Who are the Black Hebrew Israelites and what was their part in the Covington controversy?
At the beginning of the video footage you can see that the black Israelite were verbally attacking the indians. The kids ended up in the middle of this, accidentally preventing an escalation of the tensions only to be attacked by both sides.
In 1886, Chattanooga, Tennessee, a former railroad worker named Frank Cherry established the Church of the Living God, the Pillar and Ground of Truth for All Nations. (Yes, that was the full church name.) He mixed together elements of Judaism and Christianity, and believed that African Americans were descendants of the original tribes of Israel. He preached that these Israelite ancestors were chased out of Babylon into central and western Africa where they were eventually sold into slavery by the Romans. He believed that Adam, Eve, and Jesus were black. Cherry also preached that whites are inherently evil and hated by God.
In 1886, Chattanooga, Tennessee, a former railroad worker named Frank Cherry established the Church of the Living God, the Pillar and Ground of Truth for All Nations. (Yes, that was the full church name.) He mixed together elements of Judaism and Christianity, and believed that African Americans were descendants of the original tribes of Israel. He preached that these Israelite ancestors were chased out of Babylon into central and western Africa where they were eventually sold into slavery by the Romans. He believed that Adam, Eve, and Jesus were black. Cherry also preached that whites are inherently evil and hated by God.
This preaching is all over the Internet, in the schools and spreading like wildfire.
https://star.txstate.edu/2016/02/blac...
In the the beginning of slavery it was that they were uneducated and treating them as subhuman was really a cover to keep them DOWN and unable to rise up. Wouldnt have mattered if they were green, or from someplace other than africa.
Then the reason for keeping the black slaves down was just economic. It was cheaper labor, and to keep it that way one needed to keep them uneducated and feeling like THEY were subhuman.
I guess I am saying it was always economics that drove things. Once the blacks got more educated and stuck up for themselves, the labor cost advantage started to disappear.
But Obama crossed the line and made them feel like they were not only equal, but better than white people- and starting up reverse racism.
Now, there is a backlash against the entitled blacks (which they deserve for being entitled)
Freedom of religion, except for the mormons who wanted polygamy. Upholding the rights of all, except for the Native Indians. Very slow removal of slavery, because a lot of the government people owned slaves and wanted cheap labor. The list goes on and on.
The indian issue was different. All the northern indians that the forefathers knew wanted and agreed to be part of the American Experiment...all that went south with the westward push of our new civilization and the actions of jackson...the father of the demoncrapic party...hmm...go figure, they were racist from the start!
That push westward was pretty much of an evil land grab on the part of the USA. And the civil way was an attempt to PREVENT the south from just doing a BREXIT thing.
No one in the colonies knew of the pagan creatures west of them, had our forefathers been around, they likely could of convinced many an indian to join us in the American Experiment.
Earl Nightingale.
I have read some before about "black Israelites" in the paper. There was a group,some years ago, in Richmond, which had a sort of black synagogue in the eastern part of Richmond, where I lived. There was an advertisement, with a picture of a black man with a ball and chain on his leg, with "USA" written on it. (Later, that part, or maybe only the initials "USA" was taken off. In the recruiting poster it said (this is a memory quote) "Yahweh loves you, and we do too!" (I doubt that that message was intended to include any white people). But I don't think that that "synagogue" lasted long. I read a remark in the paper (I think it was in a letter to the editor) that the "white Europeans" in Israel were not the true Israelites. And I thought that anyway, the "white European" Jews were the ones who had paid the price. (Though maybe the ones born in Israel now haven't personally been in Europe)
This link shows the whole apology letter, and part of the previous condemnation letter.
https://www.wlwt.com/article/bishop-o...
Not all teachings are wrong or bad but the group we are discussing is perverted on both accounts.
As to the entitled black "religion", I see almost NO goodness in that.
As to Islam, I would say that their financial teachings arent bad, but the rest of it sucks. They are the most intolerant religion and want to kill infidels (including me).
Jewish religion isnt bad on financial dealings and family, but I dont understand why they seem to be leftist leaning.
I think a good idea is to pirate the best of all the religions and formulate the best of the best IF you have to adhere to something....
Their "god" is good, yet allows very bad things to happen to people who would be considered "good" by the religion. It grants good things to very bad people. Strike 1
The provision of "heaven" as the reward for obedience to the faith is very hollow. Where it is, how come no one ever comes back to talk about it, how come no one can experience a trial period just to verify its really there, etc.
The provision of "hell" as eternal punishment for being "bad" in this life. Where is it, whats really there except fire and brimstone, the fact no one has ever been there and then came back to report on its existence.
In all, catholic religion is so irrational that its easy to toss it out the window with no regrets, which is what I did.
It all went south from the actual teachings and history when they adopted Latin. Latin does not easily nor accurately translate from Hebrew nor Greek...therefore the original languages were confounded and the truth was hidden from the people...sounds like the fall of Babylon all over again.
Christ was trying to wake our shinny butts up! and teach us to integrate, to listen to our conscience to gain a mind and not get in trouble anymore but if our ascension into the conscious world, the moral, ethical world and care for our selves and others beyond our innate ability for mutuality "was to be so damn easy" there would have been no reason for the concept of "forgiveness" and it played out in a dramatic way...it was his choice to demonstrate that forgiveness in that manner.
Kind of a clean slate inwhich to start behaving in a conscious human manner instead of a pagan barbarian humanoid manner.
It's not exactly a news flash to find that many of the creatures we have a problem with just didn't get it but to the conscious, it seems one gets it automatically.
I get the experience of being in a pagan mass and told by some weird guy in a white dress..."if you don't come to church...your gonna go to hell!"
HEY! Wait!!!...I didn't know that, no one told me till now! ...but at that very moment, old ugly young carl said to himself...BULLCRAP! I don't believe you any more!
My biggest problem with religion was its hypocritical conflict with the morality it claims it is the only source for. Lysander Spooner once wrote that if God really did write the bible wouldn't it be written in a way that it would be patently obvious? You wouldn't have to believe it to make it work it would work on its own. The greatest leaders in the bible were truly horrible people with no value for human life or respect for others especially if they were not of their group. Once I realized this hypocrisy could not be reconciled (I thought Thomas Paine did a masterful job of destroying it in the first few pages of 'The Age of Reason') I was done.
I do not have that kind of problem with religion. I suppose believers have many problems. Once you are free of that the Bible becomes of interest as (poor) history, and as expression of thinking of those times.
The Old T is full of arguments and complaints from the characters to God, these are responded to sometimes with logic but more often with a reminder of who is in charge. The reader can get the idea that there is power that must be recognized, quite different from worship.
Thus, I throw in this idea- the Old T is not propounding religion (belief, faith). It invites questions about the human condition, and about power which can be interpreted as the laws of nature which are to studied and used (and obeyed) in order for humans to achieve their goals.
Inbetween the old and the new, mankind lost the voice, imagine, no voice at all, then a cursory awareness of self which eventually, (for some) the voice of self and conscience, yet, raw and untrained and a 1000 years to work out but still today...60% have failed having never known their mind...Hint: most have ended up in governments of the world... the rest are their pagan flock of useless idiots.
Although, the Mayans gave us a Lot of information as well. We are not even close to knowing what they knew.
So which things would you keep and why?
I would pirate the ideas about financial affairs from the same groups also because they are very practically based.
That said, I disagree as to why they believe those things. Religion makes it seem that the basis for their beliefs rest with some sort of mythical being, or in the case of mormonism a prophet and some sort of remote planet.
I think that the nature of human beings is the source of the things that I hold as correct. Thats what drew me to Ayn Rand and her way of thinking. I wouldnt say I am a member of the objectivist cult, however, and I analyze each of the objectivist ideas and evaluate them myself before I conclude they are correct.
We even see the Indian drummer walk right into the middle of the crowd of teens and the exit behind him being blocked by his own people.
https://youtu.be/mBhWUZ2pexw
https://youtu.be/wcZ0t15vV9k