brain sizes: Einstein's and women's

Bob LeChevalier lojbab at
Tue Sep 17 10:37:25 EST 2002

"John Knight" <jwknight at> wrote:
>> I see many translations all of which use the word "nation" or
>> "nations".  It is YOU, the LIAR that thinks that those translations
>> are wrong and that they all should say "race".  But YOU are indeed a
>> LIAR, speaking the words of the serpent, your master, who is the
>> Prince of Lies.
>The Greek word "ethnos" is translated as follows by Strong's:
>Probably from G1486; a race (as of the same habit), that is, a tribe;
>specifically a foreign (non-Jewish) one (usually by implication pagan): -
>Gentile, heathen, nation, people.
>So it can be both a "nation" and a "people".

We know precisely what the word ethnos means, nincompoop.  It is used
directly as an English word, both as itself and in its derivations:
ethnologist and ethnic (group).  An "ethnos" is an "ethnic group",
which means a group of people sharing a culture and heritage.
Heritage means history more than it does genetics - DNA testing has
been around for a couple of decades, but historically people have
determined ethnicity primarily by what people SAY they are, and
secondarily by who their documented parents are (which of course
ignores adoption and bastardy and cuckoldry).

>But what is meant by "people"?  RACE, of course.

Tribe, as the definition explicitly stated.

Caucasians are not a single "tribe".  Nor are orientals, nor are
Amerinds, nor are Negroids.  Each of the "colors" is MANY tribes.
Using the word "race" to translate "ethnos", especially when all the
Biblical translations do NOT use the word "race", is to inject the LIE
that the Bible is talking about something to do with skin color (i.e.
the modern concept of "race".

>The following is an example of its use as "nation":
>John 11:51  And this spake he not of himself: but being high priest that
>year, he prophesied that Jesus should die for that nation;
>John 11:52  And not for that nation only, but that also he should gather
>together in one the children of God that were scattered abroad.
>The "children of God" are the Israelites who were scattered among all

What a nincompoop.  You really love to ignore context, don't you.  Who
said this?  It was not Christ.

>[46] But some of them went their ways to the Pharisees, and told them
> what things Jesus had done.
>[47] Then gathered the chief priests and the Pharisees a council, and
> said, What do we? for this man doeth many miracles.
>[48] If we let him thus alone, all men will believe on him: and the
> Romans shall come and take away both our place and nation.
>[49] And one of them, named Caiaphas, being the high priest that same
> year, said unto them, Ye know nothing at all,
>[50] Nor consider that it is expedient for us, that one man should die
> for the people, and that the whole nation perish not.
>[51] And this spake he not of himself: but being high priest that
> year, he prophesied that Jesus should die for that nation;
        ^^^^^^^^^^^^^                       ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
>[52] And not for that nation only, but that also he should gather
> together in one the children of God that were scattered abroad.

The text in verse 51 makes clear that Caiaphas, who was a Pharisee
(and therefore a Jew) was speaking not for himself BUT "for the
nation" (i.e. the nation of Jews which he had the position to speak

And thus we see that the "he" in verse 52 is Caiaphas, and that he is
presuming in his role of high priest to speak for all of the children
of God, repeating the formula "not for that nation only BUT"  Now
clearly, by your nincompoop ideas, the Jew Caiaphas is NOT speaking
for the "White Christian Israelites", so your interpretation makes no

>but this is obviously not the same as the following, where it means
>"people" or "race":
>Joh 18:33  Then Pilate entered into the judgment hall again, and called
>Jesus, and said unto him, Art thou the King of the Jews?
>Joh 18:34  Jesus answered him, Sayest thou this thing of thyself, or did
>others tell it thee of me?
>Joh 18:35  Pilate answered, Am I a Jew? Thine own nation and the chief
>priests have delivered thee unto me: what hast thou done?

Notice that Pilate is referring to the JEWISH nation, because he
considers all the people of Judea to be Jews.  That is WHY he asks
"Art thou King of the Jews?" and not "Art thou King of the White
Christian Israelites?" (as if anyone in those days considered anyone
to be an "Israelite".

>Joh 18:36  Jesus answered, My kingdom is not of this world: if my kingdom
>were of this world, then would my servants fight, that I should not be
>delivered to the Jews: but now is my kingdom not from hence.
>Pilate obviously wasn't referring to a country when he said "thine own
>nation".  He was simply presuming that Jesus was the same RACE as the jews,
>and Jesus PROVED that He was NOT by reminding Pilate that if He had been a
>jew, the jews certainly wouldn't have been demanding He be crucified.

That is NOT what he said to Pilate.  He said that if he were a king,
his servants would fight.  There have been MANY kings that have been
killed by their subjects.

>1Peter 2:9  But ye are a chosen generation, a royal priesthood, a holy
>nation, a peculiar people; that ye should show forth the praises of him who
>hath called you out of darkness into his marvelous light
>In this Scripture, "generation" is translated from "genos" which means
>From G1096; "kin" (abstractly or concretely, literally or figuratively,
>individually or collectively): - born, country (-man), diversity,
>generation, kind (-red), nation, offspring, stock.
>So this is clearly a different use of "ethnos" than "nation".

People of a nation or tribe or ethnos were presumed to share common

>The reference to "peculiar [ethnos]" must mean "peculiar race".

Not in the sense of skin color.  But merely in the sense of

>RACE, n. [L. radix and radius having the same original. This word coincides
>in origin with rod, ray, radiate, &c.]
>1. The lineage of a family, or continued series of descendants from a parent
>who is called the stock. A race is the series of descendants indefinitely.
>Thus all mankind are called the race of Adam; the Israelites are of the race
>of Abraham and Jacob. Thus we speak of a race of kings, the race of Clovis
>or Charlemagne; a race of nobles, &c.
>Hence the long race of Alban fathers come.
>2. A generation; a family of descendants. A race of youthful and unhandled
>3. A particular breed; as a race of mules; a race of horses; a race of

I have no idea what dictionary you pulled this from.  Here is
>Main Entry: 3race
>Function: noun
>Etymology: Middle French, generation, from Old Italian razza
>Date: 1580
>1 : a breeding stock of animals
>2 a : a family, tribe, people, or nation belonging to the same stock b
> : a class or kind of people unified by community of interests,
> habits, or characteristics <the English race>
>3 a : an actually or potentially interbreeding group within a species;
> also : a taxonomic category (as a subspecies) representing such a
> group b : BREED c : a division of mankind possessing traits that are
> transmissible by descent and sufficient to characterize it as a
> distinct human type
>4 obsolete : inherited temperament or disposition
>5 : distinctive flavor, taste, or strength 

Meaning 2a is the one associated with ethnos.  The Jews are an
"ethnos".  Christians are NOT an "ethnos".

Meaning 3c is the one usually intended for "race" when referring to
"whites" and "blacks", and has NOTHING to do with "ethnos".

>The use of the Greek word "ethnos" in this instance is more accurately
>translated as "race" than as "people".

I'll believe the MANY different translators of the Bible who chose
"people", rather than a nincompoop like you who LIES on behalf of his
father the Prince of Lies.


More information about the Neur-sci mailing list