Jacksonville Jaguars Fan Forums

Full Version: Rep. Cleaver ends opening prayer for new Congress: ‘Amen and awoman’
You're currently viewing a stripped down version of our content. View the full version with proper formatting.
Pages: 1 2 3
(01-05-2021, 02:44 AM)TheO-LineMatters Wrote: [ -> ]I was just going by what I see in Gal Gadot, Natalie Portman, Benjamin Netanyahu, Gene Simmons, Bar Rafaeli and other famous people from Israel. All of them look pretty pale skinned to me. Nowhere near as dark skinned as what I see from other Middle Eastern countries. I always found that kind of strange.

As Lucky already pointed out, the diaspora split three ways. The Mizrahim in Arabia and Persia, the Sephardim in Spain but expelled to North Africa in 1492, then the Ashkenazi in Germany.  The history of all three groups is fuzzy at best, but they each went through cycles of acceptance and persecution. There was some intermarriage and some conversion into Judaism during the accepting times.  In the times of persecution, there was not just death but also conversion out of Judaism.  It's hard to be sure, but it's thought that most of the Mizrahi converted to Islam along the way, and most of the Sephardi converted to Catholicism.  Fewer of the Ashkenazi converted.  The government of Germany wasn't centralized, so the Ashkenazi had many escape valves as local persecutions came and went. This is why the Ashkenazi are the most numerous of the three today, and why they are whiter-looking than the other two.

It's also important to remember that many people in the middle east and east mediterranean converted to Judaism prior to the events of the New Testament. The Septuagint translation was created by Jewish believers living in Alexandria in the 200s BC, and Paul met Jewish believers everywhere he went
(01-05-2021, 01:47 AM)americus 2.0 Wrote: [ -> ]
(01-04-2021, 08:01 PM)jagibelieve Wrote: [ -> ]I'm going to refrain from commenting much on this topic due to possibly crossing the line with the no religion rule.  I will say though that it's one of two things.  Either this idiot congressman is really stupid and doesn't understand the phrase, or he is just doing the usual democrat pandering.

I'm leaning on #2.

As a Methodist preacher he should know what he's saying is incorrect. But who knows.

The fact that he would choose such an inappropriate and incorrect opportunity to express his ignorance is stunningly stupid. I hopes he keeps it up.  

In the name of equality, the following terms have been modified to create an atmosphere of inclusion and understanding:

Mandate be changed to womandate (although this term could be regarded as predatory and/or homophobic). Use with caution and only with consent.
Mandan Indians will be referred to as Womandan Indians.
Menstruation will be changed to womenstruation (makes sense).
Boycott will be changed to girlcott.
Mandolin will be womandolin.
Malevolent is considered appropriate and will not be changed.
Remand will be changed to rewomand (as a nod to the LGBT community)
Manual will not be changed but its use is discouraged because Rep. Cleaver says the word is offensive to undocumented workers whose name is Manuel.
Chef Boyardee will be changed to bastard.
Men's room will be changed to Sexist Gender room.
Emanuel Cleaver will be changed to Idiot.
(01-04-2021, 10:53 PM)Lucky2Last Wrote: [ -> ]Jews can be separated by geographic history. Mizrahi Jews lived in the middle east, Ashkenazi Jews in Germany to Eastern Europe, and Sephardic in Spain and North Africa. Ashkenazi Jews make up the majority, and are probably the ones you have seen the most in the US. Even though the Ashkenazi jews are more white, many Jews from antiquity were described as having fair skin. In fact, I find it really irritating when people assume that all of ancient Mesopotamia and Egypt were black (like Cleopatra).

Thanks for the info guys. I am almost 50 and I can still learn new things every day. Admittedly, I am very clueless when it comes to other religions/races. I was born, raised and reside in a very small town in rural Ohio and I get very little exposure to other cultures.
Amen is derived from the Hebrew āmēn, which means “certainty,” “truth,” and “verily.”  

Leave it up to Americans to [BLEEP] up language to meet our desires.  We're already butchering the English language to begin with ....
(01-05-2021, 10:42 AM)HURRICANE!!! Wrote: [ -> ]Amen is derived from the Hebrew āmēn, which means “certainty,” “truth,” and “verily.”  

Leave it up to Americans to [BLEEP] up language to meet our desires.  We're already butchering the English language to begin with ....

Correction: Leave it up to Rep. Emmanuel Cleaver to blank up language to meet his agenda.
(01-05-2021, 08:59 AM)jj82284 Wrote: [ -> ]I officially request that the ban on religious discourse be lifted in this thread, and this thread alone so that I can accurately respond to the question of the race & ethnicity of Christ.

I don’t see how the blanket ban would cover it anyway. It’s no different from discussing your own ethnicity, only the guy’s name is Jesus and he happens to be a historical figure.
(01-05-2021, 08:59 AM)jj82284 Wrote: [ -> ]I officially request that the ban on religious discourse be lifted in this thread, and this thread alone so that I can accurately respond to the question of the race & ethnicity of Christ.

Now I am really curious.
Religion ban should really only be limited to philosophy. Historical facts should never be banned.
Oh for Christ sake.
(01-05-2021, 10:46 AM)homebiscuit Wrote: [ -> ]
(01-05-2021, 10:42 AM)HURRICANE!!! Wrote: [ -> ]Amen is derived from the Hebrew āmēn, which means “certainty,” “truth,” and “verily.”  

Leave it up to Americans to [BLEEP] up language to meet our desires.  We're already butchering the English language to begin with ....

Correction: Leave it up to Rep. Emmanuel Cleaver to blank up language to meet his agenda.

or is it  Emwomanuel Cleaver?
(01-05-2021, 03:42 PM)captivating Wrote: [ -> ]
(01-05-2021, 10:46 AM)homebiscuit Wrote: [ -> ]Correction: Leave it up to Rep. Emmanuel Cleaver to blank up language to meet his agenda.

or is it  Emwomanuel Cleaver?

That's an upvote.
[Image: IMG-20210105-WA0004.jpg]
(01-05-2021, 07:57 PM)StroudCrowd1 Wrote: [ -> ][Image: IMG-20210105-WA0004.jpg]
You’re a weird dude.

I think you need a hobby.
Y'all wanting a religious discussion must not remember what almost shut the message board down way back in the day. Politics and religion. Thankfully we can talk politics, though these days it seems it is some peoples religion.
(01-05-2021, 08:57 PM)americus 2.0 Wrote: [ -> ]Y'all wanting a religious discussion must not remember what almost shut the message board down way back in the day. Politics and religion. Thankfully we can talk politics, though these days it seems it is some peoples religion.

Ain't that the truth.
(01-05-2021, 01:53 PM)Lucky2Last Wrote: [ -> ]Religion ban should really only be limited to philosophy. Historical facts should never be banned.

Agreed.
We just have to be careful not to delve into the "why" or "what does it mean" aspects but the "what" can't be off limits.  Jesus existed, Muhammad existed, Buddha existed, adults should be able to deal with that.
(01-05-2021, 11:12 PM)mikesez Wrote: [ -> ]
(01-05-2021, 01:53 PM)Lucky2Last Wrote: [ -> ]Religion ban should really only be limited to philosophy. Historical facts should never be banned.

Agreed.
We just have to be careful not to delve into the "why" or "what does it mean" aspects but the "what" can't be off limits.  Jesus existed, Muhammad existed, Buddha existed, adults should be able to deal with that.

I guess you weren't around back in the day. I was agnostic back then and thought it was brutal. The arguments seen here now, the really heated ones, they pale in comparison. It would be nice if the subject could stay in the historical context you're talking about, but it never does.
(01-05-2021, 11:12 PM)mikesez Wrote: [ -> ]
(01-05-2021, 01:53 PM)Lucky2Last Wrote: [ -> ]Religion ban should really only be limited to philosophy. Historical facts should never be banned.

Agreed.
We just have to be careful not to delve into the "why" or "what does it mean" aspects but the "what" can't be off limits.  Jesus existed, Muhammad existed, Buddha existed, adults should be able to deal with that.

I can think of a couple of former posters who would have flown off the handle from your last sentence.
(01-05-2021, 11:12 PM)mikesez Wrote: [ -> ]
(01-05-2021, 01:53 PM)Lucky2Last Wrote: [ -> ]Religion ban should really only be limited to philosophy. Historical facts should never be banned.

Agreed.
We just have to be careful not to delve into the "why" or "what does it mean" aspects but the "what" can't be off limits.  Jesus existed, Muhammad existed, Buddha existed, adults should be able to deal with that.

Problem is, some people view the Bible as a history book.  So it's not easy to draw the line between history and religion.  I mean, how can we just "stick to the facts" when some people view everything in the Bible, or the Koran, or other religious tracts, as purely consisting of facts?
Discussing religion should be no different then discussing other make believe [BLEEP], like Santa and The [BLEEP] Easter Bunny.
Pages: 1 2 3