• Starting today August 7th, 2024, in order to post in the Married Couples, Courting Couples, or Singles forums, you will not be allowed to post if you have your Marital status designated as private. Announcements will be made in the respective forums as well but please note that if yours is currently listed as Private, you will need to submit a ticket in the Support Area to have yours changed.

  • CF has always been a site that welcomes people from different backgrounds and beliefs to participate in discussion and even debate. That is the nature of its ministry. In view of recent events emotions are running very high. We need to remind people of some basic principles in debating on this site. We need to be civil when we express differences in opinion. No personal attacks. Avoid you, your statements. Don't characterize an entire political party with comparisons to Fascism or Communism or other extreme movements that committed atrocities. CF is not the place for broad brush or blanket statements about groups and political parties. Put the broad brushes and blankets away when you come to CF, better yet, put them in the incinerator. Debate had no place for them. We need to remember that people that commit acts of violence represent themselves or a small extreme faction.
  • We hope the site problems here are now solved, however, if you still have any issues, please start a ticket in Contact Us

interracial relationship?

Status
Not open for further replies.
Yes and no. I know many would think it racist, but I don't understand how.

Dominant and recessive traits do exist, and it is a fact that Black traits are very dominant and white traits very recessive and if they mixed the black traits would stomp the white ones out of existance as demonstrated by numerous mulattos. Or do you deny that? Do you deny the existance of dominant and recessive traits?

You know how the eye color brown is dominant over the recessive blue and green? Or how about the dominant black hair versus the recessive blonde and red?

And I could honestly care less . Will we still be human ? Yes . :)
 
Upvote 0
A

aeroz19

Guest
meandyoutoo said:
Hi! I am new here, but I am seeking Christian advice. I am a caucasian female and I am dating a male that has puerto rican background (also with german and italian about five generations back.) My step-mother says that this relationship is not biblical. I wanted to hear everyone's take on this with biblical references please. Thanks!
Danger, Will Robinson!!!

This is most likely a set-up to make it look like Christians are racists!!
 
Upvote 0
A

aeroz19

Guest
Nietzsche said:
this is a very funny topic to me many Christians are saying theres nothing wrong with it.

Funny as in the 1950s you guys were saying that god is against it and were pulling verses from the bible saying how god was against it and such.
Prove that it was the Christians who were overwhelmingly against it. I seriously doubt it.

and now days you look at it and say "theres nothing wrong with that"

In the future i know you will look back on gay marriage and say the same thing.
Doubt it.

Reason number 2235264089386082 why i hate Christians
:(

You still like Republicans though, right?

That one really hurt.
 
Upvote 0

Blackguard_

Don't blame me, I voted for Kodos.
Feb 9, 2004
9,468
374
43
Tucson
✟33,992.00
Faith
Lutheran
God certainly has no preference for blond hair and blue eyes (remember, physically, Jesus was Jewish).

Nice straw-man. I never said that he did.

And I don't think Blackguard understands genetics very well...

Sorry, but there is such a thing as dominant and recessive traits. And traits such as red hair and green eyes really are recessive and would be wiped out if they are drowned out by dominant traits.

And if this is about race not existing biologically, then how were they able to use DNA alone to identify a serial-rapist as Black (who they previously suspected was White) and lead to the arrest of Derrick Todd Lee?
 
Upvote 0
A

aeroz19

Guest
Blackguard_ said:
I think you misunderstand what a "Racist" is. It is simply someone who acknowledges that the races of Man exist, it does not necessarily mean a Supremacist of whatever stripe.
Oh, yes it does.

So a racist God would have created the different races as a non-racist God would not have created any races. God is racist, but he is not a Supremacist. Being Jewish, White, Black, etc. won't erarn you any points with God, we are all racially equal under his Law and Grace as those are purely individual matters.
Your definition of racist is incorrect.

Being racist does not mean you hate the other races.
Yes it does.

Racism does not equal hatred, if anything the anti-racists are hateful and the racists loving as the anti-racist hates the races by their actions in trying to destroy them and the racist loves the races by preserving them.
A racist is someone who believes that certain races are superior to others, an incorrect belief which leads to suffering of the supposedly inferior race.
 
Upvote 0

Blackguard_

Don't blame me, I voted for Kodos.
Feb 9, 2004
9,468
374
43
Tucson
✟33,992.00
Faith
Lutheran
A racist is someone who believes that certain races are superior to others, an incorrect belief which leads to suffering of the supposedly inferior race.

Yes, the dictionary definition was pointed out to me earlier. I was just going by "racist" as a simple combination of "race" and "ist" as "one who adheres to the idea of race" and was un-aware that the Supremacist connotation was official.

-ist
suff.
3.An adherent or advocate of a specified doctrine, theory, or school of thought: anarchist.


But my point that you can aknowldge that race exists and not hate/ have disadin for other races still stands.
 
Upvote 0

Radagast

comes and goes
Site Supporter
Dec 10, 2003
23,896
9,877
✟367,481.00
Country
Australia
Gender
Male
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Single
Upvote 0

Blackguard_

Don't blame me, I voted for Kodos.
Feb 9, 2004
9,468
374
43
Tucson
✟33,992.00
Faith
Lutheran
JESUS WAS BLACK !

Nope.

Leviticus 21
17 Speak unto Aaron, saying, Whosoever he be of thy seed in their generations that hath any blemish, let him not approach to offer the bread of his God.
18 For whatsoever man he be that hath a blemish, he shall not approach: a blind man, or a lame, or he that hath a flat nose, or any thing superfluous,
 
Upvote 0
A

aeroz19

Guest
Blackguard_ said:
1. explain the first part better.
2.How does recognizing that race exists and should be preserved make you an intolerant bigot?
If your opinion is shared by people in power such as judges, it can turn into intolerance and bigotry in the form of denying them (the inter-racial couple)the legal right to marry.

I never said the races had to fight and hate each other. Ideally they'd each have thier own lands or be able to live in the same areas without strife, I'm not sure which God ultimately wants.
I disagree. I don't think God places any significance on race. Race is the result of natural occurances, not God's direct intervention.
 
Upvote 0

Radagast

comes and goes
Site Supporter
Dec 10, 2003
23,896
9,877
✟367,481.00
Country
Australia
Gender
Male
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Single
In the NKJV, Lev 21:17-20 reads:

"Speak to Aaron, saying: "No man of your descendants in succeeding generations, who has any defect, may approach to offer the bread of his God. For any man who has a defect shall not approach: a man blind or lame, who has a marred face or any limb too long, a man who has a broken foot or broken hand, or is a hunchback or a dwarf, or a man who has a defect in his eye, or eczema or scab, or is a eunuch.

Nothing about flat noses there...

But, anyway, Jesus was (physically) Jewish, of course!

-- Radagast
 
Upvote 0

Blackguard_

Don't blame me, I voted for Kodos.
Feb 9, 2004
9,468
374
43
Tucson
✟33,992.00
Faith
Lutheran

Hmm....I'll have to read this some more to understand it better. Are you saying if the human race mixed into one race, we would see a race with a roughly equal mixture of all traits?

If both parents carry a recessive gene, their children could inherit the gene

The punnet diagram they show as an example asumes both parents have the recessive blue gene, but in reality the vast majority of people don't.

I'll have to look more into whether it is possible to eradicate a trait, but I do think that in a one mixed human race, such recessive traits as blue ayes would be at least very, very, rare.


But even if it was, why would that be bad?

Because God created the races for a reason and it would be wrong to destroy them
I prefer a humanity that is diverse as opposed to a single monolithic race where we all look the same like an alien race on "Star Trek".
 
Upvote 0

Blackguard_

Don't blame me, I voted for Kodos.
Feb 9, 2004
9,468
374
43
Tucson
✟33,992.00
Faith
Lutheran
Nothing about flat noses there...

1. I was responding jokingly to a joke.
2. The KJV is better and doesn't avoid the un-PC and sqeamish passages, for instance, here is a story about the prophet Elisha in the KJV..

2 Kings 2
23 And he went up from thence unto Bethel: and as he was going up by the way, there came forth little children out of the city, and mocked him, and said unto him, Go up, thou bald head; go up, thou bald head.
24 And he turned back, and looked on them, and cursed them in the name of the LORD. And there came forth two she bears out of the wood, and tare forty and two children of them.

And the NKJV....
2 Kings 2
23Then he went up from there to Bethel; and as he was going up the road, some youths came from the city and mocked him, and said to him, "Go up, you baldhead! Go up, you baldhead!"
24So he turned around and looked at them, and pronounced a curse on them in the name of the LORD. And two female bears came out of the woods and mauled forty-two of the youths.


But, anyway, Jesus was (physically) Jewish, of course!

I know. But Jesus had no race as his human body was just a shell for the Mind/Word of God.
 
Upvote 0

Blackguard_

Don't blame me, I voted for Kodos.
Feb 9, 2004
9,468
374
43
Tucson
✟33,992.00
Faith
Lutheran
If your opinion is shared by people in power such as judges, it can turn into intolerance and bigotry in the form of denying them (the inter-racial couple)the legal right to marry.

I'm actually quite libertarian and think that maariage should be a Church matter alone and the State should not get involved. So I think gays and such legally be allowed to marry, but idealy they should not be able to find anyone who will marry them. Besides, a marriage is a marriage becasue it is one in the eyes of God, so it doesn't really matter if Man recognizes it or not.

And you are correct in that vviews of the reality of race could lead to intolerance and bigotyr, but you have not shown that bigotry and intolerance are inherent in the belief of the reality of race.

I disagree. I don't think God places any significance on race. Race is the result of natural occurances, not God's direct intervention.

I disagree, I think the races were created by God. Or in terms of theistic evolution, God set things up so that the races would arise.
 
Upvote 0

Radagast

comes and goes
Site Supporter
Dec 10, 2003
23,896
9,877
✟367,481.00
Country
Australia
Gender
Male
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Single
Blackguard_ said:
...The punnet diagram they show as an example asumes both parents have the recessive blue gene, but in reality the vast majority of people don't...
Genes don't get destroyed in mixing, so the recessive blue genes won't vanish.

Blackguard_ said:
Because God created the races for a reason and it would be wrong to destroy them...
Did God create races? He certainly created different genes, but maybe he wanted us to intermarry! Maybe that's part of His New Testament plan! It certainly happened when Christian Jews went to Greece and Rome and Egypt and beyond...

Blackguard_ said:
...I prefer a humanity that is diverse...
Don't confuse your preferences with God's will!

-- Radagast
 
Upvote 0

Radagast

comes and goes
Site Supporter
Dec 10, 2003
23,896
9,877
✟367,481.00
Country
Australia
Gender
Male
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Single
Blackguard_ said:
1. I was responding jokingly to a joke...
Given the strong emotions you've stirred up, was that wise?

2. The KJV is better and doesn't avoid the un-PC and sqeamish passages
The KJV is not better --- it actually has some errors (I was a KJV fan once). If you can't read the original, the NKJV is probably better.

Your Kings quote, for example, uses the Hebrew na`ar which can mean a boy, a girl, a baby, a child, a servant, or a young man. The latter is probably the best translation, in context.

...Jesus had no race as his human body was just a shell for the Mind/Word of God.
That's almost a heresy... Jesus had a real human body.

-- Radagast
 
Upvote 0
Status
Not open for further replies.