Was King James of the KJV Bible black?? I would really love to know... very interesting and something I've never heard before

Oh hell yeah King James was black no doubt...you could do your own research on the net, but be aware that anybody could put information on the net especially people who want to hide the truth.
now to get off topic

I mean how come caucasian/rare people burn when they stay out
in the sun too long?
...but i can stay out in the sun for hours with no suntan lotion

If god crated adam from soil that must mean he has pigmentation...:0

for my brothers out there you ever think about how come our hair grows toward the sun like the grass and trees and looks a crown...but when the rednecks hair grows it drops down almost as if it were dead(which it is)...:0

....but god created us equal

and whats funny is that even your own scientist proved that everyone's dna trace back to an old black lady in kemet(Africa)

"In the mid-1980s the late Allan Wilson and colleagues at the University of California, Berkeley, used mtDNA to pinpoint humanity's ancestral home. They compared mtDNA from women around the world and found that women of African descent showed twice as much diversity as their sisters. Since the telltale mutations seem to occur at a steady rate, modern humans must have lived in Africa twice as long as anywhere else. Scientists now calculate that all living humans are related to a single woman who lived roughly 150,000 years ago in Africa, a "mitochondrial Eve." She was not the only woman alive at the time, but if geneticists are right, all of humanity is linked to Eve through an unbroken chain of mothers."
......:0
and this probably goes back more than 150,000 years.

here is the link... [link to ngm.nationalgeographic.com]

This thread is so much lulz.

I will help with answers to your questions.

1:I mean how come caucasian/rare people burn when they stay out in the sun too long?

White people live in the northern hemisphere where it is cooler and more humid. Their bodies have adapted to that.

2:...but i can stay out in the sun for hours with no suntan lotion
People of darker skin colours have melanin for that purpose. Your ancestors worked the fields during all sunlight hours so had to build up a resistance to it. This was waaaaay before slavery. Whitey got to sit in the shade whilst the people of colour had to work the field.

This thread is so much lulz.

I will help with answers to your questions.

1:I mean how come caucasian/rare people burn when they stay out in the sun too long?

White people live in the northern hemisphere where it is cooler and more humid. Their bodies have adapted to that.

2:...but i can stay out in the sun for hours with no suntan lotion
People of darker skin colours have melanin for that purpose. Your ancestors worked the fields during all sunlight hours so had to build up a resistance to it. This was waaaaay before slavery. Whitey got to sit in the shade whilst the people of colour had to work the field.

3 If god crated adam from soil that must mean he has pigmentation...:0
And worms? Your houses were made from mud, why don't they come alive and start european history?

4 for my brothers out there you ever think about how come our hair grows toward the sun like the grass and trees and looks a crown...
Noooope. It's trying to grow as far away from you as possible.

5 and whats funny is that even your own scientist proved that everyone's dna trace back to an old black lady in kemet(Africa)
Noooooope. Several African ladies often referred to as the 7 sisters.

What does this really prove? William Tyndall was the first ti translate in mass production... which is where KJ had his transcribers reference to.

Lol @ the Afro centric ass hats... Durr de durr... da bible is for black people white people is the debils. Black people invented da bible. Acting as if every great tribute to the world was black man power... everybody else just sat in mud huts like they still do in africa today.

Claiming all humanity came from "one women in Africa" is stupid. You should do more reading on that theory before you go spewing it like an ass hat.

bumping for race war.

P.S Everyone knows that King James was Chinese.

He was known as "Queen James" even the gays made a "Queen James" so-called "bible".

Dude seriously? Are really saying that blacks should go back to Africa because according to you it is their land??? Seriously? What is your level of education? The last time I checked...America (which seems to be where you are posting from) was inhabited by non-whites before whites took it over by force. So-maybe you and your white brethren should go back to your european caves where you came from. Hows that?

Actually... old mummies have been found in America predating what you know to be true.

Really? So-Mr. Psychic man person. Why dont you tell me what I know to be true?

Ill wait.

The blacks here at GLP are fawking delusional.

Would be funny, if it wasn't so very sad and pathetic at the same time.

Poor blacks, inventing shit, because they have no history of their own, due to the fact that they never had the written word.

hahahaha

You have to re0read your Bible. No where does it state that the Hebrews are black.

You came out of a cave you heathen. A FUCKING CAVE LOL.

The blacks here at GLP are fawking delusional.

Would be funny, if it wasn't so very sad and pathetic at the same time.

Poor blacks, inventing shit, because they have no history of their own, due to the fact that they never had the written word.


What's really sad is-when lies are exposed-lazy uneducated whites...such as yourself..would rather believe a lie youve been told rather than to do the research on your own. Now that is delusional. When is the last time you've read a historically accurate book that wasn't required in school...again..Ill wait. As far as written words go-when whites were still in caves eating eachother, Africans had Universities and were teaching language, arts and sciences, and religion. You can find many remnants of these facts if you ever decide to read a book. I doubt it though. I think Americans are some of the laziest people I have ever met. You sit around watching TV all day. Just log off and turn your TV back on.

Highly educated????


hAHAHAHAHAHAHA

Your education is courtesy of Western civilization. Were you born in Africa, you'd still be highly uneducated, just like 99% of your African brothers.

I have done the research.

Adam's name means to be ruddy.
ADam was a white man and he was created only 6,000 years ago.

Thieving blacks like you claim that Adam was named after the soil, called Adamah.

This is not true.
God names Adam Adam and then He said to Adam to name everything else. Adam called the ground after himself.

You sound so bigoted and uneducated. Firsty, Im not black. Secondly-for all the "research" you've done-I guess you werent smart enough to read the first page of the bible? Again, lazy uneducated racist white people. If you would have done the proper research-you would know that Adam and Eve were NOT the first humans on the planet. In fact-I wont even grace you with another response just because you use the bible as fact when you are too lazy to read the very first page. Good day.

You see Adam was not the first man. He was the first white man.
Blacks are pre-Adamites.

The Bible proves this.
The trees in Eden for example represent other nations.

Eze 31:9
I have made him fair by the multitude of his branches: so that all the trees of Eden, that [were] in the garden of God, envied him.

....

Trees do not feel envy, people do.

The Bible is very clear that Adam was only created 6,000 years ago, because the Bible gives us his genealogy, yet we know that the earth is much older than that.

What is more is that genetics proof that white people (blue eyes, white skin etc. first sprang into existence 6,000 years ago.

Blue eyes first appeared 6,000 years ago.
[link to www.livescience.com]
[link to www.telegraph.co.uk]

So did white skin.
[link to www.dailymail.co.uk]
.........

Whites did not evolve as the pre-Adamites did. They were created only 6,000 years ago.

Read Genesis. There are two different creation events. In Gen 1 God creates mankind. Then he rests and only after He had rested in Genesis two does he create Adam.

FACT and what is more, the proof is finally surfacing.

Look at my previous post. I answered your question.

You are right, Adam and Eve were not the first men on the planet. They were however the first white men.

Scientists have deduced that whites evolved from blacks as they have been unable to find any white remains that are older than 6,000 years.

The truth hurts, doesn't it?

Rather run away, because the secrets of the Bible has been revealed to me and your fairy tales will not stand against the scrutiny of the truth.

Look at my previous post. I answered your question.

You are right, Adam and Eve were not the first men on the planet. They were however the first white men.

Scientists have deduced that whites evolved from blacks as they have been unable to find any white remains that are older than 6,000 years.

The truth hurts, doesn't it?

Rather run away, because the secrets of the Bible has been revealed to me and your fairy tales will not stand against the scrutiny of the truth.


Ignorance sure is blissful in America.

You do not need to feel bad that you are not an Adamite, because God looked at his creation at the end of Gen 1 and concluded that it was all good.

BUT something happened when God created Adam that changed God's view of that, because God became all postal after that.


Read the following for more understanding.
[link to comparet.christogenea.org]

The parable of the sower is exactly that.

Mat 13
Another parable put he forth unto them, saying, The kingdom of heaven is likened unto a man (Jesus) which sowed good seed in his field: But while men slept, his enemy (satan) came and sowed tares among the wheat, and went his way.
But when the blade was sprung up, and brought forth fruit, then appeared the tares also.
So the servants (angels) of the householder came and said unto him, Sir, didst not thou sow good seed in thy field? from whence then hath it tares? He said unto them, An enemy hath done this. The servants said unto him, Wilt thou then that we go and gather them up?
But he said, Nay; lest while ye gather up the tares, ye root up also the wheat with them.
Let both grow together until the harvest: and in the time of harvest I will say to the reapers, Gather ye together first the tares, and bind them in bundles to burn them: but gather the wheat into my barn.

The word seed above is translated from the Greek word ZEHRAH and it means offspring (spores) so Mat 13 is not referring to plant seed.
...........

I cast my pearls before the Nakash, because your ignorance has humored me.

I transgress, for if Jesus spoke in parables, whom am I to explain to the tares that they are the tares.

Not true.

It is a fact that the Caucasian stems from the Caucasus mountains.

Incidentally they happen to appear on the Northern slopes of the Caucasus mountains 700BC, which was exactly the time when the 10 lost tribes disappeared from Northern Assyria, whose Northern border happened to be the Caucasus mountains.

[link to www.anglo-saxonisrael.com]

Many people have become agnostics because of the supposed conflict between the Bible and science. In truth, there is no conflict at all between a correct translation of the Bible and really proven science, not just unproven theories.

One of these supposed conflicts is between the fact that science knows that human beings have lived on the earth far longer than the few thousand years covered by the Bible and the common belief that the Bible says that Adam was the first man. Yes, I know that most of the preachers say that, but the Bible doesn't! It merely says that Adam was the first WHITE man. Let's look at the record.

The many mistranslations in the King James versions obscure much of the truth. For example, Genesis 1:1-2, "In the beginning, God created the heaven and the earth. And the earth was without form and void and darkness was upon the face of the deep." In the Hebrew it says, "Now the earth had become chaotic and empty."

........
Study: When was the beginning
[link to www.biblestudysite.com]
.........

(See Rotherham's Emphasized Bible) That is, some early catastrophe had wrecked the earth, which was not "without form and void" before that. This was a judgment of God on earlier civilizations, for their wickedness. Jeremiah 4:23-27 gives a vision of it. "I beheld the earth and lo, it was without form and void; and the heavens and they had no light. I beheld the mountains and lo, they trembled and all the hills moved lightly. I beheld and lo, there was no man and all the birds of the heavens were fled. I beheld, and lo, the fruitful place was a wilderness and all the cities thereof were broken down at the presence of the Lord and by His fierce anger. For thus hath the Lord said, 'The whole land shall be desolate; yet will I not make a full end.'" Therefore we do find buried ruins of cities older than Adam and skeletons which can be dated by the carbon 14 process as many as thousands of years older. But, the Bible itself tells us about this.

Next the Bible tells us about the creation of men, in the plural, in Genesis 1:26-28, saying, "Male and female created He THEM" (1:27), and God told these people, "Be fruitful and multiply and replenish the earth" (1:28). "Plenish" is an obsolete English word meaning "to fill"; and you cannot replenish what was never plenished, or filled, before. In the next chapter, Genesis 2 we find THE ADAM (in the singular) created. The Hebrew word, "aw-dawm" (rendered "Adam" in English) is from a root word meaning "to show blood in the face" or "of a ruddy complexion", a word obviously not applicable to the dark races, which we also know from scientific evidence to be much older than the White Race.

.....
Study: The two creation events
[link to www.biblestudysite.com]

Bible scholars know that Genesis 3:20 - "And Adam called his wife's name 'Eve': because she was the mother of all living" - is a later interpolation, which was not in the earlier manuscripts. (See Moffatt's translation.)

The Fourth chapter of Genesis records the birth of Cain and Abel; in the Hebrew, the wording suggests that they were twins. No other child of Eve is mentioned until the birth of Seth, when Adam was 130 years old, certainly long after the birth of Cain and Abel, which most scholars say was over 100 years earlier. Yet, when Cain killed Abel, and in punishment was driven out of the land, he complained to God that "any one that findeth me shall slay me." Genesis 4:14. Upon being sent away, Cain found many other people, for Genesis 4:17 records that Cain not only married a wife, but built a city. You don't build a city for just two people. These were the pre-Adamite races, mentioned in the latter part of Genesis 1.

Study:
Cain founded the Summerian empire
[link to www.biblestudysite.com]


The "Garden of Eden" was not a plantation of ordinary trees and shrubs. God did nothing so foolish as to make a special creation, just to have a man to wield shovel and pruning shears, when He already had millions of pre Adamites available for that type of work. We are told that the "Garden of Eden" contained "the tree of the knowledge (or experience) of good and evil". No tree of the forest has any knowledge or experience of either good or evil. Ezekiel 31, says "Behold, the Assyrian was a cedar in Lebanon, with fair branches and a shadowing bough and of an high stature; Therefore his height was exalted above all the trees of the field and his boughs were multiplied and his branches became long; all the fowls of heaven made their nests in his boughs and under his branches did all the beasts of the field bring forth their young and under his shadow dwelt all great nations. THE CEDARS IN THE GARDEN OF GOD could not hide him: the fir trees were not like his boughs and the chestnut trees were not like his branches; NOR ANY TREE IN THE GARDEN OF GOD WAS LIKE UNTO HIM IN HIS BEAUTY. I have made him fair by the multitude of his branches: SO THAT ALL THE TREES OF EDEN THAT WERE IN THE GARDEN OF GOD ENVIED HIM". Obviously, the trees in the Garden of God in Eden were "family trees" of races and nations who admired and envied the early Assyrian Empire. These made up the "garden" that Adam was to cultivate. That is, Satan had been what we might call the Super- intendant of this planet, to rule it in obedience to God's will, until he forfeited that position by rebellion against God. Adam was sent to take his place. It was Adam's job to rule the various nations and races of the earth as God's representative here, educating them in God's laws and enforcing obedience to those laws. These other races and nations had been here long before Adam.

Therefore the Bible makes it unmistakably clear that we are not all descended from Adam and Eve, for there were other races on earth, already old, already numerous, when Adam was created. Among these other races there are the several who are simply pre-Adamic and one at least, which is Satanic. If you will read the third chapter of Genesis, you will notice that, immediately after the fall of Adam, when God required them to answer what they had done, God condemned Satan. The word mistranslated "serpent" is the Hebrew word "naw-khash", which literally means "enchanter" or "magician" and, no doubt Satan still possessing angelic powers, was able to be an enchanter or magician. It is certain that the one who seduced Eve was no mere scaly snake wriggling along on the ground. Yes, I said "seduced" Eve, for that is what she admitted in the original Hebrew. Cain was the son of that seduction. The Bible uses the word "begat" with monotonous regularity but, the first time the Bible ever says that Adam ever "begat" anyone is Genesis 5:3 where it says, "And Adam lived an hundred and thirty years and begat a son in his own likeness, after his image: and called his name Seth. But to get back to Genesis 3:15, God said to Satan, "I will put enmity between thee and the woman and between THY SEED and HER SEED." The same Hebrew word for "seed" (ZEHRA) is used in both cases. Satan was to have just as literal "seed", or descendants as Eve. God's own word being pledged to this, we must expect to find it actually happening and we do. Jesus Christ, Himself, tells us of it.

In Matthew 13:38-39, explaining the Parable of the Tares Among the Wheat, Jesus says, "The field is the world; the good seed are the children OF THE KINGDOM: but THE TARES ARE THE CHILDREN OF THE WICKED ONE: THE ENEMY THAT SOWED THEM IS THE DEVIL." Again, in John 6:70-71, Jesus had been talking with His twelve deciples and we read:

"Jesus answered them, 'Have not I chosen you twelve and one of you is a devil?' He spake of Judas Iscariot the son of Simon: for he it was that should betray Him being one of the twelve." And again you should read carefully the eighth chapter of John, where Jesus told those who hated Him, "Ye are of your father the devil and the lusts of your father ye will do." He was not being vulgarly abusive in either of these cases, for He never resorted to name calling so His statement was precisely accurate. He did call some of them "serpents, children of vipers" which again, was accurate. Long before this, they had adopted the serpent as a symbol of Satan. That is why their tradition had given the word naw-khash" the translation "serpent", when it really means "enchanter". Jesus therefore was telling them that they were of their father the devil (or serpent, if they preferred that word). In this He was simply stating a biological fact with scientific precision and identifying the persons of this ancestry.

Whenever someone tells you that the Bible is in conflict with what modern science has proved true, don't you believe it. The things that many preachers teach are in conflict with scientific truth, as we all know, but these preachers are equally in conflict with the Bible. Go back to the Bible, not to any man made doctrines and double check it for accuracy of translation. You will find that what the Bible really says, in its original languages, is accurate with a precision our scientist have not yet achieved.


The Bible tells of the creation of MEN, IN THE PLURAL, in Genesis 1:26-28, saying, "Male and female created He THEM" (1:27), and God told these people, "Be fruitful and multiply, and Replenish the earth" (1:28). "Plenish" is an obsolete English word, meaning "to fill"; and you cannot REplenish what was never plenished, or filled, before.

In the next chapter, Genesis 2. we find THE ADAM (in the singular) formed. The Hebrew word, "aw-dawm" (rendered "Adam" in English) is from a root word meaning, "To show blood in the face" or "of a ruddy complexion" ... a word obviously not applicable to the dark races, which we know from scientific evidence to be much older than the White Race.

Bible scholars know the latter part of the passage in Genesis 3:20... "and Adam called his wife's name "Eve"; because she was the mother of all living" . . . -is a later interpolation, which was not in the earlier manuscripts (See Moffatt's Translation). It follows that Eve (which means 'life-giver'), being Adamic, could not have mothered the earlier Yellow or Black races; an idea which is only a popular misconception engendered by fallacious Christian Education.

EVE DID NOT EAT AN APPLE!

Edenic Covenant

In Gen. 3:3, God has told Eve she is not to eat (partake) of the fruit (offspring) of the tree that was in the midst of the Garden. We know that the tree in the midst of the Garden was a racial tree because it is described in Gen. 2:17 as a tree of the knowledge of good and evil. No fruit tree has a knowledge of good or evil, so it could not have been an "apple tree". Also, Eve was admonished not to touch* the fruit of the tree on pain of death. Certainly, touching an apple would not have called for such stern punishment. Again in Gen. 3:61 Eve saw that the fruit was pleasant to the eyes (handsome) and capable of making one wise. As it turned out, partaking of the fruit of the racial tree did make Eve wise, because she knew (immediately after she and Adam had sinned) that she was naked. A fact that she did not seem to notice before the misdeed.

The Enlish word TOUCH is translated from the Hebrew word NAGA and it means "to lay hands upon, to lie with" - See Strong's Concordance.

When God asked Eve what she had done GOD DID NOT ASK HER, WHAT SHE HAD THOUGHT, BUT WHAT SHE HAD DONE(Gen. 3:13) she said the serpent beguiled her. In the first place, the Hebrew word "Nachash", translated "serpent," actually means "spellbinding enchanter or magician". Now we know how the serpent could talk to Eve. It was not a snake or any reptile with which we are familiar, but Satan, in one of his many appearances. Understanding the foregoing makes it easy to understand that the sin committed in the Garden of Eden was of a sexual nature because when Eve said she was beguiled she actually was saying she had been seduced. The Hebrew word "Nashall translated to "beguiled" actually means "to lead astray, to seduce".

It is quite evident that before Adam and Eve sinned theirs was not a physical or sexual relationship. The Forgotten Books of Eden tell us that God, the Father, had desired to bring forth children of Light from both of them (perhaps in the same manner as Eve was brought from Adam). But when they committed sexual sin; they were reduced to a purely physical plane of reproduction (Gen. 3:16); they lost their aura or "glory" and were driven out of Eden. They were no longer children of light, free from toil and pain and death. Yet God' s mercy did not depart from them. The fallen man and woman were restored by God's grace to a condition of favour. They had been given mortality and they came therefore, under the dispensation of that state of being under which God made with them a second Covenant.



ADAMIC COVENANT

This Second Covenant teaches us the conditions of the life of mortal (fallen) humanity, the conditions, that is, that have governed the lives of all men since the Fall, under which, therefore we live. These conditions remain until the coming of the Christ when he restores all things created, to their original purity. This second Covenant was partly founded in a curse, for God's judgment came upon Adam for his sin, and the judgment bore the burden of labour, "In the sweat of thy face shalt thou eat bread"; the difficulty of labour, "thorns also and thistles shall it bring forth to thee"; the sorrow of life, "in sorrow shalt thou eat of it all the days of thy life"; physical death, "dust thou art, and unto dust shalt thou return". All these things, the fruit of the curse, are included in the judgment of God upon the Fall, yet how important it is to notice that even in such a Covenant, in such a statement of God's will and purpose there is the clear promise of blessing and restoration. For you have, in the story of this second Covenant, the first promise of a Saviour, the first beginnings of God's work of redemption through the Godly seed. It is this Covenant, made with Adam when cast out of Eden, which provides the first link in a chain that runs unbroken throughout the whole Bible; that chain of men, chosen and called out by God, who should labour for Him in righteousness, and who should be fellow workers with God to restore His dominion over the earth.

Here is a map of Assyria, as it was during the time the Israelites were being held captive there, 700BC.
[link to www.keyway.ca]

Now note the Northern border of Assyria is the Caucasus mountain range and it is known by that name today still.
[link to www.dailywritingtips.com]

..........

It is no coincidence that the Caucasians first appeared in history, 700BC on the Northern slopes of the Caucasus mountains, at exactly the same time as the Biblical Israelites disappeared from the Bible from the Southern slopes of the Caucasus mountains.

White skin turned white only 6,000 years ago.
[link to www.sciencemag.org]

This is science fact and invalidates the claim that white skin turned white due to less sunshine.

Look at this link.
[link to suite101.com]

An extract:
A preliminary genetic study done in the summer of 2007 by researchers at Penn State found that the light version of the golden gene may not have become common in Europe until 6000 or 12,000 years ago. Right when farming became much more common.

Then the unwise makes a deduction:
But farming didn’t really take a hold in Europe until 6,000 or 8,000 years ago. So what about the 30,000 or 35,000 years that people lived in Europe before farming? If there was enough vitamin D in their diet, then there would have been no need for pale skin. Recent genetic work suggests that the diet of these hunter-gatherers may have had plenty of vitamin D.

But this is the wrong deduction, because Adam was created 6,000 years ago. Note how it states above that farming only developed 6,000 years ago.

This is what the Bible says.

Gen 2:5
And every plant of the field before it was in the earth, and every herb of the field before it grew: for the LORD God had not caused it to rain upon the earth, and [there was] not a man to till the ground.

THIS WAS AFTER THE FIRST CREATION EVENT IN GENESIS 1, BUT JUST BEFORE GOD CREATED ADAM. Farming came at the same time Adam was created 6,000 years ago.
.........

The truth will not entertain you, for you are Naksah.
............



Blue eyes first originated 6,000 years ago as well.
[link to www.livescience.com]

Not only that but the link above shows that all whites have a common ancestor. Even if they have brown eyes, they carry the blue eyed gene resessively.

Both parents need to have copies of the same gene to produce offspring with blue eyes. This is why, if a 100% pure black mates with a white, the resultant offspring will always have brown eyes, because the 100% pure black does not have the blue eyed gene at all.

This offspring though will now also now carry the blue eyed gene resessively. Should this offspring mate with another 100% black, the eyes will be brown, because the 100% pure black, like you still find in Africa doesn't have the blue eye gene at all.

However should this racially mixed black mate with another racially black, then blue eye combinations are possible. Unlikely because both parents only carry the blue eyed gene resessively, but possible

Incidentally the average African American has 13% white ancestry, so they are not racially pure.
[link to www.sciencemag.org]

John Hanson
[link to www.history.com]

The black John Hanson was a senator from Liberia. The John Hanson referenced here is a white man.

End of story.

These Negroid Afrocentrists get caught in a big lie with this one. They like to claim he was the first black President but he was not. Outright lie here.

Not that the claim that King James was black has some sort of truth. This is an outright lie as well.

King James was a white man who has Y chromosome DNA common in Western Europe and clearly of a white origin. He was portrayed in all his paintings as a white man. This is obvious but unfortunately some people fall victim to these lies that Afrocentrists tell.

Blacks started this nonsense because the Jews did this type of thing. Blacks think they arethe true Jews or the Hebrews of the bible. This nonsense of course. Blacks did not live in the middle east at that time. They were not even allowed to live in Egypt.

One of the most racist white supremacists was Senoswret III of Egypt. He hated the Nubians and called them cave dwelling monkeys.

In the end the blacks that say this type of sh*t have a serious mental condition called slave mentality. At least Egypt is a question mark but the blacks that start to claim that Phoenicians and then Europeans were really black and that all the great people of the past were black they are exhibiting slave mentality. A slave mentality condition stems from such a state of low self esteem and subconcious worship if the white man that black men will lie to themselves a believe that all the masters ancestors are really black. He cannot face the truth of his non-greatness that he has been inundated with with due to the natural greatness of the white man.

Notice how black women rarely fall for such stupidity.

Now see, the fact that people even think to ask a question like this just goes to show that racism is still rampant!