Black Christians : Are we truly Christians, or, are we Mashiahians?

Discussion in 'Christian Study Group' started by Clyde C Coger Jr, Jun 1, 2010.

  1. Clyde C Coger Jr

    Clyde C Coger Jr going above and beyond PREMIUM MEMBER

    Country:
    United States
    Joined:
    Nov 17, 2006
    Messages:
    39,448
    Likes Received:
    10,421
    Gender:
    Male
    Occupation:
    Speaker/Teacher/Author
    Location:
    Dallas, TX
    Home Page:
    Ratings:
    +12,079
    ...

    Are we truly Christians, or are we Mashiahians?


    The following information will be considered obscure and perhaps even confusing for most so-called Christians, but be encouraged to read on and accept wisdom, which is to say, applied knowledge.


    It must be understood by students of the scriptures that the Greek word Christian is derived from the Greek word Christos, which is a title, which means anointed. The word 'Christos 'was in existence long before the birth of the Messiah. It is important to understand the context in which this word was used in everyday life prior to it being associated with the Messiah.
    The Greek Christos is a translation of the Hebrew Mashiah anointed (of the Lord), MESSIAH ...” http://www.plim.org/92didu.html

    Plain and simple, were the Disciples called Christians before and after the death of Yashua, Jesus, Eashoa…no they were not. What did they call themselves before being given the name Christians from non-Christians or non-followers of Christos, typically derived from Romans? They called themselves believers, brothers/sisters and saints:

    Prior to their adoption of the name, the Christians called themselves believers <Acts 5:14>, brothers <Acts 6:3>, or saints <Acts 9:13>, names which also continued to be used ... (From Nelson’s Illustrated Bible Dictionary) (Copyright (C) 1986, Thomas Nelson Publishers)."

    And since the twelve Apostles and followers of the (Mashiah) Messiah were Hebrew, wouldn’t they come in His name, Yahshua, and not the Greek title Christ? The Messiah told them at His ascension to preach in His name in Matt. 28:19 -20: "Go ye therefore, and teach all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father (Yahweh), and of the Son (Elohim), and of the Holy Ghost (Yahshua - Jn. 14:26): Teaching them to observe all things whatsoever I have commanded you: and, lo, I am with you always, even unto the end of the world." http://www.plim.org/92didu.html


    Most Bible commentaries confirm that the name Christian was not invented by the disciples or followers of the Messiah. Besides, the original context of the words Christos and Christians was derogatory:


    Hastings Dictionary of the Bible further states that Roman authorities gave the Messiah’s followers the name ‘Christians’ but the word itself to the pagans is associated with heinous crimes and vices. In this section "4. The Meaning of the Name.- The Roman authorities, who first designated the disciples of Jesus as Christians, attempted thereby to characterize them as a political group or party, held together by their loyalty to the party head, Christos. While originally the title was given for juridical convenience without implying a derogatory sense, the pagan mob must at a very early time have associated it with heinous crimes and vices ... Not too much emphasis should be placed, therefore upon the etymology of christos. Though literally meaning the ‘Anointed One," i.e. the Messiah, the title soon lost its original denotation and became a personal name in the Greek-speaking church."

    The earliest occurrences of the term in non-Christian literature include Josephus, referring to "the tribe of Christians, so named from him;"[8] Pliny the Younger in correspondence with Trajan; and Tacitus, writing near the end of the first century. In the Annals he relates that "by vulgar appellation [they were] commonly called Christians" [9] and identifies Christians as Nero's scapegoats for the Great Fire of Rome.[10]

    Etymology

    The Greek word Χριστιανός (christianos)—meaning "follower of Christ"—comes from Χριστός (christos)—meaning "anointed one"[4]—with an adjectival ending borrowed from Latin to denote adhering to, or even belonging to, as in slave ownership.[5] In the Greek Septuagint, christos was used to translate the Hebrew מָשִׁיחַ (Mašíaḥ, messiah), meaning "[one who is] anointed."[6] In other European languages, equivalent words to 'Christian' are likewise derived from the Greek, such as 'Chrétien' in French and 'Cristiano' in Spanish. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Christian



    As one that believes and accepts the Bible to be the Word of God, for some time now I have preferred to be simply called a brother or believer, and in particular, man of the pew, as indicated in my published work, Does Color Matter?


    ...


     
    Last edited: Apr 13, 2016
  2. Chevron Dove

    Chevron Dove Well-Known Member MEMBER

    Country:
    United States
    Joined:
    May 7, 2009
    Messages:
    6,080
    Likes Received:
    2,583
    Gender:
    Female
    Ratings:
    +2,732
    Bro Clyde,

    I have a copy of your book and in it too, you say that you go by the King James Version. Does my memory serve me correctly?

    Now, in this version, the term 'Christians' is written and i believe it was said that the term was first used in Syria referring to 'the believers' there? This term was used, I believe, after Jesus had come?

    At any rate, the information is good because, it was the Greeks that did interact with the believers and etc. Also, during the Greek Empire times, the scattered tribes were so apart of their culture and all of this comes into the picture regarding languages and script.

    I don't have a problem with either term though. It is frustrating with so much exploitations of the term 'Christ' and 'Christianity' over the course of thousands of years though in terms of the big governments involvement with confusing the very purpose of Jesus. This info reminds me of the word 'HEBREW' of which i've read was at one time considered a derogatory term too. It reminds me about Joseph, the Vizier when he advise his family of their low caste position in regards to the Egyptians because of their way of life. It is so amazing how terms can be propagandized to be viewed as socially acceptable or derogatory and then overtime, meanings vary from time to time.

    I appreciated the research.

    Thanks.
     
  3. Clyde C Coger Jr

    Clyde C Coger Jr going above and beyond PREMIUM MEMBER

    Country:
    United States
    Joined:
    Nov 17, 2006
    Messages:
    39,448
    Likes Received:
    10,421
    Gender:
    Male
    Occupation:
    Speaker/Teacher/Author
    Location:
    Dallas, TX
    Home Page:
    Ratings:
    +12,079
    In the Spirit of Sankofa and Real Truth!




    Yes Chevron,

    I do love the King James Version over the other versions. This research demonstrates the difficulty in translating and transliterating the Hebrew word Mashiah, and the end result of the substitute Greek word Christos/Christianity, which moved away from Biblical correctness.


     
    Last edited: Apr 13, 2016
  4. Chevron Dove

    Chevron Dove Well-Known Member MEMBER

    Country:
    United States
    Joined:
    May 7, 2009
    Messages:
    6,080
    Likes Received:
    2,583
    Gender:
    Female
    Ratings:
    +2,732
    Okay.

    In the Concordance of my King James version it does state that the english words used have a deeper meaning. And also, Jesus did say that we had to research the words and scripture. So, this is great.

    as far as it being Biblically correct, i think that the translation and meaning with regards to Jesus is great for me. it works for me.
     
  5. Clyde C Coger Jr

    Clyde C Coger Jr going above and beyond PREMIUM MEMBER

    Country:
    United States
    Joined:
    Nov 17, 2006
    Messages:
    39,448
    Likes Received:
    10,421
    Gender:
    Male
    Occupation:
    Speaker/Teacher/Author
    Location:
    Dallas, TX
    Home Page:
    Ratings:
    +12,079
    In the Spirit of Sankofa and Real Truth!



    Chevron,

    I follow what you are saying about what Jesus said about searchng the scriptures, but what is your position on the KJ version implying that Greek words are deeper than Hebrew words? Are you saying that you accept what the Concordance says about the English words having a deeper meaning?

    I'm not sure what you mean about the biblical correctness, in terms of meaning, provided by the translation on Jesus; I'm sure you have a particular point to make, and I'm curious to know what it is.


     
    Last edited: Apr 13, 2016
  6. Chevron Dove

    Chevron Dove Well-Known Member MEMBER

    Country:
    United States
    Joined:
    May 7, 2009
    Messages:
    6,080
    Likes Received:
    2,583
    Gender:
    Female
    Ratings:
    +2,732
    Hi Bro Clyde,

    no. I'm not sure I have a particular point to make. I just think the research you did was great. but again, I accept the King James Version of the word 'Christ' and 'Christian' as well. When you said,

    the KJ version implying that Greek words are deeper than Hebrew words...


    I don't remember saying this or reading this anywhere. But now that you mention it, i think in terms of the Greek culture of which goes back in time and in terms of Greek language, by the time many Hebrews became apart of their civilization, the Greek language and script, too, had been through some changes as well. So in comparison to Hebrew, I don't know.

    Again, i don't really have a point to make but, I want to reiterate that I think the researh you did regarding this word 'MASHIAHIANS' is great. i do like how you correlate it to the name 'MESSIAH'. And this too, brings a lot of thought in my mind. But haven't formed a summation. So I'll just throw out some things i'm considering.

    Based upon my own love and research, I am not 'a linguist' and, i am not a 'linguist by discipline' so, I try to take the modest approach to other researches that I come across. In the King James Version, I do believe that the words 'MESSIAH', 'RABBI' and others you have mentioned are also in there and in association to Jesus. So, I believe that the authors who wrote in the Bible knew what they were doing when they put those names in there, including 'EMMANUEL' [IMMANUEL] and etc. In my opinion, they put words that have unique descriptions of the whole presence of Jesus to the best of their ability and then, they also made sure to remind of in their writings of the power of the Holy Spirit. So even though you say that the word 'Christian' is Biblically incorrect, I think they were covered by the Holy Spirit and they made it plain that we have to do what you did and research more.

    I don't think that the Holy Spirit was asleep when they all chose to put that word, 'Christian' in the Bible but, I do believe you about the word MASHIAHIANS and the in depth research you gave about how the word 'Christians' was regarded.

    I want to add my basis and my perspective of holding unto the King James Version of the Bible.

    For the most part, it is because i am a woman and in keeping in line with the whole entire history regarding the Bible, both old and new testaments regarding me, as a woman and as a believer in the Creator, I do not profess any INDIVIDUALITY in my research outside of the realm of the Covenant. I also form this opinion based upon history and ancient governments, in general, regarding the treatment of specifically black/african women. I feel so much more safer when I am covered by a man; men of God. period. THIS IS MY TESTIMONY!

    i believe that the Creator made a testament, A COVANENT, an OATH, between Himself and the humanity [both men & women] that He created and based upon the contents, [1] I feel completely protected when I keep my arguments under that Covenant. So in reality, when someone disagrees with me, the conflict is between the Creator and the men [and women] of God who brought this OATH to be and me [only in terms of how I am understanding this Covenant do I choose to sway]. And [2] The reason why I adhere to the King James is based upon the past history of how this Covenant came together. I think that is another story! But here goes alittle of what i believe:

    =====================================================

    In terms of the history that surrounds this COVENANT between mankind and the Creator, I see that God our Creator judges on a big scale when it comes to government. He starts with the top of the government and then goes downwards from that point. And it doesn't matter whether it was His own government or a pagan government, HE STARTS AT THE TOP. He places the blame at the top first. And this is why I stick to King James; because he felt so sure about the council that he put together, He signed their work. Therefore, it will be the top government in AMERICA [& the 7 European Heads that supports its survival up to this point today] who is looked upon in judgment for SEPARATING from this version, whether it be this or that. If Jehovah blessed King James then, AMERICA is in trouble. If Jehovah had a problem with King James, we would have known it IN SCRIPT by now, that he was judged or slammed by Jehovah.

    -----BABYLON; apprx. 2000 BC, the Creator slammed this government and the top was the first to get judged. History confirms this.

    -----MINOAH; apprx. 1662 BC, the Creator slammed this system of which seems to be an extension of Babylon and we know it because...the land mass is fragmented and suffered a great and recorded catastrophe.

    -----EGYPT; 1436 BC, the Creator slammed this government at the very top. History confirms this because the dynastic change was sharp and abrupt and written about from many persespectives. At this time, he made His Covenant between Himself and humanity byway of MOSES and AARON, his chosen priest and high priest.

    ------ JUDGES--SAMSUN; apprx. 1100s BC, the Creator slammed Samsun, no matter that he was of the Chosen seed and government. then the Israelites wanted to have a Kingship form of government.

    ------KINGDOM--KING SAUL; apprx 1000s BC, the Creator slammed Saul and then set up David. But when David erred, he was corrected. He withstood a great chastisement that I don't believe many could have. But later when the kings of Israel erred to the point where they completely governed pagan style and not in accordance with THE COVENANT, they were slammed, driven out of the Middle East and went right back under pagan systems of which had become empires. When the Creator judges, it is obvious.

    -----EMPIRE GOVERNMENTS; Under all of these empire governments, the chosen seed were instructed by their own priesthood of how to regard their existence. Jesus never rebelled against the Roman Empire; He exercised freedom of speech and etc., human right freedom and he was judged wrongfully. the Creator God judged all of them eventually...the Roman Empire was abruptly slammed around AD 433 and records reveal a massive invasion of the Huns. And while that is great evidence, there is even much more such as the abrupt ending of the Mound civilization that very year, all the way over in ancient America. It was a natural phenomena that set these government collapses off!

    Not much came out of the Assyrian Empire because they had little respect for the human rights of the Israelites. But King Nebuchad was slammed alittle and when he gave respect to the Creator God, he was forgiven. His later lineage was judged. When King Darius realized that he was wrong for writing an edict that took away human rights, he turned around and got all those around him who tricked him and he was forgiven...the Persian Empire was awesome in how they turned around and gave respect to the Creator God. They helped the Jews even, rebuild their temple with a lot of money and military protection! so when the jews shouted for Roman rule; that's waht they got...a 2000 year sentence. We are the children, the offspring, of that day of election. but the priesthood was set up under the church. When Queen Elizabeth came along, she sat under her priesthood. She adhered to the epistles. She was of the lineage of kings and this is the definition of 'kingdom'; inheritance. She inherited her position and she chose not to marry in the flesh but in the spirit. That is why she became; the Virgin Queen. So when King James finally came along, he pushed to have this book translated. That was is life's contribution! I see a pattern. if he was wrong, then it seems as though he would have been slammed before is death by Jehovah, in my opinion. It would be obvious.

    Just like the earlier Molgol empire of which bit the dust beginning in AD 1335, with the Black Death Plague, the Creator God looks at the most powerful system that influences the whole planet. It doesn't matter if it is pagan, Christian, Anti-Christian, a kingdom styled system, an Imperial system...

    Now today, this government thought it okay to separate after they used this COVENANT put out under the Kingship system under King James and I would be willing to almost guarantee you that no previous president [in his right mind] signed any new age TRANSLATED VERSION after 1776, of the Covenant whether it be from ancient Greek manuscript or a re-translated Version of King James Version...they might encourage others but, if you consider that the Creator God starts at the top of a government first then trickles downward, I know i would be slow to sign away my soul for any new age council if I was a king, a president, an emperor...

    In my conclusion, I think that the Creator God starts at the top of a government and judges based upon human rights violations. And due to Separation of church and state, the State took the head over the church!!!...and chattel slavery continued for the next 89 years. This government is in trouble. They cant blame individual churches without taking the ultimate blame at the top first. they can go to church all day long...

    He will start at the top! This still means too that he will look at the Christians who profess Christianity or MASHIAHIANITY[!] but then became benefactors of this split in 1776. That means He's going to look at the top of the government but also, the pulpit. He is going to look at the white churches first, in my opinion, but also, the Black Christians based upon the fact that the COVENANT is here! It is available thanks to the mighty works of many white Christians who died for the faith. now i think a said a lot but, there is so much more to this. but that's it for now.

    Thanks for asking my thoughts! I'm still working them out though.
     
  7. Clyde C Coger Jr

    Clyde C Coger Jr going above and beyond PREMIUM MEMBER

    Country:
    United States
    Joined:
    Nov 17, 2006
    Messages:
    39,448
    Likes Received:
    10,421
    Gender:
    Male
    Occupation:
    Speaker/Teacher/Author
    Location:
    Dallas, TX
    Home Page:
    Ratings:
    +12,079
    In the Spirit of Sankofa and Real Truth!




    Chevron,

    If I can establish that you did imply the statement: the KJ version implying that Greek words are deeper than Hebrew words......will you address my below posted comments concerning that?

    Here is the quote I responded to in post # 4:
    http://destee.com/forums/showpost.php?p=657333&postcount=4





    And reading the above caused me to ask in this manner:




     
    Last edited: Apr 13, 2016
  8. Chevron Dove

    Chevron Dove Well-Known Member MEMBER

    Country:
    United States
    Joined:
    May 7, 2009
    Messages:
    6,080
    Likes Received:
    2,583
    Gender:
    Female
    Ratings:
    +2,732


    Oops!

    Okay Bro Clyde, please allow me to try again to answer.

    Regarding me implicating that Greek words are deeper than Hebrew words, I suppose this may be the implication, but honestly, I really don't know.

    When I think about the Middle English words used to translate the COVENANT out of the past script formats, I really don't know what the Council of King James were regarding. In my mind, some of them might have been skilled and disciplined in more than one language and script form.

    When I think about the English script form and language, the Greek script form and language and the Hebrew script form and language, I think all in all, they went through thousands of years of adaptations and, basically, I just don't know. I just believe the Concordance and the words of Jesus that you have to research the words and scriptures because all scripts and languages have went through adaptations down through the ages.

    Because i am not a linguist by discipline and only ascribe to doing what Jesus said was sufficient for me as a believer [Christian], I believe that I am doing a good work for myself, seeking knowledge. And finally, in my opinion, i would like to take this a step farther and say this; i really believe that most of the script forms used today by powerful and civilized governments all come from one main script form that was developed thousands of years ago in Africa byway of the very first man that is Adam.

    I believe that there was one language of which was based off of a script form that Adam had gotten the honor to preserve in script form. I believe that civilizations that did thrive did so based upon this basis and eventually some of them altered and varied later for purposes of secrecy and etc. but they still had to retain some kind of code that kept a continual basis, in my opinion. And for the systems that varied to far away from this they eventually became extinct and the people had to go into other civilizations to thrive. They had to depend upon the powerful systems that did keep that foundation and therefore, civilized humanity is based upon a solid script form, no matter the variation if they retained that origin.

    But again, in terms of Greek versus Hebrew, I just don’t know. I think that the Greek civilization was definitely first before the Hebrew-Israelites developed a culture and civilization, but then I say to myself, does that mean that their language and script form was more IN DEPTH [deeper] in terms of origins than the Greeks!? No, not necessarily.

    The Hebrews went into about 400 years of captivity during a time when the Egyptian civilization was tops. And there script form and language was the basis for the Pentatuch. Even though the Egyptians had encompassed early Greek experience too, they survived beyond the collapse of Minoa, a Greek civilization, but the Egyptians continued onward in their language and scripts in trade and contacts with other re-emerging civilizations such as in Babylon during the time of Hammurabi … and therefore they kept the origins of the earliest script form more intact, in my opinion. The later emerging Greek civilizations may have become fragmented and confusion arose with regards to some script forms such as what is known as THE LINEAR B SCRIPT and more. There arose so many distinct Greek civilizations before they formed under a 4-Head government so, I just don’t know how to equate their script as being more deeper than the Hebrew script. And then, which Hebrew script was used as a basis, since the Hebrews themselves were scattered? I just simply believe that we need to regard the very civilization that presented the COVENANT to us and research words and scriptures IN CONTEXT to gain a better understanding of the COVENANT that has been passed down through the ages.
     
  9. Clyde C Coger Jr

    Clyde C Coger Jr going above and beyond PREMIUM MEMBER

    Country:
    United States
    Joined:
    Nov 17, 2006
    Messages:
    39,448
    Likes Received:
    10,421
    Gender:
    Male
    Occupation:
    Speaker/Teacher/Author
    Location:
    Dallas, TX
    Home Page:
    Ratings:
    +12,079
    In the Spirit of Sankofa and Real Truth!




    Chevron,

    Thank you for acknowledging your implication that Greek is deeper than Hebrew and concluding that you really can't speak to that. For a minute, I thought I was seeing things wrong:).

    There are several statements, as highlighted above and below, requiring some showing and proving:





    I do understand we are getting off topic so to speak, but I'm curious to know the sources upon which you rely or knowing the point at which you arrived, asserting that Greek culture was antecedent to Hebrew and Egyptian cultures, basically.

     
    Last edited: Apr 13, 2016
  10. Chevron Dove

    Chevron Dove Well-Known Member MEMBER

    Country:
    United States
    Joined:
    May 7, 2009
    Messages:
    6,080
    Likes Received:
    2,583
    Gender:
    Female
    Ratings:
    +2,732
    You're welcome Bro Clyde.

    I was only speaking from the persepective of the King James Version and my basis was upon the time period of which it was brought together, during the time when Middle English Language was spoken. No. I just cannot make any conclusion upon Greek versus Hebrew script form. I just don't know.


    In terms of the other points you request that i show and prove, i'll have to get back with that later. But just off the top of my head, here are some terms that comes to my mind about early Greek civilizations that formed before the Hebrews after the time of the Exodus.

    Minoan Greeks and the
    Mycenaean Greeks

    The Ugarit civilization in south syria too was formed in this land which i think has Greek origins long before the Hebrews formed.

    As far as the LINEAR B script and other Greek scripts, i think a scholar named Woolly may have been one source but, i'm not sure. I will have to google search.

    ill get back.
     
Loading...