God Commands Racial Segregation--forbids Mongrelization

You just refuse to acknowlege that they were black because it messes with your mistaken views of your own competency. It is not a lie that H, sapiens sapiens was black and that their European descendants are only white due to neanderthalensis ad-mixture. Shrieking "liar!" just makes you look more chioldish than the average racist schmuck.

 

It is a lie because you have no idea what color North African Heidelbergensis was. The modern populations in same area run from brown to light skinned. We are not even 100% sure Sapiens evolved there.

I'm not "shrieking" liar, I'm calmly writing it, in full sincerity.

 

Black. Being white would have no survival value.

Irrelevant. Relatively light-skinned people from the Levant migrated there over the centuries, mixing and breeding with all manner of local populations.

The earliest known H. sapiens fossils are from the Ethiopian highlands and Skulh Cave, where they met neanderthalensis.

But youare not stating your case rationally.

 

So you can tell the people currently living in North Africa that they are actually black because their light skin is of no survival value.

You see the problem with lying to push an agenda? You just end up making yourself look stupid.

The San Bushmen are a more ancient population than the black Bantu and they do not have black skin. You have absolutely no idea what color the first Sapiens was. You don't even know when black skin evolved, it may have been recently. Native Americans on the same latitude are not black and they survive OK.

You're a self proclaimed "lefty". That means you want to promote Negroes. I am neutral. I promote the truth.

 

Citation needed. The San had all of SSA in which to spread out. Isolated population can take just about any track. It is highly likely that they wound up in an area where white skin was advantageous. They do, however, more closely resemble Bantus than they do Berbers.

They still had some ability to produce melanin, and they wore clothes. You have nothing here.

Not a bit of it.

 

I have nothing? I am not the one making any assertions.

You are the one asserting the first Sapiens was black, an assertion you have utterly failed to corroborate.

Continuing to repeat it would be a lie.

 

You are really making a fool of yourself screaming "LIE!"

There are black people east, west and south of where the earliest H. sapiens sapiens is found. Only to the north of their range are white people found.

Neanderthalensis was white and H. sapiens sapiens was very dark. And take a good look at the Adamanese people. They could pass for Kikuyu, if they just got a little taller. Why do you feel threatened by the fact that your ancestors were black? Does it make you feel less important if it can be proven true?

Racists make no sense.

 

Actually I wouldn't care if it was proven true.

My point is that you didn't prove it was true.

Dark skinned primitives on a dark skinned latitude obviously does not prove all primitives had dark skin. The san are primitive and do not have dark skin. The Ainu are primitive and do not have dark skin. The Caucasian Dravidians on the same latitude have dark skin, exactly the same color. Are they "black". You are just obsessed with skin color. So-called "racists" don't actually even care.

So stop wasting everybodies time and come back when you have some credible evidence.

 

You wouldn't admit it, either.

The San were also isolated, in an environment that could have been radically different from their current home range, thus would have drifted from the ancestral type much as did neanderthalensis.

Dravidians were the offspring of white neaderthalensis that mated with black idaltu or similar stock, like any Indo-European people.

So stop wasting everybodies time and come back when you have some credible evidence.

 

Evidence for what? I am claiming nothing.

You don't have a coherent argument, you do realise that right?

 

If we're going off the Bible, Genesis claims that Adam came from the Earth. Adam itself comes from the word "red". So it stands to reason that Adam was of an earthly tone.

In other words, the original people probably looked more like this;

 

Where did I say they were black? I don't think I said that.....link me.


WE'RE NO STRANGERS TO LOVE....
YOU KNOW THE RULES AND SO DO I
A FULL COMMITMENT'S WHAT I'M THINKING OF...
YOU WOULDN'T GET THIS FROM ANY OTHER GUY....

 

Really? Maybe I'm wrong. We don't know what color they were.

 

I'm not sure mixing together two different races is such a good idea. It does not really seem fair to the baby.



And I think humans usually look better when they are not all mixed up.

 

LMFAO! That's what these miscegenation/multiculturalists are hoping for. We sure do live in strange times.

 

Your cheating, post the entire verse and version:

read them all here

American King James Version

It's talking about people that have found God's grace that are separated, it's based on grace not race.
To infer that God was racist would IMHO be blasphemy, wouldn't it?

Kind of kills your argument that they are not talking about race in any way whatever doesn't it?

 

Exactly, GOD told HIS people not to merge among the idolaters among the world. If at the time one race of people were idolaters, then those were the people GOD warned about by telling HIS people they were not of HIS sheep. So you're right...race and grace can and should be metaphorically combined here to bring home GOD's point of separation or segregation of the peoples. Thanks for clearing that up for some of the slower ones here.

 

Good, I am happy you see tat NOW things are different to THEN. NOW, there are as many black, yellow and red people etc that are truly GRACED as there are white, sometimes IMHO it appears more.

Now I'm not talking about people who talk the talk, I'm talking about people that walk the walk. Take Obama, there is a man that walks the walk.

A lot of Christians would love it all to be nice clean and white, but I have never seen anything written that could be even hinted at being racist. Of course, racists will always read into words whatever they want, and good for them. The TRUTH is the TRUTH, no matter how they twist the FACTS.

 

Cow cookies.

 

Do you think anyone is fooled by your fallacious cherry picking to support your bias to race mixing?

Have you ever heard of sampling? You don't just pick one or two examples which support your conclusion.

Example:

 

This post has several flaws. First the Bible talks about Hebrews/Jews as a choosen People by God. Not about a suppossed White Race because back then People didnt even talked about a White Race but about different Tribes of People and Jews were racially probably related to the surrounding Pagan Nations. It has nothing to do with Vikings from Sweden and Denmark Germany and Anglo-Saxons as those People lived in the far North far from Israelites and practiced their Pagan Religions (Thor/Odin Worship). Also it is not about racial seperation but about the seperation of ways "Israel is choosen to follow Gods Path" so seperated from the surrounding pagan nations. If we carry out genetic tests on ancient tribes from that area we would see that hose tribes were not seperated by race as we understand it today. It must be clear to anyone with a sane mind.

 

For starters, give me the Bible quote that says that jews were the chosen people, for once we clear up that misconception and blatant lie then perhaps we could continue dealing with the rest of your revisionist history. Ball is now in your court.

 

Separating believers from non-believers.

 

it is Tradition since thousand of years that jews are the choosen People. not even the early and medieval christians doubtet that the old Testament refers to jews. both jews and non-jews have the Tradition to identify the jews as the choosen People.