Posted on 02/18/2008 8:45:56 PM PST by Alex Murphy
When the phrase 'Black History' is mentioned, names that immediately come to mind for most are Dr. King, Rosa Parks or Malcolm X. It's been argued Black History continues to be made daily in 2008 given the ever growing possibility that Barack Obama could become the Democratic nominee and perhaps President of the United States. But are Americans too narrowly focusing the roles blacks played in history to just the 19th and 20th centuries? National Geographic recently expanded the conversation in their February 2008 issue highlighting the reign of the Black Pharaohs in Ancient Egypt.
"Just as it should be acknowledged past the month of February, Black History goes beyond the shores of America," contends former NFL Star Willie Alexander. "The discussion should even include the names: Adam, Eve & Jesus!"
In his new book "Entering the Promised Land," Alexander lays out a detailed and documented argument challenging traditional theories about historical figures. He asserts that the role of blacks in history begins with the first human beings - Adam and Eve - hailing from ancient Ethiopia. By defining the words making up various metaphorical phrases of the Bible and using the logic of where they lived, Alexander concludes both were in fact Black.
Ethiopia is indeed the home of what archaeologists believe to be the oldest bones ever found. Discovered in 1974, 'Lucy' is estimated to have lived nearly 3.2 million years ago. "Humanity started in Ethiopia and that's backed up by the discovery of 'Lucy'," adds the former Houston Oiler turned successful businessman.
"We're just beginning to scratch the surface," continues Alexander. "By analyzing the actual metaphors in the Bible and academically defining the words used, we can gain a real understanding of what Jesus and other figures actually looked like."
Alexander also uses "Entering the Promised Land" to explain where the modern image of the blonde haired, blue-eyed Jesus came from: Sister Faustina of the Catholic Church in 1931. "This directly contradicts the Bible and other personal descriptions provided by the man who actually walked with Him," Alexander declares.
But why does the skin color of Adam, Eve or Jesus even matter in contemporary America? Alexander asserts African-Americans can benefit from the knowledge of what their authentic ancestry was, "It's vital for Black people's self-awareness and long-term self-esteem to break the remains of the imposed generational mental shackles."
Understanding such assertions will certainly lead skeptics to dispute or dismiss his claims, Alexander welcomes all challengers to find any flaws in his conclusions.
"This needs to be debated and discussed. Blacks have such a rich and noble history. But equality cannot be attained until everyone embraces the facts ignored when teaching Black History."
Good analogy.
Alexander also uses “Entering the Promised Land” to explain where the modern image of the blonde haired, blue-eyed Jesus came from: Sister Faustina of the Catholic Church in 1931. “This directly contradicts the Bible and other personal descriptions provided by the man who actually walked with Him,” Alexander declares.
But why does the skin color of Adam, Eve or Jesus even matter in contemporary America? Alexander asserts African-Americans can benefit from the knowledge of what their authentic ancestry was, “It’s vital for Black people’s self-awareness and long-term self-esteem to break the remains of the imposed generational mental shackles.”
I do not believe Jesus had blue eyes or blonde hair. And now I see WHY anyone would care. His physical appearance is not important. His earthly body was just a vessel that allowed him to walk among us for a while. I figure he looked more like middle eastern men, with black hair and brown skin and eyes, most certainly NOT blonde like me.
No one cares much about
the “race” of Adam and Eve and in any case it is not going to contribute to the collective or individual self-esteem/social/economic condition of the contemporary black populations of the world as the author seems to hope it will.
But i guess any publisher will pay to produce a book if
the theme is race.
Exactly. And that Sister Faustina hypothesis is pretty silly. Blond Jesus dates to 1931? Well, how do you explain all those medieval paintings which depicted a very European Christ/Mary? And those early Christian depictions where Christ looks like a handsome, clean-shaven youth like Apollo? This goes back WAAAY further than 1931.
Iconography is a *depiction* which owes more to devotion than to racial purity. It isn’t meant to be 100% historical. The Ethiopian Orthodox portrayals of Christ look...surprise!...very Ethiopian! The Japanese Our Lady of Akita looks....surprise...very Japanese!
Like you said, buffyt: it doesn’t matter. Christ was Middle Eastern, but in the sense that all races make up His Mystical Body the Church, we can say that he embodies all races.
He had no form or majesty that we should look at him, and no beauty that we should desire him.
- Isaiah 53:2 (NIV)
Shouldn't Alexander be claiming Charles Darwin instead?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.