Halloween traced back to the flood over "man".

If you checked out my last post, God's chosen people, a race or religion, you will see the people who died, and why I put quotes around "man". The confusion on this point is part of what gives educated Atheists fodder for throwing out the Bible as myth.

Truth is, Genetics proves all man was not killed in a global flood, at any point in history. But there was a group calling themselves Jews that can be traced back to the location and genes of 4 founding couples, specifically 4 woman, and one man, who presumably had 3 sons in order to make 4 separate couples that populated the known world at the time. . .as shown in the link above.

Many people trace back to not just the genes from Noah, but similar myths of him too. For instance,
the Chinese sacred book of the Shu-king, speaks of Fu-hi, the Chinese Noah. Fu-hi was "born of a rainbow;" of him it was also said that he bred and saved seven kinds of animals to be used as a sacrifice. The Chinese Shu- king, translated by W. Gorn-Old and referred to by Davidson, places the date of the Chinese Deluge within the reign of the Emperor Yaou, from 2356 to 2254., which period includes the Hebrew Deluge date of 2344 B.C. Moreover, according to Mr. Gorn-Old, the Shu-king gives the Epoch of Fu-hi as 2944 B.C., which is 1056 A.K., from 4000 B.C., the beginning of Adamic Chronology. A compilation of the dates of the Patriarchs in Genesis 5 will show that Noah was born in the 1056th year from 4000 B.C., or 2944 B.C. As this is the identical date of the Epoch of Fu-hi, the identity between Fu-hi and Noah is established. Genesis 7:11 states that the Flood commenced in the 600th year of Noah's life, which added to 1056 A.K. gives the Deluge again as 1656 A.K., or 2344 B.C.

According to much archaeology and Ussher's Bible Chronology the Deluge occurred in the year 2348 B.C. This is correct to within four years, as Mr. Davidson has found from his careful analysis of Chinese, Babylonian, Hebrew, and Egyptian records, presented in his work, "Early Egypt, Babylonia and Central Asia." The correct date for the Deluge is from November 1, 2345 (Genesis 7:11), to November 11, 2344 B.C. (Genesis 8:14).

 All Saints day, Nov. 1st, All Soul's day Nov. 2nd, The day of the dead, Nov. 1st and Halloween, on Oct. 31st are still kept in commemoration of the flood. 

The flood was a local one though, not a global one. Nor would it have taken a global one to kill all those deemed "man" at the time. The biblical tale like all myths based in truth, is an obvious evolution, just as the biblical creation tale, and that of the biblical Devil as well.
While all the world was covered with water at some point in our ancient past, scientists believe, it was not at the timeline in the Bible. Even the phrase can be easiy understood in it's context and time, as the phrase always spoke of an exact location or people.

It is useless for our friends, the Fundamentalists, to get vexed on this point and quote Scripture, which says that the earth was covered. . . The Bible also says in Luke 2 "that all the world should be taxed." What is meant by this order is that all the world under Roman rule should be taxed. Rome's rule did not reach into China nor into America, and if it had the Americans would have rebelled. Looking up that phrase will show you how silly the presumption of all people dying in a global flood is.

When Genesis, therefore, speaks of the Flood covering the earth, it means that part of the earth in which the Adamites (those from Adam and Eve) lived. "God" saw that the wickedness and marrying and giving in marriage was horrible on the Earth, and yet Noah was called righteous for staying "pure in his generations." So those who were unrighteous were apparently those who sinned against God by mixing with the other nations on the earth. (Like those Cain feared, and ended up getting a wife from.) The Mongrels who came of that marriage, and others in the time of Noah, as well as the pure of other nations at that time did not know of God's laws against intermarriage though, and "where there is no law, there is no transgression," according to Paul. So they were not punished with a flood, which came in the area of the Black sea. (Where we know civilization started.)
This local flood could easily have been caused by a "God", as there was no apparent cause for the land to give away without some "help". . .thus drowning many in the valley at the time. Read more about this flood here in Wikipedia.

Honoring our drowned kin on Halloween is what the holy day (holiday) was made for. Personally, it is an easy switch for me, as even my own Grandma died on Halloween 14 years ago. I find it honoring and sobering to understand the "sins" of the past generations, which almost led to man's complete genocide. To avoid destruction in the future (whether from the natural consequences of mixing blood, or "God" coming down to destroy those who disobey again), I wish to teach others a much better way of life to pass on to their children. Keep the races pure, or please don't have kids! Please read my other posts below to understand the reasons why this isn't racism, and the natural consequences if you don't follow what is clearly taught in the Bible, and down through man's history.
Source Source

 Peace to all. . .

and have a sobering Halloween. 

God's chosen people a race or religion?

If the "chosen people" the Jews are simply a made up claim of the Bible, and you are an Atheist, you may have little interest in this question. (Though if you read on, you will see that you should be very interested!)
Whereas, if you believe that the Bible holds truth, or at least some history, and you see that in the Bible it says about these chosen ones that “I [God] will bless those who bless you, And I will curse him who curses you; And in you all the families of the earth shall be blessed” (Genesis 12:3), then if they are a people group, instead of a religion, you might want to clarify who they are and what they look like!!

Plus, the answer to this question explains all history, that is, if the Bible has any truth in it. . .which I believe it does.

Let's just cut to the case, I'm an Atheist and I know based on science that color of skin alone shows how the Biblical creation story is an evolved myth.

"Creation scientists", trying to make sense of the Bible, first claimed Adam and Eve were both brown. (Like this cartoon from Answers in Genesis.)

 They then shifted to Adam being "red like the clay, and Eve white like the rib". Both suggestions are downright laughable! There has been much confusion on this subject, and much discussion. Leaving smart and honest religious folks of all colors with one of two options:

1.  Adam and Ever were both pure white. Blacks will even admit to this, stating: "There had to been other Edenite people before [white] Adam and Eve."  "They [the blacks] were possibly. . . Edenites before Adam and Eve who were not recorded in the Bible. . . After all Qayin (Cain) found a woman who became his wife and wasn't part of Adam's family." Some blacks will take the evidence and translate it to say that the different color creations were seeded here by the gods, at different times and take much science to say so. . .the black ones being the older and thus better ones of course though. None of these use the Bible as truth, or to say their race was mentioned in it as from Adam and Eve. In fact there is a big move to call the Bible racist to turn blacks to Islam. (Which they are at a fast rate.)
2. Adam and Eve were both pure black. Thus:

A. the Bible is mistranslated, wrong and evolved in many places. . .

B. the white skin came as a mutation. . .this would be what evolution teaches. It is macro not the common micro evolution though, and it has never been seen before in nature. Magic in other words. People who believe this, claim also that "Almost all the differences used to differentiate populations from around the world really are skin deep." Something that is far from the truth, as seen in posts here and here. It is liberal propaganda only.

C. white skin came as a disease called leprosy. 

 These folks say that if Miriam was white (as seems apparent with her and the nation's reaction to the Ethiopian/Cushite wife of Moses. . .) you couldn't even tell the difference if she had leprosy. While the Bible does describe the disease simply as being "white as snow" in some places, in other places it is showing what we know of leprosy today. It is scaly and rots away the flesh, ending in missing limbs and death. Not something that you live with, and pass on to your kids. While there is no doubt that some people who were white did get leprosy, they didn't look the same, and they likely over-diagnosed every scaly condition to be leprosy at first. Even a full blown case of it did not guarantee rejection in a person of high social standing, like the biblical Naaman. (So the Afrocentric position of white skin being a curse, because of the story of Miriam, is apparently wrong, on all counts.)D. DNA is wrong. . .

Bringing this down to earth for everyone. . .do you see a Mexican having a black or white kid? Because they are mixed, the possibility may be there to have a slightly lighter, or slightly darker kid, but pure white or black is highly unlikely.

To have both white and black and brown from two brown parents is statistically unfathomable! (In the case of Noah's kids for instance.) And then to make sure that they had a mate of their same skin tone, and didn't intermarry at all in the other families in order to carry on those shades is so ridiculous, I don't know where to start!

Maybe with what actual science says!

You will never get a black baby from two white parents. . .although apparently some still don't know that if a tv show had to DNA test to see if the white woman cheated on her white husband after giving birth to a black baby. (She did.)

(So let's just clarify, blacks were around in their pure state after Adam and Eve, so obviously either Adam and Eve were not both white, the Bible is wrong in that we all came from Adam and Eve, or we misunderstood something in our presumptions of the story, and definition of man. . .)

You also can't get pure white babies from pure Black parents. Even when they are both mixed, it is very rare to see a white baby! (like this Nigerian baby.) Some will say albinism counts, but that is a defect and is problematic. Even when two albinos have kids only one in 4 will be an albino. White skin from a genetically white person (just like most other things about us) either comes from our ancestors (generally all of them) or we don't have it.


As dark skin is dominant, even one black in the mix almost always produces a dark colored kid, with rare exception. (Said to be 1,000,000-1 odds of happening.)


 As the article in the link above states though, "The baby's father Richard is white, but mum Catherine has dark skin from her [again] Nigerian heritage. Genes from one of her ancestors may have lain dormant for generations - until randomly thrown together in the new baby, they brought out traits that had been latent for so long. This is what's known as a genetic/evolutionary throwback, or atavism."  In other words, his mother had a white in the closet. . .as did both the blacks above, as also seen in the different shades of their 3 kids. The fact is, color doesn't tell anyone if they have a white man in them. . .but as a white man, you will almost always know when you have a black man in you. (5% of whites according to genetics are passing as white, but have black in them.)

Blacks are proud that they can make all shades of kids, but the truth is, when you look in Africa, where the pure ones are, they are identical. Only with mixing with whites does their dark color get diluted or have variety. Genetics proves it! Light skin only comes from admixture with light skin, but it is recessive. Light skin or blue eyes or light hair may come up as often as once in every 6 generations or so I have heard in mixed tribes, but it is still recessive, as dark everything is dominant.

So let's clarify, sadly for this guy saying all people came from a black couple (being the only chosen people who should be worshiped apparently), Adam and Eve could not logically both be pure black and produce all the other whitened shades.

The problem with trying to mesh science with religion, and being politically correct (in the presumption that the first and oldest people were human) is that you must believe in God's creation including the blacks as being from Adam and Eve, and thus the modern human family. . . even though we can trace them to the monkeys. This confusion has led to Christians who believe in evolution. . .and Atheists who believe in the creation of man by aliens. 


Unfortunately for Afrocentrics, not only is the timeline of the black race messed up with the dates in the ancient texts, the "out of Africa theory", and modern man having come from Africans is debunked, as science knows that "as much as 80% of nuclear [modern human] DNA is from non-African archaic humans." (Neanderthals.) In other words, unless you believe in a magical evolution AND magical creation, you will have to admit that African people only became "homo sapiens" by mixing with the white Neanderthals.

So, If the pure blacks are "the chosen people" who had an unnatural start, why are they way older then their timeline and almost extinct in their pure form from being selected out? That would mean that God was wrong, as he told them they would be like the stars in the sky, and the sand on the shore. If God was right though, our dating is still messed up, but he was speaking of the Neanderthal whites and their descendants, who now make up most of the nuclear DNA.

This would tie into what we know of the common ancestor of most people tested in the world. . .and mean that the Y chromosome Adam, the common ancestor male of the world has to be other then pure black (along with his wife, mitochondrial Eve). And being from a different species, the homo erectus, the pure African male common ancestor (only seen in a few tested individuals so far). . .is traced back to a much older "man". (At the time of no civilization and no Neanderthal.) This also correlates with the area in Sub Sahara Africa that has been tested to not have Neanderthal on the father's side, as is in the rest of the world. . .

 Also, at the time of the biblical tale, 6-10,000 years ago, we have the start of the white mutation scientists tell us. In testing the female DNA they claim the common ancestor of everyone with blue eyes (tied to green eyes, white skin and blond and red hair) was born.

There are also new studies that indicate that at least 90% of the mutational variants in the human genome occurred in the last 200 to 400 generations (5,000 to 10,000 years).

It seems if we want to believe in the stories from all the ancient civilizations at all, we either need to change our understanding of them as evolved,  and meaning only the white man was created, or just throw them out completely as myth.

Let's not dwell on the beginning of man with Adam and Eve longer though, as much more evidence (of the "chosen people") stems from other venues of science. . .for instance, Noah and his three sons. . . The people from Adam in the Bible and less evolved texts were said to have a bottleneck in their population at Noah. So if a Jew today was not tied to one of 4 common ancestors on the woman's side, and one on the man's side, they either aren't a true Jew, or the Bible is evolved and wrong. Thus we know that the only Jews still claiming it, are the Zionist, white Ashkenazi Jews. (Which I will get into later.)

 But if the Jews looked as they mostly do today,  and if Noah was from mixed parents, instead of being "pure in his generations" as the Bible says, we would not likely see a single white person coming from them, much less a single black. . .as in this picture from a wishful thinker.

This picture actually comes from an Egyptian carving in a wall, and shows likely the first pictorial sign of variety in color. This would have been only a few hundred years after the time of Noah, where supposedly all "man" was wiped out by the global flood. (Which I will get into later.) So if these 3 colors really evolved from Noah's family in only a few hundred years, we again have some choices:

1. "man" was only one color, the other color (s) were likely called "beasts" or other nations at best in the old testament time. So the flood could have been local, with the creation myth having evolved.  Or
2. if you are taking the Bible literally, a magical babel account turned the skin all shades, nearly instantly! (Macro evolution or selection because of people being split up by slight variation of color as well as language, by an invisible "God". . . in other words magic.)
3. Or they started white and the black skin was due to a curse on Ham. .  .apparently actually his son. (A belief that King James was said to have started.) As many blacks amazingly still believe now.

The problem with the latter is that we can see from genetics that the oldest people in the world are black, and from Africa. Also, they did not go through a bottleneck at anytime like the flood story depicts! While "researchers say they have compelling evidence that four out of five white Europeans can trace their father's y chromosome roots to the Near East." 
Only the whites are at the time, and place of the creation story.

OK, that was a joke!! The fact is though, if you understand that the origins of the Bible are in the Sumerian text, and that the Sumerian rulers were white "children of God", it brings light to where they went. The Sumerian rulers became the elite Egyptians.

 The haplogroup R1b1a2, was believed to have arose around 9,500 years ago, in the Black Sea region and is mostly now traced back to a single original Egyptian line, that includes king Tut. Who half the European men can trace back to. Showing just how few whites there were in Egypt. While their slaves or servants in Sumer were known as the "black headed ones" while the later slaves in Egypt were known as the nubians. . .who later became a mixed people.
Source Source

With no sign of a slow evolution, no link with a disease, and not a single reason to turn white in a hot place like Sumer or Egypt, white man, with their mutations, characteristics and blood, seemed to come out of thin air. So, if the Bible is based in truth, then these people that started civilization were no doubt the Israelites. (As they are the only ones that fit the timeline given in the Bible.) I will show you a lot more proof of that later though. . .

Now, as an Atheist, simply because an ancient book has been translated to say something, that doesn't mean that I am bound to either accept it, or think it is right. If you believe the Bible was written to the people from Adam and Eve, at the timeline of the Bible though, as these and most Christian folks do, you are forced to believe the whites are those people.

 Simply because the Bible has been presumed and mistranslated to say something else though, doesn't excuse away what we now know from science. Either we need to throw out all the Bible, or re-examine it's presumptuous translation, based on evidence. We can't simply believe it is perfect and true (not being evolved like every other ancient text), simply because it says it is perfect. . . by the very end. That is naive and faith based, nothing else.

 Finding out who the children of "God" were, and are, we can also have some incite into the nature and possibly even looks of "God". (Otherwise what does "in his image" in Genesis 1:27 really mean?)

What happened to the Israelites?

"The tribes of Israel did not follow God's law, and eventually they ceased to exist as a nation. In particular, some intermarried with the surrounding pre-Adamic people. To what extent, we do not know. Solomon was wise. . .but he was sinful concerning the coordination of God's law and the security of the Israelite nation. He. . . married strange [foreign] wives." (As did Cain, Abraham, Jacob, Moses. . .)

What did the Israelites /Jews/Hebrews actually look like before they started mixing?
Here are examples:

1. "Sarah's (Abraham's wife) skin was pure white and smooth" (Dead Sea Scroll ).

2. David - reddish hair (ruddy), fair complexion ( I Samuel 16:12 17:42).

3. Solomon -  blue eyes, skin white and ruddy (Song of Solomon). While he had an affair with a bastard white/black slave, who was sent to work in the fields by her half brothers.

4. Nazarites - skin whiter than milk (Lamentations 4:7).

5. Rebekah - very fair (the Scroll of the Patriarchs - also called the 7th Dead Sea Scroll and Genesis 24:16, from a father called Laban, who's name means "white".).

6. Jacob. Jacob was fair skinned with little hair at birth, Esau was apparently red at birth and hairy. Esau's nick name was later Edom, which meant "red" . It is interesting that Jacob was not called red. In fact that is not the only difference. . .They are different in every way.

Esau was a hunter: a man of the field. Jacob was a quiet man and spent his days indoors. Esau was brawny, muscular, and athletic; Jacob was fair-skinned and soft. In Genesis 25:23, the Lord tells Rebekah that the reason that the twins in her womb are struggling against one another is because they are “two nations”, or “two manner of people.” This means two races in other places of the Bible.

Rebekah was told by "God" that the "nation" (meaning race of people) from Esau would serve the "nation" from his younger brother Jacob, who was fair. We also know that Esau married a woman of a dark nation, while a special wife from the mother's side was picked out for "fair" Jacob. Esau was later called Edom and his descendants, called the Edomites, were a black people.

There is only one scenario for this in my mind: Esau was a fraternal twin fathered by a different (colored) man. (Likely raping Rebekah.) This happens today and is pretty likely. Check out the geneticist weighing in on this situation here.

From the looks and actions of the brothers, as well as the giving up of the birthright that a Esau likely knew he was not getting anyways, it should be obvious that the role of the dark people was only to serve the fair skinned ones in the Bible, and down through history.

(The whites of history have just naturally followed in their ancestors footsteps with slavery, as that is all the unmixed blacks were capable of in a white civilization. After all, the dark nations didn't originally share the same blood, so were not (before the original "sin" of the "sons of God" mating with the "daughters of man" in Gen. 6) the same species we now call "modern man". Instead they are, as has been suggested that the species be renamed, Homo africanus. Source) 

After Jacob (who's name was changed to Ysrayl - Israel) died in the land of Egypt, all the Hebrews and Egyptians went down to the land of Canaan to bury him (He asked his son to bury him in the land of Canaan with his forefathers Genesis 49). This is evidence that the elite of Egypt at that time had an invested interest to go back to Canaan. Could it be because they were also connected to that place, and those people? DNA has shown the whites were the original pharaohs, called gods or children of gods. The connection from King Tut alone runs to most Europeans to this day. Meaning there were at that time few whites in Egypt, but they were the ones in charge. which brings me to my next example. . .

7. Joseph, the child of Jacob and Rachael, who was given a coat of many colors, said to be signifying his role as the top dog.  Apparently he blended in with the elite of Egypt, and was presumed to be no idiot from the start, as he was as a boy put in charge of the financial affairs of a wealthy man soon after going there. Though DNA tells us there were many colors in Egypt by it's end, at most times, all the elite were still mainly white, from the line of King Tut. Joseph was not black, or he would have just been a manual worker. He could have been working for a mixed black couple though, which would explain the wife's attraction to him, and his rejection of her. . .

8. Moses -Moses was called a Hebrew - an Israelite from the tribe of Levi (exodus 2:1-3) who was born of Leah and Jacob. We see him described as exceedingly fair (Acts 7:20). If it isn't obvious by now, the Israelites were clearly white and clearly did not accept a foreigner to be mixing with them. So when after running off to the desert and befriending a mixed black family he married an "Ethiopian" woman and had 2 children with her, she and the kids were rejected by his kin, and he sent them home to her family.) The fact that he blended in with the Egyptians, tells us the original elite Egyptians were all white, until they mixed.
9. Paul- was mistaken as an Egyptian, but clarified he was a Hebrew. Acts 21:38-39

10. Jesus- the "lion of the tribe of Judah" (from Leah and Jacob) and from the line of David ("white and ruddy"). Though no doubt many stories about him were evolved, extra-biblical tales confirm what his bloodline says he would have had to look like. "I found Joseph and Mary in the land of Mecca. . .Jesus...He is the picture of his mother, only he has not her smooth, round face. His hair is a little more golden than hers. . . He is tall...His visage is thin and of a swarthy complexion, though this is from exposure. His eyes are large and soft blue..." "I was told it was Jesus"..."His golden colored hair and beard..."(The Archaeological Writings of the Sanheidrim & Talmuds).

Also from a letter written to the monarch of Rome by Publius Lentrelus, a resident of Judea in the days of Tiberius Caesar. "He (Jesus) is a tall man, well-shaped, and of an amiable and reverend aspect; his hair of a color that can barely be matched, falling into graceful curls, waving about and very agreeable...His forehead high, large and imposing; his cheeks without spot or wrinkle, beautiful with a lovely red; his nose and mouth formed with exquisite symmetry; his beard and of a color suitable to his hair...his eyes bright and blue, clear and serene"

Mary and Joseph went to Egypt to hide from a wicked King who wanted to kill all the baby boys who might end up challenging his throne. If the Egypt of that time was all black, they would have stood out like a sore thumb. (Mat. 2:13)

Speaking of the leaders in Jerusalem:
  Lamentations 4:7 (CJB) Her [Jerusalem's] princes were purer than snow; they were whiter than milk, their bodies more ruddy than pink pearls, as beautiful as sapphires.

The Israelites were blonde-haired, blue-eyed people who averaged 6 feet in height according to "The Essene" and other literature found in the catacombs. Some pictures are below.

Israelites captured, about 1100 BC, from Temple of Rameses III. From The Origin of Race and Civilization, by Weisman.

An Israelite from an Egyptain monument-1150 BC. From Races of the Old Testemant, by Sayce.

Source

Other clues from linguistics tell us where the purist chosen people are now:

• The original name of Ireland and Spain as well.. was "Land of Hebrews".

• "Iberia" is Hebrew; it means, "Land of Hebrews". Spain is called the Iberian Peninsula.

• The root word for Iberian is Eber, a great grandson of Shem (meaning Semite), son of Noah. Eber is the origin of the word Hebrew.

• The SWISS retain the same biblical name they always have had; today called the "Confederation of the Helvetti" ("He-lveti" is merely the Hellenized form of the Hebrew name LEVITE)

• The Levites, from the pure tribe of Levi (from Leah and Jacob) were the priests from the time of Aaron. (Moses's brother, who as mentioned above, was described as "fair.) "The name Cohanim, which means priest, in all it's forms (like: Kahn, Conn, Kain, Kahen, etc.) is tied to them. To this day they are some of the most religious and spiritual leaders! Almost all Cohan's share a genetic marker they can trace back to Abraham's children! (None of which are pure blacks.) Source

• Saxons. Sacs-Sons.. Isaacs Sons

• The original Shemite tribes of East Africa and Arabia were white. A "Shemite" just means a "white man".

• WELSH still speak Hebrew. WELSH is Hebrew. And Hebrew is Sumerian, without the vowels, that were later added to the Hebrew.

• The Scottish declaration clearly illustrates the Scots as Israelites.

• The German language is 80 percent Hebrew.

• English (or Anglish rather) has the exact same syntax as Hebrew. . . one only need to translate the words.

• The 'Greek' alphabet is almost identical to Hebrew, and Hebrew you might recall is shorthand of Sumerian.

• Depending on the Indian tribe, there are substantial similarities to Greek, Latin, Berber, Phoenician, or Celtic vocabulary. Thomas Jefferson's interest in languages led him to notice the similarities between the ancient North African (in ancient times they were Adamic, and are now mixed) tongues and North American Indian.

Understandable confusion has come up over a few things in the Bible: 

One being the word "Ruddy". The term "red" or ruddy is often used to describe mixed and lighter people in the ancient times, but when paired with fair skin seems to be speaking of hair color. This word is only confusing when you don't trace the entire family tree.  

Also the much later term "human" is often brought up, saying "hu" means "hue", as in color. That is a sneaky switch that Afrocentrics use to say the only humans were those with color. This is down right silly, and ignorant, although a good case could be made for the opposite! The origin of the word "human" is "humus" or earth, which some could translate as "dust" or "clay", like the Bible says we came from. . . but not the color of. The earlier Sumerian text says it was not clay we came from though, it was a clay dish we did start in though.

Another confusion is Ham being supposedly cursed. Ham did have a son Cush, who started the Cushites, a dark people. Cannan was actually the one who was cursed in the Bible, for the sin of his father, so while Cush would have been black, Cannan likely wasn't. The belief was an ignorant one from it's inception by King James, and based on presumptions alone. No doubt Cush was dark, but his father was not. . . Cush was the father of Nimrod, and the Nubians, who adopted all Egyptian culture, language, etc. This confusion led many historians to make the presumption that because of the dark skin color of the Cushites this means they are pure Hebrew. And when they see all the black slaves of Egypt and the later mixed black leaders, they see them as also the pure Hebrews. Dominant dark color only means there were few whites in the line of the Cushites, but they did have one. . .Ham. If you care to hear the other side of the argument though, check out here.

Numerous white hebrew men had black concubines, and these offsprings became the educated "Ethiopian" servants. Ethiopians also became later gentile converts and teachers in the church. Commonly as servants to the elite they were castrated to make them more passive just like violent male bulls, or dogs who have too much testosterone. No doubt the main intention though was to lower their desire or ability to mix with the whites, which was a horrible sin. (Think the Ethiopian eunuch.)

Having somewhat clarified the people who came from the line of Adam, through skin color science, genetics, family lines and the Bible, this can actually give more credit to and clarify other parts of the Old testament. . .

 Saying who the Bible was speaking of in the Old testament (the white children of the gods), according to the original Sumerian version, it may also clarify the flood myth.

The flood is a story passed down from every people around the world, yet it is different in each one, and obviously evolved from the first flood myth, just as the biblical creation story has. It is scientifically proven to only be a local flood. All people groups around the world have similar flood stories only because they were either related distantly to the people who survived it, or they had heard of it from them.

 There is no question but that there was a great catastrophe at this time, that may have effected the entire world, but the flood part of it is better translated as a rise of about 20 feet, to the top of hills in the local area of the black sea. There is evidence that because of a "magical" collapse of a natural land dam (likely intentionally taken out by the gods) a valley with 150,000 square kilometers of land, went under. Scientists believe this happened around 5,000 BCE.

There is not nearly enough water anywhere on or in the earth to account for the water that was said in the evolved biblical tale to have covered the highest mountains! Nor was there any evidence of this flood in even Egypt, which was said to be built and run by the gods at around that time. (In fact, it is very likely that Noah and his family escaped to Egypt after the flood.)

"Let us now analyze our data. If the Deluge had been universal as orthodoxy assumes it to be, then only Noah's family, consisting of eight persons, was left alive on the whole globe. Bible chronology shows that Abraham was born about the year 2000 B.C., in UR of the Chaldeans, and ancient Chaldea was at that time a flourishing country with a large population and a certain civilization, as the excavations have shown. It is out of all reason to assume that such a population could have developed from only eight people 350 years previously. Again, as soon as Abram had been called into Canaan (Genesis, 12th chapter) he went at once into Egypt to buy grain; and there too was established a great civilization and dense population. Senusert III of the 12th Dynasty was Pharaoh at that time."

"If, as some people believe, the Great Pyramid was built by Shem or Melchizedek, it was built within only two or three centuries after the Deluge, and how could Egypt have furnished the Pyramid builders with 100,000 men every three months [something there is good evidence that they did] if all human beings were destroyed by the Deluge only two centuries before?"

 While Shem may have stayed in Egypt for a time, he may have moved on to Assyria, and spread out, because later Egypt became known as "the land of Ham." (Psalm 105:23,27 "Israel also came into Egypt; and Jacob sojourned in the land of Ham…") Ham's son Cush's name means "black", and Egypt had different colors of people in it. They likely all stemmed from one man, who mixed with his foreign slaves. Whatever the case, the other nations (and for sure in Africa) did not go through a bottleneck of their population, so there would have been abundant slaves for the white kings to choose from, or seek intermarriage with, as a political move.

 "It is useless for our friends, the Fundamentalists, to get vexed on this point and quote Scripture, which says that the earth was covered and all flesh died. The Word also says in Luke 2 "that all the world should be taxed." What is meant by this order is that all the world under Roman rule should be taxed. Rome's rule did not reach into China nor into America, and if it had the Americans would have rebelled."

The bible often says things were global that weren't, it was a figure of speech to say "the world", and mean the civilized part of it. I.E. Luke 2:1 "And it came to pass in those days, that there went out a decree from Caesar Augustus, that all the world should be taxed." The fact is in many places in the Bible the "whole earth" is referring to a location, or a specific people. Numerous mistranslations and presumptions lead us away from the evidence and correct understanding of the Bible, as seen in the link above.

From another good book, Thought about Noah's flood: "Orthodoxy has held until this day to the belief that the Deluge of Genesis was universal, covering the whole of the globe; yet such a belief, although apparently expressed by the translators, is, according to a careful analysis of certain facts of Scripture, an impossibility, to say nothing of the recorded facts of Egyptian and Chinese history, nor the impossibility presented by physical science."

"According to Ussher's Bible Chronology the Deluge occurred in the year 2348 B.C. This is correct to within four years, as Mr. Davidson has found from his careful analysis of Chinese, Babylonian, Hebrew, and Egyptian records, presented in his work, "Early Egypt, Babylonia and Central Asia." The correct date for the Deluge is from November 1, 2345 (Genesis 7:11), to November 11, 2344 B.C. (Genesis 8:14)."

Our Halloween, day of the dead and All Soul/saints's days are thought to be kept in commemoration of Noah's flood. (Even Answers in Genesis admits this is likely.)

"When Genesis, therefore, speaks of the Flood covering the earth, it means that part of the earth in which the Adamites [man] lived. . ."

Why was the flood said to have destroyed "man"? Because they sinned. . .they did not keep pure in their generations, like Noah. So those killed were no doubt those who were mixed.

This is not simply based on Noah being called righteous for staying pure that I say that, there are other signs of mixing: Violence was rampant, as well as divorce the Bible says (and this is seen mainly in mixed or black cultures both against their own, and whites as well. (As I show in the links.) Source Source


The Bible and the original "gods"consequently put a big emphasis on staying "pure in your generations", like Noah. (Which is ridiculous if only a few generations before they all came from Adam and Eve!) Examples are here:

1. Numbers 25:6-11 "One of the children of Israel came and brought unto his brethren a Midianitish woman....And Phinehas took a javelin in his hand; and he went after the man of Israel into the tent, and thrust both of them through, the man of Israel, and the woman through her belly. So, the plague was stayed from the children of Israel." Note, it was a plague of different-people marriage.
2. Deuteronomy 7:3 After taking the land God has given thee: "Neither shalt thou make marriages with them; thy daughter thou shall not give unto his son, nor his daughter shall thou take unto thy son."
3. Ezra 9:2,12 "For they have taken of their daughters for themselves, and for their sons; so that the holy seed have mingled themselves with the people of those lands." "Now therefore give not your daughters unto their sons, neither take their daughters unto your sons....".
4. Ezra 10:2-3 "We have taken strange wives of the people of the land, yet now there is hope in Israel concerning this thing. Now therefore let us make a covenant with our God to put away all the wives, and such as are born of them,...".
5. Genesis 24:3-4 "And I will make thee swear by the Lord, the God of heaven, and the God of the earth, that thou shalt not take a wife unto my son of the daughters of the Canaanites, among whom I dwell: But thou shalt go unto my country, and to my kindred, and take a wife unto my son Isaac."
6. Genesis 26:34-35 "And Esau was forty years old when he took to wife Judith the daughter of Beeri, the Hittite, and Bashemath the daughter of Elon the Hittite: Which were a grief of mind unto Isaac and to Rebekah."
7. Genesis 27:46 "And Rebekah said to Isaac, I am weary of my life because of the daughters of Heth: if Jacob take a wife of the daughters of Heth, such as these which are of the daughters of the land, what good shall my life do me?"
8. Genesis 28:1,8,9 "And Isaac called Jacob, and blessed him, and charged him, and said unto him, Thou shalt not take a wife of the daughters of Canaan." "And Esau seeing that the daughters of Canaan pleased not Isaac his father; Then went Esau unto Ishmael, and took unto the wives which he had Mahalath the daughter of Ishmael Abraham's son, the sister of Nebajoth, to be his wife."
9. Deuteronomy 23:2 "A bastard shall not enter into the congregation of the Lord, even to his tenth generation shall he not enter into the congregation of the Lord." In Hebrew, bastard (mamzer) means mongrel. In this text it means Israelite father, non-Israelite mother (do not mistake the word Israelite with the word Jew, they are not the same).
10. Proverbs 5: all "...remove thy way far from her, and come not nigh the door of her house...and thou mourn as the last, when thy flesh and thy body are consumed...drink waters out of thine own cistern, and running waters out of thine own well.... "
11. Exodus 33:16 "...so shall we be separated, I and thy people, from all the people that are upon the face of the earth."
12. Deuteronomy 17:15 "Thou shalt in any wise set him king over thee, whom the Lord thy God shall choose: one from among thy brethren shalt thou set king over thee; thou mayest not set a stranger over thee, which is not thy brother."
13. Numbers 12:1 Family of Moses was not pleased when he kept the Ethiopian wife he was given for helping a priest of Midian. . .no doubt a part Jew. He promptly sent her and the two kids back. Nothing was said by God to condemn the action.
14. Ezra 10:10-14   10 "Then Ezra the priest stood up and said to them, "You have been unfaithful; you have married foreign women, adding to Israel's guilt. 11 Now make confession to the LORD, the God of your fathers, and do his will. Separate yourselves from the peoples around you and from your foreign wives." 12 The whole assembly responded with a loud voice: "You are right!. . ."

It is apparent that "God" does not approve of multi-cultural, pluralistic, multi-racial societies, nor inter-racial marriage. . .nor did his children. (As even seen in America, that made interracial marriage illegal in all the states with slaves.) 

Some may debate this with the fact that Jesus's genealogy included Ruth, a Moabite, but it was through Joseph only, recorded for legal purposes only.

 (There are many physical reasons for not having interracial marriages, as I have blogged on here.) 


What is the punishment for the transgressions? A few examples are listed below:

1. Joshua 23:12-13 "Else if ye do in any wise go back, and cleave unto these that remain among you, and shall make marriages with them, and go in unto them, and they to you: Know for a certainty that the Lord your God will no more drive out any of these nations from before you; but they shall be snares and traps unto you, and scourges in your sides, and thorns in your eyes, until ye perish from off this good land which the Lord your God hath given you."
2. Psalms 106:34-42 "They did not destroy the nations concerning whom the Lord commanded them: But were mingled among the heathen, and learned their works...and went a whoring with their own inventions,...And he gave them into the hand of the heathen; and they that hated them ruled over them. Their enemies also oppressed them, and they were brought into subjection under their hand."
3. Ezekiel 28:7 "...I will bring strangers upon thee, the terrible of the nations: and they shall draw swords against the beauty of thy wisdom, and they shall defile thy brightness."
4. Joel 1:4 "That which the palmerworm hath left hath the locust eaten; and that which the locust hath left the cankerworm eaten; and that which the cankerworm hath left the caterpillar eaten." These insects are all symbolic of alien people.

Does all this mean that we should make war on those not like us? No, it means we should protect our individuality. There are many other Bible passages that tell us to love even our enemies. When the stranger is among us temporarily, we should treat him with courtesy and respect. The Creation requires "like after like" (Gen. 1:24).

What about God's other laws for the making and preservation of a nation? What happens when we follow His laws? What is the effect when we disobey and trample them?

Blessings and curses are listed in Deuteronomy, Chapter 28, and Leviticus, Chapter 26. A few are listed below.
1. "I will also send wild beasts (barbaric people) among you, which shall rob you of your children, and destroy your cattle, and make you few in number, and your highways shall be desolate."
2. "And I will give peace in the land, and ye shall lie down, and none shall make you afraid: and I will rid evil beasts out of the land, neither shall the sword go through your land."
3. "And ye shall chase your enemies, and they shall fall before you by the sword."
4. "Blessed shalt thou be in the city, and blessed shalt thou be in the field. Blessed shalt be the fruit of thy body, and the fruit of thy ground, and the fruit of thy cattle, the increase of thy kine, and the flocks of thy sheep."
5. "And the Lord shall make thee the head, and not the tail...."
6. "Cursed shall be the fruit of thy body."
7. "Thou shall betroth a wife, and another man shall lie with her."
8. "Thy sons and daughters shall be given unto another people and thine eyes shall look, and fail with longing for them all the day long...."
9. "Thou shall carry much seed out into the field, and shalt gather but little in for the locust (alien people) shall consume it."
10. "All thy trees and fruit of thy land shall the locust (alien people) consume."
11. "The stranger that is within thee shall get up above thee very high; and thou shall come down very low. He shall lend to thee, and thou shalt not lend to him: he shall be the head, and thou shalt be the tail."
12. "He shall put a yoke of iron upon thy neck, until he have destroyed thee."

 If you follow a religious text, you will want to take note, that the God of the old testament told the Jews to displace and kill all the other gentile nations (Deut. 20:16-17). This is one reason many moral people choose not to follow the Bible anymore, as we are too mixed up, and see no need to kill a good bunch of smart and peaceful people.

On the bright side, mixing has led to a more equal feeling and treatment for those who are dark, but there will never be equality between the two species, as you really can't compare their different strengths. This comparison is the reason there has always been jealousy and war, instead of just accepting our differences and strengths.

While it is apparent that before white man came on the scene, the homo erectus (blacks) ruled as king of the jungle by their might, the whites ruled the world by their brains. Conflicting "cultures" has always made multiculturalism a flop. Yet the mixed people mask that problem. The blacks are about half white in the northern part of America DNA studies now show, while the mainly pure ones are in the South. This misunderstanding is what led to the civil war, and the freeing of the slaves, in my opinion. It's hard as a mixed black to have to pick sides, because your white blood says to love your own! (And most blacks believe their own people are blacks.)

This may be why in the New testament it clarifies who the children of God, or little Christs /"Christians" were, claiming it would be obvious "by the love they have one for another." (John 13:35) Even those who are bastard children of God, have this way to show their spirit inside (which is really their hidden white/Neanderthal blood) by the "fruit of the spirit." (Galatians 5:22-23 "But the fruit of the Spirit [of God found in the white children of God] is love, joy, peace, forbearance, kindness, goodness, faithfulness, 23 gentleness and self-control. . . " )

The bastard dark "children of God" like Obama sometimes (depending on their amount of mixed blood) act "godly", and other times don't, as it is "hit and miss" which parent a kid will take after. Most of the claiming (and dark) Jews are sadly not being "godly" (acting white) as they are fighting for their right to claim the title and status of the pure Jew, just as the Arabs from Abraham's slave, and others from Jacob and Solomon's dark slaves/concubines have done. (As well as others from Ham.)

How do you know if you had a Jewish ancestor like Obama does?
Most of the original chosen people, being displaced from their land everywhere they have gone (either by attacks and slavery or high crime of the gentiles and consequent white flight) now no longer even know their history, much less claim their title as "God's children", the Jews. Yet almost all on earth now can be traced back to someone from Adam. (They call him Y chromosome Adam, and he is the father of Eurasian Adam, or Noah.) A few pure ones have been tested as not from the Adamic race though, from the time of the homo erectus. (A huge presumption is made that all people can be traced back to this new Y chromosome Adam, and yet there is no connection. Most people believe the existence of this new Adam means there were no two people, at the same time that started us all, and thus say that the Bible is wrong. . .I say it has been misunderstood, and mistranslated.)

 Sumerian Kings mentioned in their kings list (which follows to the Egyptian pharaohs), are believed to be the biblical patriarchs, and have been traced to the most pure "Illuminati"/ European kingly bloodline. . .who are said to have been given "the divine right to rule" by the gods, and they still are. (All the presidents, kings, etc.)

They are the only ones who had language, written words, civilization, or farming, and are thus the only ones with a known history, besides slavery.  The kingly blood, often called gods, or sons of gods are to this day seen by the RH- blood often. (Which originated in the O- I believe.) This short video connects a lot of the dots of what I've talked about, but claiming instead that the bloodline of the world's RH- blood and the red hair started with Jesus and Mary Magdalene, instead of coming down partially through some of the Jews that Mary came from, and much before that too.

Discounting other RH negative blood around the world, and the O- in particular, this video also doesn't account for the elite and other kings and queens that were red and blond haired that were disconnected with Jews later as being part of the bloodline that they call the Holy grail bloodline. Nonetheless, besides the end prejudice and ignorance, I agree wholeheartedly with it! Check it out!

Every white and brown person is part of this Adamic man's bloodline, and most black people are now too. . . outside of Sub Sahara Africa. This is seen in genetics as being part Neanderthal.


The difference in the most pure royal blooded ones and those who are not isn't always noted with the Rh- bloodtype, as it can be recessive, but the general DNA and looks in general has gotten a lot of attention. Many are saying that RH- blood is magical, the leaders of the world, or spiritual. . .and they are all right, as it is the origin of the white man, the Neanderthal. . .poorly dated due to the real explanation for the "flood" (A nuclear war of the gods, which there is much evidence for.)

As I stated in Racism and the RH factor part 2 , the ones in power (whites, some claiming their Jewish lines, some not) to this day, are all from a certain bloodline, having a strong RH- which has it's origin in O- , that has been traced to the Neanderthal. People often don't realize that Neanderthal intermixing also means European or Jewish intermixing.

So let me bring it closer to home, not only do most blacks have some ancient trace of Neanderthal in them, which brings up both their immunity (due to the age of the genes from the gods of another planet I believe) and their IQ. . . but, according to numerous different DNA companies studies. . .they generally have more recent admixture, due for the most part to the selection for the white genes by all dark people. (According to dating site stats and attraction studies, and marriage stats.)

"A whopping 35 percent of all African-American men descend from a white male ancestor who fathered a mulatto child sometime in the slavery era . . . In other words, if we tested the DNA of all of the black men in the NBA, for instance, just over one-third descend from a white second or third great-grandfather.
the African Americans they've tested range from 53 percent to 95 percent sub-Saharan African, 3 percent to 46 percent European and zero percent to 3 percent Native American. "Eighty percent of African Americans have less than 1 percent Native American ancestry. Over 2.5 percent have between 2 percent and 3 percent. And of all African Americans who have at least 1 percent Native American ancestry, the average is 2 percent Native American." So much for all of those putative Cherokee roots on just about every black person's family tree, fabricated to explain why your great-grandmother had "high cheekbones and straight black hair"! [Don't feel too bad though], "3 percent to 4 percent of people likely to consider themselves as all 'white' have some African ancestry."

Source

DNA is good at tracing the true line of the pure Jews though to this day. . .whether they claim it or not. (The looks kind of give it away though when you know all the rest.) If you need more evidence, check out the Ashkenazi Jews, the most pure ones, linked to European blood.

 "The DNA of Abraham's Children."

 "Study Points to Shared Genetic Patterns amongst Jewish Populations."  "Most Jewish communities were formed by unions between Jewish men and local [dark] women....The Ashkenazic community of Northern and Central Europe, from which most American [white looking] Jews are descended, shows less diversity than expected in its mitochondrial DNA, perhaps reflecting the maternal definition of Jewishness." 

The only claiming Jews who tie back to (most likely) Noah's family are the white ones. 


They tie on the fathers side to Eurasian Adam, who no doubt had 3 sons. . .and the mothers side to one of 4 founding mothers.
"'Four mothers' for Europe's Jews."
 "Study: Most Ashkenazi Jews from four women." 
The Europeans were mentioned in the Bible as "the tribes scattered abroad" or "the house of Israel".

"1,142 samples from 14 different non-Ashkenazi Jewish communities were analyzed. A list of complete mtDNA sequences was established for all variants present at high frequency in the communities studied, along with high-resolution genotyping of all samples. Unlike the previously reported pattern observed among Ashkenazi Jews, the numerically major portion of the non-Ashkenazi Jews, currently estimated at 5 million people and comprised of the Moroccan, Iraqi, Iranian and Iberian Exile Jewish communities showed no evidence for a narrow founder effect. . . The Indian and Ethiopian Jewish sample sets suggested local female introgression, while mtDNAs in all other communities studied belong to a well-characterized West Eurasian pool of maternal lineages. Absence of sub-Saharan African mtDNA lineages among the North African Jewish communities suggests negligible or low level of admixture with females of the host populations"

In other words North African men came and took white woman (likely as sex slaves) in raids, as the moors and Barbary pirates did.
"Jews Are a 'Race,' Genes Reveal."

Mixed Jews claim that the Zionist Ashkenzi Jews were the ones who were the "gentile" Khazar people who were "grafted in", as the Bible calls it in Romans 11. There is no indication though of Khazar genetic ancestry among most Ashkenazi Jews.

"Historians and scientists today believe the Khazarian theory should more accurately be called a myth. The theory, which claims that today's Ashkenazi Jews are descendants of the Khazar empire that had converted to Judaism, has been widely spread on the Internet and is often associated with anti-Zionist groups."
Source
Source
Source

Please read this (christian biased, even if historical) guest article for more information that provides evidence of this and much more about the difference of the Jewish groups.
Source

The true Jews who were "scattered abroad" and carried captive into Assyria, were known to be called the "white Assyrians", and were an offshoot of the Sumerian rulers. Which may be why after the fall of the Northern Kingdom, and when they returned home they called their new city Samaria. (Meaning "guarded by God" . ..or as is better originally translated, "guarded by tall men".)

Those who originated in Samaria have a high percentage of RH negative blood to this day. God eventually called those in Sumeria "prostitutes" who went whoring after the dark, mixed Assyrian commanders and warriors with "genitals like donkeys" in Ezekiel 23. (In case you weren't aware, it is common knowledge that black men are rather well endowed. . .)

"God" or should I say, the ancient aliens who seeded the white man, that was made in the image of "God", hated the darkening of their creation by mixed marriages, as you might recall.


So while ALL of Paul’s letters are to white nations, James wrote to all the 12 mixed color tribes, but not the Africans who were not part of that bloodline, nor even religion until much later!

When the Bible clarified in Gal. 3:28 that

"There is neither Jew nor Greek, there is neither bond nor free, there is neither male nor female: for ye are all one in Christ Jesus." He was talking about only the whites.

Later being more inclusive of the mixed people in Col. 3:11, the Bible says, "there is no distinction between Greek and Jew, circumcised and uncircumcised, barbarian, Scythian, slave and freeman, but Christ is all, and in all." Except when the blood of Christ is not in them. . .

Jesus was also quoted as saying that he was sent to the "Lost Sheep of the House of Israel"...in Matt. 10:6
As we can see, the "lost house of Israel" that Jesus told his disciples to go to, is clearly the scattered white people.

JESUS being a pure genetically manipulated RH- alien, with a "heavenly father", is what we now would call a "star child". He had "Angels" hovering around, protecting and teaching him the Bible says. There was a "star" or space ship over the place where he was born. There was pictured alien crafts around the place were he was said to have died. Frankly, the time of Christ was full of artwork of alien involvement! 


Jesus was said to have COME TO REDEEM ISRAEL from their Sin. . .that of mingling their blood with the natives. This clarifies the most debated and confusing verse in the Bible. . .(as well as the Bible as a whole, and history in general.)

"when the sons of God [whites] came in unto the daughters of men [blacks], and they bare children to them, the same became mighty men which were of old, men of renown. [Strong, tall and smarter warriors, as the mixed blacks are today.] And God saw that the wickedness of man was great in the earth, and that every imagination of the thoughts of his heart was only evil continually. And it repented the LORD that he had made [white] man on the earth, and it grieved him at his heart. And the LORD said, I will destroy man whom I have created from the face of the earth. . ." Because he has defiled his bloodline.

Source

Only Israel NEEDED TO BE REDEEMED, by the "second Adam" Jesus, because only Israel had violated the Covenant with "God." Hence, Jesus... "came to redeem that which was lost." The redemption was said to be "through his blood". Blood redemption is mentioned on nearly every page of the Bible. It was not by his death people were to be thus redeemed (which there is little evidence of the story of the cross being connected to him anyways) it was by his life and children.

 As the Sumerian text calls those who seeded Adam and Eve, the Annunaki or gods, likely their children (in their image and in small numbers) were no doubt called gods, or sons of gods. Jesus said to the white children of Israel that they were gods, as he also claimed to be. 

"Jesus replied, “It is written in your own Scriptures (In Ps. 82:6.) that God said to certain leaders of the people, ‘I say, you are gods!’And you know that the Scriptures cannot be altered. So if those people. . .were called ‘gods,’why do you call it blasphemy when I say, ‘I am the Son of God’? (John 10:34)

 Certainly the whites have always have been seen as gods by the primitive dark natives. . .even to this day!

Even the recent cargo cults were founded by white men in planes who came to primitive islands of natives in wartime. The natives evolved a religion from the experience. They made planes out of sticks, watched the skies for hours, praying for blessings from above, and teaching their children to do the same.

There is evidence in all mythology that white people started every civilization, and they were often even claiming to be (or tied with in some way) Israelites, hebrews, Shemites, Hamites or Japhethites. . .as do those they mixed with to this day.

The names and location are confusing though, as most people become mixed starting from the originally elite white civilizations, that had many slaves too. Just as in America (which is now turning brown like other countries) all civilizations started with the white "gods" and ended up abandoned by them as the mixed blacks take over, and crime gets out of control. One example of this is in ancient America where we believe for instance that Spaniards mixed with native Americans, before the Europeans came. Only they were actually whites as well. . .and seen as gods.

 When Columbus came to America, it was apparent the Indians had seen white men before. From the writings of Columbus, 06 Nov 1492  "...My messengers report that after a march of twelve miles they found a village with perhaps about a thousand inhabitants. The natives, they say, received them with great ceremony, lodged them in the most beautiful houses, carried them around on their arms, kissed their hands and feet, and, in short, tried to make clear to them in every possible way that it was known the white men came from the gods. About fifty men and women asked my messengers to be allowed to travel back with them to the Heaven of the eternal gods."

(Columbus, like most of the early explorers, was fair and had blue eyes.)

Pedro Pizarro was a Spanish (originally white) explorer. He conquered. . . the Incas in the early 1500's. He writes, "The ruling class in the kingdom of Peru was fair-skinned with fair hair about the color of ripe wheat. Most of the great lords and ladies looked like white Spaniards.[the original ones] In that country I met an Indian woman with her child, both so fair-skinned that they were hardly distinguishable from fair, white men. Their fellow countrymen called them 'children of the gods'." He further states that the ruling class was one large family, which supplied all the country's governors, generals, and dignitaries. These aristocrats shunned all intermarriage with the Indians. They spoke a language of their own. Source
From Wikipedia on the white gods

of the Incas and Aztecs who started the American Indians:

-A statue of St Bartholomew, whom the Indians called their white god, was found in the Incan Empire by the early Spaniards.
-Incan kings wore purple and used mummification
-The Incas utilized the decimal system and used beam scales like the Romans.
-The Incas utilized the obelisk and pyramids, like in Egypt.
"Spanish chroniclers from the 16th century claimed that when the conquistadors led by Francisco Pizarro first encountered the Inca's they were greeted as gods, "Viracochas", because their lighter skin resembled their God Viracocha. This story was first reported by Pedro Cieza de León (1553) and later by Pedro Sarmiento de Gamboa. Similar accounts by Spanish chroniclers (e.g. Juan de Betanzos) describe Viracocha as a "White God", often with a beard."

"In the writings of Cortez, (he conquered and plundered the Aztec nation), it is revealed that the Indians had legends of a great flood, a tower of Babel (it wasn't called Babel though), and an immaculate conception of the White God [man who started the great civilization]."

-Indian records in Mexico go back to about 320 AD. They chronicle the life of central Mexico and discuss the white god rulers.

The writer Robert F. Marx has written extensively about the concept of "White gods", Marx came to the conclusion that white gods "figure in almost every indigenous culture in the Americas."

The British writer Harold T. Wilkins took the concept of the white gods the furthest, writing that a vanished white race had occupied the whole of South America in ancient times. Wilkins also claimed that [they were from] Atlantis!

Peter Kolosimo believed that the legends of Quetzalcoatl had a basis in fact. He claimed that the legends actually describe a race of white men who were born in spaceships and migrated to Atlantis; then, after Atlantis was destroyed, they moved to the Americas to be treated as "white gods" by the "primitive earth-dwellers". "The story of the life of the Mexican divinity, Quetzalcoatl, closely resembles that of the Savior; so closely, indeed, that we can come to no other conclusion than that Quetzalcoatl and Christ are the same being."
Apparently Mormons believe that the white god in Spanish folk lore was Jesus. 

Source

This same story is all down through history; white /Israelite/Jew/Hebrew people of royal blood (sometimes mixed, as the black Jews were thought to have made great Zimbabwe) start great civilizations, and reign as kings or gods for many generations. Next they brown as they mix (intentionally of otherwise) with the dark race, and the civilizations crumble from a less pure elite class. (With a lowered IQ.)

I just hope the aliens are truly coming back for their children, like the Bible says they will. In the Bible it says God will clarify who are the true children of the gods, and restore their honor.

Revelation 3:9
"I will make those who are of the synagogue of Satan, who claim to be Jews though they are not, but are liars--I will make them come and fall down at your feet and acknowledge that I have loved you."

At that point the aliens will separate the "sheep from the goats", as prophesied. . .