While disagreeing with my article titled; Slavery and Colonialism: the purpose of Christianity, a commentator pointed out that ‘Christianity existed way before British/American slave owners used it for their own twisted advantages.’
He also noted that ‘some of the earliest followers of Christ were Black people. Just because nations that didn't even exist in the days of Christianity's birth used it wrongly doesn't mean that how it (Christianity) was used was its purpose.’
Apparently, the commentator and I are of the opinion that the Europeans used Christianity for ‘their own twisted advantage.’
And thus that twisted advantage, in my opinion, was why the early Europeans hijacked and remodelled Christianity to suit their purpose, which was, and I insist, to advance slavery and colonialism.
If it wasn’t so, why then do we now have a perfect white man with blond hair and blue eyes on the cross as Jesus Christ? Was Jesus of Nasserite a white man?
Jesus couldn’t have been a white man because he was a Jew. Remember that the Jews were enslaved by Egyptians. And looking at Pharaoh Tutankhamun (1336 BC - 1327 BC), obviously Egyptians were black Africans.
And so if the forefathers of Jesus (Jacob and his sons etc.) were white people, then it means black Africans once enslaved Europeans in Egypt. But have the Europeans accepted this?
All the same, why I consider Christianity to be European religion is because West Africans never knew or heard of Christianity until the conquering Europeans introduced the religion to them.
Nevertheless, my forefathers embraced this new religion because the Bible’s Ten Commandments weren’t different from what they already had as laws, such as thou shall not kill, thou shall not steal and etc.
But there was a sham underlining the tenets of the new religion. And that deception was the white man on the cross, which they called Jesus Christ. It was a scam because the Europeans knew that Jesus was a black man and yet they represented him as a white man.
As such, everybody was compelled to bow down before this statute and profess that the white man on it as his/her lord and personal saviour. That was deception in action.
The Europeans were indirectly saying to West Africans that they will continue to rely on them for their survival. The implication was that West Africans and Africans in general have inadvertently acknowledged that their survival depends on white people. And since then, things have never been the same for them.
Incidentally, slavery happened in no other part of Africa but West Africa. And so, the descendants of former slaves all over the world came from West Africa. In fact, with the help of Christianity, slavery became easier for the Slave masters since they have projected themselves as the saviour of black people.
And unfortunately black people are now propagating Christianity after the Europeans abandoned it, having served its purpose. Perhaps they are suffering from Stockholm syndrome.
Meanwhile, Africa is blessed with natural resources yet they always depend on handouts from the Europeans because they continue to profess to the white man on the cross as their lord and personal saviour.
Even corrupt African heads of state stash their looted wealth in European and American banks, I guess because they also profess that the white man on the cross is their lord and personal saviour.
Until Africans realise that (new) Christianity is a scam established by Europeans to hold them perpetually under their (Europeans) feet, the story about Africa will continue to be about wars, diseases, hunger etc.
To be continued…