HarshBitterTrut:
Ever wondered why secret societies are secret? Why is it that an overwhelming majority of elite leaders in America, including those who've occupied the highest office, have belonged to an organization in the vast network of secret societies, whose rituals and teachings derived from the ancient mystery schools of Egypt and Babylon?Why is death the penalty for breaking a secret society oath? Why do they pay homage to pagan gods and goddesses?Why do many self-proclaimed Christians belong to these secret societies, when their practices blatantly violate God's Commandments, such as Exodus 20:3, which states, "Thou shalt have no other gods before me?" And why don't their pastors say anything about it?Is there a secret motive behind the positive PR that many of these secret organizations receive for their good deeds such as feeding programs, scholarships, volunteering, youth mentoring, etc. that even the lower ranking members of these societies don't know about?Could today's network of these secret societies be the architects and workers of the antichrist' New World Order aka "Illuminati," as prophesied in the Holy Bible?These questions and more will be answered by author and Evangelist Rayford L. Johnson, who has spent more than 20 years researching, writing and teaching on the occult. Johnson has counseled and ministered demon deliverance prayers on many former members of the occult. Many of them have testified that they have been set free by the power of Jesus Christ from the spiritual torment and generational curses that the pagan rituals and oaths have unknowingly brought upon them and even their family through the "spiritual legalities" of breaking God's commandments."The Truth Shall Make You Free."John 8:32

LikeAking:
Because poverty is a bastard.

TechSpecialist:
attention seeker

BlackRexDeus:
.



https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KtHsOQxfayk




https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_AjHPNGyrd8


If we can't get them out, we will breed them out!



https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YuSjRmtd1VU



https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mMi2EoMjTF8

HarshBitterTrut:

HISTORYPaper Bag Test: Letter From 1928 Addresses Black Fraternity And Sorority Colorism At Howard University
4.0KSHARES
Share
4.0K
Tweet
58
While shadows of colorism still exist within the culture of African-American fraternities and sororities in the United States, there was a point in which it was blatantly clear that certain organizations took the hue of one’s skin into account before giving them a chance to pledge.

We have all heard stories of the practice of fraternities and sororities only allowing members with skin color lighter than a brown paper bag to gain admission into their bonds and proof that color lines and boundaries were strong and present can be seen by simply comparing the intake photos of the members of Alpha Kappa Alpha and Delta Sigma Theta from the first half of the 20th century.

You may think that these destructive practices may have simply been overlooked as a simple fact of life during the early years of our greek letter organizations, but it apparently they weren’t. In 1928, a sophomore at Howard University named Edward H. Taylor published an article in “The Hilltop” student newspaper that accused fraternities of “splitting the various classes into groups of different shades — yellow, brown, and black.” According to Taylor, “The light-skinned students are sought after by the fraternities and sororities, particularly the latter, as members and the dark ones passed by. The darker brown students then form their own cliques while the blacks are left in the cold.”

WatchTheYard.com has recently obtained a published editorial response to this article written in 1928. The writer, takes a very well argued response to this claim and explores it even more in depth addressing it in a way that makes the present day reader feel as if someone from today jumped into a time machine, saw the original article and responded to it.

akak

The article begins with the writer describing their initial feeling of distraught when hearing about the colorism found in Howard’s Greek community.

“We are not so surprised when we hear such rumors and reports about institutions of learning owned, controlled and attended by white people, but it certainly comes as a great shock and causes a feeling of shame when we hear such news about Negro colleges. At first glance, it would seem incredible that Negros, themselves the victims of ignorant prejudice and discrimination because of color should follow the lead of the Nordics.”

The writer then follows by making the claim that no matter what color you are, if you are African-American, you are Africa-American.

“Negros, young and old, everywhere in the world today and particularly in the United States, have got to clearly understand that whatever the gradations of color in the group, they are all Negros. It isn’t of the slightest moment that one Negro can boast (?) of several white ancestors while another cannot except as it reveals his lamentable ignorance, blindness and lack of race respect.

They then follow by dropping some knowledge on the reader via an example that still holds true today:

“The lightest Negro in the United States, if known as a Negro, will be jim crowed as quickly as one possessing no Caucasian ancestry.”

The author then finishes by offering a solution that if these claims of colorism within Black fraternities and sororities are true, “these organizations ought to be suppressed for the good of the university and the Negro group.” He closes by stating:

“There is nothing in a white skin to gloat over and nothing in a black skin to be depressed about. It is character, intelligence, and virtue that count. Millions of morons, cretins and degenerates have white skins and straight hair while a long list of able Negros, from the Kings of Ethiopia who once dominated the civilized world, to Askia of Songhai, to Tshaka the Zulu Napoleon, Mosheh the nation builder, Khama of Bamangwate, Sir Apolo Kagwa, Prime Minister of Uganda, and to Roland Hayes and Nathaniel Dett have been dark as the night.

article

This article speaks volumes to the current situation of colorism in the United States. Just this week, rapper Kendrick Lamar was accused on the internet of not being a conscious Black man because he chose to become engaged to his high school sweetheart who happens to be a light skinned Black woman instead of finding a darker skinned woman to marry.

Many of the truths in the article regarding greek life also still hold true today. While Black sororities in the United States all now have a mix of the beautiful shades of African-American skin tones, many of the shadows of this colorism-based past still exist. Think about it. You have probably come across a situation in which someone tells a light-skinned Delta that she looks like she could be an AKA and vice versa. While they may not have explicitly stated that this is because she has light-skin, you know exactly what they mean.

What do you think about the present day state of colorism in Black fraternities/sororities? Have you dealt with any situations as a greek because of the color of your skin? Please discuss in the comment section below.

HarshBitterTrut:

Unfit Christian
Colorism at the Cross
JUNE 20, 2016 CHURCH•RACE
COLORISM AT THE CROSS
BY D. DANYELLE THOMAS
She’s Not Dressed in a Way Becoming of a First Lady
Draped from head to toe in a brilliant cerulean blue gown with a plunging neckline, Meagan Good was instantly hit with the swift judgment of religious traditionalists across the country. The wife of a Sony Exec and Seventh Day Adventist minister, Good had, unbeknownst to her, stepped into a world long steeped in rigid code of conduct. There is, by all observed accounts, a formula for becoming and behaving as a First Lady in the church. The First Lady is demure, pious, and visually subdued to the shadow of her husband’s power as the shepherd of the house. A simple Google image search of “Pastor and First Lady” can attest to these observations.

Most of us who are or have been churched have simply accepted this as unquestioned fact. Women of moral character, especially those who profess Christian faith, should behave in a “proper” way. Yet, our long-standing traditions are not biblically based but are a residual effect of the Black church’s history of Colorism at the Cross.

HISTORY OF COLORISM IN THE BLACK CHURCH
Let’s with defining this concept. Colorism is prejudice or discrimination against individuals with a dark skin tone, typically among people of the same ethnic or racial group.

Even if you don’t know the concept by name, you’ve surely seen it in action. Its origins are rooted in slavery by the practice of putting lighter-complexioned slaves in the “privileged” position of house labor and deeper hued slaves in the field. Despite fairer hues being evidence of rape at the hands of white men, the seeming ease of working in the house compared to the fields began the decades long “light skin vs. dark skin” war in our community. The church, which has been shilled as a place of refuge and hope for our ancestors, was not impervious to this phenomenon.

In his work The Black Bourgeoisie, E. Franklin Frazier said that, “Even in their religious affirmations, the descendants of the free mulattoes held aloof from the Negro masses.” Much like fraternities and sororities at the turn of the century, so too was the church divided by skin tone. Those of lighter hues tended to place their religious affiliations within historically white denominations such as Episcopalian, Catholic, and Presbyterian. As history tells it, the Black church had its own paper bag tests. While some churches literally used paper bags, others used the “comb test”, an exercise where a fine tooth comb was used in the hair. If the comb couldn’t pass with ease, the congregant wouldn’t be extended the right hand of fellowship. Similar tests included the door test, where churches would paint their doors the darkest shade of brown allowable to become a member of their congregation.

But why would a people, much less a church, continue the problematic practice of colorism and color-codes once free from the systems that instituted it?

WASHED WHITE AS SNOW
The Black Church was not impervious to the cultural norms of the time. Whiteness was (and is) prized as the penultimate marker of civility. Basically, as long as society kept pushing whiteness as the standard of normal that every other ethnicity to strive towards, colorism was always going to be a problem. Mix up those attitudes with a little evangelical Christianity and you’ve got yourself a heap-a trouble.

Much like present day, the lighter skinned Black person faired better than their darker counterparts in several regards. That is not to say that light skinned people didn’t face the racism, classism, and other systems of oppression endemic to being Black in America. So you can save your light skinned tears in the comments about “but we all Black, doe.” Yes, the one drop rule makes us all definitively Black, but enduring racialized stereotypes in that time (and today) concluded that the presence of whiteness somehow lessened the negativity of Blackness. Light skinned Blacks were more often given work opportunities outside of domestic jobs. While light skinned Blacks, when their Blackness was known, were never accepted as white, their Blackness was more tolerated than a darker skinned person.

The seeds of colorism can also be traced to the white supremacist theological dogma of Evangelical Christianity. Black was (and is) traditionally associated with death, sin, and evil while white is associated with purity, innocence, and holiness. Even God had to be, by default, portrayed as white. You can probably see where this is going.

Many denominations of Christianity teach of the flesh (body) as inherently evil and wrought with iniquity, keeping us away from the perfect holiness of God. With that logic, black flesh was even more inherently evil than white flesh. Light complexioned Blacks, with their desire to maintain the favor afforded to them by White Gaze, turned this white supremacy inward and began to discriminate against their deeply hued brothers and sisters–even in the church.

WHERE ARE WE NOW?
While colorism is decisively extinct in the modern Black church, its remnants remain. Part of the idea of whiteness as purity, holiness, and innocence also has implications of sexuality. Whiteness or, in the case of Black folks, lightness is piety, demure and subdued behavior. Blackness beyond that of a paper bag is associated with promiscuity, Sapphire-stereotype, and evil. Essentially, whiteness is sanctified while Blackness is demonized.

Success of the First Lady formula is dependent on its performance of whiteness by mimicking the associations of colorism. Proper First Ladies are not promiscuous or immodest in dress or behavior. They are neither loud nor boisterous in speech, always deferring to their husband in exaggerated submission. Meagan Good was criticized not because she was inherently wrong but because her actions didn’t pantomime the long held performance of whiteness. Her daring to display her sexuality, which was very likely done with the consent of her husband, could be too closely associated to blackness while unearthing the church’s yet unhealed white supremacist doctrine.

black church Black culture colorism faith

HarshBitterTrut:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9YJvrBChIMk

Truthwords:
Pastor Stephen Darby, one of the greatest pastors that ever lived. I still listen to his messages till now. Rest In Power Brother

HarshBitterTrut:



Every other religion is except for the Black Jewish faith practiced homosexuality as apart of their conscious understanding of the universe. This includes gay male priests and gay female priests to attend to their false deities.


According to custom, the Rain Queen must shun public functions, and can only communicate with her people through her male or female councillors.

Every November she presides over the annual Rainmaking ceremony at her royal compound in Khetlhakone Village.

She is not supposed to marry, but has many "wives", as they are referred to in the Balobedu language. These are not spouses in the usual sense of the word; as a queen regnant, she has the equivalent of royal court servants, or ladies-in-waiting), sent from many villages all over the Balobedu Kingdom. These wives were selected by The Queen's Royal Council and in general are from the households of the subject chiefs. This ritual of "bride giving" is strictly a form of diplomacy to ensure loyalty to the Queen.

The Rain Queen's mystical rain making powers are believed to be reflected in the lush garden which surrounds her royal compound.