| Author |
 Topic  |
|
Cornerstone Foundation
Advanced Member
uSA
254 Posts |
 Posted - 23 Jan 2005 : 13:15:48
|
quote:
Originally posted by David Merrill
quote:
Marty for Cornerstone Foundation said:
Having said that, we will also say that we believe the Scripture teaches that mixing of the races is outside of Yahweh's will and is a violation of His Law.
quote:
David Merrill wrote:
It would seem hypocritical for Marty to say, "Those blacks are great people; they just cannot mix with us whites." So he qualifies the statement with a fairly subjective clause about asking for approval from Yehovah (Strong's suggested spelling). In the Messianic Age, at least since the first advent, this becomes confusing so back to mental archtypes. [This is in fact the basis of the statutory Marriage License - the presumption of ministerial or priestly counsel and approval for marrying out of the tribe or clan. - Acquiring the approval of the intermediary to God (the State as God).]
Cornerstone Foundation wrote:
We agree that to someone who observes racial and Scriptural issues only on the surface, our statement quoted above would seem hypocritical. (We do not mean to imply that David Merrill is such a man because we believe that he most certainly is not.)
We do not see hypocrisy in our quote first hereinabove written.
A rather inadequate analogy of our point of view might be one of the following:
We love ring-necked pheasants. We also love raccoons. Nevertheless we would be opposed to a genetic engineering project that would result in an amalgamation of these two distinct species of Yahweh’s creation.
We love dogs. We also love cats. If someone were to propose mixing the two species so that there would eventually no longer be an animal on earth with the distinct characteristics of either a dog or a cat we would be very much against that proposal.
We love black people. We also love white people. When people encourage the biological mixing of those two races, they encourage the destruction of not only the black race, but also the white race. (Do you really know what color Marty is?) To do so, in our opinion, is outside of Yahweh’s will and a violation of Yahweh’s Law.
We have a friend who is the offspring of such a marriage. He is a fine young man and we love him. We are quite certain our friend would agree with what Nord Davis, Jr. has stated concerning the frustration that occurs for people as a result of the mixing of the “particular racial memory that Yahweh has built into each of the races for their own good".
We do not agree with all of Nord Davis Jr.’s writings. We do agree with some of what he has written and in our opinion Mr. Davis expressed his view of these issues quite well.
Please be very certain to bear in mind that the word “bastard” in the context of the article published below does not possess any of the connotation usually associated with the word in its common usage in the American society today.
The following article is an exerpt from a book entitled Star Wars authored by the late Nord Davis, Jr.. It may be seen in its entirety by clicking on the following link:
Link to Star Wars Lesson Twoquote:
From material written by the late Nord Davis, Jr....
*My Analysis And Personal Opinion...An Editorial Comment
The major problem in America, as I see it, is not philosophical, political, social, racial or economic. The problem is theological. I use the term Thought-theology, because as a man thinketh, so is he. America was once a Christian, land, and Almighty God blessed us above every nation on the earth, in lifestyle, material wealth, and military power to defend ourselves. We were once a nation that never lost a war, you could walk the streets without fear, and in which murderers were executed. We were a nation that understood the racial questions and taught that every race was to be after its own kind, and in general, the various races did get along well within their own social and ethnic structures. We did not permit the heathen, and people who refused to work, to vote themselves a welfare income from the common treasury, or put over us anti-christ Zionist leaders of the likes of Henry Kissinger. Today, we have become an Esau-Zionist controlled nation where interracial marriages are not only permitted but encouraged. American soldiers are sent into heathen lands and encouraged to bring back heathen (as a Biblical term and sense) wives and their half-breed children to live among us, thus altering our national Thought-theology along the planned lines of the Brotherhood of Man theme. So-called Christian churches and organizations encourage the importation of these Asian-American children, mixed with either Caucasian or Negro blood. Then they are taught the Gospel, as if it were intended for All Men and Whosoever Will. But Almighty God, Who changes not, said in Deuteronomy 23:2;
"A bastard shall not enter into the congregation of the LORD, even unto his tenth generation shall he not enter into the congregation of the Lord."
The Hebrew word bastard does not mean an illegitimate child born out of wedlock, as it does in English, but is the Hebrew word mamzer, literally and positively meaning mongrel, i.e. a child of the union of an Israelite and any of the non-Israelites. Your Bible makes it plain that such mongrels are not to enter the Kingdom of Heaven prepared by Jesus Christ since the foundation of the world.
St. Paul amplifies this teaching in Hebrews 12:8 wherein he makes the point that God only corrects "His sons" and not All Men. St Paul draws a clear distinction between legitimate sons, and illegitimate sons, and the New Testament calls these people bastards. The other races are good, as God has created them for His purposes, each after his own kind. When this is not the case, and bastards are conceived, it is not good. Secular Humanist Christians, who are always questioning God's Rights and Authority, flatly state that He is not just and fair with this bastard child, since his wretched situation is not "his fault." Scoftelditis, a common terminal infection of the Thought-theology, says that this teaching is terrible and that God is a God of Love and Compassion Who could not hold this "unjust attitude." There must be some mistake! What these Humanists do not know is that all races have a particular racial memory that God has built into them for their own good. In love for His People, and for the greater good of the other races He created, He does not want these racial memories mixed between the races, as happens when bastards are conceived. You can see the major problems that these bastards must cope with, having the blend of both racial memories and not understanding those conflicting forces going on in their minds.
|
Edited by - Cornerstone Foundation on 23 Jan 2005 13:31:32 |
 |
|
|
David Merrill
Advanced Member
USA
1147 Posts |
Posted - 23 Jan 2005 : 13:58:33
|
I beg to differ. It is obvious you are making a big mistake by comparing races to species. Highly bred dogs have neural problems. The correct term is "overbreeding". The dark blacks have developed a blood disorder, sickle-cell anemia.
Your Mulatto friend is actually an improvement and strenthening of the human strain, genetically speaking. He is incorporating the genetic immunities and other improved selections from two different historical memories and from two distinct parts of the world.
But the gist of my post was the main reason not to get so involved with race. You took my comment way too seriously and personally, Marty. I was actually explaining that your comment would be hypocritical but for praying to God for counsel. But mostly I am trying to mitigate the subject of race because it is so overstated throughout other Topics here. It consumes a lot of verbiage. Way too much in my opinion.
Anyway, this Post will likely just brew more stuff about racial issues and never take to my tangent about mental archtypes.
Oh, well.
Regards,
David Merrill.
|
Edited by - David Merrill on 23 Jan 2005 14:03:47 |
|
|
|
Cornerstone Foundation
Advanced Member
uSA
254 Posts |
Posted - 23 Jan 2005 : 15:44:13
|
quote:
Originally posted by David Merrill
But mostly I am trying to mitigate the subject of race because it is so overstated throughout other Topics here. It consumes a lot of verbiage. Way too much in my opinion.
Anyway, this Post will likely just brew more stuff about racial issues and never take to my tangent about mental archtypes.
Oh, well.
Regards,
David Merrill.
Cornerstone Foundation wrote:
David,
You are certainly correct in your supposition that what you have posted "will likely just brew more stuff about racial issues".
Please consider, the fact that racial issues are so vitally important, may be the very reason that those issues evoke such interest.
It also may be the very reason our enemies do not wish to have racial issues discussed and have attempted to make the discussion of such issues politically incorrect unless one aligns with their agenda of destroying racial distinction everywhere but within their elite environment.
David, you have raised a number of issues. In our view it would be irresponsible to allow the assertions you have made to stand without commenting on them.
Best Regards,
Marty
|
|
|
|
Cornerstone Foundation
Advanced Member
uSA
254 Posts |
Posted - 23 Jan 2005 : 16:28:52
|
quote:
Originally posted by David Merrill
I beg to differ. It is obvious you are making a big mistake by comparing races to species.
Highly bred dogs have neural problems. The correct term is "overbreeding".
Regards,
David Merrill.
Cornerstone Foundation wrote:
It is our understanding that the idea that all the races of people are of the same species is in the overall historical view, a relatively recent aberration.
Charles Weisman has done more than one research compilation, that we are aware of, in the racial subject area. One such work is The Origin of Race and Civilization subtitled "An expose' of the false Christian doctrines and distorted historical and scientific teachings regarding the origins of the species of life, human and subhuman races, Adamic man, Israelites, cultures and civilizations. WITH 83 ILLUSTRATIONS. It can be obtained from Weisman Publications; P.O. Box 240844; Apple Valley, Minnesota [55124] for $9.00.
In the book, Charles Weisman has pointed out that....quote:
From the book The Origin of Race and Civilization...
The word "species" is in itself an anti-evolution term since the very meaning of the word refers to something specific and fixed, at least in terms of what can be seen or observed. If a life form can change over time, then its characteristics are not special and specific but rather unspecific and variable. Thus evolutionists cannot really tell us what a species of life is. It would be better, therefore, to adopt the definition used by naturalists of the past. (emphasis inserted by Cornerstone Foundation)
Charles has also written a book by the title Not of One Blood which, in our opinion, sets the record straight concerning the fallacies stated in the book entitledOf One Blood. Another good work in this area is An Anthology of Racial Issues by Charles Weisman. Information on these works and others can possibly be obtained by clicking on www.seek-info.com.
Respectfully Submitted,
Marty |
Edited by - Cornerstone Foundation on 23 Jan 2005 16:59:28 |
|
|
|
David Merrill
Advanced Member
USA
1147 Posts |
Posted - 23 Jan 2005 : 17:10:19
|
quote:
...human and subhuman races...
That's all I needed to hear. Defiance of physics and physiology. Ignorance of the simple Dihybrid Cross of genetics.
I had not realized Charles Weisman was such a racist. I am going to have to be careful whenever reading his material. |
Edited by - David Merrill on 23 Jan 2005 17:12:23 |
|
|
|
Cornerstone Foundation
Advanced Member
uSA
254 Posts |
Posted - 23 Jan 2005 : 17:31:29
|
quote:
Originally posted by David Merrill
quote:
...human and subhuman races...
That's all I needed to hear. Defiance of physics and physiology. Ignorance of the simple Dihybrid Cross of genetics.
I had not realized Charles Weisman was such a racist. I am going to have to be careful whenever reading his material.
Cornerstone Foundation wrote:
We are not certain without further review..but the reference to "subhuman races" may have to do with ancient species, some or all of, which are now extinct.
Having said that, we agree that you, we and all other readers should be careful whenever reading what Charles Weisman or any other author or translator has written.
Like the old rancher said....quote:
You have to be at least as smart as a cow...and...eat the hay...but spit out the sticks.
Paul said it better...quote:
1 Thessalonians 5:21...
Prove all things; hold fast that which is righteous.
Mr. Weisman's works do not need to be defended by us or anyone else. They are scholarly works of a high degree that speak for themselves and are well documented.
Let him who hs eyes, see.
Respectfully Submitted,
Marty
|
Edited by - Cornerstone Foundation on 23 Jan 2005 17:37:02 |
|
|
|
Cornerstone Foundation
Advanced Member
uSA
254 Posts |
Posted - 23 Jan 2005 : 17:51:54
|
quote:
Originally posted by David Merrill
I beg to differ. It is obvious you are making a big mistake by comparing races to species. Highly bred dogs have neural problems. The correct term is "overbreeding".
Cornerstone Foundation wrote:
It is our understanding that the condition referred to above is known among purebred breeders as "inbreeding".
It is our further understanding that the undesirable consequences of inbreeding are the result of people violating Yahweh's Laws concerning the prohibition against the mating of closely related individuals within the same family of the same species. An example of this would be a man sinning against Yahweh by impregnanting his own daughter.
When Yahweh's Laws are obeyed the result can be a strenghtening of the species and an avoidance of undesirable genetic abberrations.
We will add more support for these statements in a subsequent edit, as time permits, and if Yahweh wills for us to do so.
Respectfully submitted,
Marty
|
|
|
|
David Merrill
Advanced Member
USA
1147 Posts |
Posted - 23 Jan 2005 : 17:53:25
|
I have heard about the doctrine, "subhuman". I have heard it in terms of Shadow and even Reptilian species or races too. Once from Dan Petersen, the Montana Freeman and once from a man trying to convince me George W. Bush is a Shapeshifter. There are several keywords and Weisman indicates in the subtitle he is off into that same sort of nonsense.quote:
The Origin of Race and Civilization subtitled "An expose' of the false Christian doctrines and distorted historical and scientific teachings regarding the origins of the species of life, human and subhuman races, Adamic man, Israelites, cultures and civilizations.
In recommending Weisman, I also assumed you had read the material and thus I am confused:quote:
We are not certain without further review..but the reference to "subhuman races" may have to do with ancient species, some or all of, which are now extinct.
I gather you do not have the book handy. I seems to me if you had ever read the book, or even perused it, you would not be confused about such a fundamental point.
You also said:quote:
Mr. Weisman's works do not need to be defended by us or anyone else. They are scholarly works of a high degree that speak for themselves and are well documented.
quote:
You are certainly correct in your supposition that what you have posted "will likely just brew more stuff about racial issues".
Please consider, the fact that racial issues are so vitally important, may be the very reason that those issues evoke such interest.
That is what I disagree with and was trying to avoid. If racial issues are so "vitally important" then we cannot proceed to agreement because there is too much disagreement about the history of race. I suppose that if people enjoy hashing it over redundantly, go ahead without me. Additionally I would add that processing the race issue further is irrelevant to this Topic.
Thus I was hoping to shift the basis to mental archtypes independent of race.
Maybe after time to absorb my treatise "Posted - Jan 23 2005 : 10:51:00 AM" on False Memory Syndrome the conversations will get interesting. |
Edited by - David Merrill on 23 Jan 2005 18:16:26 |
|
|
|
David Merrill
Advanced Member
USA
1147 Posts |
Posted - 24 Jan 2005 : 06:40:49
|
quote:
We're still editing this post
Not for me. I am hoping to clarify mental archtypes will be much more effective than arguing about races. Mental archtypes are independent of race and much more applicable in the 'melting pot' of American culture, which doctrine has spread around the world.
In the Post above you are taking the reader through a myriad of already Posted quotes; during all of which I have been trying to get you to drop it. So you are notified that I am no longer participating in that bunny-trail diversion. There is a search function and if any readers want to catch up on the many racial comments and disputes already in the journal on this forum, that is a great means to do it. I am moving on.
If nobody is familiar with mental archtypes then maybe this will go nowhere. I am talking about symbols behind words which we agree on - common law in its purest sense. I have called it the numero-linguistic interface but am willing to resort to layman's terms instead of advanced-resonance inductive plasma physics and mathematics.
A keen example of mental archtypes is described in the book Hidden Symbolism of Alchemy and the Occult Arts by Herbert Silberer; Dover 1971. The book begins with a dream. The dream is fairly short but embodies classical symbols that seem to have been our most treasured mental archtypes as a species, not a race. The book redacts our deepest aspirations and fears into basic globally recognized symbols.
And I am applying the Symbol, the Qabbalistic Sephirotic Tree - the "Tree of Life" found in modern Jewry in context of Ravage's and Rosenthal's writings within the topical scope here - Original War by Propaganda.
So Marty, please drop your "responsibility" to defend your opinions about race and racism. At least on this Topic. It should be clearly getting to no resolution and serving no purpose here.
From Edenics, Edenics is The Origin of Speeches - edenics@campus.ie:quote:
“There is some scholarly support for monogenesis of language, the thesis that all human languages are derived from a single mother tongue. … Isaac Mozeson makes a strong case for Hebrew being that language.”
Dr. Alvin Schiff, Honorary president of the Educators Council of America, professor at Harvard University, Hebrew University, and several others.
“I am a physicist, not a linguist, but the clear analyses and presentation of data makes sense. The Origin of Speeches confirms that our race once spoke a common Biblical tongue, and the … field of Edenics is on track to bring us back to that Eden-like consensus of knowing our Creator.”
Lambert Dolphin, "Former Senior Research Physicist with the Stanford Research Inst., International, Menlo Park, CA. Evangelical Bible teacher since 1962. http://ldolphin.org/
The link to the entire text here:
False Memory Syndrome Foundation Compilation: Corydon Hammond |
Edited by - David Merrill on 24 Jan 2005 09:10:53 |
|
|
|
Cornerstone Foundation
Advanced Member
uSA
254 Posts |
Posted - 24 Jan 2005 : 07:50:40
|
quote:
Originally posted by David Merrill
I beg to differ. It is obvious you are making a big mistake by comparing races to species.
Highly bred dogs have neural problems. The correct term is "overbreeding".
Regards,
David Merrill.
Cornerstone Foundation wrote:
It is our understanding that the idea that all the races of people are of the same species is in the overall historical view, a relatively recent aberration.
Charles Weisman has done more than one research compilation, that we are aware of, in the racial subject area. One such work is The Origin of Race and Civilization subtitled "An expose' of the false Christian doctrines and distorted historical and scientific teachings regarding the origins of the species of life, human and subhuman races, Adamic man, Israelites, cultures and civilizations. WITH 83 ILLUSTRATIONS. It can be obtained from Weisman Publications; P.O. Box 240844; Apple Valley, Minnesota [55124] for $9.00.
In the book, Charles Weisman has pointed out that.... quote:
From the book The Origin of Race and Civilization as Studied and Verified from Science, History and the Holy Scriptures...
The word "species" is in itself an anti-evolution term since the very meaning of the word refers to something specific and fixed, at least in terms of what can be seen or observed. If a life form can change over time, then its characteristics are not special and specific but rather unspecific and variable. Thus evolutionists cannot really tell us what a species of life is. It would be better, therefore, to adopt the definition used by naturalists of the past. (emphasis inserted by Cornerstone Foundation)
Charles has also written a book by the title Not of One Blood which, in our opinion, sets the record straight concerning the fallacies stated in the book entitled Of One Blood. Another good work in this area is An Anthology of Racial Issues by Charles Weisman. Information on these works and others can possibly be obtained by clicking on www.seek-info.com.quote:
David Merrill wrote...
...human and subhuman races...
That's all I needed to hear. Defiance of physics and physiology. Ignorance of the simple Dihybrid Cross of genetics.
I had not realized Charles Weisman was such a racist. I am going to have to be careful whenever reading his material.
I have heard about the doctrine, "subhuman".... There are several keywords and Weisman indicates in the subtitle he is off into that same sort of nonsense.
Cornerstone Foundation wrote:
The only use of the word "subhuman" that we have found in the book is the following:quote:
Exerpts from Chapter 2..The Antiquity of Man..in the book entitled The Origin of Race and Civilization as Studied and Verified From Science, History and the Holy Scriptures by Charles Weisman...
It is strange that people have no difficulty believing that some monstrous dinosaur existed which became extinct..., ...but totally refuse to believe that an ape-like man existed and became extinct...
The existence of fossils and dinosaurs was rejected at first, but now no one denies their existence. It took considerable time for Christendom to acknowledge the fact that God does allow his creations to fall into extinction. No one can deny this for extinction is an observable process.
The evidence that primitive ape-men existed is becoming as great as evidence of dinosaurs or of the extinction process itself. Yet the churches and theologians refuse to recognize the obvious. Why? They will accept the existence of dinosaurs and extinct fossils because they do not really endanger their “unity” or “brotherhood of man” doctrine which falsely asserts that the races have a common origin and thus are equal. The great bulk of the “Judeo-Christian” preaching is based on this doctrine. But if ape-men or pre-Adamic races existed, they suddenly would not have a leg to stand on.
Once Christians come to realize that these primitive “ape-men” did indeed exist, and at a time prior to Adam, then a radical change will come about in understanding the works and word of God. The false “Judeo-Christian” concepts will disintegrate if such facts became generally accepted. Thus, the preachers and theologians will do anything, including distorting scientific facts or creating nonbiblical stories, so as to hide or explain away those facts in order to preserve their cash flow generated from the false “unity of races” and “brotherhood of Man” doctrines.
The same preachers and theologians who claim that "God works in mysterious ways" also claim that God would never create primitive, subhuman ape-men. Christians need to quit listening to preachers who fashion God into their mold of what they believe God should be. Instead they should go by what the word and works of God reveal about the Author. By studying the works of God, which includes all of His creation, we can better understand and appreciate the word of God. The fossil record is simply a record of God's past creations or works.
Thank you for considering this.
Best Regards,
Marty |
Edited by - Cornerstone Foundation on 24 Jan 2005 08:06:18 |
|
|
|
Cornerstone Foundation
Advanced Member
uSA
254 Posts |
Posted - 24 Jan 2005 : 18:19:06
|
quote:
David Merrill wrote….It is obvious you are makinga big mistake by comparing races to species…..
…….The dream is fairly short but embodies classical symbols that seem to have been our most treasured mental archtypes as a species, not a race.
Exerpts from Chapter 4..The Antiquity of Man..in the book entitled The Origin of Race and Civilization as Studied and Verified From Science, History and the Holy Scriptures by Charles Weisman...
The foregoing scientific data and evidence presented shows that the varied types of man possess distinguishing characteristics that justify their being divided into distinct species. Much more anatomical and morphological evidence could be produced, not to mention psychological, linguistical, sociological, and historical data, all of which would further confirm that the varied types of man represent different species under the genus homo.
The distinctions are remarkable and permanent, and cannot be invalidated by the “scale of graduation”, so often quoted, as this would apply with equal force to all animated nature. A prevailing form, a type, exists, and that is enough. (Smith and Kneeland, Natural History of the Human Species, p. 89.)
Since the different races of man are in fact species they can be classified in the taxonomic system as such. We can usually translate a race into a species category, since race and species are synonymous. Prof. Sayce states that: quote:
In the language of science, the terms ‘race’ and ‘species’ are equivalent in their application to man. In the case of the lower animals we can speak only of ‘species’; man has appropriated to himself a special term to denote the species into which he is divided, and that term is ‘race’. (A. H. Sayce, The Races of the Old Testament, p. 1.
The word “race” was first applied to man by Georges Buffon in 1749. Since then it has been used inconsistently. More recently, it has been I the context of a variety or ethnic group. As a result of this there has been much confusion and error in the classification of man. It is only by incorrectly interpreting ‘race’ to mean ‘variety’ that any have been able to attack and discredit the concept of “pure races.” But, if we recall what the original meaning of race was, we have to dismiss many of the superficial classifications and comments on race. We are not concerned with identifying and classifying pure varieties, only pure species (i.e. nonhybridized species).
Based on Linnaeus’ taxonomic system, the living races of man are classified under the family category of Homindae, which means “man-like”, and under the genus category of Homo, which means “man”. Under the Homo group there are several species of man- that is , “specific” created types.
Each true human race, thus, has two separate names: its common or popular name (such as Chinese), and its zoological name according to taxonomic rules of nomenclature which uses its genus and species name (e.g. Homo asiaticus). We thus can speak of the Mongols, Kalmucks, Viet Namese, Japanese, or Chinese as all being Homo asiaticus. It also would be more correct o say the Chinese are of the “Asiatic race” rather than “Chinese race”, as it implies that the people called Chinese are a species unto themselves. It would be better just to say “Chinese people”. We could also refer to one belonging to one of the above groups as being of the Oriental, or “Yellow race,” as these terms are more inclusive of all the varieties belonging to the species Homo asiaticus.
Likewise we often hear the terms “Anglo-Saxon race,” “Germanic race,” “Nordic race,” “Latin race,” or “Teutonic race.” It would be better just to say the “Nordics” or “the Anglo-Saxon people.” If we want to use the term “race” according to its proper meaning we should say the European or “White race,” since there really is no Anglo-Saxon race or species. They are rather a variety of the species group Homo europaeus, as are the Teutons, Romans and Germans. If two types have the same ancestral “root,” they are of the same species or race. If the Angles and Saxons were two races, then “Anglo-Saxons” would be hybrids. Rather, they are only varieties of the same race.
Page 117 of the book then shows a chart of eighteen of the “Species of Homo (Man)”.
Thank you for considering this material.
Respectfully Submitted,
Marty
|
Edited by - Cornerstone Foundation on 24 Jan 2005 18:39:11 |
|
|
|
Mark
Senior Member
USA
55 Posts |
Posted - 24 Jan 2005 : 22:31:51
|
I wouldn’t hesitate to say that Charles Weisman is deluded and nothing more than a racist and an evolutionist—they go hand and hand. (Quack-science)
quote:
It is our understanding that the idea that all the races of people are of the same species is in the overall historical view, a relatively recent aberration.
Do you think it might be, because we have a better understanding of genetics now??
“Completed in 2003, the Human Genome Project (HGP) was a 13-year project coordinated by the U.S. Department of Energy and the National Institutes of Health. During the early years of the HGP, the Wellcome Trust (U.K.) became a major partner; additional contributions came from Japan, France, Germany, China, and others. See our history page for more information.” http://www.ornl.gov/sci/techresources/Human_Genome/home.shtml
I do believe that Weisman and his kind are in for a surprise.
Race has NO basis in biology, or scripture.
Acts 17:26
And hath made of one blood all nations of men for to dwell on all the face of the earth, and hath determined the times before appointed, and the bounds of their habitation;
___________________
http://www.ecclesia.org/truth/inter-racial.html#f6 --
But some people think there must be different ‘races’ of people because there appear to be major differences between various groups, such as skin colour and eye shape.
The truth though is that these so-called ‘racial characteristics’ are only minor variations among people groups. If one were to take any two people anywhere in the world, scientists have found that the basic genetic differences between these two people would typically be around 0.2 percent—even if they came from the same people group. But, these so-called ‘racial’ characteristics that people think are major differences (skin colour, eye shape, etc.) ‘account for only 0.012 percent of human biological variation.. In other words, the so-called ‘racial’ differences are absolutely trivial—overall, there is more variation within any group than there is between one group and another. If a white man is looking for a tissue match for an organ transplant, for instance, the best match may come from a black man, and vice versa. The ABC news science page stated, ‘What the facts show is that there are differences among us, but they stem from culture, not race.’
_____________________
Peace,
Mark
P.S. Sorry David  |
Edited by - Mark on 24 Jan 2005 23:37:53 |
|
|
|
Cornerstone Foundation
Advanced Member
uSA
254 Posts |
Posted - 25 Jan 2005 : 00:24:19
|
quote:
Originally posted by Mark
I wouldn’t hesitate to say that Charles Weisman is deluded and nothing more than a racist and an evolutionist—they go hand and hand. (Quack-science)
Peace,
Mark
Exerpts from Chapter 12….Conclusion and Comment...in the book entitled Facts and Fiction Regarding Noah’s Flood: An Analysis of the Facts and Arguments Surrounding the Flood of Genesis Showing Its True Nature and Meaning by Charles Weisman...
Religion and Science – The debate over “creationism” and “evolutionism” has been part of a dialectical plan to inject confusion and distortion into the thinking process. Thus, many erroneously perceive this supposed conflict as a conflict between the Bible and science. The Bible and science should be regarded as sources of knowledge, and not synonymous with the theories or men that use these sources. The connection is a false one and generates much confusion. Creationism is not truly biblical just as evolutionism is not truly scientific.
In the conflict over creationism and evolutionism, it is perceived by most that one must be right and the other wrong, and people thus pick the one that most appeals to them. It never seems to occur to anyone that both arguments are wrong or false. But since this isn’t the case, people are left with the situation of either believing one or the other, or concluding that either the Bible is wrong or science is wrong.
It is amazing how many have been caught up in this meaningless debate, believing that true religion (the Bible) and science are in conflict. The God whose word is found in the Bible is the same God who created all the laws and processes of the natural sciences. There can be no conflict between them, but there can be error on the part of man in interpreting them. As Dr. Nott stated:quote:
Man can invent nothing in science or religion but falsehood; and all the truths which he discovers are but facts or laws which have emanated from the Creator. All science, therefore , may be regarded as a revelation from HIM; and although newly-discovered laws, or facts, in nature, may conflict with religious errors , which have been written and preached for centuries, they never can conflict with religious truth. There must be harmony between the works and the words of the Almighty, and wherever they seem to conflict, the discord has been produced by the ignorance or wickedness of man. (J.C. Nott, Types of Mankind(1854) p.61)…..
…..An accurate understanding of either science or the Bible can stand on its own without a multitude of conjecture and speculative theory to hold them up. They do not conflict with one another for there is harmony between the works and the words of the Creator. The confusion and conflict is solely in the minds of men.
Thank you for considering this material.
Respectfully Submitted,
Marty |
|
|
|
Cornerstone Foundation
Advanced Member
uSA
254 Posts |
Posted - 25 Jan 2005 : 02:19:41
|
quote:
Originally posted by Mark
I wouldn’t hesitate to say that Charles Weisman is deluded and nothing more than a racist and an evolutionist—they go hand and hand. (Quack-science)
I do believe that Weisman and his kind are in for a surprise.
Race has NO basis in biology, or scripture.
Acts 17:26
And hath made of one blood all nations of men for to dwell on all the face of the earth, and hath determined the times before appointed, and the bounds of their habitation;
Peace,
Mark
Exerpts from a chapter entitled …Acts 17:26….in the book entitled Not Of One Blood by Charles Weisman...
With a book by the title of One Blood, which uses Acts 17:26 as its theme, subject matter, and proof text, one would expect there to be some analysis of that verse. However, the verse is referred to only a few times in the book. There is no study, evaluation or biblical exegesis of this verse. There is only a presumption that it means what the authors say it does. Since the meaning of the main topic is only a presumption, that makes it a poorly written book.
Let us then examine Acts 17:26, to see what it says and what it does not say. Most authorities make note that the word “blood” is not in the ancient manuscripts. But we will ignore that issue for now, and ask what is meant by “one blood.” Does it mean that all blood I the same genetically?
It is common knowledge that blood is grouped into four types: A, B, AB, and O. Each type is also classified by an Rh factor – either positive (=) or negative (-), which makes eight different blood types. Each type is produced by a specific gene. The blood types are so different that if one type of blood is transfused into a person with a different type, it can result in death.
It is also known that blood contains different alleles, or alternate genes at certain locations on the chromosomes which contain specific inheritable characteristics. Here are some facts about the genetic difference in blood among the races:
The percentage of the population of the several races having certain blood groups vary enough so that the race of a population, if not of a particular individual, can often be identified based on blood analysis. Further, a person’s blood can often eliminate him as a member of a particular race.
The Deigo (Di a) blood antigen is absent in Aryans and Negroes, but high in Turanians (Orientals). The Kell (K) antigen is common in Aryans, but is rare in Negroes and Turanians, The Sutter (Js a) antigen occurs only in Negroes. ..Blood group A1,2 is found in Negroes, but is seldom found in Aryans or Turanians. Contrary to popular myths, the races do not share a common blood. (Thomas C. Allen, Species of Men, TC Allen Co.,1999,p.24-26)
The Lewis (Le) allele is found in most races but is absent from the blood of Australian aborigines. The FY-0 allele is found in most Negroes, but is not in Asians or Australians. The r blood allele is common in Europeans , but does not exist in Australians, Polynesians, or American Indians. Almost 90% of Bushman have the cDe allele but it is near zero in other races. (For further reference on these facts see, C. Weisman, Anthology of Racial Issues, 1997, pp. 84-85) The Duffy null allele, which confers resistance to malaria, is found in 100% of African Negroes and 0% in other races. (Ethnic Variation as a Key to the Biology of Human Disease, Annals of Internal Medicine, Sept. 1, 1997. 127:401-403.)This source also states that the ALDH2*2 allele is frequent in Asians, but 0% in Africans and Europeans. The blood gene for sickle cell anemia is found mainly in Negroes…..
…On a genetic and biological level, blood varies considerably, and is a distinctive characteristic which can set races apart…..
…..All blood is clearly not the same, whether viewed within a race or among races. So the term “one blood” could not possibly mean that all blood is the same biologically or genetically….
….The term ‘blood’ in the Bible was used to refer to the essence of life. The only other way it was used was in reference to sacrifice or atonement. It was not used to indicate the biological relationship of people. It thus is a blatant error to say that “one blood” in acts 17:26 means all people are related. Remember, this was only a presumption of the authors of the book One Blood, and obviously that presumption is wrong……
…..According to a Greek, you were either a Greek or a no count barbarian. This the two main issues of contention Paul has with the men of Athens are their ilolatry and their conceited view of their nation. Paul was telling them that there is one God who made all things, including all nations! The word “nations” is a key word here. Everyone reds Act 17:26 as though it says, God had made of one blood all men. The book One Blood quotes it as, “God had made all men of one blood.” (Ham, Wieland, Batten, One Blood But that is not what it says!
It says God has made of one blood all nations of men. The issue is nations which consist of men. God made or established all nations, including Greece. So the issue is nations not individual men. Most have failed to see this because the have been conditioned by the erroneous interpretation of this verse and develop a mental block and [are] unable to read it correctly…..
….There is strong evidence that the word “blood” in Acts 17:26, was an interpolation in the Masoretic text. If it was then it would not be the first error with that text or the King James Bible. (When the first edition of the King James Bible was printed in 1611, it had spelling errors, punctuation errors, genders mixed (he for she) , and in the seventh commandment the word “not” was missing, so it read-“Thou shalt commit adultery.”) While God’s word is true and infallible, men have made some errors in copying and translating it…..
Cornerstone Foundation wrote:
Thank you for giving this your prayerful consideration.
Respectfully Submitted,
Marty |
Edited by - Cornerstone Foundation on 25 Jan 2005 02:24:32 |
|
|
|
David Merrill
Advanced Member
USA
1147 Posts |
Posted - 25 Jan 2005 : 10:03:36
|
quote:
Mark said:
P.S. Sorry David
I am okay with it. If all this about races is entertaining and educational reading, so be it. You made a great point Mark and maybe people will stop building this Topic about race. I think that a lot of folks, like myself surf here from the Active Topics search engine and just "catch-up" by reading the last few Posts. Therefore I try to maintain some control of the subject matter because pretty quick the Pages are filling up about race instead of the Original War by Propaganda.
I thought I had a way around it with mental archtypes and that the Greentree Lecture (linked above) would stir some discussion about Jewish Qabbalah-Tree symbols in our Jungian "Communal Preconscious" - how that sort of thing may be interwoven into the subject articles by Rosenthal and Ravage.
I know it is reading between the lines but that Greentree Lecture was very popular for a long time. Now I take a line of the lecture and cannot find any hits. I am thinking the subject matter either goes one way or the other. Like the fellow trying to convince me FMSF was a CIA front to cover up the torture chambers. That guy had a gym bag full of different books on the subject of CIA Mind Control and child torture/ritual abuse. On the other hand, so many people were using the Lecture for such confirmation and it is somehow being pulled from availability. From my second reading on I noted the first word of the article - "False" Memory. But I remember being in a sort of shock after the first reading through. It looks like the FMS Foundation has decided against broadcasting it anymore. That is where I got my linked copy. Maybe the expose was backfiring like my supposed "Hammond's Regret" about even proposing his suspicions out loud.
Greentree Lecture link
I would like the readers to try wrapping their minds around this common occurance, identical Greentree experiences throughout different geographic locations and transposing it to religious and even faith symbols like the Resurrection and its extensions into absurd childish notions - Christ is Jesus' last name; Santa Clause is Jesus' dad Joseph... Christmas-time was Jesus' birthday...
My thinking is that we can develop some tools to properly analyze some of the truth in the volatile articles. Mainly the claim that Christianity was quickly picked up as a manipulative weapon by the Jews - Protocol style doctrine.quote:
They brought them to the United States. Along with them was a young boy, a teenager, who had been raised in a Hasidic Jewish tradition and a background of Cabalistic mysticism that probably appealed to people in the Cult because at least by the turn of the century Aleister Crowley had been introducing Cabalism into Satanic stuff, if not earlier. I suspect it may have formed some bond between them. But he saved his skin by collaborating and being an assistant to them in the death-camp experiments. They brought him with them. They started doing mind-control research for Military Intelligence in military hospitals in the United States. The people that came, the Nazi doctors, were Satanists. Subsequently, the boy changed his name, Americanized it some, obtained an M.D. degree, became a physician and continued this work that appears to be at the center of Cult Programming today. His name [Greentree] is known to patients throughout the country.
The proposition is to analyze what Allen Welsh DULLES, Director of Intelligence brought to America with these 'doctors', not who. And subsequently, how this same phenomenon can create shared religious experiences and common belief in the supernatural - faith. Why is faith (our belief sets) such a powerful addiction? So powerful that it may have been used against Christians for centuries?
Also proposed is a paradigm shift about that word "intelligence". Would not American Intelligence inherently imply what we think? Not just papers and data filed away in the basement at Langley? Somehow or another it got around and only surfaced with schizophrenic patients while under deep hypnosis. Explain that.
Regards,
David Merrill. |
Edited by - David Merrill on 25 Jan 2005 11:04:03 |
|
|
|
Cornerstone Foundation
Advanced Member
uSA
254 Posts |
Posted - 25 Jan 2005 : 11:10:39
|
quote:
Originally posted by David Merrill
My thinking is that we can develop some tools to properly analyze some of the truth in the volatile articles. Mainly the claim that Christianity was quickly picked up as a manipulative weapon by the Jews - Protocol style doctrine.
Cornerstone Foundation wrote:
Could the truth be that the orange definition Jews and subsequently the red definition Jews picked up the Way of Yahshua Messiah and perverted it into what became known as Christianity?
I seems that this has, historically, been the modus operandi of the red Jews and their proselytes.
Having proposed that possibility or probability, we would encourage those with knowledge of what occurred not to throw the proverbial baby out with the bath water.
In this instance, our opinion is that, the "baby" is perhaps analogous to the "literal resurrection of Yahshua Messiah."
Best Regards,
Marty |
|
|
|
David Merrill
Advanced Member
USA
1147 Posts |
Posted - 25 Jan 2005 : 16:17:12
|
The color-coded definitions for Jew are on Page 6 - http://ecclesia.org/forum/topic.asp?TOPIC_ID=414&whichpage=6
Marty said:quote:
Could the truth be that the orange definition Jews and subsequently the red definition Jews picked up the Way of Yahshua Messiah and perverted it into what became known as Christianity?
I think that is what Ravage attributes to Paul. But keeping in mind the Jews, by whatever definition who 'picked up' the Ways of Yehoshuah H'Natzrith were the Apostles and disciples like at the house of Cornelius - these were primarily a poor working class of Pharisees called Ebionites but that is based on a probably erroneous presumption. That Jesus spoke of a spiritual eternal life 'kingdom of heaven'. The Gospel of Thomas, confirmed by a cave find fifty years ago to be accurate with the originals extant, proves that Jesus was more of a Saducee because he was not talking about life after death at all. And the presumption the Bible is correct about that being the beliefs of the Saducees.
So that may be the accusation Marty. The Roman/Greco pagan concepts of rebirth and resurrection - like the chapter about Lazarus in The Nazarene Gospels Restored for example. Making the survival of Jesus into a miraculous Resurrection; that is what the perversion to the Way of Jesus really was.
http://friends-n-family-research.info/FFR/Merrill_Lazarus.zip
Chapter from The Nazarene Gospel Restored
I contend that the "baby" in the bathwater is the problem (stre-e-e-tching your model around it)*. Unless we make the Resurrection so by common agreement. That defies physics as I understand it but am open to such leaps in Superstring Theory. That is what I am getting at so far as mental archtypes anyway. By believing in the miraculous Resurrection we have set that symbol ingrained into our beliefs called "Christian Beliefs". It is easy to accept because of this archtype a lot of people share, even though it defies reality.
Regards,
David Merrill.
* And this completely convolutes the accusation you make. The Jews, being offended by the idolatry of making a man into God, have been misled by this perversion - Christianity. They are victims more than the Christians because the Messiah of God goes unrecognized in Judaism. |
Edited by - David Merrill on 25 Jan 2005 18:18:32 |
|
|
|
David Merrill
Advanced Member
USA
1147 Posts |
Posted - 27 Jan 2005 : 18:15:04
|
I gather the above is absurdly unpopular here.
Therefore I will clear up a division of groups. There was the James the Just crowd who were for whatever reason, in contention with the Pauline crowd - or at least with Paul when he visited Jerusalem for the last time. The Apostle Paul was the 'commission to the Gentiles'. So therefore the latter group were by and large pagans of Asia Minor, the target of Paul's epistles that survived time and are now canonized the New Testament. Above, I was only talking about the Jews who knew the Way of Jesus.
Paul played on the mental archtypes extant in pagan Asia Minor, those Roman/Greco frolickers Ravage describes, to develop Christianity. Christianity itself is a perversion to the Way of Jesus. That is what The Nazarene Gospel Restored analyzes. The way Paul's wild fantasies about the Messiah of God fitting the pagan models of rebirth/resurrection and even virgin birth were worked into subsequent editing of the historical Gospel accounts.
It is the truth that will set you free. If faith keeps you from seeing the truth, faith is the shackles that bind you.
Regards,
David Merrill.
|
Edited by - David Merrill on 27 Jan 2005 18:21:46 |
|
|
|
BatKol
Advanced Member
USA
735 Posts |
|
|
David Merrill
Advanced Member
USA
1147 Posts |
Posted - 28 Jan 2005 : 11:37:21
|
A racial profiler? Now that sounds like one of those political correctness dances, for sure!
Agreed, the genetic differences albeit maybe a very small percentage between myself (white) and a black man are definitely biologic. And the percentages of genetic differences between myself and other white people may be significantly larger than that between me and an 'equivalent' black man - same height, metabolism, bone structure etc. I am not sure.
But it is getting obvious that it is much more interesting to people than the wild new theories I have proposed about Christianity.
Regards,
David Merrill.
|
|
|
|
Topic |
|
|
|
Original War by Propaganda
