White People and History

[Papait]

Arabs... while also developing the three major abrahamic religions of Judaism, Christianity.

What?

Arabs and Levantines are basicly the same thing, they're both Semites

[Immoren]

What?

Arabs and Levantines are basicly the same thing, they're both Semites

So Hebrews are/were Arabs?

[Southern Test Islands]

Many white people (and, even sadder, non-white people too) are painfully unaware of the achievements of non-white races throughout history because our substandard "education" system doesn't inform them correctly.

[Cetacea]

Arabs and Levantines are basicly the same thing, they're both Semites

So Hebrews are/were Arabs?

Ishmaelites and Israelites - so yes both Semitic, from the sons of Abraham

[The Batorys]

Who is included in "white people" except Europeans?

Europe only got the lead in imperialism due to geographic luck (their coal deposits were accessible and where much of their industry already was, whereas China's were in an area recently devastated in war at the time, and so other parts of China started industrializing first, giving the Europeans, especially the British, a head start). Where they lived had more to do with it than who lived there.

And yeah, they shaped the "modern world." So what? They affected the world for a three hundred year period? Human history is thousands of years long. And will likely continue for thousands of years more.

Turks, Arabs, Persians, North Africans.
You know... Caucasians

Interesting. Most white supremacists seem to exclude these groups.

[The Batorys]

Arabs and Levantines are basicly the same thing, they're both Semites

So Hebrews are/were Arabs?

Not exactly, but they are both Semitic groups.

[Papait]

Turks, Arabs, Persians, North Africans.
You know... Caucasians

Interesting. Most white supremacists seem to exclude these groups.

Yes but they usually exclude Jews, Poles, Hispanics and Eastern Europeans as well, sometimes even French, Italian, Greek and Sami people.

And when have white supremacists ever been a good source of information?
They generally aren't the most intelligent people, frankly i think most of these baboons are the proud owners of a 2-digit IQ

[Archeuland and Baughistan]

European people may be superior because they mated with neanderthalians, who had bigger brains and created thus smarter descendants with more power and cleverness.

This is why I say evolution breeds racism. Yet the Bible teaches we are all one race and we all come from Adam and Eve.

[Mavorpen]

European people may be superior because they mated with neanderthalians, who had bigger brains and created thus smarter descendants with more power and cleverness.

This is why I say evolution breeds racism. Yet the Bible teaches we are all one race and we all come from Adam and Eve.

Which is funny because a major justification for slavery wasn't evolution, it was the Bible.

But hey, who needs historical facts?

[Archeuland and Baughistan]

This is why I say evolution breeds racism. Yet the Bible teaches we are all one race and we all come from Adam and Eve.

Which is funny because a major justification for slavery wasn't evolution, it was the Bible.

But hey, who needs historical facts?

Great, now find me proof of that!

[Mavorpen]

Which is funny because a major justification for slavery wasn't evolution, it was the Bible.

But hey, who needs historical facts?

Great, now find me proof of that!

Proof of what?

[Archeuland and Baughistan]

Great, now find me proof of that!

Proof of what?

So, you don't have proof?

[Mavorpen]

Proof of what?

So, you don't have proof?

Proof of what?

[Immoren]

Proof of what?

So, you don't have proof?

http://www.religioustolerance.org/chr_slav1.htm

[Soldati Senza Confini]

Which is funny because a major justification for slavery wasn't evolution, it was the Bible.

But hey, who needs historical facts?

Great, now find me proof of that!

Erm... you should read your own Bible.

People have been using a huge part of Exodus, Numbers, Deuteronomy, Leviticus, and even the NT with Paul for a while to justify slavery.

Then again slavery was different back then than the nowadays interpretation of slavery, in many different ways.

[Archeuland and Baughistan]

Proof of what?

Proof about your secularist interpretation of history!

[Conserative Morality]

Proof about your secularist interpretation of history!

That the Bible supports slavery or that slaveholders used Christianity and the Bible as a shield against criticism of slavery?

[Archeuland and Baughistan]

So, you don't have proof?

http://www.religioustolerance.org/chr_slav1.htm

Religious tolerance = persecution of Christianity and distortion of the Bible to fit the

secularist interpretation of history!

[Archeuland and Baughistan]

Proof about your secularist interpretation of history!

That the Bible supports slavery or that slaveholders used Christianity and the Bible as a shield against criticism of slavery?

Proof of all that secularist nonsense!

[Immoren]

http://www.religioustolerance.org/chr_slav1.htm

Religious tolerance = persecution of Christianity and distortion of the Bible to fit the

secularist interpretation of history!

Did you even open the page?
Sweet locks of Eris!

[Archeuland and Baughistan]

Religious tolerance = persecution of Christianity and distortion of the Bible to fit the

Did you even open the page?
Sweet locks of Eris!

I've read the page before (more than once), and it is really a lie!

[Soldati Senza Confini]

Proof of what?

Proof about your secularist interpretation of history!

Oh so you think you know better than all historians now.

Let me ask you this: why do you think people defended slavery?

[Immoren]

Did you even open the page?
Sweet locks of Eris!

I've read the page before (more than once), and it is really a lie!

Way you use that exclamation markgives me hard time believing your sincerity.
It's as if your not being serious.

[Conserative Morality]

http://www.religioustolerance.org/chr_slav1.htm

Religious tolerance = persecution of Christianity and distortion of the Bible to fit the

secularist interpretation of history!

“When a man strikes his slave, male or female, with a rod and the slave dies under his hand, he shall be avenged. But if the slave survives a day or two, he is not to be avenged, for the slave is his money." - Exodus 21:20-21

"Slaves, obey your earthly masters with fear and trembling, with a sincere heart, as you would Christ." - Ephesians 6:5

"Slaves are to be submissive to their own masters in everything; they are to be well-pleasing, not argumentative, not pilfering, but showing all good faith, so that in everything they may adorn the doctrine of God our Savior." - Titus 2:9-10

"Slaves, obey in everything those who are your earthly masters, not by way of eye-service, as people-pleasers, but with sincerity of heart, fearing the Lord." - Colossians 3:22

"If a man lies sexually with a woman who is a slave, assigned to another man and not yet ransomed or given her freedom, a distinction shall be made. They shall not be put to death, because she was not free" - Leviticus 19:20

"Let all who are under a yoke as slaves regard their own masters as worthy of all honor, so that the name of God and the teaching may not be reviled. Those who have believing masters must not be disrespectful on the ground that they are brothers; rather they must serve all the better since those who benefit by their good service are believers and beloved. Teach and urge these things." -1 Timothy 6:1-2

"And the peoples will take them and bring them to their place, and the house of Israel will possess them in the Lord's land as male and female slaves. They will take captive those who were their captors, and rule over those who oppressed them." Isaiah 14:2

[Archeuland and Baughistan]

Proof about your secularist interpretation of history!

Oh so you think you know better than all historians now.

Let me ask you this: why do you think people defended slavery?

It was necessary at the time, you know. Look at it this way - slaves built this nation. By the way, slaves were not all beaten and treated poorly - I expect that was a rare occurrence. We only hear about the bad things. Not that slavery is a good thing, but it wasn't necessarily bad at that time for many people. We did, by the way, totally abolish slavery in the northern states within a few years after our founding. The 1787 Northwest Ordinance prohibited slavery outright. It was totally abolished de jure by Lincoln's time. Slaves were no longer needed, not really, by that time anyway.

I don't defend slavery necessarily. I'll take a middle ground. I like to look at things as black and white, but this issue is very complex. Another way to look at it - the noble blood, sweat, and tears of slaves and 'masters' alike helped build a significant portion of this country. We should not look at it so...tempocentrically.