Jump to content

Black People Wrote the Bible. How many of You are aware of this FACT?


Energy

Recommended Posts

The Bible is the book written by our black ancestors, became lost, found by Europeans, and who returned it to us. 

Read more at the Black History Knowledge site
 

TheBibleWriters copy.jpg

Many sub-Sahara Africans, are the twelve tribes of Israel in exile. The Hebrews are not lost. The Bible makes it abundantly clear they are in sub-Sahara Africa. Consider the following verse.

"From beyond the rivers of Cush My worshipers, My scattered people will bring Me an offering."
Zephaniah 3:10


So there you have it. The Israelites are in the Land of Cush, which is sub-Sahara Africa. They fled there when Nebuchadnezzar and the Babylonians destroyed ancient Israel 3000 years ago. This means all the people transported as Slaves out of Africa during the Arab and the Transatlantic Slave trade are all Hebrews in exile.

Find out more by reading the information at the link on black history knowledge

  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Energy

 

Welcome to the site.


As for your topic.....

 

It's not a "fact" that Black people wrote the Bible.

It's an opinion based upon false information and wishful thinking.

After being enslaved and exploited, our people were indoctrinated with Christianity and told the lie that "The Bible" was the word of God when it really was just the English translation of a collection of books written by men....and those men weren't Black.

 

The fact is, most Black people probably wouldn't even know the Bible existed if it weren't for Caucasians who introduced it to some of our ancestors through slavery, colonialism, and other forms of exploitation....and ofcourse we started passing it down to eachother by tradition because many of us didn't know any better.

Now we KNOW better.
You KNOW that book wasn't written by God, but by other men and contains numerous contradictions but I don't think you want to accept it because you don't know how to replace it.

I've found a replacement.  I believe in and trust in The SUPREME BEING.

Stop believing in and promoting this falsehood from your enemy.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hello Pioneer1. Thanks for the welcome.

How do you explain the verse below which says the lost tribes of Israel are in sub-Sahara Africa? Is that what you term false information and wishful thinking?

"From beyond the rivers of Cush My worshipers, My scattered people will bring Me an offering."
Zephaniah 3:10

Link to comment
Share on other sites


Energy

 

How do I explain it?

I didn't write it, so it's not up to me to explain....lol.
But I'll say this.....
 

According to the Bible, some of the Israelites who left Palestine traveled down into Egypt and accordingly ended up in other parts of Africa as well.

The question is are ALL or even MOST AfroAmericans the descendants of these Israelites?


Why did they have to leave their land and get scattered in the first place?

 

 

The vast majority of our people when they were brought from Africa were practicing traditional African religions which involved venerating the Ancestors.  A smaller percentage were Muslims.  And almost none were Christians or Jews.
 

I believe....though I could be wrong..that because our some of our ancestors were forced to believe in the Bible and become Christians and that tradition was passed down to us....many of us try to READ ourselves into a book that is clearly not holy or from God.

So we pull out verses here and scriptures there and try to make it fit.

For example, he verse you present says "My scattered people will bring Me and offering".

Now what does that mean?


That verse was written in it's original script thousands of years ago..exactly when is this offering supposed to take place?

How does that prove it's truth or that we as AfroAmericans are THOSE people??
 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Granted you did not write the Bible but the information and the meaning is very clear, "my scattered people" means the Hebrews in exile. So the verse is saying the lost tribes of Israel are in Africa. Most sub-Sahara Africans are the ancient Israelites. They relocated to Africa when Nebuchadnezzar and his Babylonians destroyed ancient Israel 3000 years ago. Sub-Sahara Africans are Negroes. This means the ancient Israelites were Negroes. The image below was left in antiquity by the Assyrians who took  a section of the Israelites into exile. As you can see by the dreadlocks, they are black people. These are the FACTS based on history and archaeology. Thus, it is not false information or wishful thinking, as you called it. I base it on in-depth knowledge and I have written SIX best seller BOOKS on the subject.

Dreadlocked Hebrews.jpg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Energy

 

 

Just because you write best-seller books about a subject, doesn't mean what you write is TRUE.
Dr. Suess wrote multiple best-seller books about a TALKING CAT in a hat....that didn't make what he wrote true.

 

You ability to write best-seller books probably point more to your wonderful creativity than how true your writings are.

 

 


Granted you did not write the Bible but the information and the meaning is very clear, "my scattered people" means the Hebrews in exile. 

 

The Bible doesn't specifically mention "Hebrews in exile".

 

According to the Bible the Hebrews are the children of the patriarch Eber.
And based on MY research, the Hebrews are actually the ancestors of the Igbo (pronouced "Eeboo") people of Nigeria.....not ALL Black Africans.
 

 

 

 


It talks about Israelites being removed from their land and  from the Kin

So the verse is saying the lost tribes of Israel are in Africa. 

 

According to the Bible, the tribes weren't exactly "Lost".

Many of them....especially the tribe of Judah...were allegedly taken back to Babylon, and others were scattered to various areas but kept in close contact with eachother.

 

 

 

 


Sub-Sahara Africans are Negroes.

 

Lol...when did AfroAmericans began to call our race "Negro" again?
I thought we decided that that term was inappropriate for us.

 

 

 

 

This means the ancient Israelites were Negroes.


You're doing what's called "jumping to conclusions".
 

Jeremiah 13:23 says:
"Can an Ethiopian change his skin or a leopard its spots? Neither can you do good who are accustomed to doing evil."
 

If ancient Israelites were "Negroes" as you say, why would Jeremiah point to Ethiopians and refer to THEIR skin if he..being an Israelite...was the same as them???

In Exodus it is said that Moses' sister Miriam had a problem with him choosing an Ethiopian wife.
He they were "Negroes" as you say, what was her problem?

 

 

 

 

The image below was left in antiquity by the Assyrians who took  a section of the Israelites into exile. As you can see by the dreadlocks, they are black people. These are the FACTS based on history and archaeology. 

 

Did YOU go to the site and find this picture/carving?
If not...how can you verify whether or not it's a fact or where it came from or who it refers to?
 

Too often our people accept whatever Caucasians give them or present to them as "facts" and "history" when the truth is it's false information that has no verification what so ever.

I'm not saying that picture IS or IS NOT an actual picture of Israelites.  I simply don't know one way or the other, and I doubt you do either.  


Speaking of Israel....


Do you know what the word "Israel" means?

You apparently think "Israel" is a good name to have.
 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

LOL! I will start by answering the last part to wrap up everything else you wrote. You asked if I know the mean on the name Israel. Yes, I do. The original name is Yershiral. It is an Akan African word and it means, "blessing." This was what Jacob asked from the Angel - a blessing.
 Before you ask, how do I know that? The answer is, "Yes," I am African. Most Bible words are written in my native language, which is pronounced ERVERH.
The word ERVERH is the ORIGINAL Name of the ancient Israelites. The Greeks wrote is as IVRAIKI.  The Romans then translated that as Hebraic, which finally translates in English as Hebrew. Because I am ERVERH, I know the real meaning of most words in the Original Text of the Bible. The original name of Israel is Yershiral and it means BLESSING.

So to wrap up, the following verse is the fulfilment of prophecy. We are the ERVERH people aka the Hebrews, and we are in Sub-Sahara Africa, West Africa to be precise.

"From beyond the rivers of Cush My worshipers, My scattered people will bring Me an offering."
Zephaniah 3:10

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Energy

 

 

I'm not surprised.
Many Black people in Africa were manipulated and exploited through colonization like many Black people in the Americas were manipulated and exploited through slavery.

The same racists oppressed and manipulated both.

 

According to the Bible you quote from, Israel means "He who fights/struggles with God".

 

In Genesis chapter 32 Jacob allegedly wrestled with an Angel and afterwards his name was changed to "Israel".

 

If Jacob was FIGHTING an Angel or a Being he believed to be God, then you should ask yourself the question who was backing him.

Why would a RIGHTEOUS man fight or wrestle with an Angel in the first place?
 

Is = He
Ra = Wrestles/Fights/Struggles
El = God

 

In other words...REBELLIOUS.

 

What if I were to tell you that Israel or "Children of Israel" was the name that the Canaanites gave to the Caucasians who invaded their land and destroyed their cities?

When you read the book of Exodus the Children of Israel were allegedly "given" the land of Canaan, but it already had many people living ON the land! 
So according to scripture they slaughtered most of the inhabitants of the land and enslaved the remainder.
This is what Caucasians have done all over the planet....but it's  just happened to be recorded in the Bible.

 

Because these Caucasians were so destructive and wicked and murderous they were called "Children of Israel" or "Children of those who are rebellious to God"


Africans had and still have their traditional religions but when the Europeans came, they took YOUR original religions away from you and replaced them with FALSE religions in order to take away your true spiritual power.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You said and I quote:

Quote

"Black people in Africa were manipulated and exploited through colonization."



LOL! Not in in Central or West Africa. European colonisation saved us from many of the terrible practices we the natives were practising, which included Slavery, Cannibalism and Human Sacrifice. If you disagree, then I will love to see your EVIDENCE to the contrary

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Energy

 


LOL! Not in in Central or West Africa. European colonisation saved us from many of the terrible practices we the natives were practising, which included Slavery, Cannibalism and Human Sacrifice. If you disagree, then I will love to see your EVIDENCE to the contrary

 

How can I disagree with a statement I can't prove right or wrong.
I would have to go back in history to verify if what you said was true or false.

 

I'm curious what nation do you come from and what is your ethnic group?

Also, did you personally witness a remnant of some of these practices of cannibalism and human sacrifice you speak of yourself?
 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

LOL! I told you I am an ERVERH. We usually write the name as EWE because the VHWERH sound in the pronunciation of our name is not in the English alphabet. To compensate, we substitute the letter W where the sound should appear. The result is EWE. Nevertheless, the best was to help you pronounce the name is to write it out, which is ERVERH.

Our territory stretches from the Ga-Adangbe Region in Ghana all the way to Lagos in Nigeria. During the Transatlantic slave trade, our region was called the Slave Coast because most of the slaves to the Americas were from the region. This territory is now divided between four Countries, namely Ghana, Togo, Republic of Benin and Nigeria.

Anyway, back to the point I was making, "European colonisation saved us from many of the terrible practices we the natives were practising, which included Slavery, Cannibalism and Human Sacrifice. We were not manipulated and exploited through colonization, as you claim.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Energy

 

 

LOL! I told you I am an ERVERH. We usually write the name as EWE because the VHWERH sound in the pronunciation of our name is not in the English alphabet. To compensate, we substitute the letter W where the sound should appear. The result is EWE. Nevertheless, the best was to help you pronounce the name is to write it out, which is ERVERH.

 

?

 

Since you posted that I've watched videos on it and how it's pronounced and from what I've heard the people pretty much say "Eh-way"
It doesn't seem very hard to spell the proper pronunciation.

 

 

 

 

But do you know what the problem might be?

 

Since Caucasians (White people) spell it "Ewe"  THAT is why you continue to do it!
It has nothing to do with how difficult it is to pronounce, but more to do with the lack of a desire to dispute and contend with the "white way" of doing things....even when it's obviously wrong.

 

If the people or language is pronounced "Eh-way" then it should be SPELLED  EH-WAY  or EW-U-WAY.  
It's not hard...unless you try to put a square peg in a round hole.

 

 

 

Our territory stretches from the Ga-Adangbe Region in Ghana all the way to Lagos in Nigeria. During the Transatlantic slave trade, our region was called the Slave Coast because most of the slaves to the Americas were from the region. This territory is now divided between four Countries, namely Ghana, Togo, Republic of Benin and Nigeria.
 

Yes, most AfroAmericans are descended from West Africans.

 

But most West Africans...like most Africans period....are descended from Kemet, or ancient Egypt.
But not necessarily the Hebrews.
Hebrews were only ONE TRIBE of many living in Kemet.

 

 

 

 

 

Anyway, back to the point I was making, "European colonisation saved us from many of the terrible practices we the natives were practising, which included Slavery, Cannibalism and Human Sacrifice. We were not manipulated and exploited through colonization, as you claim.


I ask you again, did YOU witness any of this cannibalism and human sacrifice that you speak of?

How did you know it was taking place, unless YOU witnessed it yourself?

 

 

I'm not sure if you've read my thread on KNOWLEDGE vs INFORMATION:

 

 

 

...but you need to check it out.

 

 

Because I'm not sure if you know the difference between FACTS that have been verified to be true and mere INFORMATION that has been repeated and passed down over and over again through history.

 

Too often people of color (African, Asian, ect...) will believe and accept something as officially true, factual, and historical simply because a Caucasian TOLD them it was....without verifying it for themselves.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You said, and I Quote:

Quote

Because I'm not sure if you know the difference between FACTS that have been verified to be true and mere INFORMATION that has been repeated and passed down over and over again through history.

You are being very rude. I am a leading Historian of my people. I have written books on my people's history to educate ignorant people like yourself. Without my books, I doubt someone like you will know anything about your African roots. So, I suggest you mind your language. Below is a link to one of my books. Follow the link to read the Reviews to see what your fellow African-Americans view and VALUE the knowledge I bring to the table. If you can not be polite, I suggest you find someone else to play with. Thank you!

The Bible is the Black Man's History book

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Energy

 


I apologize if you're taking my words being rude....that's certainly not my intention.


However the TRUTH of what I've said remains.....

You can't claim to know things YOU haven't experienced or observed to verify them yourself.
And you shouldn't call them "facts" unless they have been verified either by you or a credible 2nd hand source.

I've repeatedly asked you have YOU witnessed certain things and been to certain archeological sites to verify that which you call "facts" and instead of answering the question you ignore it and attempt to deflect.

I highly doubt most AfroAmericans or Africans will take too kindly to you still refering to us as "negroes" or talking about how our ancestors were steeped in cannibalism and human sacrifice until Europeans "saved" them by colonizing them.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Facts of History usually don't make pleasant reading. Below is a link to one of the many barbaric acts about Human Sacrifice and the primitive traditions that fuelled the slave trade. It is no secret that European Colonialists went to WAR with our African ancestors to force them to stop these evil practices. Most of the accounts were from EYE-WITNESSES and backed up by Oral traditions.

I am not telling you these things for the fun of it. I am making you are aware of them because they are the identifying marks God put on the Hebrews to IDENTIFY them in exile. You can read about the identifier curses in Deuteronomy 28. Every horror mentioned in there was fulfilled in Africa.

GEZO - Human Sacrifice in Dahomey

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Energy

 

 

Facts of History usually don't make pleasant reading.

 

I think you're missing my point.
Much of what you're calling "facts of history" aren't actually facts AT ALL.
It's mere information that you've gotten passed along to you from sources and people who themselves had it passed down to them OR made it up.
 

Again, you continue to IGNORE the standards that I've suggested we use to verify whether this information is true or not which is having witnessed it yourself.

 

 


 Below is a link to one of the many barbaric acts about Human Sacrifice and the primitive traditions that fuelled the slave trade. It is no secret that European Colonialists went to WAR with our African ancestors to force them to stop these evil practices. Most of the accounts were from EYE-WITNESSES and backed up by Oral traditions.

 

((shakes head))

I ask YOU have YOU witnessed any of this, and instead of telling me what YOU have seen or what PEOPLE YOU KNOW have seen.....instead you give me a STORY you've pulled off the internet as if that is some sort of verification.
You have NO IDEA whether that article is true or false.

 

It's about YOU.....I ask did YOU witness any of this?
And if not have YOUR PARENTS or anyone YOU PERSONALLY KNOW witnessed this?


If not, you may as well forget about calling it a "fact".

 

 

 

 

 


I am not telling you these things for the fun of it. I am making you are aware of them because they are the identifying marks God put on the Hebrews to IDENTIFY them in exile. 

 

Ask yourself an intelligent question:


Why does "God" need a mark to identify the people He created?


The SUPREME BEING knows Everything!   ALL KNOWING.

There is no need for a marker to identify anyone or anything.
That's the thinking of a human being, because a human being wrote the book.

 

 

 


You can read about the identifier curses in Deuteronomy 28. Every horror mentioned in there was fulfilled in Africa.

 

Are you telling me that instead of doing it Himself, God decided to use Caucasians to curse and punish them?

Why????

Why do you think God would use another race who are JUST AS IF NOT MORE SINFUL than the Africans to punish Africans?
The SUPREME BEING is fully capable of punishing Whoever needs to be punished.
No need to send Europeans or any other Caucasians into Africa to fullfill some "curse" spoken of.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

And in keeping with the topic of this thread: We can say the same thing of the Bible

I'm counting on the fact that neither YOU nor anybody YOU KNOW has witnessed any event that has been recorded in the Bible NOR have you or anybody you know even witnessed who wrote it!

Yet you believe in it whole heartedly.

Not because it is true and you can verify it, but because some of our ancestors were either FORCED to believe in it or were BRIBED into believing in it by Caucasians who came offering money and other valuable goods in exchange for their conversion and that tradition was passed down from one generation to the next.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Going by how you deny history, EVERYTHING from the past is false because we never saw it with our eyes, right? Okay, I have seen this game before. For example, there are Africans who say the Transatlantic Slave Trade never happened. Likewise, there are African-Americans who say Blacks have always lived in America and that the story of the Transatlantic Slave Trade is false. It never happened. If we go by your reasoning, because we witnessed none of these historical events, they are false. Okay! Have it your way. The past never happened because we never saw any of it with our own eyes.

Link to comment
Share on other sites


Energy

 

When it comes to history (distant past events), it's not about confirming it OR denying it.

It's not about saying it DID happen or DIDN'T happen.

It's about the LIKELIHOOD of it happening.


If we weren't around to experience it or witness it ourselves then unless we have a time machine OR we have a spiritual experience where we are Divinely taken back....the best we as human beings can do is CONSIDER the evidence of whether it happened or not and weigh the evidence.
 

Evidence ARE facts that we can verify or dis-spell an assertion.


Yes, I'm aware of people who assert that the Great Ma'afa (TransAtlantic Slave Trade) didn't happen and that we didn't come from Africa.  But they don't provide proof or evidence of this, they just get online and SAY it.
But people running their mouths on the internet and putting out baseless theories aren't "facts" or "evidence".

Again, facts are things we can verify and prove.

Although neither you nor I were around to witness it, there is more evidence (facts) that support the assertion that the Great Ma'afa did happen than didn't.


In a world where so many African people (African in the racial sense) suffer from poverty, disease, and violence....our people need the TRUTH to help them solve their problems.
Not mythology and false history.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You said and I quote:

 

Quote

the best we as human beings can do is CONSIDER the evidence of whether it happened or not and weigh the evidence.

What EVIDENCE? Are you contradicting yourself? History is information based on eye-witness DOCUMENTED accounts. Failing that it is called a myth. But you wanna put a new spin on the meaning of History to say if we did not see it with our own eyes, it  can not be called History. Now you wanna talk about EVIDENCE? Evidence from where if we did not witness the so-called Evidence?  Going by your reasoning the evidence will also be bogus if it was not witnessed by the living.

Link to comment
Share on other sites


Energy

 

 

Evidence = FACTS that support an assertion.

 

Evidence are not just fact, but facts that SUPPORT whatever you claim.

Evidence isn't simply WORDS or DOCUMENTS.
Evidence are WORDS or DOCUMENTS that have been proven to be TRUE.

 

You may not be able to witness the assertion/claim....but you SHOULD be able to see the evidence to support it.

 

 

In other words.......


You assert that Africans were brought to the Americas to be slaves.

You don't KNOW this because you weren't around to experience or witness it. So now you must figure out based on the EVIDENCE whether or not this assertion is true.

A so-called "history book" that says Africans were brought over to be slaves IS NOT EVIDENCE.

It's just another assertion that may or may not be true.

 

-An old receipt for Africans being sold from on Slave plantation to another is EVIDENCE!

 

-AfroAmericans who speak various forms of West African languages mixed with English is further EVIDENCE!

 

-The fact that many AfroAmericans are concentrated in the West Indies and along the coasts of Mexico and the United States near the Atlantic Ocean is further EVIDENCE!


Granted, none of it is absolute PROOF, but it's all EVIDENCE that piles up to support the fact that it DID HAPPEN.

Evidence are FACTS that support the assertion.

 

 

But honestly, perhaps we SHOULD get in the habit of not arbitrarily believing things we weren't around to witness SIMPLY because Caucasians put it in their history books or teach it in their schools.


I'm not sure about African tradition, but most older AfroAmericans who were around to witness certain events would tell me as a kid that it happened ONE way, but when you read about it in history books written by Caucasians....they story they tell is often times totally different.
 

Caucasians have a HISTORY of being deceptive, omitting certain facts, and straight up lying.
So why should we believe what they write in their books?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

There is no evidence that is tenable if we deny the history that came with the said evidence. The evidence and the source are from the same stable. You can't pick and choose. Thus, as far as I am concerned, going by your reasoning,  the Transatlantic Slave Trade never happened because we have NO EVIDENCE in Africa to say that it did. The dungeons in those Forts and Castles were for prisoners who were later released.

In fact, the EVIDENCE we have strongly speaks against any such event happening. A few Europeans could not visit Africa thousand of miles from home and shipped off millions of alleged HELPLESS Africans to another country as slaves. That is just IMPOSSIBLE. Also, the Caucasians have no history of ever engaging in human trafficking before they set foot in Africa. The purpose for coming to Africa was to find an alternative route to India and trade in minerals. They had no prior knowledge of human trafficking. No time in their History did the British, Danes, the Spanish, the Dutch and the Portuguese engage in slavery. Thus, any suggestion that all of a sudden, out of the blue, they suddenly transformed into monstrous slavers is preposterous.
The black people in America have always been natives of America. Some of your own fellow African-Americans have confirmed this. The giant statutes with Negroid features found across America attest to this as fact.
This, my friend, is the conclusion we arrive at if you want to rewrite history by denying EVERYTHING from our Oral History and from the history books.

Finally, you seem to have a very unhealthy and distorted view of white people. Just as white people hate the KKK (racist whites), likewise the majority of black people hate their version among black people.

Link to comment
Share on other sites


Energy

 

 

There is no evidence that is tenable if we deny the history that came with the said evidence. The evidence and the source are from the same stable. You can't pick and choose. 

 

What IS "history" without the evidence to support it....besides only mythology, or just plain old lies?

 

If you are older than me, you can sit up here and tell me ANYTHING and call it "history"...... and I'll believe it if I'm silly enough.  
But a wise person will look for EVIDENCE of what you said before believing it.
I'm not going to call it a lie...I have no proof of that either..but I'm not going to call it the truth before I atleast find evidence; otherwise, you just told a "story" that may or may not be true.

 

 

 

 


Thus, as far as I am concerned, going by your reasoning,  the Transatlantic Slave Trade never happened because we have NO EVIDENCE in Africa to say that it did. The dungeons in those Forts and Castles were for prisoners who were later released.


In fact, the EVIDENCE we have strongly speaks against any such event happening.


I haven't been to Africa yet so I'm not in a position to argue what kind of evidence does or does not exist in Africa.
I know evidence of it exists in America.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 A few Europeans could not visit Africa thousand of miles from home and shipped off millions of alleged HELPLESS Africans to another country as slaves. That is just IMPOSSIBLE. 

 

It's possible if the Europeans (or any other group) are stronger or have better weapons.
Millions of people are of little match when paired of against merely thousands with superior weapons.

Now I wasn't around to witness what happened, but the fact that most European nations have superior weapons TODAY is EVIDENCE that they also had them several centuries ago.
Not proof, but evidence that supports it.

 

 

 

 


Also, the Caucasians have no history of ever engaging in human trafficking before they set foot in Africa.

 

You're wrong about that.
Whether it happened or not -- there is plenty of HISTORICAL DOCUMENTS and WRITINGS that make the claim they did!
 

First of all, it is alleged that ARABS came into Africa many centuries before the Europeans to capture and enslave Africans and use them for labor throughout the various empires.
Arabs come in various races, but most of them were allegedly Caucasian Arabs who initially came in and engaged in the trafficking.

And many centuries before that it is alleged through history that Caucasians invaded ancient India and slaughtered and enslaved the Dravidian people native to that land.

There is plenty of "history" of Caucasians engaging in slavery before Europeans did.

 

Infact, in the very Bible you believe in it talks about Solomon who is described as being a White man (not Black) and it mentions how he put the native Canaanites (those who weren't slaughtered) to work on building the temple.

 

 

 

 

 The purpose for coming to Africa was to find an alternative route to India and trade in minerals. They had no prior knowledge of human trafficking. No time in their History did the British, Danes, the Spanish, the Dutch and the Portuguese engage in slavery. 

 

Maybe not, but these weren't the ONLY Caucasians.
They are only a fraction of the Caucasian race.


That would be like saying, since there is no history of the Ewe and Wolof people engaging in warfare....that means there is no history of African people PERIOD engaging in warfare.

 

 

 

 

 


Thus, any suggestion that all of a sudden, out of the blue, they suddenly transformed into monstrous slavers is preposterous.
The black people in America have always been natives of America. Some of your own fellow African-Americans have confirmed this. 


The giant statutes with Negroid features found across America attest to this as fact.

 

How so?

Here are giant stone carvings of Caucasians on Mt. Rushmore in America

 

 

Mount Rushmore National Memorial (U.S. National Park Service)

 

 

 

Does THIS attest to the "fact" that Caucasians have always been in America?

 

A statue is a statue, not a time machine.

 

The fact is, there are MANY theories about those heads.
One of the theories I believe based on the evidence is that the West African Ghanaian King Mansa Musa's brother Abu Bakr and his crew of soldiers sailed across the Atlantic centuries before Columbus.  I have no proof of this, not even evidence...but I've heard the assertion and it's plausible.

 

Furthermore, most AfroAmericans who believe SOME Africans were here before Columbus (as I do) don't believe we were ALWAYS here but that we were here many many hundreds of years before Columbus.

Centuries does not  =  "always".

 

 

 


This, my friend, is the conclusion we arrive at if you want to rewrite history by denying EVERYTHING from our Oral History and from the history books.

 

I'm not confirming it OR denying it.
I hear and listen to it....but until solid evidence is produced one way or the other....it's just a story.

 

You and many other people on the other hand will accept "history"  without proof or even solid evidence to back it up and pass these same unbiased assertions and stories down from one generation to the next.

 

It's the same thing with RELIGIONS.
Too often people are tricked or forced into religions that have very little or no validity and they pass the same lies and fairytales down from one generation to the next and berate those who refuse to believe in them.


And usually in the case of African/AfroAmerican people...both the "history" and "religions" they believe in have the same common original source:  Some Caucasian who enslaved or colonized them.

 

 

 

 

 

Finally, you seem to have a very distorted view of white people.

 

How so?
Have I lied on them?

 

 

 

 


Just as white people hate the KKK (racist whites), likewise the majority of black people hate their version among black people.

 

How do you KNOW that White people hate the KKK and other racist Whites?
Have they TOLD you this?
What evidence do you have to support this, besides more wishful thinking and hoping for it to be true.

 

....again, making assertions without PROVING them or backing them up with EVIDENCE is the problem.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I am curious to know what evidence you have to support this statement you made. Not all Caucasians engaged in the Transatlantic Slave Trade. Those who did were namely, French, British, Danes, Dutch, Spanish and the Portuguese. Can you show me any time in History that these mentioned nations ever engaged in human trafficking/slavery?

 

6 minutes ago, Pioneer1 said:

Also, the Caucasians have no history of ever engaging in human trafficking before they set foot in Africa.

 

You're wrong about that.
Whether it happened or not -- there is plenty of HISTORICAL DOCUMENTS and WRITINGS that make the claim they did!
 

First of all, it is alleged that ARABS came into Africa many centuries before the Europeans to capture and enslave Africans and use them for labor throughout the various empires.
Arabs come in various races, but most of them were allegedly Caucasian Arabs who initially came in and engaged in the trafficking.

And many centuries before that it is alleged through history that Caucasians invaded ancient India and slaughtered and enslaved the Dravidian people native to that land.

There is plenty of "history" of Caucasians engaging in slavery before Europeans did.

 

Infact, in the very Bible you believe in it talks about Solomon who is described as being a White man (not Black) and it mentions how he put the native Canaanites (those who weren't slaughtered) to work on building the temple.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites


Energy

 

 

I am curious to know what evidence you have to support this statement you made. Not all Caucasians engaged in the Transatlantic Slave Trade.

 

Who made the statement that "all Caucasians" engaged in the slave trade?
 

 

 

Those who did were namely, French, British, Danes, Dutch, Spanish and the Portuguese. Can you show me any time in History that these mentioned nations ever engaged in human trafficking/slavery?

 

Well first, what do you mean can I show you "any time" in history?

There are plenty of historical documents of the British, Spanish, and Portuguese engaging in human trafficking and slavery.

Tell me EXACTLY what you're asking me to provide.


Also, wll you address the OTHER points I've made about the high standards of proof and evidence we should demand before simply accepting things told to us as "truth" or "facts"?
Or will you continue to ignore most of what I say and just drill on a point or two?
 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

35 minutes ago, Pioneer1 said:

Well first, what do you mean can I show you "any time" in history?

There are plenty of historical documents of the British, Spanish, and Portuguese engaging in human trafficking and slavery.

Tell me EXACTLY what you're asking me to provide.

Show me or refer me to these Historical documents please. These claims tells me you are unaware that Africans called MOORS ruled the Portuguese and Spaniards for 800 years. I know the History of these people from the time they first became nations starting from the Visigoths, Saxons, Celts, Gauls and the Vikings. I never read anything like you are claiming in their History so I find your claims intriguing. So can you mention or point me to these alleged historical documents that said they engaged in slavery or human trafficking any time in their history? What i am asking from you is the HIGH STANDARD, Historians like myself approach a subject before accepting any such claims as proof or fact. Provide the EVIDENCE.

Link to comment
Share on other sites


Energy

 

 

Show me or refer me to these Historical documents please. 

 

OK, thanks for the clarification...and I will:

 

Documentation of British involvement:
 

http://abolition.e2bn.org/slavery_45.html 


http://www.nationalarchives.gov.uk/slavery/pdf/britain-and-the-trade.pdf 


https://www.bl.uk/learning/histcitizen/campaignforabolition/abolitionbackground/abolitionintro.html 

 

 

image.png.2118bbe67d414d7ae6a42a67133c6869.png

 

 

image.thumb.png.8eadd5528131bf7c7ecd389e3f95b855.png

 

 

 

 

 

 

 


Documentation of Spanish involvement:
 

https://academic.oup.com/ahr/article/120/2/433/45569 


http://ldhi.library.cofc.edu/exhibits/show/african_laborers_for_a_new_emp/the_spanish_and_new_world_slav 


https://www.history.com/news/transatlantic-slave-first-ships-details 

 

 

image.png.51c0a5e5b0b34766331cffe6c3c35a33.png

 

 

image.png.b8e902adbe388dca78acf579a13b40a5.png

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 


Documentation of Portuguese involvement:


https://www.dw.com/en/portugal-commemoration-transatlantic-slave-trade/a-56976093 


http://ap.gilderlehrman.org/history-by-era/origins-slavery/essays/iberian-roots-transatlantic-slave-trade-1440–1640 


https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/abs/10.1177/0094582X8501200103?journalCode=lapa 

 

 


Now do you ACCEPT these links and pictures that I've provided for you as historical documents?

 

 

 

 


 These claims tells me you are unaware that Africans called MOORS ruled the Portuguese and Spaniards for 800 years. 
 

This statement makes no sense to me.


How does my statement that there are plenty of historical documents that support the role of Britain, Spain, and Portugal participated in human trafficking and slavery...which I just provided for you....express my LACK of knowledge of the Moors?

Does not mentioning them mean I am unaware of their existence or activities?


I didn't mention ancient Chinese or Aztec civilization either, does that mean I'm unaware of their existence or activities?

 

Your logic is puzzling.

 

 

 

 


 I know the History of these people from the time they first became nations starting from the Visigoths, Saxons, Celts, Gauls and the Vikings. I never read anything like you are claiming in their History so I find your claims intriguing.   So can you mention or point me to these alleged historical documents that said they engaged in slavery or human trafficking any time in their history?

With all due respect sir, it seems as if you're trying to CHANGE THE REQUEST.
 

First you request that I provide historical documentation on the role of the NATIONS of  Britain, Spain, Portugal in The Great Ma'afa.
NOW you're bringing up various ancient European TRIBES like the Celts and Gauls and asking for historical documentation of THEIR participation in it.
 

What next.... are you going to demand historical documentation on the CAVE MEN and GRIMALDIS and NEADERTHALS and their role in The Great Ma'afa as well????
 

You asked me for historical documentation on NATIONS of Britain, Spain, and Portugal and that is what I've provided for you.



 

 

 

Provide the EVIDENCE.

 

Again, it seems as you're attempting to CHANGE or MODIFY your request!

First you asked for HISTORICAL DOCUMENTATION, and now you're demanding EVIDENCE.

Historical documentation isn't NECESSARILY evidence.

In some cases it is....
In other cases it isn't....

It depends on the documents.
 

At any rate, you asked for historical documentation and I provided them for you.
 

Does this satisfy your initial request?
And if not, why not?

 

 

 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

What is this? Did you understand the question? I asked for EVIDENCE that says any of the said countries had engaged in human trafficking BEFORE they came to Africa? Europeans first set foot in West Africa in 1471. I am asking you when in their History before 1471 did any of the Europeans nations that took part in the Transatlantic Slave Trade ever in their history engage in Human trafficking? That is the question I asked and you kept insisting that there is documentary evidence that they did. Show me this evidence?

Let me make the question simple for you. Before 1471 when Europeans first set foot in West Africa, did any of the Countries involved in the Transatlantic Slave Trade ever engaged in human trafficking in their history? Yes or No?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Energy

 

 

What is this?

 

It's giving you the Historical Documentation of the British, Spanish, and Portuguese involvement in human trafficking and slavery that you asked for.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 Did you understand the question? 

 

Yes I understood the question, and I even asked you for CLARIFCATION to make sure I understood it!

 

I asked you to tell me EXACTLY what you're asking me to provide, and you said: 
 

"Show me or refer me to these Historical documents please. These claims tells me..... "

You specifically asked for historical documentation.

 

 

 

 

 

 

I asked for EVIDENCE that says any of the said countries had engaged in human trafficking BEFORE they came to Africa? 

 

NO YOU DID NOT!

 

Again, in reference to THOSE NATIONS (Britain, Spain, Portugal) you asked for HISTORICAL DOCUMENTATION of their involvement in human trafficking and slavery, NOT EVIDENCE.   
Then LATER ON in that same paragraph you started talking about various ancient European TRIBES like the Saxons, Celts, ect...and their history and asked for evidence in THEIR involvement in slavery.  Here is exactly what you wrote:

"  I know the History of these people from the time they first became nations starting from the Visigoths, Saxons, Celts, Gauls and the Vikings. I never read anything like you are claiming in their History so I find your claims intriguing. So can you mention or point me to these alleged historical documents that said they engaged in slavery or human trafficking any time in their history? What i am asking from you is the HIGH STANDARD, Historians like myself approach a subject before accepting any such claims as proof or fact. Provide the EVIDENCE."

 

🤔Something I found very strange since we weren't talking about these tribes.  We were talking about the NATIONS of Britain, Spain, and Portugal.

 

You were attempting to make a STRAWMAN ARGUMENT over something we weren't discussing by changing the focus from the roles of Britain, Spain, and Portugal and focusing it on a bunch of half-organized ancient European tribes who just came out of the caves and tried to tie THEM into the role of enslaving Africans.
 

This is why I kept the focus on the SUBJECT at hand, the role of Britain, Spain, and Portugal.
 

 

 

 

 

 

Europeans first set foot in West Africa in 1471. I am asking you when in their History before 1471 did any of the Europeans nations that took part in the Transatlantic Slave Trade ever in their history engage in Human trafficking? That is the question I asked and you kept insisting that there is documentary evidence that they did. Show me this evidence?
 

All of this is irrelevant STRAWMAN ARGUING.

No one is talking about exactly when Europeans came to West Africa or who the Gauls and the Visgoths were.
That argument is neither here nor there.
The question was - could I provide documentation of the roles that  England, Spain, and Portugal played in the TransAtlantic Slave Trade.


And I provided you with links to those documents as well as pictures.

 


Remember you said:
Those who did were namely, French, British, Danes, Dutch, Spanish and the Portuguese. Can you show me any time in History that these mentioned nations ever engaged in human trafficking/slavery?

 

 

You said ANY TIME IN HISTORY....now all of a sudden you are trying to modify your request with specific dates before or after.

All of this crap about when the first White man set foot on West African soil, who was Queen of the Visgoths and how she loved her eggs fixed in the morning, or how many ships the Vikings had at their disposal are just diversion and distraction tactics.
 

You asked me a direct question, and I provided you with direct answers.
 

 

 

 


Let me make the question simple for you. Before 1471 when Europeans first set foot in West Africa, did any of the Countries involved in the Transatlantic Slave Trade ever engaged in human trafficking in their history? Yes or No?
 

A totally different question all together from the one you asked in your previous posts.

I've provided you with information you requested on England, Spain, and Portugal.  Infact, I've been answering YOUR questions directly since you started this thread....now it's about time you start paying me the same respect!


I'm not going to entertain any more of your questions UNTIL you stop ducking and dodging and bouncing around the ring trying to avoid  MINE.
 

Since this thread is about Biblical matters, let me start with 2 simple ones:
 

Have YOU or anyone you PERSONALLY KNOW had direct communication with anyO/one in the Bible?


And-


Have YOU or anyone you PERSONALLY KNOW had any direct communication with anyone who had a part in actually WRITING the Bible?

Since I've answer many of your questions, how about you answer my two...and we can continue with mutual respect.


 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

LOL. I am answering your questions by going back to the history of the Transatlantic slave trade to show how ridiculous your position is in denying events in history that sounds unpalatable to your ears.
Take a look at the quote and compare it to the attached below, which is a screenshot of your last statements. Can you see the SIMILARITY in the question I asked? What you say is a totally different question is exactly the SAME QUESTION I have been asking you throughout. You have even highlighted it in red, which is very helpful. It shows CLEARLY that all I asked you was, show when and where those Europeans involved in the Transatlantic Slave trade, ever in their History engaged in human trafficking BEFORE arriving in West Africa. It is there, you can see it because you yourself highlighted it in RED. You run from answering the question and now accusing me of engaging in a strawman. No Sir, I am not. Below is the EVIDENCE and it is pitched against you. It is damning.
 

17 hours ago, Pioneer1 said:

Also, the Caucasians have no history of ever engaging in human trafficking before they set foot in Africa.

 

You're wrong about that.
Whether it happened or not -- there is plenty of HISTORICAL DOCUMENTS and WRITINGS that make the claim they did!
 

First of all, it is alleged that ARABS came into Africa many centuries before the Europeans to capture and enslave Africans and use them for labor throughout the various empires.
Arabs come in various races, but most of them were allegedly Caucasian Arabs who initially came in and engaged in the trafficking.

And many centuries before that it is alleged through history that Caucasians invaded ancient India and slaughtered and enslaved the Dravidian people native to that land.

There is plenty of "history" of Caucasians engaging in slavery before Europeans did.

 

Infact, in the very Bible you believe in it talks about Solomon who is described as being a White man (not Black) and it mentions how he put the native Canaanites (those who weren't slaughtered) to work on building the temple.

 

Screenshot 2021-04-20 at 06.53.01.png

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 4/19/2021 at 10:28 AM, Energy said:

Before 1471 when Europeans first set foot in West Africa, did any of the Countries involved in the Transatlantic Slave Trade ever engaged in human trafficking in their history?

 

@Pioneer1 this is a perfectly valid and simple question which you have failed to directly answer.  It is very similar to the one I posed to you about the existence of racism prior to race based slave trade.

 

Also, you should check out the comments on the video you posted one commenter made a point of critiquing the speak on how they were pronouncing the names of people.

 

Afrika Diaspora Teacher

3 months ago

"Learn the proper pronunciations and that could make your research very authentic. Names have meanings so when you butcher them, they lose their meaning. Respectfully call people and places by their proper name and pronunciations. There's no one called Togbui Ewenya. The closest pronunciation is Vwhenya. The Evwheh people did not get their name from Togbui Vwhenya, the Evwheh got their name rather from the God of Thunder and Lightening called YEVWHEH."

 

Now I don't know who is right, but the video does not prove anything. Indeed if you consider your source, some guy in a tee shirt in his foyer.  Who is he what are his credentials?  You give him less credit than someone who has written multiple books on the subject.  I'm not saying everything in a book is tru

 

For a new comer I have to admit @Energy is living up to his name -- he has demonstrated a energy and patience to go toe-to-toe with Pioneer.

 

It would be interesting to read what @Chevdove would have to say on this subject.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Energy

 


Pardon me, but was their an ANSWER to atleast one of my questions in your post?

 

If it was, I must have missed it...lol.

If not, there's no need for me to repeat myself...my questions remain up their in bold letters to be answered.

 

 

 

 

 

Troy

 

this is a perfectly valid and simple question which you have failed to directly answer.  It is very similar to the one I posed to you about the existence of racism prior to race based slave trade.

 

Well first of all this is a DIFFERENT question than the one he originally asked.  It has dates and African locations, where as the original question  requested documentation of certain nation's involvement and they were GIVEN to him.
 

Second...and this is the most important point....it's not the question in and of itself that's the problem.  It's the high probability that answering THIS question would not resolve the issue anyway. Even if I were to answer it he'd ignore the answer and move on to another point.  Because there is no "real" issue outside of attempting to win the "argument" and divert attention from the validity of Biblical scriptures as it relates to African people....and focus it on everything else BUT that as a diversionary tactic.


There's nothing impressive about bait-n-switch and diversion.

 

 

 

 

 

 

Now I don't know who is right, but the video does not prove anything. Indeed if you consider your source, some guy in a tee shirt in his foyer.  Who is he what are his credentials?  You give him less credit than someone who has written multiple books on the subject. 

 

Energy can correct me if I'm wrong but I understood him as saying he wrote books on how Africans are related to the Hebrews of The Bible...not on the Ewe language and culture in specific.

 

Now I produced the video because it shows an Ewe man actually pronouncing the word "Ewe".

 

If you listen to it at the 1:55 minute mark, you'll hear him pronounce it as either:  Eh-weh  or  Eh-veh

 

But the most common way he pronounces it is Eh-weh


Here's ANOTHER video of an Ewe young lady who pronounces it the same way:

 

 

 

 

In NEITHER of the videos do I hear them pronounce it as "Erverh".

 

You don't hear an "r" sound in any pronounciation.


So why one would one take a word the is clearly pronunced as Eh-weh and spell it as "Erverh"...except to cause confusion?

 

 

My point for bringing that up was a lot of time people from other nations come to the West and ALLOW Caucasians to mispell and mispronounce their names and languages and not even try to correct them but allow the confusion to continue generation after generation.

The word "Mexico" is a good example of this.

 

 

 

 

 


For a new coming I have to admit @Energy is living up to his name -- he has demonstrated a energy and patience to go toe-to-toe with Pioneer.

 

He also seems to be a great DANCER too.
 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Energy
 

So in other words,

Instead of showing MUTUAL RESPECT and answering some of my questions so that I can answer MORE of yours.....
 

You accuse people of being dishonest and run out of the door.

But before you go you post some link to "wikipedia" as if  IT is a better source on how to pronounce "Ewe" than the Ewe people actually SPEAKING it???
 

I don't need to read some wikipedia article on how to pronounce "Ewe" correctly when I can just as easily HEAR the people say it for themselves.

 

This is my point about some of our people putting more faith in Caucasians and what THEY say than in your own people.

Why do you need a Caucasian to TELL you how to spell and pronounce your own language?????
 

It's clearly pronounced "Eh-weh".

It's as clear as day.  As clear as a bell ringing.
 

There is no "r" sound in it.

 

But because a Caucasian (White man) TOLD you to spell it "Erverh" - you're gonna just ignore common sense and spell it the way HE told you to!
 

((shakes head))


This mentality is what allows him to come to YOUR country and tell you that YOUR traditional religion was wrong and give you  HIS religion and The Bible and tell you THAT is the book you should read and believe in...and you went for it!

Imagine people from Nigeria or Zimbabwe sailing to England and telling the Queen of England and the other British that what THEY believe in is wrong and that they should convert to traditional African religion.  How well would that fair?


Take control of YOUR OWN MIND brother.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 hours ago, Energy said:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ewe_language

This is my last comment. I am out of here. The dishonesty is too much for my liking

.



Let the record show that Energy decided to leave on his own FREE WILL

He wasn't banned (infact the Administrator came on and gave him a compliment that he refused to even acknowledge), he wasn't harassed, nor was he restricted from expressing himself in any way, shape, or form.
He CHOSE to leave.

I post this so that it's on record so that people can't run around saying they were "harassed" or "banned" from AALBC or make blanket statements about how they are no longer allowed to speak their mind on "the internet".

No

People pick and choose which platforms they decide to frequent and focus their "energy" on.
So if Twitter of Facebook or Clubhouse bans you or restricts your content...don't cry about "the internet" doing it, it's those Caucasian operated platforms YOU CHOSE to patronize and place value on that did it to you. 
You had the opportunity to patronize Black sites (for FREE....Troy is nice, I'd CHARGE some of your sorry asses to peddle your books on my site...lol) but you dismissed and ignored them.
 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Del  

 

Lol.....how can one get tired of something they weren't doing?

 

His agenda was clear: to push the idea that the Bible was written by Black people

He wasn't trying to hear anything that contradicted that narrative.

 

That's what religion tends to do to our people.

It causes friction in the U.S., in the Carribean, and if you go through out African nations you'll find entire regions of our people FIGHTING eachother over and in the name of religion....both sides CONVINCED that they are right and the other side is wrong and are worthy of death.

In most of this fighting, none stop and take 5 minutes to consider WHERE their information came from.
Since they didn't personally see the books being written...question WHO may have wrote the book or given the religious information.
They just BELIEVE it and haul off putting their all into defending it.

You don't see Caucasians fighting like that over religion anymore because many of them are smart enough to know that most religions were MADE UP from the hands of other men...thus contain too many errors to kill eachother over.
They fight....but most don't do it  over religion anymore.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 4/21/2021 at 8:45 AM, Pioneer1 said:

I post this so that it's on record so that people can't run around saying they were "harassed" or "banned" from AALBC or make blanket statements about how they are no longer allowed to speak their mind on "the internet".

 

Pioneer, the need for you to post this disclaimer tells me that that you felt it was necessary, but more importantly that the perception that @Energy was run off the forum by you is plausible. 

 

Now I could see you challenging @Delano or me in that fashion, but we have seen your antics for years, know what to expect, and are not gonna take it personally.  However, a newbie is less likely to tolerate it -- not out the gate.  So the comment, "I am out of here." was not surprising at all.  Indeed, I'm surprised it did not happen earlier.

 

I did not read the exchange deeply, but I thought Jesus the Christ was Black and that the people who wrote the original Bible were Black too.  We know the versions of the bible read today were written by white folks most notably the KJV. Was Energy completely wrong about that? 

 

As far has the pronunciation of words why challenge a native speaker, who has studied the language?  But we know you have no problem challenge people who demonstrably know more about a given subject -- especially scientists.

 

Was anyone (including you Pioneer) happy with the exchange, and more importantly, the outcome of this exchange?

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Troy


Now I could see you challenging @Delano or me in that fashion, but we have seen your antics for years, know what to expect, and are not gonna take it personally.  However, a newbie is less likely to tolerate it -- not out the gate.  So the comment, "I am out of here." was not surprising at all.  Indeed, I'm surprised it did not happen earlier.

 

I'm not surprised either.  I saw it coming.

 

But not because of anything I said or planned on saying to drive him away, but because he was coming from a religious angle.

Usually when people come with religious convictions they can't stand ANY challenge to their ideology or doctrine no matter how respectful and intelligently argued that challenge is presented to them.  But even more problematic about his reaction is that it's not uncommon among many Black men today and I find that a bit bothersome.
Let me explain......


Keep in mind Troy and I must point out again:


a) He wasn't harassed (followed from one thread to the next being badgered and trolled)

 

b) He wasn't called any names

 

c) You actually commented him on his stamina to go rounds with me...which he didn't seem to even acknowlege (unless he did it to you through PM)

d) He wasn't threatened or warned.

 

e) There wasn't even any cussing involved...lol

 


His ideas were simply CHALLENGED by another poster, and that alone was enough to seize his attention and deplete all of his patience to the point he got frustrated and left.

Think about that.
What does that say to you about a man's character and emotional strength?

 

 

He said he wrote a number of best-seller books and was an author.   If he didn't appreciate my words or even my presence he could have just as easily ignored me (as many of the member do...lol) or posted in one of the many other sections of this site (that I intentionally stay out of) to promote his books and ideas...but he didn't.
Instead he focused on maintaining a back and forth with me until he reached the point of frustration, then made the emotion-driven decision to pack up his toys and scamper off.

 

But the reason this situation gets me is because it's not just about Energy...
We saw this same thing with Kareem and we also saw it with Stefan.
 

You see this "just get emotional and run away" attitude too much among many AfroAmerican men lately, and it bothers me.

It bothers me because it implies that they are either too stupid to defend themselves let alone fight intellectually....which is usually not the case...or emotionally weak and immature.

 

Most intellectually strong people don't get emotional and run away from a challenge.  They tend to stay and stand their ground by either bringing a wealth of information to defend their position AND/OR humiliating their opposition with sarcasm and wit.  

 

You mentioned him being new.  Where I'm from it was the NEW kids on the block who tried ESPECIALLY HARD to establish a powerful repuation...lol.

The newest cat on the block who just moved into the neighborhood BETTER NOT run from a challenge...or he may as well just stay in the house until he turns 21 and moves out....to a DIFFERENT CITY, lol.

 

 

 

*I'm a little busy at the moment but I plan to finish on your other points and answer your questions in another post.

Link to comment
Share on other sites


Troy

 

 

Pioneer, the need for you to post this disclaimer tells me that that you felt it was necessary, but more importantly that the perception that @Energy was run off the forum by you is plausible. 

 

 

It's human nature to want to be right, but many of our people take it to another level by having absolute CONVICTION of their beliefs without even considering that they are wrong.  Some people react violently at being challenged, others make threats, but the most common reaction among a lot of our people is simply AVOIDING those they disagree with or who challenge their views.

This isn't necessarily a bad thing, as it helps to cut down on conflict.  But this could also lead to 2 problems:


1. Some of our people never learn real effective CONFLICT RESOLUTION and how to work out differences with others because they're always packing up and running away instead of making earnest efforts to get along.
 

2. If you never consider the fact that you MAY be wrong, how can you ever be corrected and get it right?

If you study our exchange, not once did Energy concede on ANY of my points or consider he may have been wrong or mistaken in any of his.

If I have a belief about something and every time I'm challenged on that belief and told it was wrong I fold my arms and turn my back on the person or simply leave the room.....how will my error EVER be corrected?


I bring this up because again....
What I find problematic is this is MORE than just Energy's behavior but Kareem and Stefan and many other AfroAmerican men around the internet and even in real life have expressed the same emotional response of shutting-off or tuning-out all opposition to their convictions.

 

 

 


I did not read the exchange deeply, but I thought Jesus the Christ was Black and that the people who wrote the original Bible were Black too.  We know the versions of the bible read today were written by white folks most notably the KJV. Was Energy completely wrong about that? 

 

For one thing, he didn't SAY any of that.
He didn't qualify it or detail it like you just did...he made a blanket statement that "Black people wrote the bible" and called it a FACT.

Further, when I tried to shed more light and greater detail on the issue by pointing out that the Bible was a COLLECTION of books written in different languages over different periods of time (the Greeks who wrote much of the New Testament certainly weren't Black)....he REFUSED acknowledge or engage in that more academic conversation.  

 

 

 

 

As far has the pronunciation of words why challenge a native speaker, who has studied the language?  But we know you have no problem challenge people who demonstrably know more about a given subject -- especially scientists.

 

1. We (or atleast I) don't know for sure he that IS a native speaker.
He didn't stick around long enough for us to know much about him and whether he was telling the truth about himself and his credentials. 
I'm not saying that to cast doubt on him or his credentials...just being honest.
 

I mean....
The man dropped a link to WIKIPEDIA on the "Ewe" language as his departing gesture.
Lol, what does that tell you? 


He also made statements about the Europeans rescuing his people from cannibalism and savagery or something to that effect..which I find highly suspicious for an African to say.

 

 

 


 

Was anyone (including you Pioneer) happy with the exchange, and more importantly, the outcome of this exchange?


I wasn't satisfied with it.
I love talking to Africans from the continent and IF he was truly an African (and that's an "if") I would have enjoyed an exchange.


However, I'm not a psychiatrist or psychologist.
As with the case with Stefan, if you think you know everything and are so sensitive and emotional that any challenge or disagreement brings out rage or disillusionment to the point you'd rather throw up your hands and exit the building than spend another minute with someone who disagrees with what you believe to be the "gospel truth"....I can't force you to.

 

At one point in the conversation Energy called me rude or disrespectful. I apologized for it and told him that wasn't my intention. He didn't even acknowledge it, but continued to be confrontational.  Not conceding another person's apologies or any good points they may have made during an exchange is one of the SURE SIGNS of emotional immaturity.

 

I remember during one exchange Chevdove told me I was being disrespectful.  I apologized and told her that wasn't my intention and she acknowledged it and moved on.

 

Daniel got upset over you suggesting he was a liar but you made it clear that it wasn't an insult or personal and he got past it and you two continue in relative harmony.  He didn't storm off and leave, he bounced off the wall and went back to pushing his Conservative philosophy and promoting his books..lol.

 

It's called being a "grown up" who is not only physically and intellectually mature but EMOTIONALLY stable and mature.
 

It's called understanding life and learning how to get along with people with different personalities and ways of thinking.

 

I'm curious to know if Energy is married. 
Not that I'm interested in him...lol...but women will sometimes INTENTIONALLY hound you and challenge you over the pettiest of shit or do things just to get an emotional rise out of you.


If you don't have the patience and emotional maturity to tolerate a conversation online....it makes me wonder if you have the patience and emotional maturity to deal with the games women will often play.

Link to comment
Share on other sites


🙄After reading through the thread, I have to admit that my FIRST post was indeed on the harsh and confrontational side.
I take responsibility for that.

 

 

 

@Troy

You know, I JUST saw your latest post in this thread?

It shows that it is two hours old, but for some reason it JUST showed up in the thread.....or atleast I just saw it.
I'm not sure what's going on but there seems to be a serious time delay somewhere.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 hours ago, Pioneer1 said:

not once did Energy concede on ANY of my points or consider he may have been wrong or mistaken in any of his.


...hummm where have I’ve seen that before? 😉

 

11 hours ago, Pioneer1 said:

He also made statements about the Europeans rescuing his people from cannibalism and savagery or something to that effect..which I find highly suspicious for an African to say.


That sounds like racist troll crap to me.

 

11 hours ago, Pioneer1 said:

If you don't have the patience and emotional maturity to tolerate a conversation online...

 

The younger generation and I suspect energy is younger than both you and I. The younger generation is far more  sensitive and easily “triggered.” We used to call men like this “pussies,” but that would not be politically correct today.

 

It is very annoying in the real world and part of the reason social media, in general, is so powerful because one can easily exclude people, thoughts, and ideas that conflict with your worldview — even if they are factual.

 

You know I have no problem with someone who gets upset with the conflicting idea and runs away, but I say let’s give newbies, who demonstrate a willingness to engage, some space before you tear them apart — at least two posts 🙂

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites


Troy

 

 

hummm where have I’ve seen that before

 

Not from me.
I admit my errors when they are CLEARLY SHOWN to me.

 

Now, you can't come to me with a different OPINION and call it a "fact" and just expect me to just lay down and concede, lol.

You must PROVE that you're correct.

 

 

 

 

That sounds like racist troll crap to me.

 

Well, this is a direct quote from one of his earliest posts:

Quote


Not in in Central or West Africa. European colonisation saved us from many of the terrible practices we the natives were practising, which included Slavery, Cannibalism and Human Sacrifice. If you disagree, then I will love to see your EVIDENCE to the contrary


I haven't heard an African talk like that before, even the ones who dye their hair blonde, get online, and ask for wealthy men from Europe to come and marry them and get them out of poverty don't talk like that.


It sounded kind of odd.


Not sure if you remember when he first came on, but at first he didn't have a picture in his avatar.  That picture of a Black man was introduced later on after he had posted 6 or 7 times.
But perhaps he really IS a brother who just thinks like that.

 

 

 

 

 

It is very annoying in the real world and part of the reason social media, in general, is so powerful because one can easily exclude people, thoughts, and ideas that conflict with your worldview — even if they are factual.

 

When it first came out, the internet brought more people from all over the world together.
But when social media became the dominant means of communication it began making people more selfish, self-centered, and isolated.

 

I've seen entire religious movements....with only ONE MEMBER...on some Youtube channels!

 

People are getting on Instagram while on the toilet having conversations, wiping, flushing the toilet, not to be vulgar or rude but just not caring!

 

 

 


You know I have no problem with someone who gets upset with the conflicting idea and runs away, but I say let’s give newbies, who demonstrate a willingness to engage, some space before you tear them apart — at least two posts

 

Duly noted
I keep saying I'm not going to argue with other Black people over history and religion anyway, but the topics are too tempting.
But I should practice more discipline over my behavior.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

21 minutes ago, Pioneer1 said:

I admit my errors when they are CLEARLY SHOWN to me.

 

That statement defies credulity as you consistently reject the findings of the scientific community, on race, medicine, genetics, climate change, geology, etc...

 

The statement @Energy made, "European colonisation saved us from many of the terrible practices we the natives were practising, which included Slavery, Cannibalism and Human Sacrifice." is a classic racist troll talking point.  It is rather odd he would write that.  Are trolls becoming that much more sophisticated?

 

26 minutes ago, Pioneer1 said:

But I should practice more discipline over my behavior.

 

Actually once Energy wrote the crap about European colonists "saving," Africans, the gloves need to come off. No one who says something like that deserves any mercy -- for real!

  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites


Troy

 

I considered he may indeed be a troll, but like you said he was also pushing the idea of Black people being Hebrews and Biblical people which is a pretty popular concept and ideology among Black people....especially Christians...around the world.

Maybe he used it as a cover.

 

Another thing is he spelled "practice" as "practise" which tells me he probably comes from an English speaking nation OUTSIDE of the United States.

 

 

 

That statement defies credulity as you consistently reject the findings of the scientific community, on race, medicine, genetics, climate change, geology, etc...

 

Lol, well then I guess I'll get off of Energy and get on YOU now.

I don't necessarily reject the findings of the "scientific community".  
I'm SUSPICIOUS of the findings and information coming from CAUCASIANS who claim to be scientists.
You must understand the difference.
 

Why?
Because many of them have a history of lying and providing false/inaccurate information.

They have very little credibility after being caught lying so much.
 

Science is supposed to be the collection of KNOWLEDGE and FACTS.
If you haven't experienced it, observed it, or know anyone who HAS to confirm whether or not it's the truth.....why do you put so much faith in it?
 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Troy

 

 

So you reject all scientific findings for this reason?!

 

No.
However we need to have a clear definition of what IS and what IS NOT "science".


MY definition of science is a system of collecting and organizing knowledge and facts.
It would be foolish to reject knowledge and facts.



 

Do you believe the world is flat too?
 

No.
A world.....being a concept....has no physical shape.
It's a collection of systems.

 

Western world
Islamic world
Financial world
ect.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Man you are talking out of both sides of your neck, with a forked tongue.

 

You can’t make up your own definition of science and use it to reject science. You have previously rejected science because white people are in it.

 

When I said the “world” I was talking about the planet earth, Not some concept. So do you believe that the planet earth is flat?

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...