Lamentations 4:7 Zion's princes were purer than snow, whiter than milk. Their bodies were more pink than coral. Their hair was like sapphires.
(This could suggest God's people were White.)
Jeremiah 13:23 Can an Ethiopian change the color of his skin? Can a leopard take away its spots? Neither can you start doing good, for you have always done evil.
(This could be misinterpreted to mean dark skin is evil.)
Genesis 18:8 So he (Abraham) took butter and milk and the calf which he had prepared, and set it before them; and he stood by them under the tree as they ate.
All modern day Jews and Middle Easterners are lactose intolerant, unless they were crossbred with Northern Europeans. If Abraham had dairy, then Abraham and his tribe, his people, were not lactose intolerant, and not genetically related to Middle Easterners or Semites.
White people travel, explore, and set up new colonies. Of course White people would have populated the most important junctions on trade routes. There were likely multiple colonies of Whites where the Silk Road met the Mediterranean. Where the Eastern World met the West. (Where the events of the Bible happened.) And also in the fertile Nile valley. That's why King Tut's DNA proves he was Northern European in race.
Outside of the Bible - Gamaliel described Jesus as Blond and Blue. Pilates letter to Tiberius Caesar called Jesus a Blond.
In ancient Hebrew, the word adam means to blush (to show blood in the face). The first "human" as defined by the Old Testament is essentially named White Man.
As a side note- Many people get the story of Adam and Eve wrong. Adam and Eve are called the first man and woman; the first "humans". When their child Cain left Adam and Eve he went to live with another tribe. In other words, a tribe of sub-humans. The Bible does not dispute evolution. It instead says that pre-humans evolved into humans capable of blushing. The first human being called Adam (the one who blushes). But the other un-evolved dark skinned beings are animals in the eyes of the Lord.
Lactose persistance evolves everywhere people ate alot of raw milk. Which is mostly cold places where cows have been raised. Middle easterners have moderate amounts of lactose persistance since they ate alot of cheese and yogurt which keeps better in the heat.
Everybody does this. Retarded abos colonized australia. Feather niggers colonized the americas.
Jesus is described as dark or “bronze” in the bible. I call bullshit on your Pilate quote. I dont know who gamaliel is but he sounds like a jew. Who knows what adam means. Jews make up all kinds of shit— dont take it seriously.
diggernicks55, Master_Foo, and nationalsocialism are kikes pretending to be christian hating whites. They hate anything that unites whites. Deus vult awaits them. They may be the same person or work in the same Israeli center.
Jesus is described as dark or “bronze” in the bible. I call bullshit on your Pilate quote. I dont know who gamaliel is but he sounds like a jew. Who knows what adam means. Jews make up all kinds of shit— dont take it seriously.
There are ways to figure out what Jesus looked like. We just have to use some common sense and research.
The gospels have been written and re-written. Translated, and translated again and again. So they may not be the most reliable. (People like to use religion to push agendas and all that.)
2,000 years ago does seem like a long time ago. But humans were well advanced by then. The area was controlled by the Roman Empire. It was an extremely important junction on the Silk Road. So if there was someone preaching a new religion, and gaining a substantial following, there would have been reports made back to Rome. Or at least between governors in the area. They obviously didn't have cameras back then, so there would have been written descriptions of this preacher. Writing do survive over time. And you'd think that if the religion became popular and stayed popular that these writings would be saved and copied.
Well.... all of those things are true for Jesus and Christianity. So what writings do we have?
Gamaliel described Jesus as Blond and Blue. Pilates letter to Tiberius Caesar called Jesus a Blond.
There we go. Some common sense and research.
I dont know who gamaliel is but he sounds like a jew.
In Biblical times Jews had names like Joseph, David, and John. Names like Gamaliel and Tiberius seem more Roman or Italian.
Gamaliel literally has the name of the jewish god El in it. Clearly jewish. I looked him up. He was a pharissee rabbi who may have converted to christianity. An “apocryphal “ gospel is attributed to him and the eastern church considers him a saint.
Pilates letter to Tiberius Caesar called Jesus a Blond.
No letter like this has ever been proven to exist. I just looked it up.
[ - ] Not_C 1 point 1.4 yearsJan 7, 2023 21:36:51 ago (+1/-0)
I just looked it up.
Did you use Jewish owned Google to look it up? Maybe Wikipedia. - The site that only honest people are allowed to edit.
Meanwhile, I tried to look you up on the internet, and I couldn't find your birth certificate. So by your logic, I've just proven that you were never born, and you don't exist.
Well why dont you show me the proof that this letter wasnt just some made up bullshit? You tell me what the source of this letter is. Who the hell would have a letter from Pilate to Caesar? No one does. Some dude just produced what he purported to be a translation of this letter. But there is no provenance. Have the courage to admit its probably a fake or show me some evidence otherwise.
No matter what I do, or what I show you, you are too weak to admit when you are wrong.
You said -> "He lived in the middle east — everyone was a shitskin." EVERYONE. You said EVERYONE. The word you used was EVERYONE. EVERYONE was the word you used.
And you are WRONG. The word that describes you is WRONG.
Now, admit you are WRONG and move on.
As for me -
Have the courage to admit its probably a fake or show me some evidence otherwise.
Probably a fake? I'm not going to "admit" a probably. You don't "admit" probablies, you assume them. And I will not assume something so ridiculous.
And I'm supposed to show you evidence? Give me your address and I'll mail you a high school history textbook and I'll highlight the parts showing that the Roman Empire covered the Holy Lands. That's "evidence". That's something pointing to the fact that it's true. But you don't want "evidence", because you don't understand the word "evidence". Just like you don't understand the word "EVERYONE".
You don't want evidence. You want indisputable undeniable concrete proof that the letter physically existed and that you are not a brain in a jar hooked up to a simulator. Well, I can't prove that the letter existed because I can't prove that anything we see or feel is real and not just electrical signals shot into our brains by a high tech computer.
Meanwhile, the "evidence" that it existed is the fact that people have been talking and writing about the letter for centuries. The "evidence" that it existed is the fact that a new religion was created in the area at that time. The "evidence" that both Gamaliel's description and Pilates letter back each other up. That's "evidence". There's your "evidence".
Next, you're going to show that you're too much of a coward to admit that the evidence exists. And you're going to try to demand impossible to obtain proof thinking that this allows you to avoid admitting that you are WRONG, when it does not.
And again, - You said -> "He lived in the middle east — everyone was a shitskin." EVERYONE. You said EVERYONE. The word you used was EVERYONE. EVERYONE was the word you used.
And you are WRONG. The word that describes you is WRONG. Now, admit you are WRONG and move on.
Yeah ya know I didnt really read all this. I just see someone shouting at me that Im wrong and thats a sign that this has ceased to be productive. I dont have time for this silliness.
No matter what I do, or what I show you, you are too weak to admit when you are wrong.
You said -> "He lived in the middle east — everyone was a shitskin." EVERYONE. You said EVERYONE. The word you used was EVERYONE. EVERYONE was the word you used.
And you are WRONG. The word that describes you is WRONG.
Now, admit you are WRONG and move on. But you won't because I was right when I said - "No matter what I do, or what I show you, you are too weak to admit when you are wrong."
All modern day Jews and Middle Easterners are lactose intolerant, unless they were crossbred with Northern Europeans.
If Abraham had dairy, then Abraham and his tribe, his people, were not lactose intolerant, and not genetically related to Middle Easterners or Semites.
This is retarded. There are plenty of dairy herders in the middle east. Mostly sheep and goats.
Of course White people would have populated the most important junctions on trade routes. There were likely multiple colonies of Whites where the Silk Road met the Mediterranean. Where the Eastern World met the West. (Where the events of the Bible happened.)
Just because white people travel doesn't mean every trade hub was white.
Gamaliel described Jesus as Blond and Blue.
Where?
Pilates letter to Tiberius Caesar
Which is fake.
In ancient Hebrew, the word adam means to blush (to show blood in the face). The first "human" as defined by the Old Testament is essentially named White Man.
Just because white people travel doesn't mean every trade hub was white.
White people do travel and they do colonise new lands. Especially economically viable lands, like the most important junction of the Silk Road. Where the Mediterranean meets the Silk Road. And also the overland route where Europe met the Middle East. It was also one of the most important parts of the Roman Empire.
Does that mean that EVERY town, EVERY colony, EVERY person was White? Of course not.
But why would it be impossible for there to be a White colony in the Bible lands during biblical times when it was a very important part of the Roman Empire? That's an honest question. Why would it be completely 100% impossible?
I could go over the other things you said, but if you are so Hell bent on something like that being 100% impossible, then there is no reasoning with you. You have completely blinded yourself to facts and basic common sense - because there are agendas that you want so desperately to push - that no matter how many facts or simple common sense is presented, you will resort to saying any ridiculous things you can to further your agenda.
If I'm wrong, then answer the question. Why would it be completely 100% impossible for there to be a White colony in the Bible lands during biblical times when it was a very important part of the Roman Empire?
White people do travel and they do colonise new lands. Especially economically viable lands, like the most important junction of the Silk Road. Where the Mediterranean meets the Silk Road. And also the overland route where Europe met the Middle East. It was also one of the most important parts of the Roman Empire.
And? That doesn't mean every part of the silk road (or even the near east) was white. Other groups travel and colonise too. By this argument we should assume the Nabateans were white because they were on an important mediterranean trade route.
But why would it be impossible for there to be a White colony in the Bible lands during biblical times when it was a very important part of the Roman Empire?
It's not impossible, there's just no reason to assume Jesus was white and every reason to assume he was jewish.
I could go over the other things you said, but if you are so Hell bent on something like that being 100% impossible, then there is no reasoning with you.
Lots of things are possible, it's possible that emperor augustus was actually secretly arabic. It's just not very likely and there's no reason to believe he was.
You have completely blinded yourself to facts and basic common sense
No lol. This is a perfect role reversal. You are the one going on weird flights of fancy.
Why would it be completely 100% impossible for there to be a White colony in the Bible lands during biblical times when it was a very important part of the Roman Empire?
I never said it was, this is entirely your strawman.
Now let me ask you a question: Even if there were some white living in the levant during rabbi Yeshua's lifetime (we know there were), why should we assume he was one of them?
He:
- Was born near jerusalem
- To parents who originally came from that area
- Both he and his parents had jewish names
- He was raised in the jewish faith and speaking a jewish language
- He later became a rabbi and assembled a following of jews
- He mostly preached to jews referring to their religious text as his primary inspiration
What part of that suggests to you that he was white? Literally nothing about him had anything to do with europeans except that he lived in an area that had a tiny european population (mostly soldiers).
Now let me ask you a question: Even if there were some white living in the levant during rabbi Yeshua's lifetime (we know there were), why should we assume he was one of them?
We shouldn't assume. That's the point. We should go on specific facts.
- Was born near jerusalem
So? His mother wasn't from Jerusalem. They were travelling there so his step-dad could take part in the census. Because his step-dad was from the House of David. His mother was pregnant before she met his step-dad. A step-dad does not share any genetics with a step-child. And an Indian born in Ireland is an Indian. They aren't ethnically or racially Irish. Race has nothing to do with were someone is born. Race is genetic.
- To parents who originally came from that area
His mother was a Nazarene from Galilee. That's why he was called Jesus of Nazareth. And not Jesus of Judea, or Bethlehem, or Jerusalem. And again, his step-dad's genetics and birthplace are irrelevant. Even if an Indian is born and raised in Ireland, that doesn't mean that their kids are ethnically and racially Irish.
- Both he and his parents had jewish names
I know people named Michael, David, John. None of them are Jews. Jesus' dad's name was God. And that was kinda a Jewish name. So hey, you got that partially right.
- He was raised in the jewish faith and speaking a jewish language
He was raised around the dominate religion of the area. Speaking the dominate language of the area that was also the language spoken by Jews because it was the dominate language. An Indian speaking english doesn't make an Indian genetically British. And religion does not determine genetics.
- He later became a rabbi and assembled a following of jews
He became a preacher who preached Christianity, not Judaism. That's... ummm.... that's where the the Christ in Christianity comes from. Because Christ preached it. His followers were Christians. Because they followed him, Christ. Come on. This is some pretty simple stuff here.
- He mostly preached to jews referring to their religious text as his primary inspiration
Christianity is a branch of the Abrahamic religions. His primary inspiration was himself and the invalidation of the Jewish religion and their rituals. Besides the story of Christ and the Anti-Christ (the Jews), Christianity invalidates the Jewish religion and any and all Jewish rituals. And again, religion has nothing to do with genetics.
What part of that suggests to you that he was white? Literally nothing about him had anything to do with europeans except that he lived in an area that had a tiny european population (mostly soldiers).
What part of that? Those things only prove that what you're saying is wrong. That you are a liar.
Jesus was blonde and blue. Of which there is evidence to support that. And Jesus was a God, not a regular everyday human. Even if Mary gave birth to him, (religiously and mythologically speaking) that does not make him human. But to take the religiousness and mythology out of it - Jesus' father is unknown. And ethnic and racial Jews mainly lived in Judea, not Galilee. Galilee didn't even border Judea. And religion has nothing to do with genetics.
This isn't about me being right. It's about you being wrong. And that's what you are. Wrong. Wrong about so many things. Wrong about so many things that you can no longer push your agenda. Well... no longer able to push your agenda without blatantly and obviously lying.
Hey, this is neat. The Jews called Galilee "g'lil ha-goyím" back in Old Testament times.
"The Book of Isaiah refers to the region as g'lil ha-goyím (Hebrew: גְּלִיל הַגּוֹיִם), meaning 'Galilee of the Nations' or 'Galilee of the Gentiles' (Isaiah 9:1)."
I knew gentile translated in round about ways to "the nation" and to non-Jews. So g'lil (Galilee) ha-goyím (of the Goyim) The Jews name for Galilee was actually Galilee of the Goyim.
"According to the Biblical history of the Twelve Tribes, the region of Galilee was allotted to the tribes of Naphtali and Dan, at points overlapping with the domain of the Tribe of Asher and neighboring the region of Issachar. In the First Book of Kings, the Phoenician ruler King Hiram I of Sidon was awarded twenty cities in the region of Galilee, given to him by Solomon, and the land was subsequently settled by foreigners (hmmm interesting) during or after the time of Hiram. As part of the Northern Kingdom, Galilee and all the land of Naphtali were dispersed and resettled through the influx of foreigners (influx of foreigners, eh? It says that all the land of Naphtali were dispersed and resettled through the influx of foreigners) due to the resettlement policy of the Neo-Assyrian Empire during the 8th century BC (2 Kings 15:29)."
That's why they called it Galilee of the Goyim in Old Testament times. Because the Jews no longer lived there. They were displaced by the "foreigners".
Well, I learned something that backs up what I already knew. I previously didn't know why or how the ethnic and racial Jews were driven out of the rest of the holy lands and confined to Judea, but now I do. Thanks. Who would have thought that you could be good for something?
Lamentations 4:7 King James Version 7 Her Nazarites were purer than snow, they were whiter than milk, they were more ruddy in body than rubies, their polishing was of sapphire:
Jeremiah 13:23 King James Version 23 Can the Ethiopian change his skin, or the leopard his spots? then may ye also do good, that are accustomed to do evil.
king james version is the best
this has nothing to do with race but the attitude of the hebrew people in being a sinful, rebellious and faithless nation.
the Lord knew who they really were that's why he had to sent jesus to them first.
All the evidence shows white people have been native to middle east, turkey, caucasus etc. The roman empire allowed safe travel and roads back in the time of the bible. So jews and christians traveled all over europe, middle east and africa
also jews were definitely whiter before the arab invasions so these arguments aren't the big win you think they are. many jews are still red-headed to this day. and their princes or elites are still white-skinned today.
Whites are God's chosen people. This is why jews pretend to be White.
ProTip: If anyone has some holy book that would dispute the fact that God loves White people, there's either something wrong with the book or with the one interpreting it.
ProTip: Every culture that ever existed insists that they are the "Chosen People". If you go to some Nigger tribe in Africa, and the witch doctor comes out and tells you his people are "God's Chosen People", you aren't going to throw up your hands and proclaim "OH MY GOD THESE PEOPLE ARE REALLY WHITE!!!"
Of course not. So, why are you doing it when your read it in a book written by Sand-Niggers?
Hint: It's because the Sand-Niggers have convinced you that a Sand-Nigger God is your God, And the Sand-Nigger God has a Chosen People. And now the ONLY way you can convince your that YOU qualify to be a Chosen Person, is: 1. Pretend you have Sand-Nigger skin, like the people in the Bible. That's a pretty hard lie considering you don't have Sand-Nigger skin. 2. Pretend the Sand-Nigger God is really White.
Congratulations you chose the fourth rule of Christ-Cuck's law: #4, "The Jews are the REAL Whites".
diggernicks55, Master_Foo, and nationalsocialism are kikes pretending to be christian hating whites. They hate anything that unites whites. Deus vult awaits them. They may be the same person or work in the same Israeli center.
The Israelites are the White Race. The Declaration of Arbroath(Scottish Declaration of Independence) literally states they are Israel.
"They journeyed from Greater Scythia by way of the Tyrrhenian Sea and the Pillars of Hercules, and dwelt for a long course of time in Spain among the most savage tribes, but nowhere could they be subdued by any race, however barbarous. Thence they came, twelve hundred years after the people of Israel crossed the Red Sea, to their home in the west where they still live today." https://constitution.org/1-History/scot/arbroath.pdf
The Declaration of Arbroath(Scottish Declaration of Independence) literally states they are Israel.
Oh well then theres your proof, eh? If a bunch of renaissance scottish politicians dont know archeogenetics, then no one does, right? This is air tight evidence. Some benighted scotsmen fantasizing aboUt their jewish pedigree. Give me a fucking break.
[ - ] DoughGoy 1 point 1.4 yearsJan 7, 2023 18:50:54 ago (+1/-0)
I thought I read the Ethiopians were originally White, before blacks settled there. Also remember reading something one time that the land of Kush was Ethiopia, and also that there were two different lands of Kush.
Well i think there is evidence that ethiopians, somalians, people associated with Punt and Kush were probably much whiter at some point , i.e. middle eastern looking and eventually nilotic negros migrated there and mixed with them. Genetic analysis of horn africans and other blacks of the sahel show that they have high amounts of middle eastern type genetics. They are basically half arab. Yes these countries are blacker now than they were thousands of years ago.
This explains why so many black african countries speak an afro-asiatic language like amharic. Blacks think they were the real hebrews and the real egyptians and whites or middle easterners drove them out of their own lands. It was literally the reverse. I doubt black SS africans ever lived north of the sahara.
The Israelites are the White Race. The Declaration of Arbroath(Scottish Declaration of Independence) literally states they are Israel.
"They journeyed from Greater Scythia by way of the Tyrrhenian Sea and the Pillars of Hercules, and dwelt for a long course of time in Spain among the most savage tribes, but nowhere could they be subdued by any race, however barbarous. Thence they came, twelve hundred years after the people of Israel crossed the Red Sea, to their home in the west where they still live today." https://constitution.org/1-History/scot/arbroath.pdf
Having white skin doesn't excuse jews from doing the most awful things for 3300 years since they took over Egypt and genocided the population before running off with all its wealth. I still refuse to consider kikes white.
There is a good argument that the Hebrews of the Bible were the ancestors of the Scythians, Greeks, Romans, Saxons, Celts... White Europeans. Kikes are Babylonians who infiltrated and said that they were Hebrews and therefore Israelites when it was actually Whites
diggernicks55, Master_Foo, and nationalsocialism are kikes pretending to be christian hating whites. They hate anything that unites whites. Deus vult awaits them. They may be the same person or work in the same Israeli center.
If by good arguments you mean the jew book says so and that's about it, then I'm gonna remain quite skeptical.
If these Babylonian jews have been in control of our society for at least the last thousand years (on and off, perhaps) do you think they wouldn't have lied to you about religion? That they haven't infiltrated the church and fed you their version of religion?
How would the writer of lamentations know what white looked like? He lived in the middle east — everyone was a shitskin. Having the distinction of being the whitest turd in the toilet is maybe not such a great thing.
They’re still Greeks that live in the Middle East that never mixed mostly because of the barrier of religion. Groups like the Galatians Celtic tribes that migrated into Turkey who have a book about them in the Bible. Scythians are also clearly mentioned. The Middle East wasn’t always filled with semites but had many different groups of Whites that lived there such as the Sumerians and the ancient Persians. There’s a reason why White features are so heavily revered in Asia especially in the Middle East. Because it’s a sign royalty which means the ancient rulers of those lands at that time were Aryan. Their legacy is their culture of horse back riding, their languages, their religions, and the government systems that they left behind such as the caste system in India
How would the writer of lamentations know what white looked like? He lived in the middle east — everyone was a shitskin. Having the distinction of being the whitest turd in the toilet is maybe not such a great thing.
you are ignorant, there are arabs with red hair in parts of the levant. there are few that's true but they do exist.
king david was blonde or of red hair
“And he sent, and brought him in. Now he was ruddy, and withal of a beautiful countenance, and goodly to look to. And the LORD said, Arise, anoint him: for this is he.”
yes he was the exception to the rule but you can find some arabs with red hair in the middle east today. specially in the kurdistan region
Yeah because periodically whitish people from colder climates migrated southward and mixed with shitskin”basal eurasians” of the last 10,000 years or more. The average middle easterner is a result of this mixing. A few are still carrying genes that show up like blond or red hair. Probably from som hittites. But so what. This mix has gone on to produce the most degenrate and deceptive groups in the history of the human race. Basically all the brown people in the middle east and asia are hybridzed people, a blend of tropical primitive niggers and more advanced groups from farther north who took over nigger territory and interbred with them. Its these mixed groups that are the greatest threat to the world, not the spear chuckers. The real israelites are not going to turn out to be swedish like you hoped. Ive studied this shit.
The Declaration of Arbroath. "Most Holy Father and Lord, we know and from the chronicles and books of the ancients we find that among other famous nations our own, the Scots, has been graced with widespread renown. They journeyed from Greater Scythia by way of the Tyrrhenian Sea and the Pillars of Hercules, and dwelt for a long course of time in Spain among the most savage tribes, but nowhere could they be subdued by any race, however barbarous. Thence they came, twelve hundred years after the people of ✳️ ✳️ Israel ✳️ ✳️ crossed the Red Sea, to their home in the west where they still live today. The Britons they first drove out, the Picts they utterly destroyed, and, even though very often assailed by the Norwegians, the Danes and the English, they took possession of that home with many victories and untold efforts; and, as the historians of old time bear witness, they have held it free of all bondage ever since. In their kingdom there have reigned one hundred and thirteen kings of their own royal stock, the line unbroken a single foreigner. The high qualities and deserts of these people, were they not otherwise manifest, gain glory enough from this: that the King of kings and Lord of lords, our Lord Jesus Christ, after His Passion and Resurrection, called them, even though settled in the uttermost parts of the earth, almost the first to His most holy faith. Nor would He have them confirmed in that faith by merely anyone but by the first of His Apostles by calling, though second or third in rank the most gentle Saint Andrew, the Blessed Peter's brother, and desired him to keep them under his protection as their patron forever."
Historians and archeologists need to show provenance. They cant just say “Scottish are the real jews” they have to submit evidence and then I can review that evidence. The scottish lairds havent a drop of evidence.
We know who scots are based on their genetics and comparisons with much older skeletal dna from ancient individuals. They are descended from steppe herders, anatolian farmers and western european hunter gatherers. The anatolians left the near east and settled europe 8000 yrs ago. Too early for any of them to be involved with the cult of El.
This narrative just makes us look like a pack of hoteps.
Modern ash. jews are 50% descended from levantine jews like jesus and 50% descended from europeans— probably the white women who they bought as slaves.
The events of the OT are far to recent fro there to be any real mystery about the ethnic identity of the hebrews/israelites. Their genetics were consistent with other groups in the area such as the canaanites and moabites, who btw all spoke the same language and worshipped the same gods. Theres no trace of scottish genetics in that area ffs. It would stick out like a sore thumb.
[ - ] Not_C 1 point 1.4 yearsJan 7, 2023 15:08:32 ago (+1/-0)
He lived in the middle east — everyone was a shitskin.
DNA has proven that King Tut was Northern European. So even in King Tut's time there weren't only Whites living in Egypt, they were ruling over it.
The events of the Bible happened in the Roman Empire where the Silk Road meets the Mediterranean. An important junction like that would have had multiple colonies of White people living there.
To say that the Middle East can only be populated by Semites and Arabs, is like saying that North America can only be populated by Redskins.
Dna did not prove that king tut was white. Dna proved that his dad akhenaton (and by extention probably him as well) probably had R1b haplotype that means the royal fam was probably patrilineally descended from steppe herder ancestry which is “white” in a broad kind of way. (White people as they exist today are only really 4 to 6 thousand years old.)
Patrilineal descend may only account for a tiny fraction of one’s ancestry. Most beaners in latin america have R1b haplotype. They do not have high amounts of steppe ancestry. Native americans were conquered by people who were conquered by people who were conquered by steppe herders 6000 years ago and that is why beaners have R1b. They are more likely to have R1b than whites, but they are not MORE white than whites! Tut probably had R1b subclade V-88 which is common in north africa and also in Chad. 7000 years ago some people with steppe ancestry entered africa, but by the time Tut lived those steppe herders would have been thoroughly assimilated by shit skins and niggers. They did not remain pure in N. Africa for 3000 years.
To say that the Middle East can only be populated by Semites and Arabs
You are missing the point. Semites are partly descended from whites. Smarter more advanced people with haplogroup J migrated south into the middle east and mixed with darker more primitive “basal eurasians”. Middle easterners are mixed. J haplogroup’s sibling clade is Haplogroup I, which includes scandinavians and southern slavs. Middle easterners are patrilineally descended from western eurasians closely related to us. The mixture and the environment bred a bunch of violent corrupt midwits.
[ - ] Not_C 1 point 1.4 yearsJan 7, 2023 20:10:26 ago (+1/-0)
You're missing the point, and also agreeing with it without realising it.
Again, the events of the Bible happened in the Roman Empire where the Silk Road connects with Europe. An important junction like that would have had multiple colonies of non-shitskin people living there.
As one example, it is well documented that there were many Greek colonies in Galilee during Biblical times. And as another example, the junction where the Mediterranean met the Silk Road was of extreme importance to the Roman Empire, and would have had a very high Roman (Italian) population. Greeks and Italians are not shitskins.
Because it was where the Mediterranean me the Silk Road, there would have been colonies of all the various peoples in the Roman Empire. Especially all peoples of the Mediterranean.
Also, you yourself talk about how DNA has been dispersed across the world. Yet, at the same time, you claim that only one color or race of people could've occupied the area.
How do you equate greek colonies with northern europeans? You say king Tut is a northern european.
Also, you yourself talk about how DNA has been dispersed across the world. Yet, at the same time, you claim that only one color or race of people could've occupied the area.
Im saying we know that there is no genetic signal from a population consistant with modern white northern europeans in that area. None. If people of steppe herder ancestry expanded in to Egypt and the Levant it would have been way before the events of the bible and those people would have mixed with the surrounding population, ie they were no longer white. They would not have remained separate. Are indian Brahmins white? No they are mixed shit skins and yet the aryans invaded india only 3500 years ago. The egyptian civilization was much older than that and King Tut lived at the tail end of it— thousands of years after the pyramids were built. He was a shit skin.
[ - ] Not_C 1 point 1.4 yearsJan 7, 2023 21:23:01 ago (+1/-0)
How do you equate greek colonies with northern europeans?
I equate Greeks with non-shitskins.
I equate you with someone who can't admit they were wrong when they said, ">He lived in the middle east — everyone was a shitskin."
The egyptian civilization was much older than that and King Tut lived at the tail end of it— thousands of years after the pyramids were built. He was a shit skin.
The dates in which the pyramids were built is irrelevant. Whites have moved all across the world. Subjugating and ruling over the lesser races for centuries. Egypt is one example of Whites ruling over an area.
Meanwhile, Tut's relatives had blonde hair and European shaped skulls and features. Ramesses II - Who scholars believe was the Pharaoh during Moses' time - Was a ginger. A ginger sure as Hell isn't a shitskin.
Just because someone lived in Egypt, that doesn't make them a shitskin. And if someone in the past lived in what is now Palestine/Israel, that doesn't guarantee they were a shitskin. There are currently countless White colonies in non-White countries right now. And there have been countless White colonies in non-White countries for centuries.
If Whites create a colony in a new land, their skin doesn't instantly change color. And if one colony integrated with the local population, that doesn't mean that EVERY colony to ever exist integrated, or integrated immediately upon arrival in a new land.
Another moron who doesn't think that the demographics of a geological location ever changes........ Look at Chicago, the racial demographics literally changed in less than 50 years. But you can't possibly conceive that the area of Palestine changed over the course of a couple thousand years..... LMAO.
Just think.... in a few hundred years, people will think of England the same way we think of Turkey or Iran. Mostly brown, speaking Arabic languages, wearing burkas, blasting calls to prayer. The thought of it being full of white English-speakers will sound absurd!
[ + ] Not_C
[ - ] Not_C 4 points 1.4 yearsJan 7, 2023 14:49:49 ago (+5/-1)
So he (Abraham) took butter and milk and the calf which he had prepared, and set it before them; and he stood by them under the tree as they ate.
All modern day Jews and Middle Easterners are lactose intolerant, unless they were crossbred with Northern Europeans.
If Abraham had dairy, then Abraham and his tribe, his people, were not lactose intolerant, and not genetically related to Middle Easterners or Semites.
White people travel, explore, and set up new colonies.
Of course White people would have populated the most important junctions on trade routes. There were likely multiple colonies of Whites where the Silk Road met the Mediterranean. Where the Eastern World met the West. (Where the events of the Bible happened.)
And also in the fertile Nile valley. That's why King Tut's DNA proves he was Northern European in race.
Outside of the Bible -
Gamaliel described Jesus as Blond and Blue. Pilates letter to Tiberius Caesar called Jesus a Blond.
In ancient Hebrew, the word adam means to blush (to show blood in the face).
The first "human" as defined by the Old Testament is essentially named White Man.
As a side note-
Many people get the story of Adam and Eve wrong.
Adam and Eve are called the first man and woman; the first "humans". When their child Cain left Adam and Eve he went to live with another tribe. In other words, a tribe of sub-humans.
The Bible does not dispute evolution. It instead says that pre-humans evolved into humans capable of blushing. The first human being called Adam (the one who blushes). But the other un-evolved dark skinned beings are animals in the eyes of the Lord.
[ + ] PostWallHelena
[ - ] PostWallHelena 1 point 1.4 yearsJan 7, 2023 16:53:47 ago (+3/-2)
Everybody does this. Retarded abos colonized australia. Feather niggers colonized the americas.
Jesus is described as dark or “bronze” in the bible. I call bullshit on your Pilate quote. I dont know who gamaliel is but he sounds like a jew. Who knows what adam means. Jews make up all kinds of shit— dont take it seriously.
[ + ] deleted
[ - ] deleted 1 point 1.4 yearsJan 7, 2023 18:15:27 ago (+1/-0)
[ + ] zr855
[ - ] zr855 -1 points 1.4 yearsJan 7, 2023 18:35:35 ago (+1/-2)*
[ + ] Not_C
[ - ] Not_C 0 points 1.4 yearsJan 7, 2023 20:35:09 ago (+1/-1)
There are ways to figure out what Jesus looked like. We just have to use some common sense and research.
The gospels have been written and re-written. Translated, and translated again and again. So they may not be the most reliable. (People like to use religion to push agendas and all that.)
2,000 years ago does seem like a long time ago. But humans were well advanced by then.
The area was controlled by the Roman Empire. It was an extremely important junction on the Silk Road. So if there was someone preaching a new religion, and gaining a substantial following, there would have been reports made back to Rome. Or at least between governors in the area.
They obviously didn't have cameras back then, so there would have been written descriptions of this preacher. Writing do survive over time. And you'd think that if the religion became popular and stayed popular that these writings would be saved and copied.
Well.... all of those things are true for Jesus and Christianity. So what writings do we have?
Gamaliel described Jesus as Blond and Blue. Pilates letter to Tiberius Caesar called Jesus a Blond.
There we go. Some common sense and research.
In Biblical times Jews had names like Joseph, David, and John.
Names like Gamaliel and Tiberius seem more Roman or Italian.
[ + ] PostWallHelena
[ - ] PostWallHelena 1 point 1.4 yearsJan 7, 2023 20:55:27 ago (+1/-0)
No letter like this has ever been proven to exist. I just looked it up.
[ + ] Not_C
[ - ] Not_C 1 point 1.4 yearsJan 7, 2023 21:36:51 ago (+1/-0)
Did you use Jewish owned Google to look it up?
Maybe Wikipedia. - The site that only honest people are allowed to edit.
Meanwhile, I tried to look you up on the internet, and I couldn't find your birth certificate. So by your logic, I've just proven that you were never born, and you don't exist.
[ + ] PostWallHelena
[ - ] PostWallHelena 0 points 1.4 yearsJan 7, 2023 22:01:03 ago (+0/-0)
[ + ] Not_C
[ - ] Not_C 0 points 1.4 yearsJan 8, 2023 14:21:27 ago (+0/-0)
You said -> "He lived in the middle east — everyone was a shitskin." EVERYONE. You said EVERYONE. The word you used was EVERYONE. EVERYONE was the word you used.
And you are WRONG. The word that describes you is WRONG.
Now, admit you are WRONG and move on.
As for me -
Probably a fake? I'm not going to "admit" a probably. You don't "admit" probablies, you assume them. And I will not assume something so ridiculous.
And I'm supposed to show you evidence? Give me your address and I'll mail you a high school history textbook and I'll highlight the parts showing that the Roman Empire covered the Holy Lands.
That's "evidence". That's something pointing to the fact that it's true.
But you don't want "evidence", because you don't understand the word "evidence". Just like you don't understand the word "EVERYONE".
You don't want evidence. You want indisputable undeniable concrete proof that the letter physically existed and that you are not a brain in a jar hooked up to a simulator.
Well, I can't prove that the letter existed because I can't prove that anything we see or feel is real and not just electrical signals shot into our brains by a high tech computer.
Meanwhile, the "evidence" that it existed is the fact that people have been talking and writing about the letter for centuries.
The "evidence" that it existed is the fact that a new religion was created in the area at that time.
The "evidence" that both Gamaliel's description and Pilates letter back each other up.
That's "evidence". There's your "evidence".
Next, you're going to show that you're too much of a coward to admit that the evidence exists. And you're going to try to demand impossible to obtain proof thinking that this allows you to avoid admitting that you are WRONG, when it does not.
And again, - You said -> "He lived in the middle east — everyone was a shitskin." EVERYONE. You said EVERYONE. The word you used was EVERYONE. EVERYONE was the word you used.
And you are WRONG. The word that describes you is WRONG.
Now, admit you are WRONG and move on.
[ + ] PostWallHelena
[ - ] PostWallHelena 0 points 1.4 yearsJan 8, 2023 18:40:40 ago (+0/-0)
[ + ] Not_C
[ - ] Not_C 0 points 1.4 yearsJan 9, 2023 14:05:42 ago (+0/-0)
No matter what I do, or what I show you, you are too weak to admit when you are wrong.
You said -> "He lived in the middle east — everyone was a shitskin." EVERYONE. You said EVERYONE. The word you used was EVERYONE. EVERYONE was the word you used.
And you are WRONG. The word that describes you is WRONG.
Now, admit you are WRONG and move on.
But you won't because I was right when I said - "No matter what I do, or what I show you, you are too weak to admit when you are wrong."
[ + ] oppressed
[ - ] oppressed [op] 0 points 1.4 yearsJan 7, 2023 16:24:00 ago (+0/-0)
[ + ] Broc_Liath
[ - ] Broc_Liath 0 points 1.4 yearsJan 10, 2023 06:17:42 ago (+0/-0)
This is retarded. There are plenty of dairy herders in the middle east. Mostly sheep and goats.
Just because white people travel doesn't mean every trade hub was white.
Where?
Which is fake.
Oh please. You don't have to be white to blush.
[ + ] Not_C
[ - ] Not_C 0 points 1.4 yearsJan 10, 2023 15:00:06 ago (+0/-0)
White people do travel and they do colonise new lands. Especially economically viable lands, like the most important junction of the Silk Road. Where the Mediterranean meets the Silk Road. And also the overland route where Europe met the Middle East.
It was also one of the most important parts of the Roman Empire.
Does that mean that EVERY town, EVERY colony, EVERY person was White? Of course not.
But why would it be impossible for there to be a White colony in the Bible lands during biblical times when it was a very important part of the Roman Empire?
That's an honest question.
Why would it be completely 100% impossible?
I could go over the other things you said, but if you are so Hell bent on something like that being 100% impossible, then there is no reasoning with you.
You have completely blinded yourself to facts and basic common sense - because there are agendas that you want so desperately to push - that no matter how many facts or simple common sense is presented, you will resort to saying any ridiculous things you can to further your agenda.
If I'm wrong, then answer the question.
Why would it be completely 100% impossible for there to be a White colony in the Bible lands during biblical times when it was a very important part of the Roman Empire?
[ + ] Broc_Liath
[ - ] Broc_Liath 0 points 1.3 yearsJan 11, 2023 19:54:10 ago (+0/-0)
And? That doesn't mean every part of the silk road (or even the near east) was white. Other groups travel and colonise too. By this argument we should assume the Nabateans were white because they were on an important mediterranean trade route.
It's not impossible, there's just no reason to assume Jesus was white and every reason to assume he was jewish.
Lots of things are possible, it's possible that emperor augustus was actually secretly arabic. It's just not very likely and there's no reason to believe he was.
No lol. This is a perfect role reversal. You are the one going on weird flights of fancy.
I never said it was, this is entirely your strawman.
Now let me ask you a question: Even if there were some white living in the levant during rabbi Yeshua's lifetime (we know there were), why should we assume he was one of them?
He:
- Was born near jerusalem
- To parents who originally came from that area
- Both he and his parents had jewish names
- He was raised in the jewish faith and speaking a jewish language
- He later became a rabbi and assembled a following of jews
- He mostly preached to jews referring to their religious text as his primary inspiration
What part of that suggests to you that he was white? Literally nothing about him had anything to do with europeans except that he lived in an area that had a tiny european population (mostly soldiers).
[ + ] Not_C
[ - ] Not_C 0 points 1.3 yearsJan 11, 2023 21:54:36 ago (+0/-0)
We shouldn't assume. That's the point. We should go on specific facts.
So? His mother wasn't from Jerusalem. They were travelling there so his step-dad could take part in the census. Because his step-dad was from the House of David.
His mother was pregnant before she met his step-dad.
A step-dad does not share any genetics with a step-child.
And an Indian born in Ireland is an Indian. They aren't ethnically or racially Irish. Race has nothing to do with were someone is born. Race is genetic.
His mother was a Nazarene from Galilee. That's why he was called Jesus of Nazareth. And not Jesus of Judea, or Bethlehem, or Jerusalem.
And again, his step-dad's genetics and birthplace are irrelevant.
Even if an Indian is born and raised in Ireland, that doesn't mean that their kids are ethnically and racially Irish.
I know people named Michael, David, John. None of them are Jews.
Jesus' dad's name was God. And that was kinda a Jewish name. So hey, you got that partially right.
He was raised around the dominate religion of the area. Speaking the dominate language of the area that was also the language spoken by Jews because it was the dominate language.
An Indian speaking english doesn't make an Indian genetically British.
And religion does not determine genetics.
He became a preacher who preached Christianity, not Judaism. That's... ummm.... that's where the the Christ in Christianity comes from. Because Christ preached it.
His followers were Christians. Because they followed him, Christ.
Come on. This is some pretty simple stuff here.
Christianity is a branch of the Abrahamic religions. His primary inspiration was himself and the invalidation of the Jewish religion and their rituals.
Besides the story of Christ and the Anti-Christ (the Jews), Christianity invalidates the Jewish religion and any and all Jewish rituals.
And again, religion has nothing to do with genetics.
What part of that? Those things only prove that what you're saying is wrong. That you are a liar.
Jesus was blonde and blue. Of which there is evidence to support that.
And Jesus was a God, not a regular everyday human. Even if Mary gave birth to him, (religiously and mythologically speaking) that does not make him human.
But to take the religiousness and mythology out of it - Jesus' father is unknown. And ethnic and racial Jews mainly lived in Judea, not Galilee.
Galilee didn't even border Judea.
And religion has nothing to do with genetics.
This isn't about me being right. It's about you being wrong.
And that's what you are. Wrong.
Wrong about so many things.
Wrong about so many things that you can no longer push your agenda. Well... no longer able to push your agenda without blatantly and obviously lying.
Hey, this is neat. The Jews called Galilee "g'lil ha-goyím" back in Old Testament times.
"The Book of Isaiah refers to the region as g'lil ha-goyím (Hebrew: גְּלִיל הַגּוֹיִם), meaning 'Galilee of the Nations' or 'Galilee of the Gentiles' (Isaiah 9:1)."
I knew gentile translated in round about ways to "the nation" and to non-Jews.
So g'lil (Galilee) ha-goyím (of the Goyim)
The Jews name for Galilee was actually Galilee of the Goyim.
"According to the Biblical history of the Twelve Tribes, the region of Galilee was allotted to the tribes of Naphtali and Dan, at points overlapping with the domain of the Tribe of Asher and neighboring the region of Issachar. In the First Book of Kings, the Phoenician ruler King Hiram I of Sidon was awarded twenty cities in the region of Galilee, given to him by Solomon, and the land was subsequently settled by foreigners (hmmm interesting) during or after the time of Hiram. As part of the Northern Kingdom, Galilee and all the land of Naphtali were dispersed and resettled through the influx of foreigners (influx of foreigners, eh? It says that all the land of Naphtali were dispersed and resettled through the influx of foreigners) due to the resettlement policy of the Neo-Assyrian Empire during the 8th century BC (2 Kings 15:29)."
That's why they called it Galilee of the Goyim in Old Testament times. Because the Jews no longer lived there. They were displaced by the "foreigners".
Well, I learned something that backs up what I already knew.
I previously didn't know why or how the ethnic and racial Jews were driven out of the rest of the holy lands and confined to Judea, but now I do.
Thanks. Who would have thought that you could be good for something?
[ + ] knightwarrior41
[ - ] knightwarrior41 3 points 1.4 yearsJan 7, 2023 11:20:59 ago (+3/-0)*
King James Version
7 Her Nazarites were purer than snow, they were whiter than milk, they were more ruddy in body than rubies, their polishing was of sapphire:
King James Version
23 Can the Ethiopian change his skin, or the leopard his spots? then may ye also do good, that are accustomed to do evil.
king james version is the best
this has nothing to do with race but the attitude of the hebrew people in being a sinful, rebellious and faithless nation.
the Lord knew who they really were that's why he had to sent jesus to them first.
[ + ] Trickthegoyim
[ - ] Trickthegoyim 2 points 1.4 yearsJan 7, 2023 21:13:59 ago (+2/-0)
[ + ] BlueEyedAngloMasterRaceGod
[ - ] BlueEyedAngloMasterRaceGod 2 points 1.4 yearsJan 7, 2023 19:43:49 ago (+2/-0)
also jews were definitely whiter before the arab invasions so these arguments aren't the big win you think they are. many jews are still red-headed to this day. and their princes or elites are still white-skinned today.
[ + ] Master_Foo
[ - ] Master_Foo 2 points 1.4 yearsJan 7, 2023 16:55:05 ago (+3/-1)
ProTip: The Bible was written by Jews. Treat it with the same skepticism you treat EVERYTHING that was written by Jews.
[ + ] Temp20210918c
[ - ] Temp20210918c 2 points 1.4 yearsJan 7, 2023 17:26:10 ago (+3/-1)*
ProTip: If anyone has some holy book that would dispute the fact that God loves White people, there's either something wrong with the book or with the one interpreting it.
[ + ] Master_Foo
[ - ] Master_Foo 1 point 1.4 yearsJan 7, 2023 17:34:33 ago (+3/-2)
If you go to some Nigger tribe in Africa, and the witch doctor comes out and tells you his people are "God's Chosen People", you aren't going to throw up your hands and proclaim "OH MY GOD THESE PEOPLE ARE REALLY WHITE!!!"
Of course not. So, why are you doing it when your read it in a book written by Sand-Niggers?
Hint: It's because the Sand-Niggers have convinced you that a Sand-Nigger God is your God, And the Sand-Nigger God has a Chosen People. And now the ONLY way you can convince your that YOU qualify to be a Chosen Person, is:
1. Pretend you have Sand-Nigger skin, like the people in the Bible. That's a pretty hard lie considering you don't have Sand-Nigger skin.
2. Pretend the Sand-Nigger God is really White.
Congratulations you chose the fourth rule of Christ-Cuck's law: #4, "The Jews are the REAL Whites".
[ + ] zr855
[ - ] zr855 -1 points 1.4 yearsJan 7, 2023 18:35:52 ago (+1/-2)*
[ + ] Youaresosmart
[ - ] Youaresosmart 2 points 1.4 yearsJan 7, 2023 14:39:28 ago (+4/-2)
"They journeyed from Greater
Scythia by way of the Tyrrhenian Sea and the Pillars of
Hercules, and dwelt for a long course of time in Spain among
the most savage tribes, but nowhere could they be subdued
by any race, however barbarous. Thence they came, twelve
hundred years after the people of Israel crossed the Red Sea,
to their home in the west where they still live today."
https://constitution.org/1-History/scot/arbroath.pdf
[ + ] PostWallHelena
[ - ] PostWallHelena 2 points 1.4 yearsJan 7, 2023 16:02:49 ago (+3/-1)
Oh well then theres your proof, eh? If a bunch of renaissance scottish politicians dont know archeogenetics, then no one does, right? This is air tight evidence. Some benighted scotsmen fantasizing aboUt their jewish pedigree. Give me a fucking break.
[ + ] oppressed
[ - ] oppressed [op] 0 points 1.4 yearsJan 7, 2023 16:26:35 ago (+0/-0)
[ + ] Youaresosmart
[ - ] Youaresosmart -2 points 1.4 yearsJan 8, 2023 02:45:51 ago (+0/-2)
Get that kike cock out of your mouth.
[ + ] ReincarnatedGoat
[ - ] ReincarnatedGoat 0 points 1.4 yearsJan 9, 2023 05:49:32 ago (+0/-0)
[ + ] DoughGoy
[ - ] DoughGoy 1 point 1.4 yearsJan 7, 2023 18:50:54 ago (+1/-0)
[ + ] PostWallHelena
[ - ] PostWallHelena 0 points 1.4 yearsJan 7, 2023 21:08:53 ago (+0/-0)
This explains why so many black african countries speak an afro-asiatic language like amharic. Blacks think they were the real hebrews and the real egyptians and whites or middle easterners drove them out of their own lands. It was literally the reverse. I doubt black SS africans ever lived north of the sahara.
[ + ] Her0n
[ - ] Her0n 1 point 1.4 yearsJan 7, 2023 18:28:18 ago (+1/-0)
[ + ] Youaresosmart
[ - ] Youaresosmart 1 point 1.4 yearsJan 7, 2023 14:35:56 ago (+3/-2)
"They journeyed from Greater
Scythia by way of the Tyrrhenian Sea and the Pillars of
Hercules, and dwelt for a long course of time in Spain among
the most savage tribes, but nowhere could they be subdued
by any race, however barbarous. Thence they came, twelve
hundred years after the people of Israel crossed the Red Sea,
to their home in the west where they still live today."
https://constitution.org/1-History/scot/arbroath.pdf
[ + ] NaturalSelectionistWorker
[ - ] NaturalSelectionistWorker -1 points 1.4 yearsJan 7, 2023 12:31:01 ago (+1/-2)
[ + ] Jiggggg
[ - ] Jiggggg 0 points 1.4 yearsJan 7, 2023 13:27:44 ago (+2/-2)
[ + ] Master_Foo
[ - ] Master_Foo 2 points 1.4 yearsJan 7, 2023 16:57:48 ago (+3/-1)
[ + ] zr855
[ - ] zr855 0 points 1.4 yearsJan 7, 2023 18:36:47 ago (+2/-2)*
[ + ] NaturalSelectionistWorker
[ - ] NaturalSelectionistWorker 1 point 1.4 yearsJan 7, 2023 13:34:33 ago (+2/-1)
If these Babylonian jews have been in control of our society for at least the last thousand years (on and off, perhaps) do you think they wouldn't have lied to you about religion? That they haven't infiltrated the church and fed you their version of religion?
[ + ] doginventer
[ - ] doginventer 2 points 1.4 yearsJan 7, 2023 14:29:26 ago (+2/-0)
[ + ] Broc_Liath
[ - ] Broc_Liath 0 points 1.4 yearsJan 10, 2023 06:09:00 ago (+0/-0)
No lol, no there isn't. We are completely genetically unrelated and we speak completely unrelated languages to them.
If spinoff-judaism hadn't become popular in europe and european children weren't raised with jewish mythology no one would be claiming we're related.
[ + ] PostWallHelena
[ - ] PostWallHelena -5 points 1.4 yearsJan 7, 2023 11:09:48 ago (+3/-8)
[ + ] Allienonymus
[ - ] Allienonymus 6 points 1.4 yearsJan 7, 2023 13:00:51 ago (+6/-0)
[ + ] Ironcrusader88
[ - ] Ironcrusader88 5 points 1.4 yearsJan 7, 2023 12:24:20 ago (+5/-0)
[ + ] knightwarrior41
[ - ] knightwarrior41 4 points 1.4 yearsJan 7, 2023 11:27:39 ago (+5/-1)
you are ignorant, there are arabs with red hair in parts of the levant. there are few that's true but they do exist.
king david was blonde or of red hair
“And he sent, and brought him in. Now he was ruddy, and withal of a beautiful countenance, and goodly to look to. And the LORD said, Arise, anoint him: for this is he.”
yes he was the exception to the rule but you can find some arabs with red hair in the middle east today. specially in the kurdistan region
[ + ] PostWallHelena
[ - ] PostWallHelena -4 points 1.4 yearsJan 7, 2023 11:40:05 ago (+3/-7)
[ + ] zongongo
[ - ] zongongo 2 points 1.4 yearsJan 7, 2023 12:25:08 ago (+4/-2)
[ + ] doginventer
[ - ] doginventer 1 point 1.4 yearsJan 7, 2023 14:50:09 ago (+1/-0)
The Declaration of Arbroath.
"Most Holy Father and Lord, we know and from the chronicles and books of the ancients we find that among other famous nations our own, the Scots, has been graced with widespread renown. They journeyed from Greater Scythia by way of the Tyrrhenian Sea and the Pillars of Hercules, and dwelt for a long course of time in Spain among the most savage tribes, but nowhere could they be subdued by any race, however barbarous. Thence they came, twelve hundred years after the people of ✳️ ✳️ Israel ✳️ ✳️ crossed the Red Sea, to their home in the west where they still live today. The Britons they first drove out, the Picts they utterly destroyed, and, even though very often assailed by the Norwegians, the Danes and the English, they took possession of that home with many victories and untold efforts; and, as the historians of old time bear witness, they have held it free of all bondage ever since. In their kingdom there have reigned one hundred and thirteen kings of their own royal stock, the line unbroken a single foreigner. The high qualities and deserts of these people, were they not otherwise manifest, gain glory enough from this: that the King of kings and Lord of lords, our Lord Jesus Christ, after His Passion and Resurrection, called them, even though settled in the uttermost parts of the earth, almost the first to His most holy faith. Nor would He have them confirmed in that faith by merely anyone but by the first of His Apostles by calling, though second or third in rank the most gentle Saint Andrew, the Blessed Peter's brother, and desired him to keep them under his protection as their patron forever."
[ + ] PostWallHelena
[ - ] PostWallHelena 1 point 1.4 yearsJan 7, 2023 16:03:53 ago (+1/-0)
[ + ] doginventer
[ - ] doginventer 0 points 1.4 yearsJan 7, 2023 16:13:56 ago (+0/-0)
[ + ] PostWallHelena
[ - ] PostWallHelena 1 point 1.4 yearsJan 7, 2023 16:43:38 ago (+1/-0)
[ + ] doginventer
[ - ] doginventer 0 points 1.4 yearsJan 7, 2023 18:36:59 ago (+0/-0)
As opposed to the nonsense the universities make their crew believe :p
[ + ] PostWallHelena
[ - ] PostWallHelena 0 points 1.4 yearsJan 7, 2023 19:08:33 ago (+0/-0)
We know who scots are based on their genetics and comparisons with much older skeletal dna from ancient individuals. They are descended from steppe herders, anatolian farmers and western european hunter gatherers. The anatolians left the near east and settled europe 8000 yrs ago. Too early for any of them to be involved with the cult of El.
This narrative just makes us look like a pack of hoteps.
Modern ash. jews are 50% descended from levantine jews like jesus and 50% descended from europeans— probably the white women who they bought as slaves.
The events of the OT are far to recent fro there to be any real mystery about the ethnic identity of the hebrews/israelites. Their genetics were consistent with other groups in the area such as the canaanites and moabites, who btw all spoke the same language and worshipped the same gods. Theres no trace of scottish genetics in that area ffs. It would stick out like a sore thumb.
[ + ] doginventer
[ - ] doginventer 0 points 1.4 yearsJan 7, 2023 19:13:11 ago (+0/-0)
[ + ] deleted
[ - ] deleted 0 points 1.4 yearsJan 7, 2023 15:01:20 ago (+0/-0)
[ + ] UncleDoug
[ - ] UncleDoug -1 points 1.4 yearsJan 7, 2023 12:26:59 ago (+3/-4)
KEK, absolute destruction.
[ + ] Not_C
[ - ] Not_C 1 point 1.4 yearsJan 7, 2023 15:08:32 ago (+1/-0)
DNA has proven that King Tut was Northern European. So even in King Tut's time there weren't only Whites living in Egypt, they were ruling over it.
The events of the Bible happened in the Roman Empire where the Silk Road meets the Mediterranean. An important junction like that would have had multiple colonies of White people living there.
To say that the Middle East can only be populated by Semites and Arabs, is like saying that North America can only be populated by Redskins.
[ + ] PostWallHelena
[ - ] PostWallHelena 1 point 1.4 yearsJan 7, 2023 16:24:09 ago (+1/-0)
Patrilineal descend may only account for a tiny fraction of one’s ancestry. Most beaners in latin america have R1b haplotype. They do not have high amounts of steppe ancestry. Native americans were conquered by people who were conquered by people who were conquered by steppe herders 6000 years ago and that is why beaners have R1b. They are more likely to have R1b than whites, but they are not MORE white than whites! Tut probably had R1b subclade V-88 which is common in north africa and also in Chad. 7000 years ago some people with steppe ancestry entered africa, but by the time Tut lived those steppe herders would have been thoroughly assimilated by shit skins and niggers. They did not remain pure in N. Africa for 3000 years.
You are missing the point. Semites are partly descended from whites. Smarter more advanced people with haplogroup J migrated south into the middle east and mixed with darker more primitive “basal eurasians”. Middle easterners are mixed. J haplogroup’s sibling clade is Haplogroup I, which includes scandinavians and southern slavs. Middle easterners are patrilineally descended from western eurasians closely related to us. The mixture and the environment bred a bunch of violent corrupt midwits.
[ + ] Not_C
[ - ] Not_C 1 point 1.4 yearsJan 7, 2023 20:10:26 ago (+1/-0)
Again, the events of the Bible happened in the Roman Empire where the Silk Road connects with Europe. An important junction like that would have had multiple colonies of non-shitskin people living there.
As one example, it is well documented that there were many Greek colonies in Galilee during Biblical times.
And as another example, the junction where the Mediterranean met the Silk Road was of extreme importance to the Roman Empire, and would have had a very high Roman (Italian) population.
Greeks and Italians are not shitskins.
Because it was where the Mediterranean me the Silk Road, there would have been colonies of all the various peoples in the Roman Empire. Especially all peoples of the Mediterranean.
Also, you yourself talk about how DNA has been dispersed across the world. Yet, at the same time, you claim that only one color or race of people could've occupied the area.
[ + ] PostWallHelena
[ - ] PostWallHelena -1 points 1.4 yearsJan 7, 2023 20:37:27 ago (+0/-1)
How do you equate greek colonies with northern europeans? You say king Tut is a northern european.
Im saying we know that there is no genetic signal from a population consistant with modern white northern europeans in that area. None. If people of steppe herder ancestry expanded in to Egypt and the Levant it would have been way before the events of the bible and those people would have mixed with the surrounding population, ie they were no longer white. They would not have remained separate. Are indian Brahmins white? No they are mixed shit skins and yet the aryans invaded india only 3500 years ago. The egyptian civilization was much older than that and King Tut lived at the tail end of it— thousands of years after the pyramids were built. He was a shit skin.
[ + ] Not_C
[ - ] Not_C 1 point 1.4 yearsJan 7, 2023 21:23:01 ago (+1/-0)
I equate Greeks with non-shitskins.
I equate you with someone who can't admit they were wrong when they said, ">He lived in the middle east — everyone was a shitskin."
The dates in which the pyramids were built is irrelevant.
Whites have moved all across the world. Subjugating and ruling over the lesser races for centuries.
Egypt is one example of Whites ruling over an area.
Meanwhile, Tut's relatives had blonde hair and European shaped skulls and features.
Ramesses II - Who scholars believe was the Pharaoh during Moses' time - Was a ginger. A ginger sure as Hell isn't a shitskin.
Just because someone lived in Egypt, that doesn't make them a shitskin.
And if someone in the past lived in what is now Palestine/Israel, that doesn't guarantee they were a shitskin.
There are currently countless White colonies in non-White countries right now. And there have been countless White colonies in non-White countries for centuries.
If Whites create a colony in a new land, their skin doesn't instantly change color.
And if one colony integrated with the local population, that doesn't mean that EVERY colony to ever exist integrated, or integrated immediately upon arrival in a new land.
[ + ] zongongo
[ - ] zongongo 1 point 1.4 yearsJan 7, 2023 12:23:50 ago (+3/-2)
https://youtu.be/-_pBwpOoLo0
[ + ] oppressed
[ - ] oppressed [op] 2 points 1.4 yearsJan 7, 2023 13:47:48 ago (+2/-0)
[ + ] doginventer
[ - ] doginventer 0 points 1.4 yearsJan 7, 2023 15:04:37 ago (+0/-0)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RH9L4pQN8qA&t=1634s
[ + ] oppressed
[ - ] oppressed [op] 0 points 1.4 yearsJan 7, 2023 13:28:28 ago (+0/-0)
[ + ] doginventer
[ - ] doginventer 1 point 1.4 yearsJan 7, 2023 14:43:01 ago (+1/-0)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZKpJB2vmhkg
[ + ] Youaresosmart
[ - ] Youaresosmart 0 points 1.4 yearsJan 7, 2023 14:38:23 ago (+2/-2)
[ + ] Jiggggg
[ - ] Jiggggg 0 points 1.4 yearsJan 8, 2023 01:06:48 ago (+0/-0)