"Is there a translation of the word black that hasn't been appropriated into a slur in modern times? It just means black. It's not the words Kush"
Probably not and I understand that it may not necessarily have been a racial slur but just a way to describe them, but there was a nation known as Kush which is where the jewish word black comes from. Either that or somebody named them Kush because of the jewish word and it just kind of stuck, regardless, though:
An example
"I think Mormons put more stock in it then anything"
Yea, it was used more by europeans, in general.
"Why would Canaanites be enslaved for skin color, while others with skin like the Falaschas were made High Priests?"
I was talking more about the Europeans, and obviously america, where that was an active excuse for their enslavement. I'm sure it wasn't all of them who used it, again, but it was still used. I never intended this conversation to continue this long ;/
"I'm not excusing it, or pretending that didn't happen, but any stories that have been fictionalized by other religions and other denominations to justify modern behavior such as the Black slave trade should not be attributed to Jews, let alone ancient Jews."
Okay. I really wasn't trying to justify it by saying the jews did it first, I was just responding to courage by saying the notions were actually derived INDIRECTLY from the jews.
"Like I said, Canaanites were enslaved, or killed, and it happened at the hands of Jews"
And they had a religous excuse; just like europeans were trying to do with the curse of ham. I guess my placement of the jewish religous excuse was wrong, is all, but the sentiment was still along the same lines.
" I think we've both managed to refute the Palestinian conection to Canaanites pretty easily."
Yep.
According to the bible and historical information jewish people would actually be descendent of canaans, because I believe abraham was a canaan for some time. Wasn't he a nomad who settled in canaan, adopting their culture and such?
Hybrid Mode
