Originally Posted by Iota Man (Post 2160103)

LOL @ this dumb mofo. You just told me that you don't give a shit. So you do give a shit? Which is it? LOL Have a seat home's.

Originally Posted by MysticCat (Post 2160104)

Are we going to start that stupid "have a seat home's" thing again..

Originally Posted by MysticCat (Post 2160104)

So predictable.

Originally Posted by MysticCat (Post 2160104)

Oh, and since it apparently isn't clear to you, caring that you seem to be contradicting yourself isn't the same as caring what you do or don't do.

Originally Posted by MysticCat (Post 2160092)

Saying things like "the church I attend now" and you'll ask your "current pastor" definitely suggests more than "a couple of times as an adult." But whatever.

Originally Posted by Iota Man (Post 2160103)

LOL @ this dumb mofo. You just told me that you don't give a shit. So you do give a shit? Which is it? LOL Have a seat home's.

Originally Posted by SWTXBelle (Post 2160137)

Home's WHAT? I'm dying to know what it is that belongs to " home".

Originally Posted by DrPhil (Post 2160146)

Did you really just explain slang? I'm sure SWXTBelle knows that particular slang.

Originally Posted by Munchkin03 (Post 2160122)

Not necessarily.

There are plenty of people who will refer to a church as "their church," especially if it's the one they attended as a child, or if their family's celebrations of life (christenings, funerals, and weddings) take place there. Sometimes they even know who the pastor is and are familiar with him. Imagine that!

Nitpickiness has its place, but it's not here, it seems.

Originally Posted by Iota Man (Post 2160148)

She asked, so I replied to her question.

Originally Posted by DrPhil (Post 2160159)

How sexy is it that MysticCat is teaching slang.

Boomchickawowwow!!!!

Originally Posted by MysticCat (Post 2160156)

Again, what he said was "the church I attend." Present tense verb.

Originally Posted by MysticCat (Post 2160156)

She asked why you keep putting an apostrophe -- which either indicates omitted letters of a word or indicates a possessive -- in "home's." The word is "homes."

Originally Posted by Iota Man (Post 2160248)

This doesn't make any sense. You did a search on a past tense post I made months ago, and then turn around and call it present tense. The post I made yesterday (now past tense) was present.

Originally Posted by MysticCat (Post 2160156)

I was remembering a conversation he and I had that suggested at least somewhat regular church attendance. That seemed worth bringing up since he was saying he's only been to church a couple of times to counter Dr.Phil's response ("Hello contradiction.") to his posts. That is all..

Originally Posted by MysticCat (Post 2160265)

"Attend" is present tense. "Attended" is past tense. "Will attend" is future tense. That's not going to change no matter how old the post is..

Originally Posted by MysticCat (Post 2160156)

But thanks for the laughs.

Originally Posted by Iota Man (Post 2160267)

LOL so you were remembering a conversation you and I had from a post in the past, and then call it present. So if at the time I mentioned a church, my church, that I attend, means I'm still attending? It doesn't dumbass.

What you still aren't getting is that you brought up a post I posted in the past which means at the time, and then turn around and call it present.

Originally Posted by MysticCat (Post 2160271)

LOL yourself at you not understanding the difference between saying you used the present tense of a verb in an old post and saying that previous post is now somehow in the present.

Originally Posted by MysticCat (Post 2160271)

I don't why, but I'll try one more time and then I'm done.

Originally Posted by MysticCat (Post 2160271)

I never said anything about whether you attend church now. When Dr.Phil said you were contradicting yourself, you said you've only been to church a couple of times in adulthood. I linked to two posts from 6 months ago where you mention the church you "attend" (present tense of the verb), where you mention your "current" pastor and where you say you will ask that pastor about something and see what he says.

Originally Posted by MysticCat (Post 2160271)

One can reasonably take these posts to mean that when you posted them 6 months ago -- which presumably was during adulthood -- you were attending church often at least enough to be having some conversations with your "current" pastor about the theological issues that were the topics of those posts. That seemed to contradict your statement in this thread that you have only been a couple of times in adulthood. Nothing about what you are doing now, just earlier statements from you that suggest more than a couple of times in adulthood. That is all. Nothing more.

Originally Posted by SWTXBelle (Post 2160275)

FWIW, I had assumed he had meant "Holmes" - http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=Holmes, the usage with which I am familiar. I was aware of the use of "homie" as a shortened form of "homeboy" but not "homes". Who says GC isn't educational?

Originally Posted by Iota Man (Post 2160278)

No, what's funny as hell is you're relying on your own dumbass assumptions, like I said earlier, assuming that what I said in the past still applies to now, when it doesn't.


LOL I don't know why you started this shit in the first place. This would have never even gotten started if you would have just come to me and said some shit like "I remember a conversation we had a while ago, that you go to church regularly". I probably would have said I go once or twice a year, which goes back to what I said to The Doc. But what you wanted to do, as you seem to do often do to folks on here is try to call me out some shit that you made an assumption about.


You linked two post from 6 months ago, which is in the past. I can say something 6 months ago that applies to that time which would be present (at that time), and come back and say something totally different today, which wouldn't apply to the past. I said I've been a couple of times as an adult. Did it ever dawn on you that during that time one of the times could have been then? And folks can say they go to a church and mention their pastor as being their current pastor while at the same time haven't been to church in 2 years. That's another part of this discussion you don't seem to understand.


No, once again, you made an assumption. Instead of pulling up a 6 month old post from an old ass thread, making an attempt to call me out, while at the same time adding "roll eyes", you should have just asked me do I still attend, based on our past conversation. Like I said, I haven't been to church since I was a kid, and a couple of times as an adult. Same pastor, same church home I was brought up in. Just because a mofo says he goes to church, talks about his pastor as if dude is current, doesn't mean he/she goes all the time, which is what Munchkin03 was trying to tell you, but you disregarded her post, too. We can go on and on with this shit, and still never come to an agreement. You can bring up past tense verbs and any other dumb shit you want to bring up to cover yourself, you're still wrong, either way.

Originally Posted by MysticCat (Post 2160284)

I give up. I am indeed sorry if I offended you.

Originally Posted by MysticCat (Post 2160284)

But I really can't help it if you refuse to understand what I have explained repeatedly, .

Originally Posted by MysticCat (Post 2160284)

and if you insist on calling me out for making assumptions when just about all of your responses have been based on your own assumptions rather than on what I actually said..

Originally Posted by MysticCat (Post 2160284)

Done.

Originally Posted by Andre Turner (Post 2158969)

Before anybody can answer your questions, we first must understand what Christianity is and where it's teachings came from.
Most of us call ourselves Christians because our parents call themselves Christians. And their parents call themselves Christians, because their parents call themselves Christians. Is this the truth? Of course it is. But why were they calling themselves Christians? They were calling themselves Christians because a man named Jesus visited the slave-plantation one day and baptized them in the waters of the Mississippi River. Jesus did not come to them in a vision or a dream, and say to them…"from this day forward, I declare you all to be Christians!" So, now if Jesus didn't come to the slave-plantation to give us this so-called Christianity, then who did come? Who was it that gave our forefathers and mothers these teachings of Christianity? Who was it that taught us this? You know who taught us this. The white slave master gave us these teachings of so-called Christianity, and we accepted these teachings with no questions asked, just like we accepted everything else that he gave us. Christianity, as we know it, is only the white slave masters teachings of what and who God and the devil is. We really were never taught the true teachings of Jesus. All that we have is the teachings of the white slave master, with Jesus' name on it.

Originally Posted by dekeguy (Post 2160460)

The historical Yeshua bar Yusef or Jesus, as we now refer to Him, was a swarthy complected, dark curley haired Semite. Not exactly the blond blue eyed Northern European type by any means.

Originally Posted by naraht (Post 2160520)

The other oddity that happened as the Christian traditions moved north is that the story of the innkeeper in regards to "No room at the inn" gets uglier and uglier. In a place like Germany or England, being forced to sleep out with the animals near the winter solstice is Cruelty to Mary and Joseph and places the young babe at risk. Late December in Bethlehem is simply the rainy season with temperatures *rarely* dropping below freezing. And straw was probably the sleeping padding for those in the Inn as well...

Originally Posted by dekeguy (Post 2160460)

"I believe in one God, the Father Almighty, maker of heaven and earth, and of all things visible and invisible.

Originally Posted by dekeguy (Post 2160460)

===============================

Does anyone else find this to be as deeply and fundamentally flawed as I do?
I find this to be grossly offensive to my convictions concerning the nature of Christianity and the two millenia of scholarship, careful consideration, and prayer on the sources and means of understanding the message of Christ.

What you want to believe and profess is your business and as an American I support your right to believe it. By the same token I assert my right to believe what I profess. What I challenge is your position that Christianity in the 21st Century is a recent construct filtered through the teachings of "white slave masters" of the early-18th Century to the mid-19th Century.

The historical Yeshua bar Yusef or Jesus, as we now refer to Him, was a swarthy complected, dark curley haired Semite. Not exactly the blond blue eyed Northern European type by any means. The message He gave to all of us was to love the Lord our God and to love our neighbors as ourselves.
So, What is Christianity? Christianity is the acceptance of Jesus Christ as the Son of God and the acceptance of His blueprint regarding how we should see and act upon our relationship with God and our fellow human beings. Where did it come from? From the teachings of our Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ, handed down to us by the Apostles and their successors carefully studying and preserving the scriptures and traditions of the earliest time of His revelations. Not the filtered interpretations of "white slave masters".

What I personally profess is fairly well summed up in the Creed from the Council of Nicea which in the 4th Century A.D. promulgated this simple statement of what a Christian believes:
"I believe in one God, the Father Almighty, maker of heaven and earth, and of all things visible and invisible. And in one Lord Jesus Christ, the only begotten Son of God, and born of the Father before all ages. God of God, light of light, true God of true God. Begotten not made, of one in being with the Father, by whom all things were made. Who for us men and for our salvation came down from heaven. And was incarnate of the Holy Ghost and of the Virgin Mary and was made man; was crucified also for us under Pontius Pilate, suffered death and was buried; and the third day rose again according to the Scriptures. And He ascended into heaven, where He sits at the right hand of the Father, and shall come again with glory to judge the living and the dead, of whose Kingdom there shall be no end. And I believe in the Holy Ghost, the Lord and Giver of life, who proceeds from the Father and the Son, who together with the Father and the Son is adored and glorified, who spoke by the Prophets. And I believe in one holy, catholic, and apostolic Church. I confess one baptism for the remission of sins. And I look for the resurrection of the dead and the life of the world to come. Amen."

OK, You have had your say and I have had mine. I would however suggest that if you are going to propose your interpretation of Christianity and its origin and development you might want to support your argument with historical fact clearly traceable through 2000 years rather than by simply playing the race card. Considering the centuries of persecution suffered by
all shades of Christians for the faith of Christ, and the ancient seats of Christianity in Africa and Asia, that card cuts with a two edged sword!

AMDG

Originally Posted by Psi U MC Vito (Post 2160626)

Andre Turner also ignores the fact that a Black man was recorded as being baptized in the Acts soon after the Resurrection.

Originally Posted by NC KSig (Post 2160533)

I find that weird, because most Greeks I know are Christian, especially here in the south

Originally Posted by Andre Turner (Post 2160649)

No, I am not pulling any race card, sir. If I was, what would be wrong with me pulling the race card? Your people have been pulling the race card for the past four centuries and still continue to pull the race card that seems to always be in your favor. . . .

Originally Posted by Andre Turner (Post 2160649)

No, I am not pulling any race card, sir. If I was, what would be wrong with me pulling the race card? Your people have been pulling the race card for the past four centuries and still continue to pull the race card that seems to always be in your favor. Now, you tell me, how many people with blonde hair and blue eyes were living in the Middle East during the time of Jesus? It is impossible for there to have ever been a blonde hair, blue eyed Jesus... something that the slave master instilled in the minds of black people. My people were also directly and indirectly taught (by the slave master) to hate their natural black selves. "Black is bad". Wear white to weddings, and black to funerals. Devil's food cake is black and angel's food cake is white. If I know something bad about you, I could "blackmail" you. You can tell a little "white lie", but you better not tell a big bold "black lie". Do you see the psychology in this? My people were conditioned (by the slave master) to hate everything about themselves that was natural and black. We hate our black beauty because we were taught to define our own beauty according to these white, anglo, caucasoidal, European, westernized, beauty standards. As an example: a white, blonde hair, blue eyed Jesus. This means that anything less than blue eyes and blonde hair is considered less than beautiful. The further you get away from blonde hair and blue eyes, the uglier you get. This is what we were taught. This means that if you got black eyes, black, tight, nappy hair and dark black skin, you are the ugliest thing on the planet. What is sad is the slave master was successful in the brainwashing of black people and this still continues to this very day. As an example: Chris Rock’s "Good Hair" movie. The question I have to my people is why do we want to look like the slave master?...the murderous, cold-blooded, rapist "mutha-fucka". I said rapist "mutha-fucka" for a reason, not just to use foul language. I am speaking the truth. Let me define what a "mutha-fucka" is. A "mutha-fucka" is an individual who is the "fucka of muthas". The white man is a historical "fucka of muthas" around the world. A historical rapist. He was the "fucka" of our "fore-muthas". This is why we come in so many different shades of black now. I find it to be sad that we want to look like, and worship (the image of a white Jesus), the same image type of people who hung us from trees. I'm not arguing your religious beliefs. What I am saying is we have been taught that Jesus is white, with blue eyes, and blonde hair, when that is impossible. I am not using any race card, sir, I am only speaking the truth. I have not lied about anything here.

Originally Posted by MysticCat (Post 2160660)

I see what you're saying, but you might get your point across better if it wasn't in one huge block of text. I had to read it 4 or 5 times just to follow it. Paragraphs are your friends.

Originally Posted by 33girl (Post 2161201)

caucasoidal

Is this a word?

What does the race card have to do with being Greek?

Do playing cards come in different races in different countries?

I'm so confused. :confused: :confused:

Originally Posted by 33girl (Post 2161201)

And on another note, the stained glass windows in my church showed Jesus as a brunette, and a somewhat swarthy brunette at that. (This is in a community of people with predominantly German ancestry.) Like naraht, the first time I saw a picture of Jesus looking like his name should be Lars Holmgren I think my initial thought was "who on earth is that?"

Originally Posted by agzg (Post 2161218)

I think the intersection between race and religion (particularly Christianity) is interesting... dekeguy seems to want to diminish the effect that slavery and Christianity's use as a tool in slavery still has on the African American Christian community today, and that could include membership in Greek Life Organizations.

Originally Posted by DrPhil (Post 2161220)

Images of Jesus. . . .

http://t1.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:A...rbXPnA5x3PgpvQ
http://t1.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:A...a7lMxI5nF2G9bg