i doubt that the jesus i was taught about would be in favor of what just happened with isreal attacking an aid ship...but hey, jesus was never wrong, so maybe i should shut the fuck up right?
"You can tell the greatness of a man by what makes him angry." - Lincoln
If Jesus is mythological, at least get the story right...Jew.
HOB 10.05.2005, E Rutherford 06.03.2006, The Gorge 07.22.2006, Lolla 08.05.2007, West Palm 06.11.2008, Tampa 06.12.2008, Columbia 06.16.2008, EV Memphis 06.20.2009, New Orleans 05.01.2010, Kansas City 05.03.2010
If Jesus is mythological, at least get the story right...Jew.
arabs can be jews...
don't compete; coexist
what are you but my reflection? who am i to judge or strike you down?
"I will promise you this, that if we have not gotten our troops out by the time I am president, it is the first thing I will do. I will get our troops home. We will bring an end to this war. You can take that to the bank." - Barack Obama
when you told me 'if you can't beat 'em, join 'em'
i was thinkin 'death before dishonor'
yeah, this. this thread is clearly just an attempt to rile up some perceived stereotypical christians and southeners. not all southerners are racist, and neither are all christians.
True. I regard 99% of so-called Christians as a bit of a joke.
By the way, why pretend that the number of Christians in America isn't huge, and that they don't carry considerable influence in the political system over there, and consequently in U.S foreign affairs? I view them as not just idiots, but as very dangerous idiots.
look, i never said or implied that there are not a lot of christians in the US, nor that they are not influential. in fact, i would even agree with you that the impact of the way some people interpret christianity has negatively influenced US foreign affairs. (and ohbytheway, i definitely do think race and religion is an interesting topic; i'm in here aren't i?)
my problem is with claims like these: "99% of christianity is a joke." what, have you had in-depth conversations with 1000 christians and thought only ten of them had anything good to say? or are you just generalizing based on a few outliers, with whom i (as a christian) wouldn't agree with either?
and calling christians in america idiots is total bullshit. some may do and/or believe stuff you (and i) don't like, but the extreme generalization is completely unfair. it makes it seem like you are not actually interested in an actual discussion here.
If Jesus is mythological, at least get the story right...Jew.
arabs can be jews...
I think this point is worth considering....is an Arab defined by race or religion or geography. Jew is definately an Ethnic group, and religion is central to the Ethnic group. But you are quite right, Arabs can be Jews. I just don't think Jews consider themselves Arabs. We need an Anthropologist.
HOB 10.05.2005, E Rutherford 06.03.2006, The Gorge 07.22.2006, Lolla 08.05.2007, West Palm 06.11.2008, Tampa 06.12.2008, Columbia 06.16.2008, EV Memphis 06.20.2009, New Orleans 05.01.2010, Kansas City 05.03.2010
my problem is with claims like these: "99% of christianity is a joke."
I base that assertion on the fact that 99% of so-called Christians don't live according to the teachings of Christ in any way whatsoever.
How many Americans live their lives according to the example set by Jesus? Is it higher than 1%? I doubt it. I think I was being kind by stating 99%. I should have said 99.9%.
Did you just tell me "No"? Your so "right" minded. :?
Are Irish an ethnic group? What about Italians? Doesn't ethnicity have something to do with being born among a group or persons, bloodline, and in this case born Jewish? And yes you can convert to Judaism, thats a fact ....but Jews consider themselves born Jews. You are not born Catholic or Christian, because if you know anything about Christianity its the choice to believe that allows you to be called by the name. Its not an entitlement you are born with. I don't care if you think its full of crap or not.
The Jewish nation of Israel, is a nation, has been for quite sometime and well before 1948. Just saying. I am just going on history here. Not saying there aren't some serious gray areas in this conversation (thats history for you), but what nation or ethnic group doesn't have that.
It is interesting that you can convert to Judaism, I am not sure how they handle that since I have never talked to a Rabbi...do they consider you grafted into the nation or the ethnicity of Jewishness when you convert?
So Jesus was a Jew...and an Arab...and a Christian.
HOB 10.05.2005, E Rutherford 06.03.2006, The Gorge 07.22.2006, Lolla 08.05.2007, West Palm 06.11.2008, Tampa 06.12.2008, Columbia 06.16.2008, EV Memphis 06.20.2009, New Orleans 05.01.2010, Kansas City 05.03.2010
So Jesus was a Jew...and an Arab...and a Christian.
Well, if we believe the Bible then Mary was a Jew, and Jesus's dad was a man in the sky called God.
Either way, he wouldn't have looked anything like Robert Powell.
And if we take a look at the available historical evidence for Jesus then we find that all of it points to the historical figure of Jesus pre-dating the mythological figure of Jesus by approx 1000 years, and being of Egyptian descent.
The Jewish nation of Israel, is a nation, has been for quite sometime and well before 1948.
Israel was a nation before 1948? Really? Care to elaborate?
You really don't believe in the existence of a nation called Israel anytime in history before the year 1948? I guess all those archaelogical digs, writings, historical references, etc mean little. Is your mind made up?
What about Atlantis?
HOB 10.05.2005, E Rutherford 06.03.2006, The Gorge 07.22.2006, Lolla 08.05.2007, West Palm 06.11.2008, Tampa 06.12.2008, Columbia 06.16.2008, EV Memphis 06.20.2009, New Orleans 05.01.2010, Kansas City 05.03.2010
The Jewish nation of Israel, is a nation, has been for quite sometime and well before 1948.
Israel was a nation before 1948? Really? Care to elaborate?
You really don't believe in the existence of a nation called Israel anytime in history before the year 1948? I guess all those archaelogical digs, writings, historical references, etc mean little. Is your mind made up?
What about Atlantis?
It was called Palestine for 2000 years. As to what composed Israel 2000 years ago is debatable.
I.e, here's one particular slant on it:
Michael Neumann: 'In the case of a Jewish claim to Palestine, the claims are themselves dubious. Here it is not necessary to have decided on a truth, which may elude researchers forever. It is enough to show that there is serious controversy, and that is easily done. One account of recent findings can be found in 'The Bible Unearthed: Archeology's New Vision of Ancient Israel and the origin of It's sacred Texts'. It's authors are Israel Finkelstein, director of an archeological institute at Tel Aviv Uuniversity, and Neil Asher Silberman, director of a Belgian archeological institute and a contributing editor to 'Archeology' magazine. These writers display no political agenda and repeat to the point of saturation their admiration and respect for the Bible. Asher and Silberman introduce their work with the claim that:
"The historical sage contained in the Bible - from Abraham's encounter with God and his journey to Canaan, to Moses's deliverance of the children of Israel from bondage, to the rise and fall of the Kingdom of Israel and Judah - was not a miraculous revelation, but a brilliant product of the human imagination."
This is the authors' exceedingly polite way of saying that the Biblical accounts are sometimes nonsense, sometimes deliberate lies, exaggerations, and distortions. The status of the Biblical Kingdom is particularly relevant to the Jewish claims to Palestine. One of Asher and Silberman's more devastating findings is that:
"The Biblical borders of the land of Israel as outlined in the book of Joshua had seemingly assumed a sacred inviolability...the Bible pictures a stormy but basically continuous Israelite occupation of the land of Israel all the way to the Assyrian conquest. But a reexamination of the archeological evidence...points to a period of a few decades [in which Israel existed], between around 835-800B.C.E..."
In other words, they find that the "Great" Jewish Kingdom existed in something like their fabled extent for a tiny fraction of the period traditionally alleged. Even then, their boundaries never came close to the "Greater Israel" of contemporary Jewish fundamentalism. The rest of the time. Judah and Israel are thought to have been, for the most part, very primitive entities, devoid of literate culture or substantial administrative structure, extending to only a small, landlocked part of what is now called Palestine. The great structures of the Biblical era are, all of them, attributed to Canaanite cultures. Moreover, the inhabitants of Biblical Israel and Judah seem to have, for most of the time and for the most part, practitioners of Canaanite religions rather than Judaism, or of various synthetic cults. These "Israelites" were not, that is, "Jewish" in one important sense of the term. The authors refer to the Biblical Kingdom at it existed as a "a multi-ethnic society." The idea that such a past could validate a Jewish historical claim to Palestine is simply ludicrous, even if it could be shown - which it cannot - that today's Jews are in some legal sense, heirs to the ancient Israelite Kingdoms.'
Are Irish an ethnic group? What about Italians? Doesn't ethnicity have something to do with being born among a group or persons, bloodline, and in this case born Jewish? And yes you can convert to Judaism, thats a fact ....but Jews consider themselves born Jews.
The following may help to shed some light in it. It points out the difference between 'the inhabitants of a country', and 'races':
'To explain in what sense 'Jews' have a right to return to their homeland, the AICE states that "At present, the definition is based on Hitler's Nuremberg Laws: the right of Return is granted to any individual with one Jewish grandparent, or who is married to someone with one Jewish grandparent. As a result, thousands of people with no meaningful connection to the Jewish people theoretically have the right to immigrate." AICE neglects to mention that such persons also have the actual right to immigrate, and to obtain citizenship. On the other hand, a stateless Palestinian refugee, perhaps living a precarious existence in France, has no such right of return, even if his ancestors inhabited Palestine itself for a thousand years. Palestine, it seems, is not is the 'homeland' of Palestinians, but only of the Jews.
'Jew', in other words, does not refer to those who espouse Judaism or embrace Jewish culture. 'Jew' means 'of Jewish ancestry'. In virtually every Canadian jurisdiction, ancestry is explicitly cited as a prohibited ground of discrimination. Ancestry is just a contemporary stand-in for the older notion of race and is generally used in references to racial discrimination.(**) Like skin colour, it's something you cannot change, and therefore a particularly repugnant basis for determining civic status.
When Zionists suggest that the French and Germans have a right to their states, they conveniently forget that this means the *inhabitants* of France and Germany, not those of some French or German *ancestry*, not a 'people' in the sense of an ethnic group...'
Are Irish an ethnic group? What about Italians? Doesn't ethnicity have something to do with being born among a group or persons, bloodline, and in this case born Jewish? And yes you can convert to Judaism, thats a fact ....but Jews consider themselves born Jews.
The following may help to shed some light in it. It points out the difference between 'the inhabitants of a country', and 'races':
'To explain in what sense 'Jews' have a right to return to their homeland, the AICE states that "At present, the definition is based on Hitler's Nuremberg Laws: the right of Return is granted to any individual with one Jewish grandparent, or who is married to someone with one Jewish grandparent. As a result, thousands of people with no meaningful connection to the Jewish people theoretically have the right to immigrate." AICE neglects to mention that such persons also have the actual right to immigrate, and to obtain citizenship. On the other hand, a stateless Palestinian refugee, perhaps living a precarious existence in France, has no such right of return, even if his ancestors inhabited Palestine itself for a thousand years. Palestine, it seems, is not is the 'homeland' of Palestinians, but only of the Jews.
'Jew', in other words, does not refer to those who espouse Judaism or embrace Jewish culture. 'Jew' means 'of Jewish ancestry'. In virtually every Canadian jurisdiction, ancestry is explicitly cited as a prohibited ground of discrimination. Ancestry is just a contemporary stand-in for the older notion of race and is generally used in references to racial discrimination.(**) Like skin colour, it's something you cannot change, and therefore a particularly repugnant basis for determining civic status.
When Zionists suggest that the French and Germans have a right to their states, they conveniently forget that this means the *inhabitants* of France and Germany, not those of some French or German *ancestry*, not a 'people' in the sense of an ethnic group...'
Like I said earlier, there's lots of gray when discussing the history and ethnicity of any nation, and in this case a person...I wasn't making any political point or discussing Jesus as a Jew in terms of some loss of right of Palestine to exist as a seperate nation or Israel to exist as a nation. And I wasn't stating that because Abraham exists in the Bible that as proof that Israel existed as a nation pre Jesus or post Jesus.
But there is alot of other context out there regarding the study of anthropology including archaelogy that if we were discussing any other ancient culture probably would not be questioned. But would at least be given consideration that might leave more questions than answers, but nonetheless worth considering.
And to the point of the thread, if Jesus was also considered to possibly have existed, it would be relevent to consider the origins of the person as being from Arabia, and that the story that gives this person his name is from a what many believe a Jewish land that contained the sea of Galilee and the river Jordan, which would appear to have been inhabited by Jews and Arabs and even Romans in later times. Lets also remember that Jews don't think of Jesus as a Jew themselves because he ended up being the reason for Christianity, which they reject. So its not like we are trying to argue that Jesus was Jewish because Jews believed it, and therefore we could draw a political arguement for the existence of Isreal because Jesus was accepted as Jewish.
But the imaginary or real person of Jesus in my small brain was Arab, because his story originated in Arab lands, and Jewish because he was born of the Jewish line of David, and Christian because he was the reason for Christianity. If we want to discuss if he was real or not, then I guess that is a different conversation.
And maybe that was your point, that he wasn't real in the context of the common story of Jesus, but he was just some dude from another time, like a legend. But don't let me put words in your mouth.
HOB 10.05.2005, E Rutherford 06.03.2006, The Gorge 07.22.2006, Lolla 08.05.2007, West Palm 06.11.2008, Tampa 06.12.2008, Columbia 06.16.2008, EV Memphis 06.20.2009, New Orleans 05.01.2010, Kansas City 05.03.2010
And maybe that was your point, that he wasn't real in the context of the common story of Jesus, but he was just some dude from another time, like a legend. But don't let me put words in your mouth.
I believe that the Biblical Jesus was based on an actual historical person, but that this person existed about 1000 years prior to the birth of the Church in the latter half of the first century A.D. Hence, the mention of Jesus in the dead Sea Scrolls of the Essenes, and of all of the historical ties to the Egyptian lineage of the 18th Dynasty.
Basically, I'm no expert. And the truth is I was bored, and there was nothing interesting on the message board, so thought I'd stir some shit up with this thread.
Either way, I read a couple books by the Egyptian Ahmed Osman on this subject a few years back and they seemed extremely convincing.
if you really have visited the southern or midwestern states at any time since 1968 (and i have my doubts you have), you would see how utterly full of shit you are. but you're probably one of those "travellers" who visits countries to see what you expect to see, not what is.
I'd take a breath there pal. Sounds like you're running your mouth off faster than your brain can think.
I've been in the south more then once. Not that that has anything to do with it. Are you a church going southern Christian? You seem a little uptight.
You think 1968 was some kind of watershed year when everything changed in Mid Western America?
you really are just completely full of shit on every level. i dont believe for a second that you've spent any real time in southern or middle US. your EXTREME ignorance on the subject proves it.
to say that arabs (or any brown people) are lynched for going to a church in the south is fucking stupid.
The mythological figure of Jesus. He didn't actually exist, but for arguments sake, if he did, then he was an Arab. I just get the impression that many middle American, church going patriots would rather forget this fact, and instead prefer to imagine him as one of their own:
considering that your 1st post was that Jesus was an Arab and you second post states that he didn't exist, doesn't that mean that you are wrong. a person that doesn't exist can be Arab or anything at all.
considering that your 1st post was that Jesus was an Arab and you second post states that he didn't exist, doesn't that mean that you are wrong. a person that doesn't exist can be Arab or anything at all.
IF Jesus existed he would have been Arab, IF, but you're right
a person that doesn't exist can be Arab or anything at all
but i guess is just an innocent mistake from Byrnzie, anyway the whole idea remains intact, he didn't exist but if he did exist he would have been Arab.
"The good thing about science is that it's true whether or not you believe in it"
Neil deGrasse Tyson
considering that your 1st post was that Jesus was an Arab and you second post states that he didn't exist, doesn't that mean that you are wrong. a person that doesn't exist can be Arab or anything at all.
IF Jesus existed he would have been Arab, IF, but you're right
a person that doesn't exist can be Arab or anything at all
but i guess is just an innocent mistake from Byrnzie, anyway the whole idea remains intact, he didn't exist but if he did exist he would have been Arab.
understand, still a useless tread. sorry, but this is just more politics like the right does and to tell you the truth i am sick of it all.
sorry, i just finally read all the other pages and realized that people already mentioned what i brought up. didn't mean to rehash something that is already done.
I think this point is worth considering....is an Arab defined by race or religion or geography. Jew is definately an Ethnic group, and religion is central to the Ethnic group. But you are quite right, Arabs can be Jews. I just don't think Jews consider themselves Arabs. We need an Anthropologist.
To the extent that one can draw sweeping generalizations, Arabs are technically Caucasian, in racial terms. "Arab" is also a panethnicity based on more than just physical features: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Panethnicity
Ooo, Jesus belongs to the "Arab panethnicity". How edgy.
Jesus is just all right with me
Jesus is just all right, Oh yeah
Jesus is just all right with me
Jesus is just all right
I don't care what they may know
I don't care where they may go
I don't care what they may know
Jesus is just all right, oh yeah
Jesus is just all right
I don't care what they may say
I don't care what they may do
I don't care what they may say
Jesus is just all right, oh yeah
Jesus is just all right
Jesus is just all right with me
Jesus is just all right, Oh yeah
Jesus is just all right with me
Jesus is just all right
Jesus is just all right with me
Jesus is just all right, Oh yeah
Jesus is just all right with me
Jesus is just all right
“We the people are the rightful masters of bothCongress and the courts, not to overthrow the Constitution but to overthrow the men who pervert the Constitution.” Abraham Lincoln
if you really have visited the southern or midwestern states at any time since 1968 (and i have my doubts you have), you would see how utterly full of shit you are. but you're probably one of those "travellers" who visits countries to see what you expect to see, not what is.
I'd take a breath there pal. Sounds like you're running your mouth off faster than your brain can think.
I've been in the south more then once. Not that that has anything to do with it. Are you a church going southern Christian? You seem a little uptight.
You think 1968 was some kind of watershed year when everything changed in Mid Western America?
you really are just completely full of shit on every level. i dont believe for a second that you've spent any real time in southern or middle US. your EXTREME ignorance on the subject proves it.
to say that arabs (or any brown people) are lynched for going to a church in the south is fucking stupid.
I've spent 10 years living in Louisiana, and in that time I've been to many different churches - and I'm yet to see a Jesus with a tan.
And I listen for the voice inside my head... nothing. I'll do this one myself.
you really are just completely full of shit on every level. i dont believe for a second that you've spent any real time in southern or middle US. your EXTREME ignorance on the subject proves it.
to say that arabs (or any brown people) are lynched for going to a church in the south is fucking stupid.
I couldn't care less what you believe tough guy. You really are of no importance.
Comments
O.k, I'll do that the next time I pop over there for a cold beer and a...wait a minute? You can't buy beer in Saudi. Fuck it, I'm not going.
"Well, you tell him that I don't talk to suckas."
arabs can be jews...
what are you but my reflection? who am i to judge or strike you down?
"I will promise you this, that if we have not gotten our troops out by the time I am president, it is the first thing I will do. I will get our troops home. We will bring an end to this war. You can take that to the bank." - Barack Obama
when you told me 'if you can't beat 'em, join 'em'
i was thinkin 'death before dishonor'
look, i never said or implied that there are not a lot of christians in the US, nor that they are not influential. in fact, i would even agree with you that the impact of the way some people interpret christianity has negatively influenced US foreign affairs. (and ohbytheway, i definitely do think race and religion is an interesting topic; i'm in here aren't i?)
my problem is with claims like these: "99% of christianity is a joke." what, have you had in-depth conversations with 1000 christians and thought only ten of them had anything good to say? or are you just generalizing based on a few outliers, with whom i (as a christian) wouldn't agree with either?
and calling christians in america idiots is total bullshit. some may do and/or believe stuff you (and i) don't like, but the extreme generalization is completely unfair. it makes it seem like you are not actually interested in an actual discussion here.
I think this point is worth considering....is an Arab defined by race or religion or geography. Jew is definately an Ethnic group, and religion is central to the Ethnic group. But you are quite right, Arabs can be Jews. I just don't think Jews consider themselves Arabs. We need an Anthropologist.
No it isn't. Anyone can become a Jew if they convert to Judaism.
http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2002/aug/07/israel1
What do you think he'd say?
He'd say your in the wrong place pat. You went up instead of down. Here comes the elevator now. Say hello to Lucifer for me ok?
I base that assertion on the fact that 99% of so-called Christians don't live according to the teachings of Christ in any way whatsoever.
How many Americans live their lives according to the example set by Jesus? Is it higher than 1%? I doubt it. I think I was being kind by stating 99%. I should have said 99.9%.
Did you just tell me "No"? Your so "right" minded. :?
Are Irish an ethnic group? What about Italians? Doesn't ethnicity have something to do with being born among a group or persons, bloodline, and in this case born Jewish? And yes you can convert to Judaism, thats a fact ....but Jews consider themselves born Jews. You are not born Catholic or Christian, because if you know anything about Christianity its the choice to believe that allows you to be called by the name. Its not an entitlement you are born with. I don't care if you think its full of crap or not.
The Jewish nation of Israel, is a nation, has been for quite sometime and well before 1948. Just saying. I am just going on history here. Not saying there aren't some serious gray areas in this conversation (thats history for you), but what nation or ethnic group doesn't have that.
It is interesting that you can convert to Judaism, I am not sure how they handle that since I have never talked to a Rabbi...do they consider you grafted into the nation or the ethnicity of Jewishness when you convert?
So Jesus was a Jew...and an Arab...and a Christian.
Israel was a nation before 1948? Really? Care to elaborate?
I have my moments :P
"Well, you tell him that I don't talk to suckas."
Well, if we believe the Bible then Mary was a Jew, and Jesus's dad was a man in the sky called God.
Either way, he wouldn't have looked anything like Robert Powell.
And if we take a look at the available historical evidence for Jesus then we find that all of it points to the historical figure of Jesus pre-dating the mythological figure of Jesus by approx 1000 years, and being of Egyptian descent.
You really don't believe in the existence of a nation called Israel anytime in history before the year 1948? I guess all those archaelogical digs, writings, historical references, etc mean little. Is your mind made up?
What about Atlantis?
It was called Palestine for 2000 years. As to what composed Israel 2000 years ago is debatable.
I.e, here's one particular slant on it:
Michael Neumann:
'In the case of a Jewish claim to Palestine, the claims are themselves dubious. Here it is not necessary to have decided on a truth, which may elude researchers forever. It is enough to show that there is serious controversy, and that is easily done. One account of recent findings can be found in 'The Bible Unearthed: Archeology's New Vision of Ancient Israel and the origin of It's sacred Texts'. It's authors are Israel Finkelstein, director of an archeological institute at Tel Aviv Uuniversity, and Neil Asher Silberman, director of a Belgian archeological institute and a contributing editor to 'Archeology' magazine. These writers display no political agenda and repeat to the point of saturation their admiration and respect for the Bible. Asher and Silberman introduce their work with the claim that:
"The historical sage contained in the Bible - from Abraham's encounter with God and his journey to Canaan, to Moses's deliverance of the children of Israel from bondage, to the rise and fall of the Kingdom of Israel and Judah - was not a miraculous revelation, but a brilliant product of the human imagination."
This is the authors' exceedingly polite way of saying that the Biblical accounts are sometimes nonsense, sometimes deliberate lies, exaggerations, and distortions. The status of the Biblical Kingdom is particularly relevant to the Jewish claims to Palestine. One of Asher and Silberman's more devastating findings is that:
"The Biblical borders of the land of Israel as outlined in the book of Joshua had seemingly assumed a sacred inviolability...the Bible pictures a stormy but basically continuous Israelite occupation of the land of Israel all the way to the Assyrian conquest. But a reexamination of the archeological evidence...points to a period of a few decades [in which Israel existed], between around 835-800B.C.E..."
In other words, they find that the "Great" Jewish Kingdom existed in something like their fabled extent for a tiny fraction of the period traditionally alleged. Even then, their boundaries never came close to the "Greater Israel" of contemporary Jewish fundamentalism. The rest of the time. Judah and Israel are thought to have been, for the most part, very primitive entities, devoid of literate culture or substantial administrative structure, extending to only a small, landlocked part of what is now called Palestine. The great structures of the Biblical era are, all of them, attributed to Canaanite cultures. Moreover, the inhabitants of Biblical Israel and Judah seem to have, for most of the time and for the most part, practitioners of Canaanite religions rather than Judaism, or of various synthetic cults. These "Israelites" were not, that is, "Jewish" in one important sense of the term. The authors refer to the Biblical Kingdom at it existed as a "a multi-ethnic society." The idea that such a past could validate a Jewish historical claim to Palestine is simply ludicrous, even if it could be shown - which it cannot - that today's Jews are in some legal sense, heirs to the ancient Israelite Kingdoms.'
The following may help to shed some light in it. It points out the difference between 'the inhabitants of a country', and 'races':
http://www.counterpunch.org/neumann10142009.html
'To explain in what sense 'Jews' have a right to return to their homeland, the AICE states that "At present, the definition is based on Hitler's Nuremberg Laws: the right of Return is granted to any individual with one Jewish grandparent, or who is married to someone with one Jewish grandparent. As a result, thousands of people with no meaningful connection to the Jewish people theoretically have the right to immigrate." AICE neglects to mention that such persons also have the actual right to immigrate, and to obtain citizenship. On the other hand, a stateless Palestinian refugee, perhaps living a precarious existence in France, has no such right of return, even if his ancestors inhabited Palestine itself for a thousand years. Palestine, it seems, is not is the 'homeland' of Palestinians, but only of the Jews.
'Jew', in other words, does not refer to those who espouse Judaism or embrace Jewish culture. 'Jew' means 'of Jewish ancestry'. In virtually every Canadian jurisdiction, ancestry is explicitly cited as a prohibited ground of discrimination. Ancestry is just a contemporary stand-in for the older notion of race and is generally used in references to racial discrimination.(**) Like skin colour, it's something you cannot change, and therefore a particularly repugnant basis for determining civic status.
When Zionists suggest that the French and Germans have a right to their states, they conveniently forget that this means the *inhabitants* of France and Germany, not those of some French or German *ancestry*, not a 'people' in the sense of an ethnic group...'
Like I said earlier, there's lots of gray when discussing the history and ethnicity of any nation, and in this case a person...I wasn't making any political point or discussing Jesus as a Jew in terms of some loss of right of Palestine to exist as a seperate nation or Israel to exist as a nation. And I wasn't stating that because Abraham exists in the Bible that as proof that Israel existed as a nation pre Jesus or post Jesus.
But there is alot of other context out there regarding the study of anthropology including archaelogy that if we were discussing any other ancient culture probably would not be questioned. But would at least be given consideration that might leave more questions than answers, but nonetheless worth considering.
And to the point of the thread, if Jesus was also considered to possibly have existed, it would be relevent to consider the origins of the person as being from Arabia, and that the story that gives this person his name is from a what many believe a Jewish land that contained the sea of Galilee and the river Jordan, which would appear to have been inhabited by Jews and Arabs and even Romans in later times. Lets also remember that Jews don't think of Jesus as a Jew themselves because he ended up being the reason for Christianity, which they reject. So its not like we are trying to argue that Jesus was Jewish because Jews believed it, and therefore we could draw a political arguement for the existence of Isreal because Jesus was accepted as Jewish.
But the imaginary or real person of Jesus in my small brain was Arab, because his story originated in Arab lands, and Jewish because he was born of the Jewish line of David, and Christian because he was the reason for Christianity. If we want to discuss if he was real or not, then I guess that is a different conversation.
And maybe that was your point, that he wasn't real in the context of the common story of Jesus, but he was just some dude from another time, like a legend. But don't let me put words in your mouth.
I believe that the Biblical Jesus was based on an actual historical person, but that this person existed about 1000 years prior to the birth of the Church in the latter half of the first century A.D. Hence, the mention of Jesus in the dead Sea Scrolls of the Essenes, and of all of the historical ties to the Egyptian lineage of the 18th Dynasty.
Basically, I'm no expert. And the truth is I was bored, and there was nothing interesting on the message board, so thought I'd stir some shit up with this thread.
Either way, I read a couple books by the Egyptian Ahmed Osman on this subject a few years back and they seemed extremely convincing.
to say that arabs (or any brown people) are lynched for going to a church in the south is fucking stupid.
considering that your 1st post was that Jesus was an Arab and you second post states that he didn't exist, doesn't that mean that you are wrong. a person that doesn't exist can be Arab or anything at all.
IF Jesus existed he would have been Arab, IF, but you're right but i guess is just an innocent mistake from Byrnzie, anyway the whole idea remains intact, he didn't exist but if he did exist he would have been Arab.
Neil deGrasse Tyson
Why not (V) (°,,,,°) (V) ?
understand, still a useless tread. sorry, but this is just more politics like the right does and to tell you the truth i am sick of it all.
No disrespect Byrnzie
To the extent that one can draw sweeping generalizations, Arabs are technically Caucasian, in racial terms. "Arab" is also a panethnicity based on more than just physical features:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Panethnicity
Ooo, Jesus belongs to the "Arab panethnicity". How edgy.
Jesus is just all right, Oh yeah
Jesus is just all right with me
Jesus is just all right
I don't care what they may know
I don't care where they may go
I don't care what they may know
Jesus is just all right, oh yeah
Jesus is just all right
I don't care what they may say
I don't care what they may do
I don't care what they may say
Jesus is just all right, oh yeah
Jesus is just all right
Jesus is just all right with me
Jesus is just all right, Oh yeah
Jesus is just all right with me
Jesus is just all right
Jesus is just all right with me
Jesus is just all right, Oh yeah
Jesus is just all right with me
Jesus is just all right
I've spent 10 years living in Louisiana, and in that time I've been to many different churches - and I'm yet to see a Jesus with a tan.
I couldn't care less what you believe tough guy. You really are of no importance.