Race and Christianity

Been in a discussion with a friend. Thoughts?
————-
Him:
"The ultimate point is not that there are differences among people, which is undeniable, but that those differences that exist are part of God’s plan and gifts, so each one of us would make the best use of them in His service and be held accountable to Him for them. None of us is inherently more valuable based on our distinctions, since God sovereignly distributed those among us. The widow’s mite was more valuable than the gold coins given by others."

David Lane:
"Any religion or teaching which denies the Natural Laws of the Universe is false. Whatever People’s perception of God, or Gods, or the motive Force of the Universe might be, they can hardly deny that Nature’s Law are the work of, and therefore the intent of, that Force. Nature evidences the divine plan, for the natural world is the work of the force or the intelligence men call God."

Acts 17:26 “from one man all nations were made.” But biological racial differences exist, such as bone marrow transplant difficulties and different blood types, to name a few.

There are several possibilities to reconcile Acts 17:26 with significant biological differences:

1. An older earth allowing more time for micro-evolution

2. A partial instead of complete Noah’s flood. This would allow the Sons of God and the Nephilim descendents to have survived
(side note: who were the Sons of God? 1) they were fallen angels, 2) they were powerful human rulers, or 3) they were godly descendants of Seth intermarrying with wicked descendants of Cain. Source: gotquestions.org/sons-of-God.html)

3. The Bible is not infallible

4. Interbreeding with animals, much as mules come from a male donkey and a female horse, though in this case mules are mostly (but not all) infertile

5. Christian Identity: Adam was the White race (ruddy or flushed) but some “nations” are not even Biblically considered to be people, they are animals mistaken for people by mainstream evangelicals

6. Matthew 3:9 “and do not think to say to yourselves, ‘We have Abraham as our father.’ For I say to you that God is able to raise up children to Abraham from these stones.” New peoples of a certain race can be made as Adam was made.

Attached: 5ba92da535f0f.jpeg (570x390, 56.9K)

Other urls found in this thread:

kenanmalik.com/2012/03/04/why-both-sides-are-wrong-in-the-race-debate/
twitter.com/NSFWRedditImage

Just because other people have varied genetics, doesn't mean they're not human. This Zig Forums shit is getting out of hand

Just because dindus and sand people are dumb doesn't mean they can't reach salvation. I would just prefer if they did that outside of my country.

A real problem is if gooks have souls.

Why should it take millions of years for races to evolve into distinct specimens?

Attached: 1323c988c3f14a0e28c32aba6e16e3a89d7ca2c9cc9762a560cc18b2e141aad4.jpg (450x338, 20.96K)

Hol' up. When was the Simpsons ever on Comedy Central?

Many evangelicals believe the earth to be at 5500 BC (7500 years ago). How would could one man and one woman create such a great variety of races in such a short time?

Number 5 is correct. However, we should preach the gospel to all creatures. If an African can truly believe on Jesus Christ, then I suppose he can be saved. I don't think MOST have the cognitive capacity, however. Anyways, the Ethiopian eunuch was considered eligible to be baptized, but notice how he went right back to his country.

5500 BC thats 7200 devided by 20 that's 375 generations. We have seen differences between species in about 20 generations. In fact about 5 is enough under controlled conditions.

You know Jesus Christ was from.. nvm

Attached: 3563453.jpg (333x500, 52.72K)

Isrealites were Europid (not "white,") not Arabid.
Modern Jews are mixed with central Asians, North Africans, and Arabid Yemenis.

This is worse than black isrealites

And that's avoiding the quagmire that is claiming Jesus belongs to any ethnicity.

Also, I have significant European Mediterranean ancestry (Spain (not LA), Italy). and I look a lot like that picture, complexion wise.

Jesus was semetic which is arab, if that hurts your pride and delusions you're free to become a pagan

Mediterranean people have Arab genetics user

Semitic is a language group, not an ethnic grouping.
There are French speaking Africans, does that make them the same ethnicity as ethnic French people?

That's just wrong.
Next you will tell me Egyptians are Arabs and so are Iranians.

Yeah but when people talk about semitism its obvious what they mean about it. When someones called an antisemite theyre not talking about someone hating Arabs, Akkadians, Canaanites, or Ethiopians.

Ethnic groups aren't super clear cut, in almost every society there's a mix of different people that share a common culture. I'm not saying the American model of bring everyone in and everything will be ok is right, but race purism is something that only sheltered children believe has ever been a thing

No, not particularly. Sicilians have the highest Arab admixture in Italy, a WHOPPING 5% average lol (i'm Calabrian though). With the rest of southern italy only having 2% average admixture.
The Normans ethnically cleansed muslim Arabs from Italy.

Attached: Italy_faces.jpg (602x292, 22.23K)

It's pretty clear that that's not really the case, it doesn't really matter anyways

Each of those are heretical and unnecessary. Acts 17:26 teaches racial diversity. The interpretation that sharing a common ancestor would necessitate "one race" is leftist. From what we know of how natural selection works (vid related), differences between races with common descent is a certainty. Also, the verse says "all nations". Recognition of national differences is literally in the verse

Theres scriptural evidence to suggest genealogys are shortened and they are actually many more generations in between. For example Matthew condenses the genealogy of christ, and apparently omission was common in hebrew genealogy listings.

That pic is retarded.
Dog breeds ARE a social construct(it's more prevalent in breeds like alaskan huskies).

It's painful seeing stormfags winnie the pooh up taxonomy so hard, when it's the fuzziest thing in biology.

Attached: 800px-Close-up_two_sled_dogs_(edited).jpg (799x559, 101.53K)

Yes race exists and has always been relevant politics, social changes, etc. Although this doesn't mean that I have to agree with ZOG/pol/ interpretation of it. If I did then pretty much half of white europeans would have to be exterminated because they don't conform to the nordicist supremacist vision of whiteness that Zig Forums has.

Whatever the history may be, it's a fact that Sicilians have only 5% of Arab genetics, and South Italians without Sicily around 1% (the other guy said 2%, but I remember 1% from a paper). That's less non-European admixture than blond haired blue eyed white Americans have, on top of it Americans are mixed with Negroes and Indians whereas Arabs are Caucasians and were very similar to European Meds to begin with - they're just Meds from the other side of "the lake". Which means you couldn't possibly pick up the difference between a South Italian 2000 years ago and a South Italian now.
North Western Europeans have inferiority complexes because they look nothing alike ancient Greece and Italy which they so much admire. Maybe some humility is in order, instead of fabricating non-European origins of other peoples.

Attached: hannibal_247_c183_bc_hi.jpg (450x579, 31.02K)

pretty cool video

Being this self absorbed in your own racial superiority is perverted

How is this supposed to be incompatible with biological racial differences? Even a pure evolutionist thinks all humans have common ancestry.

They're clear-cut enough in most places. The only time things get blurry is when you have recent, large-scale racial mixing, like in Latin America.

Tell that to nordicists m8

Why because they are white?
You racis cund.
Btw black israelites are pretty much biblical. Queen of sheba anyone?

WE

Sheba is in south Arabia

No because it's an absurd fetishization of ones own race, regardless of if it's true or not (likely not)

Well technically it's the Copts that are descendants of the Pharaohs. The Muslim Egyptians are the Arabs, as their DNA is very close to Arab DNA.


Christ was NOT an Arab, he was a Levantine, very close to modern day Lebanese. Lebanese aren't Arab, and neither are Levantines in general.

Attached: 3151f6c9f7307847bfa5ed27decadb14--catholic-memes-anthony-hopkins.jpg (736x527, 87.83K)

Yet you only call it out when whites do it, you hypocrite.
You are just a self hating white or a semetic demon. Either way, confess.

Attached: cultural marxism.jpg (483x695, 18.94K)

Attached: 8636d5db66cd429f7ad73220e5635a8f89fb7ff2d45796c59ea81c8e141d1d03.jpg (500x456, 36.33K)

but we are talking about race not capitalism or communism.

No.
The point is clear, and it's winnie the pooh retarded.
It tries to parody all the "i'm so raceblind" liberals, but it falls on it's face.
Given how much i've seen neo-nazis arguing about racialism, and how much they love using dog breeds as an example, i'm pretty sure the author of that pic was serious about it, and considered himself quite smart and witty about it, to boot.

He is not, and racialists making absolutely cringy and idiotic conclusions is painful to watch, and harms the point they are trying to make to anyone with more than 2 brain cells.

Attached: Ecotypes_of_Physcomitrella_patens.JPG (1056x1056, 749.55K)

How do you go from "Different peoples are biologically different" to "ZOMG literally subhuman"?

Can you expand on this pls?
I haven't seen many people counter Zig Forums racial rethoric, so i'm interested in knowing more.


I don't know maybe because we are so used to Zig Forums calling everyone who disagrees with them a
I don't know just to name a few.

The absolute state of leftists

Dogs and wolves fall under good old canis lupus.
They are pretty much the same thing, and can fully interbreed.
Why do they look so different?
Well, domestication means an increase in neoteny and co(look at domesticated foxes, for similar changes in personality, floppy ears, pigmentation, etc.) and other traits(it's possibly related to changes in the neural crest), and then humans came along, and amped up the most variable traits(snout shape, general size, achondroplasia, colour patterns) and then took more weird ass mutants(those with super weird fur, skin, etc.), and cranked that shit up through selective breeding until we got all the modern breeds, along with absolute abominations with health problems, like pugs.
All of these ARE for the most part social constructs, that as a sidenote, got restricted hard in the past century, which is why modern purebreds are more inbred.
A "basic" dog looks like a dingo, or other pariah dogs.
Unless weve been enslaved by the f**kin Qu from All Tomorrows while i havent been paying attention, comparing races to dog breeds is idiotic.

So, what about human differences?
Well, technically, if you wanna be pedantic, the closest taxonomical classification for humans would be ecotypes and clines.

What about modern races?
Do they have a biological support?
Soooomewhat, see link related.
kenanmalik.com/2012/03/04/why-both-sides-are-wrong-in-the-race-debate/
But as you can see there, you can slice humanity however you want(which is why serious euro racial autists do the whole alpino-braho-whatevero subclassification), and again, it's partially a social construct(go ask Zig Forums who counts as white, and get ready for n^10 possible answers, just for starters)

Does that mean you have to be some super liberal pro-immigration faggot?
No.
Are humans different?
Yup.

But dont try to explain it through taxonomy if you dont know what the f**k you are talking about.
You will look like a moron, and deserve to get laughed at for talking out your ass about stuff you don't know.

A social construct is something that is purely a product of society and social conventions. In other words, it's something with no tangible reality but lots of people think exist. This is why fags will say "gender is a social construct" to justify LARPing as women. So when you list off these real, tangible, biological differences between dogs and then say dog breeds are a social construct, you're just making yourself look retarded, you retard
It can't be "partially" a social construct, it can't be part tangible, part cultural, these things are mutually exclusive
How about 'Japhethite', is that a satisfactory answer?

Attached: autism spectrum.jpg (564x604, 97.53K)