Good article, read with pleassure. Thank you.

As some may know, I love history and while in the Employee of the Smithsonian (a short diversion from DOD) I often found myself in libraries... during one of my many visits I found a document, actually a manuscript that was on loan from Lord Kelly. There is a short paragraph in a short epistle to the Senate, written by Tiberius Caesar, Publius Lentullus, President of Judea, concerning the Nazarene called Jesus. For what it is worth, it is quoted for your consideration: "There appeared in these our days a man, of the Jewish Nation, of great virtue, named Yeshua [Jesus], who is yet living among us, and of the Gentiles is accepted for a Prophet of truth, but His own disciples call Him the Son of God- He raiseth the dead and cureth all manner of diseases. A man of stature somewhat tall, and comely, with very reverent countenance, such as the beholders may both love and fear, his hair of (the colour of) the chestnut, full ripe, plain to His ears, whence downwards it is more orient and curling and wavering about His shoulders. In the midst of His head is a seam or partition in His hair, after the manner of the Nazarenes. His forehead plain and very delicate; His face without spot or wrinkle, beautified with a lovely red; His nose and mouth so formed as nothing can be reprehended; His beard thickish, in colour like His hair, not very long, but forked; His look innocent and mature; His eyes grey, clear, and quick- In reproving hypocrisy He is terrible; in admonishing, courteous and fair spoken; pleasant in conversation, mixed with gravity. It cannot be remembered that any have seen Him Laugh, but many have seen Him Weep. In proportion of body, most excellent; His hands and arms delicate to behold. In speaking, very temperate, modest, and wise. A man, for His singular beauty, surpassing the children of men."

And there is a second one that I found in the Congressional Library in Washington, D.C which is an account from Pontius Pilate to Tiberius Caesar, again I quote it for your consideration: "He is the picture of his mother, only he has not her smooth, round face. His hair is a little more golden than hers, though it is as much from sunburn as anything else. He is tall, and his shoulders are a little drooped; his visage is thin and of a swarthy complexion, though this is from exposure. His eyes are large and a soft blue, and rather dull and heavy...."

Both descriptions are very possible, going back into the Tanakh you will find in Genius 25:25 and 1 Samuel 16:12 and 17:42 that both Esau and King David described as admoni... which translates to red or ruddy. Of course this is not conclusive that Jesus was a ginger, but one has to consider the gene MC1R, which is the gene for red hair or reddish hair, and the NT makes the case that Mary was a direct descendant of King David. The mention of these ginger men sets them apart from others for only one reason.... it is estimated that currently only one percent of the world population are gingers.

Pennylynn
You do not come forward very often but when you do you always come armed to the teeth
with facts and sources. I greatly enjoyed the below. I like history as well. Spending enough
time in the D.C. area in the 70's to take in much of the Smithsonian. It must have been very
exciting for you. I said for you because of your ability to recall and source the info below .
That in it self tells me why you had to love it there.

I Just started out to say thanks for this posting.

So , thanks.

I thought about staying out of this, but my sense of fairness jumped up and asked the question... are you a true friend to the only man who defended your daughter against a filthy mouthed woman who attacked her back two years ago? This woman would not let up, she chased her from thread to thread belittling her, and finally forced this very bright young girl of 16 (at the time) to leave OPP. Those posts have now disappeared from OPP, but my daughter kept them.... pinned them to her wall as an example of how not to behave.

Now then back to Archie... I am proud of him for standing his ground. It is past time that people stand up and say, if you start crap, then you must be willing to take as much as you dish out. If you propose a race war...then you are bringing up race so it becomes fair game. If you imply someone is a homosexual, then your gender will be attacked. If you call me a cracker or crakka then you are opening the door to be called similar names. Enough with walking on egg shells because someone else starts crap! Some will sensor the words of a white man and remain silent when a black can say whatever they please and they do not see this as a double standard...... in the words of George Washington,

"If the freedom of speech is taken away then dumb and silent we may be led, like sheep to the slaughter."

I thought about staying out of this, but my sense of fairness jumped up and asked the question... are you a true friend to the only man who defended your daughter against a filthy mouthed woman who attacked her back two years ago? This woman would not let up, she chased her from thread to thread belittling her, and finally forced this very bright young girl of 16 (at the time) to leave OPP. Those posts have now disappeared from OPP, but my daughter kept them.... pinned them to her wall as an example of how not to behave.

Now then back to Archie... I am proud of him for standing his ground. It is past time that people stand up and say, if you start crap, then you must be willing to take as much as you dish out. If you propose a race war...then you are bringing up race so it becomes fair game. If you imply someone is a homosexual, then your gender will be attacked. If you call me a cracker or crakka then you are opening the door to be called similar names. Enough with walking on egg shells because someone else starts crap! Some will sensor the words of a white man and remain silent when a black can say whatever they please and they do not see this as a double standard...... in the words of George Washington,

"If the freedom of speech is taken away then dumb and silent we may be led, like sheep to the slaughter."

Thank you. Your post gave me a lot to think about. I grew up under the aegis of take nothing from nobody. Give them as much as you get. Then this thought came: where does it end? It is not my intent to disagree with you; what you offer as a solution, well not exactly a solution but a perpetual cycle of reprisals that could work only when one finally tires of the game. But a lot can go very wrong in between. Too often, it is the one who takes offense that does far more damage than the one who initially gave offense. And it escalates, slowly or quickly. Why not tire early? Why give energy to the other we really want nothing to do with? What changed my thinking was reading this story about two friends in the city and one stops to buy a paper. The paper vendor in the kiosk is a miserable son of a bitch and makes some mean-spirited comments to the man. He simply responds, "Thank you. Have a nice day." A few steps later his friend asks, "Why did you let that guy get away with insulting you?" The other responds, "Why should I allow him to ruin my day."

Taking offense gives power to the offender. "Standing up" to them puts us under their thumb, it drags us down. Ignoring the detractors frees us and makes them the fool. We lose freedom of association when we are corralled by a comment or gesture into their world.

I thought about staying out of this, but my sense of fairness jumped up and asked the question... are you a true friend to the only man who defended your daughter against a filthy mouthed woman who attacked her back two years ago? This woman would not let up, she chased her from thread to thread belittling her, and finally forced this very bright young girl of 16 (at the time) to leave OPP. Those posts have now disappeared from OPP, but my daughter kept them.... pinned them to her wall as an example of how not to behave.

Now then back to Archie... I am proud of him for standing his ground. It is past time that people stand up and say, if you start crap, then you must be willing to take as much as you dish out. If you propose a race war...then you are bringing up race so it becomes fair game. If you imply someone is a homosexual, then your gender will be attacked. If you call me a cracker or crakka then you are opening the door to be called similar names. Enough with walking on egg shells because someone else starts crap! Some will sensor the words of a white man and remain silent when a black can say whatever they please and they do not see this as a double standard...... in the words of George Washington,

"If the freedom of speech is taken away then dumb and silent we may be led, like sheep to the slaughter."

Thank you. Your post gave me a lot to think about. I grew up under the aegis of take nothing from nobody. Give them as much as you get. Then this thought came: where does it end? It is not my intent to disagree with you; what you offer as a solution, well not exactly a solution but a perpetual cycle of reprisals that could work only when one finally tires of the game. But a lot can go very wrong in between. Too often, it is the one who takes offense that does far more damage than the one who initially gave offense. And it escalates, slowly or quickly. Why not tire early? Why give energy to the other we really want nothing to do with? What changed my thinking was reading this story about two friends in the city and one stops to buy a paper. The paper vendor in the kiosk is a miserable son of a bitch and makes some mean-spirited comments to the man. He simply responds, "Thank you. Have a nice day." A few steps later his friend asks, "Why did you let that guy get away with insulting you?" The other responds, "Why should I allow him to ruin my day."

Taking offense gives power to the offender. "Standing up" to them puts us under their thumb, it drags us down. Ignoring the detractors frees us and makes them the fool. We lose freedom of association when we are corralled by a comment or gesture into their world.

Sorry, why did she not pin those who supported what she said? Why was the supposed negativity worth saving? Why was an example of "how not to behave" motivation to run away? I am confused. Did you both talk about this issue? How does a "very bright young girl of 16" allow herself to be defeated, become a victim, over a disagreement in views? "Very bright" suggests to me an emotional maturity as well as intelligence. From your description of your daughter, it would seem she could handle herself. Did you forewarn her of what might be trolls? Before she decided to quit, did you talk over that decision? I apologize again but some pertinent facts seem to be missing.