Oops!

[metalman]

A ?Christian? who believes Jesus is a black Marxist rebel!

Jesus black? Looking at the historic region Jesus was much blacker than the blue eyed, blonde haired aryan which he's frequently illustrated ase in our society. And likely much blacker then the current people which reside in the region.

Judas had to point Jesus out to those arresting him. This implies that Jesus' physical appearance did not differ from his disciples.

a forensic reconstruction of a typical Galilean Semite

Christians as Marxists? Again looking at history early Christian societies tended to be communal. They were clearly more Marxist in nature then capitalistic.

The Gospel does not make goods common, except in the case of those who do of their own free will what the apostles and disciples did in Acts IV. They did not demand, as do our insane peasants in their raging, that the goods of others - of a Pilate and a Herod - should be common, but only their own goods. Our peasants, however, would have other men's goods common, and keep their own goods for themselves. Fine Christians these! I think there is not a devil left in hell; they have all gone into the peasants."

The goals of Black Liberation Theology are to turn religion into sociology and Christianity into a political agenda. BLT is only interested in politics, not preaching the gospel of the Bible and personal salvation. BLT images Jesus as Che Guevara.

The understanding of the Bible that orthodox Christian's have is that Jesus did indeed associate with the downtrodden and the oppressed, but He was interested in their souls, not in their politics. The zealots of Jesus' day were looking for a militant Messiah, and Jesus did not fit the bill, nor did He ally Himself with them or their cause.

 

[metalman]

A ?Christian? who believes Jesus is a black Marxist rebel!

Jesus black? Looking at the historic region Jesus was much blacker than the blue eyed, blonde haired aryan which he's frequently illustrated ase in our society. And likely much blacker then the current people which reside in the region.

Judas had to point Jesus out to those arresting him. This implies that Jesus' physical appearance did not differ from his disciples.

a forensic reconstruction of a typical Galilean Semite

Christians as Marxists? Again looking at history early Christian societies tended to be communal. They were clearly more Marxist in nature then capitalistic.

The Gospel does not make goods common, except in the case of those who do of their own free will what the apostles and disciples did in Acts IV. They did not demand, as do our insane peasants in their raging, that the goods of others - of a Pilate and a Herod - should be common, but only their own goods. Our peasants, however, would have other men's goods common, and keep their own goods for themselves. Fine Christians these! I think there is not a devil left in hell; they have all gone into the peasants."

The goals of Black Liberation Theology are to turn religion into sociology and Christianity into a political agenda. BLT is only interested in politics, not preaching the gospel of the Bible and personal salvation. BLT images Jesus as Che Guevara.

The understanding of the Bible that orthodox Christian's have is that Jesus did indeed associate with the downtrodden and the oppressed, but He was interested in their souls, not in their politics. The zealots of Jesus' day were looking for a militant Messiah, and Jesus did not fit the bill, nor did He ally Himself with them or their cause.

 

[metalman]

A ?Christian? who believes Jesus is a black Marxist rebel!

Jesus black? Looking at the historic region Jesus was much blacker than the blue eyed, blonde haired aryan which he's frequently illustrated ase in our society. And likely much blacker then the current people which reside in the region.

Judas had to point Jesus out to those arresting him. This implies that Jesus' physical appearance did not differ from his disciples.

a forensic reconstruction of a typical Galilean Semite

Christians as Marxists? Again looking at history early Christian societies tended to be communal. They were clearly more Marxist in nature then capitalistic.

The Gospel does not make goods common, except in the case of those who do of their own free will what the apostles and disciples did in Acts IV. They did not demand, as do our insane peasants in their raging, that the goods of others - of a Pilate and a Herod - should be common, but only their own goods. Our peasants, however, would have other men's goods common, and keep their own goods for themselves. Fine Christians these! I think there is not a devil left in hell; they have all gone into the peasants."

The goals of Black Liberation Theology are to turn religion into sociology and Christianity into a political agenda. BLT is only interested in politics, not preaching the gospel of the Bible and personal salvation. BLT images Jesus as Che Guevara.

The understanding of the Bible that orthodox Christian's have is that Jesus did indeed associate with the downtrodden and the oppressed, but He was interested in their souls, not in their politics. The zealots of Jesus' day were looking for a militant Messiah, and Jesus did not fit the bill, nor did He ally Himself with them or their cause.

 

[metalman]

A ?Christian? who believes Jesus is a black Marxist rebel!

Jesus black? Looking at the historic region Jesus was much blacker than the blue eyed, blonde haired aryan which he's frequently illustrated ase in our society. And likely much blacker then the current people which reside in the region.

Judas had to point Jesus out to those arresting him. This implies that Jesus' physical appearance did not differ from his disciples.

a forensic reconstruction of a typical Galilean Semite

Christians as Marxists? Again looking at history early Christian societies tended to be communal. They were clearly more Marxist in nature then capitalistic.

The Gospel does not make goods common, except in the case of those who do of their own free will what the apostles and disciples did in Acts IV. They did not demand, as do our insane peasants in their raging, that the goods of others - of a Pilate and a Herod - should be common, but only their own goods. Our peasants, however, would have other men's goods common, and keep their own goods for themselves. Fine Christians these! I think there is not a devil left in hell; they have all gone into the peasants."

The goals of Black Liberation Theology are to turn religion into sociology and Christianity into a political agenda. BLT is only interested in politics, not preaching the gospel of the Bible and personal salvation. BLT images Jesus as Che Guevara.

The understanding of the Bible that orthodox Christian's have is that Jesus did indeed associate with the downtrodden and the oppressed, but He was interested in their souls, not in their politics. The zealots of Jesus' day were looking for a militant Messiah, and Jesus did not fit the bill, nor did He ally Himself with them or their cause.

 

[faethor]

Judas had to point Jesus out to those arresting him. This implies that Jesus' physical appearance did not differ from his disciples.

a forensic reconstruction of a typical Galilean Semite

So we agree that this more typical view of Jesus isn't likely.

The Gospel does not make goods common, except in the case of those who do of their own free will what the apostles and disciples did in Acts IV. They did not demand, as do our insane peasants in their raging, that the goods of others - of a Pilate and a Herod - should be common, but only their own goods. Our peasants, however, would have other men's goods common, and keep their own goods for themselves. Fine Christians these! I think there is not a devil left in hell; they have all gone into the peasants."

Don't know what to say but of course. Clearly Martin Luther was not an early Christian so it's not really a counterpoint to my statement. By the time Martin Luther entered the fold Catholicism was a well constructed center power. I think if you read the Gospels you'll find that the theocracitic subjectation of people was not the sort of thing Jesus was trying to bring about.

While Martin Luther did post his 99 Thesis on the church door it was to improve the church not break it apart. He spent many years in the twilight of his life trying to reunite the church. And of course with this would be the continuation of the church's control and dicatation to society.

The goals of Black Liberation Theology are to turn religion into sociology and Christianity into a political agenda. BLT is only interested in politics, not preaching the gospel of the Bible and personal salvation. BLT images Jesus as Che Guevara.

Yup nutters everywhere. Seems that even more influencial might be a certain End of Days church in Alaska that a certain female VP was part of.

The understanding of the Bible that orthodox Christian's have is that Jesus did indeed associate with the downtrodden and the oppressed, but He was interested in their souls, not in their politics. The zealots of Jesus' day were looking for a militant Messiah, and Jesus did not fit the bill, nor did He ally Himself with them or their cause.

Okay and yet the Catholic church of Martin Luther used Jesus for more militant oppression of the masses.

 

[faethor]

Judas had to point Jesus out to those arresting him. This implies that Jesus' physical appearance did not differ from his disciples.

a forensic reconstruction of a typical Galilean Semite

So we agree that this more typical view of Jesus isn't likely.

The Gospel does not make goods common, except in the case of those who do of their own free will what the apostles and disciples did in Acts IV. They did not demand, as do our insane peasants in their raging, that the goods of others - of a Pilate and a Herod - should be common, but only their own goods. Our peasants, however, would have other men's goods common, and keep their own goods for themselves. Fine Christians these! I think there is not a devil left in hell; they have all gone into the peasants."

Don't know what to say but of course. Clearly Martin Luther was not an early Christian so it's not really a counterpoint to my statement. By the time Martin Luther entered the fold Catholicism was a well constructed center power. I think if you read the Gospels you'll find that the theocracitic subjectation of people was not the sort of thing Jesus was trying to bring about.

While Martin Luther did post his 99 Thesis on the church door it was to improve the church not break it apart. He spent many years in the twilight of his life trying to reunite the church. And of course with this would be the continuation of the church's control and dicatation to society.

The goals of Black Liberation Theology are to turn religion into sociology and Christianity into a political agenda. BLT is only interested in politics, not preaching the gospel of the Bible and personal salvation. BLT images Jesus as Che Guevara.

Yup nutters everywhere. Seems that even more influencial might be a certain End of Days church in Alaska that a certain female VP was part of.

The understanding of the Bible that orthodox Christian's have is that Jesus did indeed associate with the downtrodden and the oppressed, but He was interested in their souls, not in their politics. The zealots of Jesus' day were looking for a militant Messiah, and Jesus did not fit the bill, nor did He ally Himself with them or their cause.

Okay and yet the Catholic church of Martin Luther used Jesus for more militant oppression of the masses.

 

[faethor]

Judas had to point Jesus out to those arresting him. This implies that Jesus' physical appearance did not differ from his disciples.

a forensic reconstruction of a typical Galilean Semite

So we agree that this more typical view of Jesus isn't likely.

The Gospel does not make goods common, except in the case of those who do of their own free will what the apostles and disciples did in Acts IV. They did not demand, as do our insane peasants in their raging, that the goods of others - of a Pilate and a Herod - should be common, but only their own goods. Our peasants, however, would have other men's goods common, and keep their own goods for themselves. Fine Christians these! I think there is not a devil left in hell; they have all gone into the peasants."

Don't know what to say but of course. Clearly Martin Luther was not an early Christian so it's not really a counterpoint to my statement. By the time Martin Luther entered the fold Catholicism was a well constructed center power. I think if you read the Gospels you'll find that the theocracitic subjectation of people was not the sort of thing Jesus was trying to bring about.

While Martin Luther did post his 99 Thesis on the church door it was to improve the church not break it apart. He spent many years in the twilight of his life trying to reunite the church. And of course with this would be the continuation of the church's control and dicatation to society.

The goals of Black Liberation Theology are to turn religion into sociology and Christianity into a political agenda. BLT is only interested in politics, not preaching the gospel of the Bible and personal salvation. BLT images Jesus as Che Guevara.

Yup nutters everywhere. Seems that even more influencial might be a certain End of Days church in Alaska that a certain female VP was part of.

The understanding of the Bible that orthodox Christian's have is that Jesus did indeed associate with the downtrodden and the oppressed, but He was interested in their souls, not in their politics. The zealots of Jesus' day were looking for a militant Messiah, and Jesus did not fit the bill, nor did He ally Himself with them or their cause.

Okay and yet the Catholic church of Martin Luther used Jesus for more militant oppression of the masses.

 

[faethor]

Judas had to point Jesus out to those arresting him. This implies that Jesus' physical appearance did not differ from his disciples.

a forensic reconstruction of a typical Galilean Semite

So we agree that this more typical view of Jesus isn't likely.

The Gospel does not make goods common, except in the case of those who do of their own free will what the apostles and disciples did in Acts IV. They did not demand, as do our insane peasants in their raging, that the goods of others - of a Pilate and a Herod - should be common, but only their own goods. Our peasants, however, would have other men's goods common, and keep their own goods for themselves. Fine Christians these! I think there is not a devil left in hell; they have all gone into the peasants."

Don't know what to say but of course. Clearly Martin Luther was not an early Christian so it's not really a counterpoint to my statement. By the time Martin Luther entered the fold Catholicism was a well constructed center power. I think if you read the Gospels you'll find that the theocracitic subjectation of people was not the sort of thing Jesus was trying to bring about.

While Martin Luther did post his 99 Thesis on the church door it was to improve the church not break it apart. He spent many years in the twilight of his life trying to reunite the church. And of course with this would be the continuation of the church's control and dicatation to society.

The goals of Black Liberation Theology are to turn religion into sociology and Christianity into a political agenda. BLT is only interested in politics, not preaching the gospel of the Bible and personal salvation. BLT images Jesus as Che Guevara.

Yup nutters everywhere. Seems that even more influencial might be a certain End of Days church in Alaska that a certain female VP was part of.

The understanding of the Bible that orthodox Christian's have is that Jesus did indeed associate with the downtrodden and the oppressed, but He was interested in their souls, not in their politics. The zealots of Jesus' day were looking for a militant Messiah, and Jesus did not fit the bill, nor did He ally Himself with them or their cause.

Okay and yet the Catholic church of Martin Luther used Jesus for more militant oppression of the masses.

 

[faethor]

Judas had to point Jesus out to those arresting him. This implies that Jesus' physical appearance did not differ from his disciples.

a forensic reconstruction of a typical Galilean Semite

So we agree that this more typical view of Jesus isn't likely.

The Gospel does not make goods common, except in the case of those who do of their own free will what the apostles and disciples did in Acts IV. They did not demand, as do our insane peasants in their raging, that the goods of others - of a Pilate and a Herod - should be common, but only their own goods. Our peasants, however, would have other men's goods common, and keep their own goods for themselves. Fine Christians these! I think there is not a devil left in hell; they have all gone into the peasants."

Don't know what to say but of course. Clearly Martin Luther was not an early Christian so it's not really a counterpoint to my statement. By the time Martin Luther entered the fold Catholicism was a well constructed center power. I think if you read the Gospels you'll find that the theocracitic subjectation of people was not the sort of thing Jesus was trying to bring about.

While Martin Luther did post his 99 Thesis on the church door it was to improve the church not break it apart. He spent many years in the twilight of his life trying to reunite the church. And of course with this would be the continuation of the church's control and dicatation to society.

The goals of Black Liberation Theology are to turn religion into sociology and Christianity into a political agenda. BLT is only interested in politics, not preaching the gospel of the Bible and personal salvation. BLT images Jesus as Che Guevara.

Yup nutters everywhere. Seems that even more influencial might be a certain End of Days church in Alaska that a certain female VP was part of.

The understanding of the Bible that orthodox Christian's have is that Jesus did indeed associate with the downtrodden and the oppressed, but He was interested in their souls, not in their politics. The zealots of Jesus' day were looking for a militant Messiah, and Jesus did not fit the bill, nor did He ally Himself with them or their cause.

Okay and yet the Catholic church of Martin Luther used Jesus for more militant oppression of the masses.

 

[faethor]

Judas had to point Jesus out to those arresting him. This implies that Jesus' physical appearance did not differ from his disciples.

a forensic reconstruction of a typical Galilean Semite

So we agree that this more typical view of Jesus isn't likely.

The Gospel does not make goods common, except in the case of those who do of their own free will what the apostles and disciples did in Acts IV. They did not demand, as do our insane peasants in their raging, that the goods of others - of a Pilate and a Herod - should be common, but only their own goods. Our peasants, however, would have other men's goods common, and keep their own goods for themselves. Fine Christians these! I think there is not a devil left in hell; they have all gone into the peasants."

Don't know what to say but of course. Clearly Martin Luther was not an early Christian so it's not really a counterpoint to my statement. By the time Martin Luther entered the fold Catholicism was a well constructed center power. I think if you read the Gospels you'll find that the theocracitic subjectation of people was not the sort of thing Jesus was trying to bring about.

While Martin Luther did post his 99 Thesis on the church door it was to improve the church not break it apart. He spent many years in the twilight of his life trying to reunite the church. And of course with this would be the continuation of the church's control and dicatation to society.

The goals of Black Liberation Theology are to turn religion into sociology and Christianity into a political agenda. BLT is only interested in politics, not preaching the gospel of the Bible and personal salvation. BLT images Jesus as Che Guevara.

Yup nutters everywhere. Seems that even more influencial might be a certain End of Days church in Alaska that a certain female VP was part of.

The understanding of the Bible that orthodox Christian's have is that Jesus did indeed associate with the downtrodden and the oppressed, but He was interested in their souls, not in their politics. The zealots of Jesus' day were looking for a militant Messiah, and Jesus did not fit the bill, nor did He ally Himself with them or their cause.

Okay and yet the Catholic church of Martin Luther used Jesus for more militant oppression of the masses.