Was King James black? A look at the man who made the bible common
By EvanHunter
@EvanHunter (4026)
United States
August 18, 2010 12:37pm CST
While there are lots of charges against King James who rewrote the bible into English and made it available to the world, even to us today, there is one rumor that I have heard a few times that I would like to bring up that is different than others and that is the possibility that he was a man of "color" and not "white". He has been accused of many thing of being homosexual by the Muslim community of being a heretic and having incest by the Catholics. But was there a possibility that he was a descendant of a black Israelite as some claim? Let's hear from the de-bunkers and the supporters. I think regardless of his color he made the bible widely available for everyone a thing that the catholic church tried to avoid for many years.
If you are not familiar with the theory here is a video:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VoQUFGrCULk
2 people like this
2 responses
@suspenseful (40193)
• Canada
19 Aug 10
Actually the only way he could have been a 'black' Hebrew Israelite was if one of his ancestors had come from Ethiopia. (Moses second wife was Ethiopian and she may have told her countrymen about God and many converted to the Hebrew religion( And the Israelites were not black, they were of the Semitic group and were brown, they were not descended from the Negroes of the area South of the Sahara in Africa.
But if you read a lot of books of that time, many English regarded anyone with dark or almost black hair as black, for instance the Black Irish were those Irish who had dark brown or almost black hair rather then the kind whose hair was either red or blond. So King James may have had black or dark brown hair.
I noticed that the comments on that video have been disabled so obviously those who wanted to believe that King James was descended from Israelites and especially those Israelites who were of part Ethiopian descend not to disagree with them.
1 person likes this
@EvanHunter (4026)
• United States
20 Aug 10
I think the reason the comments was disabled is because there is a large debate on youtube between traditional "Jews" and "black Israelite" communities. There is a video of a community of people who were genetically tested and shown to be descendants of those who escaped Israel that live near south Africa and still practice Judaism I will have to find the video.
1 person likes this
@suspenseful (40193)
• Canada
21 Aug 10
Well those Jews who escaped Israel had to be pure Jewish unless their ancestors had intermarried with the local Zulus or Bushmen in the area and converted them to Judaism. That would make them part black. Also if those Jews who escaped also went through Ethiopia and intermarried with the Ethiopians who practiced the Jewish faith. That would be the only reason for them to be black Jews.
So was that the case?
@EvanHunter (4026)
• United States
21 Aug 10
You are assuming the original "Jewish" community was light skinned, the bible says time and again they were dark skinned, even Jesus was dark skinned revelations 1:15. Other scriptures: Lamentations 4:8, Lamentations 5:10, Job 30:30, SOS 1:5
Here is that video http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZaDh07w7AYo
1 person likes this
@petersum (4522)
• United States
18 Aug 10
Like most things to do with royalty, there is as much "untrues" as "trues". That bad English specifies that everything not true isn't necessarily false. I would say it is most unlikely that King James was any of the things mentioned in your post.
As for re-writing the Bible, King James may have caused it to happen but probably did none of the work himself.
1 person likes this
@EvanHunter (4026)
• United States
20 Aug 10
I agree he didn't do the work himself but considering that the catholic church at one time would have killed anyone for being a heretic for translating the bible into English it was still a pretty big step.