripture where the Messiah condones avarice????
Show me ONE passage from Scripture where the Messiah condones hating another human being based on the color of their skin????

You won't be able to because he condones ABSOLUTELY NONE of these things and anyone who does is acting contrary to the message and example of Christ, anti-Christ if you will.

Originally Posted by Juice.

Hunger and famine in Africa was/is Christian. The slave trade was Christian.

Please enlighten me as to how being ''like-Christ'' is responsible for hunger and famine in Africa or how being ''like-Christ'' was responsible for the trading of slaves which has gone on for thousands of years????

Originally Posted by Juice.

history, in no way, aligns Jewish to any other people

Actually you're wrong! Other than Egypt/Mitsraim, Israel was probably aligned to more nations than any other in that region.

Scripture, as well history, repeatedly shows that in times of trouble/invasion they always found refuge to the west, deeper into the east African interior, whether in Mitsrayim (Egypt) or Kush (Ethiopia) (Is 11:11/Zeph 3:10).

Originally Posted by Juice.

It in no way proves, or suggest, that Jesus should be the guiding light for all groups of people on Earth.

Wrong, again.

The Messiah tells his disciples to go to Israel first (Mt 10:5-6/Mt 15:24) so that they could be an example/testimony to non-Israelites and Acts 13:26 makes it clear the Law/Torah was sent to the Israelites and ALL those who fear God.

Originally Posted by Juice.

To make the suggestion that Jesus, a Jew, is the guiding light for all of us, falsely implies that Jews, who descend from that belief system, are God's chosen people.

The nation of Israel was chosen by the Most High to be a ''light'', a righteous example to non-Israelites, the rest of humanity (Isa 49:6) and it's made clear that the Law/Torah given to Israel, through Moshe, is for the whole of mankind (Lev 24:22).

Now in relation to the ''Jew'', what you and I consider a ''Jew'' are probably totally different.

Firstly, I find the word ''Jew'' erroneous seen as it is a 19th century invention and in no way connected to ancient Israel or the Israelite tribe of Yudah.
Secondly, I don’t consider the current people calling themselves ''Jews'' and claiming descent from the Israelite patriarch, Ya'aqob, to be in anyway related, historically or culturally with Israel.

The ancient north-east African nation of Israel was what we would call today a ''black'' nation and it’s my belief they still are (black) today.

Since you seem to be a fan of history I'll provide a few historical images made by those who saw the ancient Israelites face-to-face.

Israelite prisoners being led away from Lachish by Assryian gaurds:



Israelite captives being led to Assyria:

Nice locks….



Israelite musicians in Babylon:

Nice cornrows…



Israelite farmer in Babylon:

Originally Posted by Juice.

Christianity was re-written by white people. That's how Christianity's seat came to be in the heart of the Roman empire.

If by ''Christianity'' you mean the Scriptures were re-written by white people you couldn’t be more wrong.

The thousands of years old Hebrew, Aramaic and Greek scrolls correlate with the Scriptures we have today. What exactly did the Romans re-write?

The only link with Scripture the Romans have is their use of it to prop up their Satan-inspired creation, Catholicism. They didn't/couldn't change the essential message of Scripture; love for your neighbor and obedience to the Most High.

Originally Posted by Juice.

When the slave master thought it was possible to use Christianity as a doctrine of white-supremacy, they did so. They used the spiritualistic mindset of Black people, in such a way, to make them subservient to the people who brought them this modern day religion.

You seem trapped within the cage of racism, unable to accept anything you belief too associated with white skinned people, so if it'll make you feel better, the ''Bible'' is a thoroughly African/Black book.

The first nation mentioned in the Bible is Kush (modern day Ethiopia)(Gen 2:13).

African nations are mentioned over a thousand times in Scripture. Sidon (son of Canaan) is mentioned 17 times, Kush (son of Ham, modern day Ethiopia) is mentioned 40 times, Canaan (son of Ham, modern day Palestine) is mentioned more than 153 times and Mitsraim (modern day Egypt) is mentioned more than 730 times.
Compare this with the minuscule amount of times European (white) nations are mentioned, 46 (42 of those in the ''New Testament''), your claim the ''Bible'' is alien to black/African people becomes absurd.

To make things clear, the ''Bible'', was written by black/African people, written about black/African people but written for ALL people. Your mis-placed hate clouds your judgement and I feel sorry for you.

Originally Posted by Juice.

How come one day reading and writing was incompatible in the relationship between slave and slavemaster, and then the next day, reading scripture out a Christian Bible was compatible?

They were NOT compatible, that’s always been my point! Their actions did not match their words so they were not Christians (Christ-like).

Those anti-''Christs'' are burning in hell for what they did to our ancestors.

Originally Posted by Juice.

Because with the Christian religion came instructions on how to forget your culture and your people and develop an inferiority complex

Scripture or its message didn't give African/black people an inferiority complex. Aspiring, in vain, to emulate the worst sort of European and their culture, which is based on greed and exploitation, did. This is still a problem we have to today, in this ''secular'' modern age.

Originally Posted by Juice.

Black people fell into the habit of preaching 'safe'

What’s ''safe'' about loving your neighbor? What’s ''safe'' about not committing murder? What’s ''safe'' about not placing desperate importance on money????

I'd say trying to be ''like-Christ'' in today's world is EXCEPTIONALLY radical and if it is ''safe'', I don't mind being called ''safe''.

Originally Posted by Juice.

they also fell into the habit of being a whitewashed tool for the Plutocratic Oligarchy that is America, and not being an enlightened people.

So the culture of selfishness, greed, adultery, ''baby mamas'', ''bling'' and record black on black crime dominating black people today is your idea of enlightenment??? Wow. Your hate really does cloud your judgment. I’ll pray for you.

Peace!

[Istlota]

Originally Posted by UrbanLegend

Like I said before anyone who acts contrary to ''Christ'' cannot be a ''Christian''!

Your argument assumes as a universal truth that which has never, in the entire history of Christianity, been universal.

Since they were first called Christians [Acts 11:26], Christians have never agreed, even amongst themselves, as to who is, and who is not, to be considered Christ-like. That was, after all, the reason for Constantine's Councils --- to do what you are doing --- dictate to others what will, and will not, be considered Christ-like.

There is also a second, more sinister, flaw in your argument. You have, apparently, come up with a list of deadly sins which disqualify someone from being considered a Christian. But, Jesus saw no distinction between some sins and other sins. Hence, he taught that to even think about hating your brother was just as bad as if you actually killed him. Your definition for what is Christ-like leaves no room for grace, mercy, and forgiveness.

But, that said, I do acknowledge that your stated opinion is typical among Christians. They ignore the beam in their own eye and judge the mote in the eye of everyone else.

[UrbanLegend]

Originally Posted by Istlota

Your argument assumes as a universal truth that which has never, in the entire history of Christianity, been universal.

Since they were first called Christians [Acts 11:26], Christians have never agreed, even amongst themselves, as to who is, and who is not, to be considered Christ-like. That was, after all, the reason for Constantine's Councils --- to do what you are doing --- dictate to others what will, and will not, be considered Christ-like.

Constantine has nothing to do with Christians or Christ, he was a political opportunist who tried to join his sun worship to the Torah. I can say he has nothing to do with Christ because Scripture says anyone who lives contrary to Christ can't be a follower of Him or like Him, ''Christian'' (1 Jn 2:3-6).

Christ, not me, makes it clear those who honor Him with their lips but don't honor Him with their actions (follow the Law), worship him in vain and follow/teach commandments of men. It's very clear, that's why there has never been any need for ''councils'', ''denominations'', etc. Anyone who sincerely wants to follow Christ and his righteous example only needs a Bible and the will to match their actions with their words. Those that call themselves ''Christian'' but live contrary to ''Christ'' are only deceiving themselves (Jms 1:22-27).

I'm not here to ''dictate'' to anyone, nor do I need to ''dictate'' to anyone. Christ himself makes it clear, those who follow the commandments of men are not like him, Christian (Mt 15:7-9).

Originally Posted by Istlota

There is also a second, more sinister, flaw in your argument. You have, apparently, come up with a list of deadly sins which disqualify someone from being considered a Christian.

Again, let me make it clear, I didn't ''come up'' with anything. Those ''deadly sins'' as you put it are from Scripture. Anyone who commits them is living contrary to Christ and what He asked of us and, as I've pointed out, HE makes it clear, they worship Him in vain.

Originally Posted by Istlota

But, Jesus saw no distinction between some sins and other sins.

Where in Scripture does Christ see ''no distinction between some sins and other sins''???

He actually says, leaving no-one in doubt, ''assuredly, I say to you, until heaven and earth pass away, one jot or tittle will by no means pass away from the Law''. I'd say that's pretty clear.

Still, I'll wait for the chapter and verse in which he says there's ''no distinction between some sins and other sins''.

Originally Posted by Istlota

Hence, he taught that to even think about hating your brother was just as bad as if you actually killed him.

Where in anything I've written have you found me expressing hate for my fellow man/woman??? I only hate ONE, Satan, and the fact that you would try and imply any hate on my part, with absolutely no reason to do so I find pretty suspect. Sad really.

Also, where can I find this chapter and verse where Christ says ''hating your brother was just as bad as if you actually killed him''???

Originally Posted by Istlota

Your definition for what is Christ-like leaves no room for grace, mercy, and forgiveness.

My definition of what is ''Christ-like'' is simply to be ''like-Christ'', as Scripture stipulates. I have in NO way claimed committing sin, being ''anti''-Christ ''leaves no room'' for forgiveness but I have said, time and again, if you do repent, your actions should match your words and, despite what you may groundlessly assert, neither I, Christ or Scripture expects anyone to be perfect because no-one is (truly) good but One and that is God (Mt 19:17-21).

Originally Posted by Istlota

But, that said, I do acknowledge that your stated opinion is typical among Christians. They ignore the beam in their own eye and judge the mote in the eye of everyone else.

I find it amusing you write about ''typical'' ''Christians'' after showing you have absolutely no understanding of what a ''Christian'' is, and the fact you would even attempt to accuse me of ''judging'' anyone after I made it clear in my very first post in this thread that I don't ''judge'' anyone shows your ignore-ance.

So despite you, embarrassingly, trying to paint me as a ''hate''-filled, ''dictating'', ''judge'' I've got NOTHING but love for you and jacqui because was it not written the testing of your faith produces patience (James 1:3).

Bless!

p.s. I'm still interested in learning more about those ''distinctly hindu spiritual beliefs'' you said Martin Luther King ''lived by''?