What I hate about every "race"

Josephus description of Christ: “At that time also there appeared a certain man of magic power … if it be meet to call him a man, [whose name is 👉Jesus], whom [certain] Greeks call a son of [a] God, but his disciples [call] the true prophet … he was a man of simple appearance, mature age, 👉black-skinned (melagchrous)👈, short growth, three cubits tall, hunchbacked, prognathous (lit. ‘with a long face’ [macroprosopos]), a long nose, eyebrows meeting above the nose … with scanty [curly] hair, but having a line in the middle of the head after the fashion of the Nazaraeans, with an undeveloped beard.”

View attachment 2200194





Golden Girls Lol GIF by HULU
The name of the source this quote is derived from please
 
  • Ugh..
Reactions: Deleted member 24507
They need it because the autists on this forum are retarded.
It’s because you’re too retarded to actually break apart arguments so you resort to this
 
  • Ugh..
Reactions: Deleted member 24507
The name of the source this quote is derived from please

It’s from Josephus, Hamite (so-called African) nigger. It’s in the comment.
 
It’s because you’re too retarded to actually break apart arguments so you resort to this

No, it’s because you’re too dumb to comment in proper grammar like the dumb nigger you are.
 
It’s from Josephus, Hamite (so-called African) nigger. It’s in the comment.
You’re retarded Josephus wrote multiple things how can I know which one lol and. I can’t find the quote anywhere else online
 
  • Ugh..
Reactions: Deleted member 24507
You’re retarded Josephus wrote multiple things how can I know which one lol and. I can’t find the quote anywhere else online

Dumb Hamite (so-called African) nigger is now coping because he claimed there wasn’t any documentation of Israelites being so-called Negroes during Christ’s time period and when shown evidence he crumbles 😆.
 
Dumb Hamite (so-called African) nigger is now coping because he claimed there wasn’t any documentation of Israelites being so-called Negroes during Christ’s time period and when shown evidence he crumbles 😆.
You can’t even show me where you got you’re evidence from lol for all I know you made it up
 
  • Ugh..
Reactions: Deleted member 24507
You can’t even show me where you got you’re evidence from lol for all I know you made it up

You can Google it to see it, dumb nigger 😂.
 
It’s funny that you’re claiming to claim me though because you’re an inferior baboon that needs to latch onto other nations of men that are superior to you.
ironic
 
  • JFL
  • Ugh..
Reactions: infini and Deleted member 24507
Stupid nigger is lying lol.








That citation is from page 467 of R Eisler's Messiah Jesus and John the Baptist (1931, Alexander Krappe's abridged single volume English translation of Eisler's two volume German language book, ΙΗΣΟΥΣ ΒΑΣΙΛΕΥΣ ΟΥ ΒΑΣΙΛΕΥΣΑΣ, 1928/1929).

This is, then, Eisler's proposed restoration of Josephus' lost original Aramaic language book "The Capture of Jerusalem," which has not been preserved. Eisler has used the Slavonic additions to Josephus' War, as if they are fragments that quote or allude to Josephus' Aramaic "Capture," and other legendary materials (Letter of Lentulus, "wanted" posters seeking capture of runaway slaves found in the garbage heaps of Egypt, etc.).

Eisler himself notes (pg 446) that one such letter describing Jesus has several contradictions, so cannot be real.

He thinks he has it all figured out (his reconstruction). However, a recent edition of Slavonic Josephus by Leeming & Leeming (Josephus’ Jewish War & Its Slavonic Version, 2003) feels that the differences and additions can be better explained as coming from semi-pagan Slav & Russian nobility of the middle ages, as opposed to a lost Aramaic description of the "Capture of Jerusalem".
 
  • Ugh..
Reactions: Deleted member 24507
That citation is from page 467 of R Eisler's Messiah Jesus and John the Baptist (1931, Alexander Krappe's abridged single volume English translation of Eisler's two volume German language book, ΙΗΣΟΥΣ ΒΑΣΙΛΕΥΣ ΟΥ ΒΑΣΙΛΕΥΣΑΣ, 1928/1929).

This is, then, Eisler's proposed restoration of Josephus' lost original Aramaic language book "The Capture of Jerusalem," which has not been preserved. Eisler has used the Slavonic additions to Josephus' War, as if they are fragments that quote or allude to Josephus' Aramaic "Capture," and other legendary materials (Letter of Lentulus, "wanted" posters seeking capture of runaway slaves found in the garbage heaps of Egypt, etc.).

Eisler himself notes (pg 446) that one such letter describing Jesus has several contradictions, so cannot be real.

He thinks he has it all figured out (his reconstruction). However, a recent edition of Slavonic Josephus by Leeming & Leeming (Josephus’ Jewish War & Its Slavonic Version, 2003) feels that the differences and additions can be better explained as coming from semi-pagan Slav & Russian nobility of the middle ages, as opposed to a lost Aramaic description of the "Capture of Jerusalem".




“The quote offered by the black Jesus advocates is as follows. “At that time also there appeared a certain man of magic power … if it be meet to call him a man, [whose name is 👉Jesus], whom [certain] Greeks call a son of [a] God, but his disciples [call] the true prophet who is supposed to have raised dead persons and to have cured all diseases. Both his nature and his form were human, for he was a man of simple appearance, mature age, 👉black-skinned (melagchrous👈), short growth, three cubits tall, hunchbacked, prognathous (lit. ‘with a long face [macroprosopos]), a long nose, eyebrows meeting above the nose, that the spectators could take fright, with scanty [curly] hair, but having a line in the middle of the head after the fashion of the Nazaraeans, with an undeveloped beard. (Halōsis, ii.174).”14)”







 
“The quote offered by the black Jesus advocates is as follows. “At that time also there appeared a certain man of magic power … if it be meet to call him a man, [whose name is 👉Jesus], whom [certain] Greeks call a son of [a] God, but his disciples [call] the true prophet who is supposed to have raised dead persons and to have cured all diseases. Both his nature and his form were human, for he was a man of simple appearance, mature age, 👉black-skinned (melagchrous👈), short growth, three cubits tall, hunchbacked, prognathous (lit. ‘with a long face [macroprosopos]), a long nose, eyebrows meeting above the nose, that the spectators could take fright, with scanty [curly] hair, but having a line in the middle of the head after the fashion of the Nazaraeans, with an undeveloped beard. (Halōsis, ii.174).”14)”







That quote disproves your point lol.
 
Last edited:
  • Ugh..
Reactions: Deleted member 24507
That quote disproves your point lol

It doesn’t actually, nigger lol.


Musnad Ahmed Chapter 50 Page 488

“I saw Esa (Jesus) as a young man, Udmah (jet black), and kinky haired.”

مسند أحمد بن حنبل ج ٥٠ ص ٤٨٨

وَرَأَيْتُ عِيسَى شَابًّا أَبْيَضَ ، جَعْدَ الرَّأْسِ
 
  • Ugh..
Reactions: Deleted member 24507
  • Ugh..
Reactions: Deleted member 24507
Did you read what I says baboon it’s literally about disproving the reliability of you’re citation retard

If you actually read it it proves my point, baboon Hamite (so-called African) nigger 😂.


“The first century Jewish writer Josephus (37-100 AD) penned the earliest non-biblical testimony of Jesus. In his work Halosis or the “Capture (of Jerusalem),” written around 72 A.D., Josephus discussed “the human form of Jesus and his wonderful works.” Biblical scholar Robert Eisler in a classic 1931 study of Josephus’ Testimony was able to reconstruct the unaltered testimony based on a newly-discovered Old Russian translation that preserved the original Greek text. According to Eisler’s reconstruction, the oldest non-Biblical description of Jesus read as follows:

“At that time also there appeared a certain man of magic power … if it be meet to call him a man, [whose name is Jesus], whom [certain] Greeks call a son of [a] God, but his disciples [call] the true prophet … he was a man of simple appearance, mature age, black-skinned (melagchrous), short growth, three cubits tall, hunchbacked, prognathous (lit. ‘with a long face’ [macroprosopos]), a long nose, eyebrows meeting above the nose … with scanty [curly] hair, but having a line in the middle of the head after the fashion of the Nazaraeans, with an undeveloped beard.”






You’re too dumb to know how to read historical documents though as expected from a nigger from Africa 😆.
 
Last edited:

You need to stop with the cope, nigger.



You’re a unkept Hamite nigger lol it’s why you deleted the photo of what you looked like

Hamite (so-called African) nigger is ugly and wants to claim an Israelite (so-called Negro) man and you need to fix your poor grammar, dumb nigger 😂
 
If you actually read it it proves my point, bavoon Hamite (so-called African) nigger 😂.


“The first century Jewish writer Josephus (37-100 AD) penned the earliest non-biblical testimony of Jesus. In his work Halosis or the “Capture (of Jerusalem),” written around 72 A.D., Josephus discussed “the human form of Jesus and his wonderful works.” Biblical scholar Robert Eisler in a classic 1931 study of Josephus’ Testimony was able to reconstruct the unaltered testimony based on a newly-discovered Old Russian translation that preserved the original Greek text. According to Eisler’s reconstruction, the oldest non-Biblical description of Jesus read as follows:

“At that time also there appeared a certain man of magic power … if it be meet to call him a man, [whose name is Jesus], whom [certain] Greeks call a son of [a] God, but his disciples [call] the true prophet … he was a man of simple appearance, mature age, black-skinned (melagchrous), short growth, three cubits tall, hunchbacked, prognathous (lit. ‘with a long face’ [macroprosopos]), a long nose, eyebrows meeting above the nose … with scanty [curly] hair, but having a line in the middle of the head after the fashion of the Nazaraeans, with an undeveloped beard.”
Lol you edited out the original post where they disprove the validity If you’re citation
 
  • Ugh..
Reactions: Deleted member 24507
Lol you edited out the original post where they disprove the validity If you’re citati

I really didn’t, nigger and fix your poor grammar, nigger lol.
 
It doesn’t actually, nigger lol.


Musnad Ahmed Chapter 50 Page 488

“I saw Esa (Jesus) as a young man, Udmah (jet black), and kinky haired.”

مسند أحمد بن حنبل ج ٥٠ ص ٤٨٨

وَرَأَيْتُ عِيسَى شَابًّا أَبْيَضَ ، جَعْدَ الرَّأْسِ
600 years after Jesus was born
 
  • Ugh..
Reactions: Deleted member 24507
I really didn’t, nigger and fix your poor grammar, nigger lol.
You did here’s the full quote

The quote offered by the black Jesus advocates is as follows. “At that time also there appeared a certain man of magic power … if it be meet to call him a man, [whose name is Jesus], whom [certain] Greeks call a son of [a] God, but his disciples [call] the true prophet who is supposed to have raised dead persons and to have cured all diseases. Both his nature and his form were human, for he was a man of simple appearance, mature age, black-skinned (melagchrous), short growth, three cubits tall, hunchbacked, prognathous (lit. ‘with a long face [macroprosopos]), a long nose, eyebrows meeting above the nose, that the spectators could take fright, with scanty [curly] hair, but having a line in the middle of the head after the fashion of the Nazaraeans, with an undeveloped beard. (Halōsis, ii.174).”14) There are a number of issues with this quote as cited. First, the source referenced as Halōsis, ii.174, is inaccurate. Halōsisis a Greek word meaning “capture”15) This is supposed to be Old Slavonic language, not Greek. Secondly, the actual reference to Jesus Christ in the Slavonic Josephus is in the book of Jewish Wars 2.9.2 § 169. When I plugged this quote into a search engine it only provided websites stating Jesus is black. That is a little suspicious. Thirdly, the quote as provided above is not even about Jesus, however the name Jesus is inserted into brackets indicating it is not in the original source but provided by the person citing this text. Fourthly, this quote is not even found in the Old Slavonic text of Josephus. The real reference to Jesus in the Old Slavonic version is as follows.
 
  • Ugh..
Reactions: Deleted member 24507
Last edited:
  • Ugh..
Reactions: Deleted member 24507
You did here’s the full quote

The quote offered by the black Jesus advocates is as follows. “At that time also there appeared a certain man of magic power … if it be meet to call him a man, [whose name is Jesus], whom [certain] Greeks call a son of [a] God, but his disciples [call] the true prophet who is supposed to have raised dead persons and to have cured all diseases. Both his nature and his form were human, for he was a man of simple appearance, mature age, black-skinned (melagchrous), short growth, three cubits tall, hunchbacked, prognathous (lit. ‘with a long face [macroprosopos]), a long nose, eyebrows meeting above the nose, that the spectators could take fright, with scanty [curly] hair, but having a line in the middle of the head after the fashion of the Nazaraeans, with an undeveloped beard. (Halōsis, ii.174).”14) There are a number of issues with this quote as cited. First, the source referenced as Halōsis, ii.174, is inaccurate. Halōsisis a Greek word meaning “capture”15) This is supposed to be Old Slavonic language, not Greek. Secondly, the actual reference to Jesus Christ in the Slavonic Josephus is in the book of Jewish Wars 2.9.2 § 169. When I plugged this quote into a search engine it only provided websites stating Jesus is black. That is a little suspicious. Thirdly, the quote as provided above is not even about Jesus, however the name Jesus is inserted into brackets indicating it is not in the original source but provided by the person citing this text. Fourthly, this quote is not even found in the Old Slavonic text of Josephus. The real reference to Jesus in the Old Slavonic version is as follows.


“The first century Jewish writer Josephus (37-100 AD) penned the earliest non-biblical testimony of Jesus. In his work Halosis or the “Capture (of Jerusalem),” written around 72 A.D., Josephus discussed “the human form of Jesus and his wonderful works.” Biblical scholar Robert Eisler in a classic 1931 study of Josephus’ Testimony was able to reconstruct the unaltered testimony based on a newly-discovered Old Russian translation that preserved the original Greek text. According to Eisler’s reconstruction, the oldest non-Biblical description of Jesus read as follows:

“At that time also there appeared a certain man of magic power … if it be meet to call him a man, [whose name is 👉Jesus], whom [certain] Greeks call a son of [a] God, but his disciples [call] the true prophet … he was a man of simple appearance, mature age, 👉black-skinned (melagchrous), short growth, three cubits tall, hunchbacked, prognathous (lit. ‘with a long face’ [macroprosopos👈]), a long nose, eyebrows meeting above the nose … with scanty [curly] hair, but having a line in the middle of the head after the fashion of the Nazaraeans, with an undeveloped beard.”





















I’m dating a retarded baboon on a lookmax forum not writing an essay

You’re a faggot Hamite (so-called African) nigger dating a man on Looksmaxxing.org 😂.





@apemaxxed he’s a confirmed faggot nigger.
 
  • JFL
Reactions: Deleted member 21661
Matches what Josephus says and you can’t refute it, Hamite (so-called African) nigger 🤷🏿.
It wasn’t even written during when jesus as alive nigger so how could they have seen hi
 
  • Ugh..
Reactions: Deleted member 24507
It wasn’t even written during when jesus as alive nigger so how could they have seen hi

Speak English bot gibberish, dumb nigger. I know Africa doesn’t teach you intelligence but you’re in the West now.
 
“The first century Jewish writer Josephus (37-100 AD) penned the earliest non-biblical testimony of Jesus. In his work Halosis or the “Capture (of Jerusalem),” written around 72 A.D., Josephus discussed “the human form of Jesus and his wonderful works.” Biblical scholar Robert Eisler in a classic 1931 study of Josephus’ Testimony was able to reconstruct the unaltered testimony based on a newly-discovered Old Russian translation that preserved the original Greek text. According to Eisler’s reconstruction, the oldest non-Biblical description of Jesus read as follows:

“At that time also there appeared a certain man of magic power … if it be meet to call him a man, [whose name is 👉Jesus], whom [certain] Greeks call a son of [a] God, but his disciples [call] the true prophet … he was a man of simple appearance, mature age, 👉black-skinned (melagchrous), short growth, three cubits tall, hunchbacked, prognathous (lit. ‘with a long face’ [macroprosopos👈]), a long nose, eyebrows meeting above the nose … with scanty [curly] hair, but having a line in the middle of the head after the fashion of the Nazaraeans, with an undeveloped beard.”























You’re a faggot Hamite (so-called African) nigger dating a man on Looksmaxxing.org 😂.





@apemaxxed he’s a confirmed faggot nigger.
I meant to say debating fuck, weren’t you the one asking for gay sex in i messages lol
 
  • Ugh..
Reactions: Deleted member 24507
I meant to say debating fuck, weren’t you the one asking for gay sex in i messages lol

Faggot nigger, you admitted you’re dating another man on this forum 😂.
 
  • Ugh..
Reactions: Deleted member 24507

Users who are viewing this thread

Back
Top