Are people from MENA white?
- Thread starter LittleCedar
- Start date
-
Christian Chat is a moderated online Christian community allowing Christians around the world to fellowship with each other in real time chat via webcam, voice, and text, with the Christian Chat app. You can also start or participate in a Bible-based discussion here in the Christian Chat Forums, where members can also share with each other their own videos, pictures, or favorite Christian music.
If you are a Christian and need encouragement and fellowship, we're here for you! If you are not a Christian but interested in knowing more about Jesus our Lord, you're also welcome! Want to know what the Bible says, and how you can apply it to your life? Join us!
To make new Christian friends now around the world, click here to join Christian Chat.
)
Mostly we're just trying to figure out why we must have an opinion on the racial identity of MENA people.
If you want to campaign for a certain racial identity, that's fine.
If you can't take "we have no idea about this issue, much less an opinion on it" as our answer, that is puzzling.
I don't insist you have an opinion about dark chocolate or the latest Call of Duty video game. Live4Him3 doesn't badger you about your opinion of bears. cinder doesn't keep asking you over and over about what you think of mission trips.
Here's a news reporter who covers the Middle Eastern nations. She goes by the name Syrian Girl. That's between Iraq and Turkey.
Right now she's light skinned, but looks like she might tan darker if she was working outside during the summer. Ask a room full of people and they'd give an answer or two.
I've seen some Persian girls with jet black hair that had skin that would be just as light.
However if you traveled down to Oman, you would find skin shades darker than many Americans who classify themselves as "Black" on a census.
Right now she's light skinned, but looks like she might tan darker if she was working outside during the summer. Ask a room full of people and they'd give an answer or two.
I've seen some Persian girls with jet black hair that had skin that would be just as light.
However if you traveled down to Oman, you would find skin shades darker than many Americans who classify themselves as "Black" on a census.
I'm interested in hearing your experience in the region, not for this matter anyway.
Many people here don't seem to have a minimal grasp of what's going on there. They always think in the lines of Israel, Israel, Israel, and everybody else are Satans in human form who want to pervert God's "super holy plan" for a bunch of Christ-haters. They not only corrupt the Bible, but will ignore or justify every single offence the state of Israel commits, claiming it's propaganda and God stands with Israel and blah blah blah.
Christians in Palestine and the Middle East are suffering because of Israel's imperialism, interventionism and support of Islamic terrorism. Syria, once a great country with a thriving Christian minority, is a prime example of the destruction Israel, US and their proxies have provoked. And these Bible-corrupting, Israel-glamourizing pseudo-Christians are supporting the maniacs who are wiping out Christendom from the Middle East, and removing the light from the own land of Jesus. All for the sake of a Christ-hating brood of vipers from Sodom and Egypt.
Ah now we see your prejudices on full display. Israel's imperialsim? Quick history lesson - Islamic fanatics ( who sadly tend to follow the Koran and example of their prophet much more literally and honestly than more moderate muslims, but that's another discussion entirely) have been persecuting Jews and Christians in areas where Muslims are the dominant power for longer than there's been a state of Israel. Pretty much as long as there's been enough Muslims to wield enough power to win a fight. Before Islam came along much of MENA was predominantly Jewish or Christian. But it was the European nations who systematically murdered 6 million plus Jews in the 1940's and perhaps partially out of guilt, decided when they split up their colonial holdings that maybe those Jews needed a nation of their own so they had a safe haven, and helped create the modern state of Israel (there hadn't been independent nations in that are since the Ottoman empire conquered them at least, they were under ottoman turk control and then british control after the dissolution of the ottoman empire). The British plan was to create two nations, one for Arabs and one for Jews in that area, but the surrounding Arab nations rejected that plan and declared war on Israel the day it was founded. But every time they've attacked they've lost.
Another interesting historical note is that most of the Jews in surrounding MENA countries emigrated to Israel when it was founded because they were pretty sure they weren't safe in those countries. The Arab muslims living in the land that became the nation of Israel did no such thing, nor did / were the surrounding nations eager to welcome them. Instead they stayed, fought against the nation of Israel and its citizens, and have been used as a political talking point of humanitarian crisis because Israel has had to take some rather drastic measures to protect itself.
So no, you can't blame Islamic terrorists on Israel's imperialism or those who defend its freedom, any more than you can blame the battered wife for being beaten on because she doesn't do everything her abusive husband says (I mean that's a classic abuser line that the victim is making them do it because of the victim's behavior). Violent agression is always the responsibility of those who choose to employ it, not the responsibility of those it is turned against.
Yeah, no, you're not going to get much sympathy here. Many of us know enough history to be aware that you are very wrong, and many of us know enough about the Bible to be aware that you are waaaaay out of place.
However it is nice to finally know what your objective is. The suspense was killing me.
Yes, but you miss the full context. Muslims in the Arab world were generally more moderate for much of the 20th century than they are today. Arab Muslims and Christians were unified in their opposition to the radicalized Ottoman Empire, and in fact, the founders of Arab nationalism were Christians.
It was with the rise of Israeli and Western-funded Wahhabism in the 1980s when radicalized Muslims began to gain power, and Christians and other groups saw themselves increasingly persecuted. During that time, Christians would seek protection from nationalist leaders like Mubarak, Assad and Saddam Hussein, but once their hegemony ended, the disaster broke out. Israel and the West came to deprive Christians in those countries of the only shield that prevented them from suffering a massive genocide.
The Arabs rejected the plan because Palestine was illicitly taken off from them and given to people who had never set a foot there. Imagine a horde of Uyghurs settled one day in Scotland, then declared independence and expelled the native Scots from their land, with the pretext they face persecution in China.
And why they had to?
To protect itself, are you serious??? Israel is much stronger than any of its neighbours, and has crushed many of them. This is why Israel would always win against them, and why countries like Syria or Lebanon can't even govern their own territory. Israel is the most militarized country in the world, and conscripts both men and women for 2-3 years, so it's not like they are poor creatures who need to raid Palestinian villages so they may defend themselves.
Ironically, this allegory is an huge contrast to the Bible, which represents Israel as a whore who repeatedly cheats on and makes God feel bad.
looks like this topic met an end after all that
If you dont live in that region you cant really comment what goes on in peoples lives on a daily basis.
Was this question posed in the ARAB CHRISTIANS forum on CC?
Not sure what its doing on singles.
If you dont live in that region you cant really comment what goes on in peoples lives on a daily basis.
Was this question posed in the ARAB CHRISTIANS forum on CC?
Not sure what its doing on singles.
I see this gent has been cast out into outer darkness. However, find that his premises was flawed because he is using modern day as a data point for the ancient and classical time periods. He has also failed to take into account the culture and failed to use the bible itself to answer his question.
Christ would have undoubtedly had the features of one who was a ethnic Jew. For one we can start at the beginning of why certain ethnicities do seem to have certain genetic traits. That would be the table of nations in Genesis and more so the tower of Babel. God broke mankind up by language. Each group banded together by language. Not knowing what the total population was but whatever guess we wanna make it the fact of the matter is that total population count is gonna be dived by the number of languages.
That means each individual group is now smaller in number. So as they parted ways and got on with the business of being fruitful and multiplying. They are now gonna be inbred, which not making a claim for incest or such although that was a fact of the time. Less numerical numbers means you will breed inside the same limited number. That will mean more gene traits become more predominant and why recessive genes are more predominant among certain ethnic groups. As they were bred in by having less of a gene pool to pull from.
The Babylon captivity gave way to Pharisees which means the separated. They took the mixing of folks from Cana as reason for the captivity as well as as other factors. They even used words like manzer, which was for a child born of the forbidden such as a child born out of wedlock, adultery, incest, or such. They were very much aware of ethnicity and sticklers to it. They called Christ a Samaritan which was a insult by them. As they had problems with those folks as their bloodline was not as pure, as folks from that area, Samaria, bred with gentiles.
Christ also laid down foundations for us today about ethnicity and thinking one is better or chosen by that factor alone. They believed that they were it because Abraham was their father and one by the physical in the natural and not spiritual.
We also have the genealogy of Christ. At that time period there is a definite social, cultural, and religious fixation on the pureness of ethnicity. We have in the bible a book called Galatians. That book or the name of it is named for a area that today would be modern day Turkey. The Galatians were what today we would call Caucasians. They were from what we would today call France and Belgium. The Romans called the area Gaul and that is where the Galatians cam from. They migrated there as they were pushed out and of course they were great mercenaries. So they migrated and settled. Gaul's are of course actually Celts. Which Rome and Greece called barbarians. Which we oft today think that means unrefined or savage. However, Rome and Greece called them as such because they had facial hair. Which today that word with that meaning has carried over and when get a hair cut we go to a barber.
We also have the four horns that arose out of the one great horn. Or in historical terms the four generals that took over the kingdom of Alexander upon his death. In Egypt we had the general Ptolemy establish his kingdom and the most famous being Cleopatra. Then of course Seleucus took over the levant. With Antiochus of course founding Antioch. Then we have Antiochus the IIII who sent his wife away and founded a city in Turkey named after his wife. Named in honor of her named Laodicea. Antiochus IIII used as a type of the antichrist seems purposeful that God declared how he is master of time and the future by the last church and church age he addressed was Laodicea. Set it up so that church was last mentioned before the introduction of the antichrist who Antiochus was a type of. Just reads purposeful to me at least and the irony is not missed.
Anyway I digress we can see that there was a definite assimilation going on through classical history. However, when we look at the Jews and there attitude and the rise of a predominant religious sect that separated from this assimilation. I think we can deduct that Christ would have been a ethnic Jew with the features of that time. As the Jews of that time were separated from other ethnicities and God even had to show Peter this in Acts when he sent him to Cornelius. So I find that Christ was a ethnic Jew and he had the features to go with them in accordance to the culture and social thoughts Jews had when it came to inter ethnic relationships.
Christ would have undoubtedly had the features of one who was a ethnic Jew. For one we can start at the beginning of why certain ethnicities do seem to have certain genetic traits. That would be the table of nations in Genesis and more so the tower of Babel. God broke mankind up by language. Each group banded together by language. Not knowing what the total population was but whatever guess we wanna make it the fact of the matter is that total population count is gonna be dived by the number of languages.
That means each individual group is now smaller in number. So as they parted ways and got on with the business of being fruitful and multiplying. They are now gonna be inbred, which not making a claim for incest or such although that was a fact of the time. Less numerical numbers means you will breed inside the same limited number. That will mean more gene traits become more predominant and why recessive genes are more predominant among certain ethnic groups. As they were bred in by having less of a gene pool to pull from.
The Babylon captivity gave way to Pharisees which means the separated. They took the mixing of folks from Cana as reason for the captivity as well as as other factors. They even used words like manzer, which was for a child born of the forbidden such as a child born out of wedlock, adultery, incest, or such. They were very much aware of ethnicity and sticklers to it. They called Christ a Samaritan which was a insult by them. As they had problems with those folks as their bloodline was not as pure, as folks from that area, Samaria, bred with gentiles.
Christ also laid down foundations for us today about ethnicity and thinking one is better or chosen by that factor alone. They believed that they were it because Abraham was their father and one by the physical in the natural and not spiritual.
We also have the genealogy of Christ. At that time period there is a definite social, cultural, and religious fixation on the pureness of ethnicity. We have in the bible a book called Galatians. That book or the name of it is named for a area that today would be modern day Turkey. The Galatians were what today we would call Caucasians. They were from what we would today call France and Belgium. The Romans called the area Gaul and that is where the Galatians cam from. They migrated there as they were pushed out and of course they were great mercenaries. So they migrated and settled. Gaul's are of course actually Celts. Which Rome and Greece called barbarians. Which we oft today think that means unrefined or savage. However, Rome and Greece called them as such because they had facial hair. Which today that word with that meaning has carried over and when get a hair cut we go to a barber.
We also have the four horns that arose out of the one great horn. Or in historical terms the four generals that took over the kingdom of Alexander upon his death. In Egypt we had the general Ptolemy establish his kingdom and the most famous being Cleopatra. Then of course Seleucus took over the levant. With Antiochus of course founding Antioch. Then we have Antiochus the IIII who sent his wife away and founded a city in Turkey named after his wife. Named in honor of her named Laodicea. Antiochus IIII used as a type of the antichrist seems purposeful that God declared how he is master of time and the future by the last church and church age he addressed was Laodicea. Set it up so that church was last mentioned before the introduction of the antichrist who Antiochus was a type of. Just reads purposeful to me at least and the irony is not missed.
Anyway I digress we can see that there was a definite assimilation going on through classical history. However, when we look at the Jews and there attitude and the rise of a predominant religious sect that separated from this assimilation. I think we can deduct that Christ would have been a ethnic Jew with the features of that time. As the Jews of that time were separated from other ethnicities and God even had to show Peter this in Acts when he sent him to Cornelius. So I find that Christ was a ethnic Jew and he had the features to go with them in accordance to the culture and social thoughts Jews had when it came to inter ethnic relationships.
I would also guess that the OP is of Lebanese heritage since he used the Cedar tree and that tree is the symbol on their flag and of course his screen name. So as others pointed out his question was not innocuous, as he in his opening said such..............."From what I have noticed, many people, and I mean many, from countries like Lebanon, Syria, Palestine, Egypt, Tunisia or Algeria look as fair as a typical European, and not few of them even have light hair and eyes. Sorry to burst your bubble Anglocentrists."
Guess we would have found out absent his casting out how he was the ethnic master.......LOL
Guess we would have found out absent his casting out how he was the ethnic master.......LOL
T