Black Hebrews

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Black Man

LOL....you're a funny person, b.u.t. you don't know what you're talking about here buddy.

Which one of the above denounces the NOI?

Half White and Half Polynesian (New Zealand).....:lmao:

One of his students, gives a very detailed account of his history. The FBI....like I would trust anything them cointelpro smucks have to say.

---

True Islam got a book out called Master Fard Muhammad: Who Is He? Who Is He Not?

i haven't read it but supposedly it clears up the many identities fard was said to have.

it might be biased though

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by WuLatino- MANGANI

-You have a very simplistic way of thinking.

---

You can't be serious. Go back and read your post on the diner.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by WuLatino- MANGANI

My story was in no way an affirmation of blanket attributes of caucasians who live in warm climates. My statement was in reference to what someone else said- a white person I presume- that he has been working outside and his skintone is now "burnished bronze". Some white's skin adapts to warm temperatures and actually produces melanin- others don't. Some develop cancerous accumulations of melanin- others develop freckles.

---

Yet you stated that the entire diner was full of whites that were darker than you and your friend.

If your argument is valid though why would the phenomenon stated happen only in Alabama and not outback Australia.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by WuLatino- MANGANI

Don't be an idiot...

---

Again you would have to be kidding.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by WuLatino- MANGANI

"Your the one that classified African-Americans as a race. Go back and read my post and you'll notice that I didn't class African-American's as a race but as "God's chosen people". "

-When speaking of "peoples" as an ancestral line it is implied that you are referring to a race of peoples (when speaking scientifically, or religiously). Your implication that "African-Americans" are ancestors of "Ancient Hebrews" is an implication that "African-American" is a race, and/or a joint representative of "blacks". In context you are implying that African-American is synonymous with the black race. You are wrong in either case.

---

Firstly your quote system is right up shit creek here, but your saying I implied.

And your example is not sufficient. What race do African-Americans belong to then?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by WuLatino- MANGANI

"And everyone is an "ancestor" of someone."

an·ces·tor (nsstr)
n.
1. A person from whom one is descended, especially if more remote than a grandparent; a forebear.
2. A forerunner or predecessor.
3. Law The person from whom an estate has been inherited.
4. Biology The actual or hypothetical organism or stock from which later kinds evolved.

-African-Americans are forebearers of other African-Americans, and are therefore not ancestors to any proceeding breed, stock, ethnicity, or culture. Neither are you... so not "everyone" is "ancestor of someone".

---

What? Forebear is a synonym for ancestor. That is your weakest argument thus far.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by WuLatino- MANGANI

"Yet Deuteronomy 7:6 states "For thou art an holy people unto the Lord thy God: the Lord thy God hath chosen thee to be a special people unto himself, above all people that are upon the face of the earth"."

-Deuteronomy was written by a Hebrew for Hebrews. They were invading other lands, and the best way to justify political disenfranchisement, genocide, and invasion is through religion. Moses was an Egyptian of Hebrew decent- his story reflects his point of view, his struggles, and his justifications for his actions (or at least what was written and who wrote it).

---

Are you saying that Deuteronomy is not divinely inspired but the old equivalent of mein kampf?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by WuLatino- MANGANI

"Again same as the first issue, I did not classify Jews as a race. I said the "current Jewish people". So your argument of Jews being comprised of all races, ethnicities and geographical descendants whilst true, is not valid in this argument."

-Again, in context you made that implication. This entire discussion is about race. Your reference to "Jewish people" when we are talking about Hebrews- which is a race and an ethnicity- is an implication that Jewish is synonymous with Hebrew. Again, you are wrong.

---

Captain obvious, this discussion is about race. I was talking about your reply to my quote.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by WuLatino- MANGANI

"I take this as your attempt to mock what you "think" is my image of god. Quite erroneous in nature and an attack that has no effect upon my belief structure. And this was definitely an attack."

[Originally Posted by WuLatino- MANGANI
-If God were a little boy with ignorant ideas, childish favoritisms, and humanisitic vanities then he would not be God.]

-I think it is pretty clear what I meant, and your implication that I was attacking you is ridiculous. I am attacking the belief system which attributes human qualities to a supreme being. You claim those are not your beliefs, yet without my referencing your beliefs you took offense. There is a saying in Spanish that says "if you pick at it, you are eating it"...

---

Yeah there is a saying here in Australia and it is "what the fuck is this bloke on about?"

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by WuLatino- MANGANI

"I get the impression that Magani's God is one of omnipotence whilst mine is an ignorant, small child."

-I stated nothing of "omnipotence" or other scholarly attributed virtues which have no bearing in true religion. If your belief is that God is racist, ie. he shows favoritism toward a race, ethnicity, or group of people, then your belief is ignorant- not your god.

---

But I provided the verse in the Bible yet you still argue it.

Check your earlier comment

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by WuLatino- MANGANI

-If God were a little boy with ignorant ideas, childish favoritisms, and humanisitic vanities then he would not be God.

---

Your the one applied human characteristics to God. Not me

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by WuLatino- MANGANI

You know what... I'm tired of debating kids who believe whatever they read and don't apply any value to fact, logic, and science. Believe what you want...

---

I am not a kid.

From my point your argument has been poorly argued.

And you again attempt to finish off with "political rhetoric".

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Mic Tyson

True Islam got a book out called Master Fard Muhammad: Who Is He? Who Is He Not?

---

-True Islam has one book- the Qur'an.

Trismegistos, this is the second time you and I participate in the same debate, and the second time you prove to be deficient in many areas- most importantly the topic of debate. This is not a forum with an official debate structure, and therefore I can only "say" your arguments lack true value and/or merit, but I challenge you- if you think you can handle yourself in a truly structured environment I challenge you to debate me on multiple topics at Www.debate.com . Your lack of logic will be pointed out by others, as well as your lack of credible sources. You make a lot of ad-hominem claims against me because you cannot defend your arguments, and though you say you are not a kid, your arguments contain less substance than those of many 14 year old debaters I know. On a forum like this one- full of people who are not necessarily serious about discussion, people who disregard logic and prefer arguments in support of fantastic religions and conspiracy theories- it is very easy for you to get away with the nonsense in which you partake in making your arguments. Again- if you dare have a truly structured argument you know where to find me. Until then you can just keep reading books and educate yourself. You really seem to need to expand your library and vocabulary, as well as your logic bank...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by WuLatino- MANGANI

-True Islam has one book- the Qur'an.

---

He's speaking about the scholar named True Islam not the religion.

http://www.theblackgod.com

The book he's speaking about can be found on this website. There are also a lot of articles and multimedia you can check out.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by WuLatino- MANGANI

-True Islam has one book- the Qur'an.

---

you have no clue who i was talking about. and islam existed before the quran was written

EDIT:my bad i didn't see the post that the dude above me made

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by WuLatino- MANGANI

-Hebrews are as much from Africa as are Celts, Goths, Visigoths, Gauls, etc. All peoples migrated out of Africa at some point. Hebrews migrated to Iraq- settled there for over 45,000 years, then Abraham brought this lineage to Canaan. If he was from Africa then so is George Bush.

---

i agree

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by WuLatino- MANGANI

Trismegistos, this is the second time you and I participate in the same debate, and the second time you prove to be deficient in many areas- most importantly the topic of debate. This is not a forum with an official debate structure, and therefore I can only "say" your arguments lack true value and/or merit, but I challenge you- if you think you can handle yourself in a truly structured environment I challenge you to debate me on multiple topics at Www.debate.com . Your lack of logic will be pointed out by others, as well as your lack of credible sources. You make a lot of ad-hominem claims against me because you cannot defend your arguments, and though you say you are not a kid, your arguments contain less substance than those of many 14 year old debaters I know. On a forum like this one- full of people who are not necessarily serious about discussion, people who disregard logic and prefer arguments in support of fantastic religions and conspiracy theories- it is very easy for you to get away with the nonsense in which you partake in making your arguments. Again- if you dare have a truly structured argument you know where to find me. Until then you can just keep reading books and educate yourself. You really seem to need to expand your library and vocabulary, as well as your logic bank...

---

You also make a lot of ad hominem claims against me and I don't think you are the master of debate that you might perceive yourself to be.

I know your educated and I am willing to meet you in a debate, but I'd like to make sure that you can meet the following:

* Can you provide a link to your arguments at www.debate.com? This is to prove that you have successfully debated with someone and that it contained the structured set up that you want.

* I will not go debating religious issues on a website full of atheists and also I will not debate this issue of "were the ancient Hebrews black" to an audience of athiest whites. Does www.debate.com provide statistical details of the demographics of the members of its website?

* I am not going to debate an argument that is unassailable to one debater. e.g. "Hitler was a good guy", "George W Bush is the most intelligent politician ever", "Saddam Hussein was a great leader" etc etc

* Throw up a few general ideas and I'll take it from there. I'd also like to know what the response times are for each debater as I'm fairly busy with work at times.

* I am only going to debate a topic that we BOTH agree to debate.

LOL I can't believe you guys are fighting over a story book.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Charles Barry

He's speaking about the scholar named True Islam not the religion.

http://www.theblackgod.com

The book he's speaking about can be found on this website. There are also a lot of articles and multimedia you can check out.

---

-LOL! My bad!

will be back to read all of this shit



http://91.121.132.199/gifs/8128.gif

"You also make a lot of ad hominem claims against me and I don't think you are the master of debate that you might perceive yourself to be."

-You cannot make ad-hominem claims against someone who has provided no facts because you have left only your beliefs to attack, and not any facts, figures, or scientific data. I have provided these, and you have not attacked my information rather my person. Not the same thing...

"* Can you provide a link to your arguments at www.debate.com? This is to prove that you have successfully debated with someone and that it contained the structured set up that you want."

-http://www.debate.com/Mangani - here you can examine my arguments, topics of debate, and comments made by voters. The site is not perfect, but it will provide a more structured environment where comments are not part of the debate, and voters can attack each other based on whether they are voting on the merits of the debate or their own beliefs.

"* I will not go debating religious issues on a website full of atheists and also I will not debate this issue of "were the ancient Hebrews black" to an audience of athiest whites. Does www.debate.com provide statistical details of the demographics of the members of its website?"

-I am pretty sure the majority of the world disagrees with you, but that is not the point. The voters can point out deficiencies in your arguments that you may not be aware of, as well as my own. The point of the website is to try to vote on the merits of the argument, and not your own opinion. I have voted against people I completely agree with because their arguments were ridiculous, and others have voted for me even if they disagree because my arguments have been better. I have lost debates that my opponent has conceded, so the site is not perfect (vers. 3 will take care of all these issues), but it's being worked on. The point is it is a better environment for a structured one on one debate.

"* I am not going to debate an argument that is unassailable to one debater. e.g. "Hitler was a good guy", "George W Bush is the most intelligent politician ever", "Saddam Hussein was a great leader" "

-We can agree on a debate, for one, and second, you don't have to accept a debate you don't like. If you want we can word your premise here, and the "resolved" statement to your liking. You are the "pro" here, so it's your premise.

"* Throw up a few general ideas and I'll take it from there. I'd also like to know what the response times are for each debater as I'm fairly busy with work at times."

-72 hours for each argument, and we can decide on a number of rounds (I think the max is either 5 or 7, but normally 3... it's up to you).

"* I am only going to debate a topic that we BOTH agree to debate."

-Like I said- it's your premise.

Tell me if you like this title- you write the premise, or I can pose the opposing argument, and you respond. By the way- if you feal you are demographically challenged you can send invites to your friend's emails so they can come and vote... though I would encourage them to vote based on the merits of the arguments as I always ask others to do.

"Resolved- The Ancient Hebrews were "black"- Black is defined anthropoligically as "Congoid" and refers spefically to the physical traits generally attributed to peoples of "Sub-Saharan Africa". "

Let me know if you like it, or if you want to modify it.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by WuLatino- MANGANI

"Resolved- The Ancient Hebrews were "black"- Black is defined anthropoligically as "Congoid" and refers spefically to the physical traits generally attributed to peoples of "Sub-Saharan Africa". "

Let me know if you like it, or if you want to modify it.

---

I'll pass on that one. I don't want to debate this topic or religion based on the fact that I believe that a lot of people will vote based on their belief or lack thereof.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by WuLatino- MANGANI

Trismegistos, this is the second time you and I participate in the same debate, and the second time you prove to be deficient in many areas- most importantly the topic of debate. This is not a forum with an official debate structure, and therefore I can only "say" your arguments lack true value and/or merit, but I challenge you- if you think you can handle yourself in a truly structured environment I challenge you to debate me on multiple topics at Www.debate.com . Your lack of logic will be pointed out by others, as well as your lack of credible sources.

---

I'm actually debating you to prove that:

• I'm able to engage in a debate, officially with the structures that you desire;
• that my debating skills are above the level of a 14 year old;
• that I am not "uneducated";
• that I am not purely writing on this forum because it is filled with people with followers of fantasy religions and conspiracy theorists; and
• that I am not hiding from engaging in official debate. Which seems what you've been gunning for against me twice now.

I therefore propose that we debate a current issue and I'd like the debate to be:

"The Lisbon Treaty - Evidence that the European Union is increasingly becoming a less democratic institution"

Also:

• I will not be inviting any friends to vote on the matter;
• We can post a link in this website asking if anyone is interested in voting on the matter;
• I think you have an advantage in that you have 17 debates under your belt at the website mentioned.

So this is just to reiterate that I accepted the challenge to disprove that:

• I am unable to engage in debate;
• I am devoid of logic; and
• my debating skills are poorer than a 14-year-old.

I should be an easy victory for you!

4 Rounds, 72 Hours Per Round & The Option for a "Best Of Three" if I beat you on the first one.