Has anyone else noticed that several Hebrew characters in the Bible had relationships with black women? First, there's Joseph marrying an Egyptian. Then there's Moses marrying a Kushite. Third, there's King Solomon with the Queen of Sheba. It seems like there's a trend here.
Does anyone else know if there are other instances of Hebrew men with black women in the Bible?
Posted by Djehuti (Member # 6698) on :
It is a commonly known FACT, at least to Jews and those familiar with Biblical texts that the early Israelite people have mixed extensively with blacks, if one excludes Natufian (proto-Semitic?) African ancestry among the Israelites in the first place.
Abraham's maidservant and concubine Hagar who was mother of Ishmael was Egyptian. Joseph's wife, Asenat was Egyptian though I don't doubt his brothers and fellow tribesmen married Egyptian women as his sisters and Israelite women were disproportionately few. Moses's wife Zipporah was actually not a Kushite but a member of the Kenite tribe of the Sinai region. The label of 'Kushite' is actually a misnomer due to later translations of her Hebrew description 'kushi' meaning simply 'black'. Again, it should come as no surprise if native peoples in the Sinai or even Levant region were black. The Queen of Sheba is southern Arabian origins so she being black is no surprise, though if you are referring to the 'Song of Songs' passage, it wasn't the Queen of Sheba but a woman of the Shulamite tribe-- again the occurance of blacks in the Levant. Remember Biblical texts refer to Canaanite people in general as being the progeny of Ham, so that should give you a good idea as to how prominent blacks were.
[ 27. May 2021, 02:02 PM: Message edited by: the lioness, ]
Posted by Mike111 (Member # 9361) on :
Djehuti - at least BrandonP knows better, he is just PLAYING ignorant. So each time that nonsense is put forth, I will respond with this!
BTW Djehuti, are you still promoting the Whites turned White suddenly in Europe nonsense?
From the Black Obelisk of Assyrian King Shalmaneser III - 858 B.C.
Hebrews.
.
Wall relief depicting Assyrian King Sennacherib’s Attack and conquest of the Judean City of Lachish. British museum, London.
Hebrews.
.
Assyrian king Tiglath-pilesar III’s Assyrian warriors leading the inhabitants of a city near the Sea of Galilee, Astartu or Ashtaroth.
Hebrews.
.
Phoenician.
Two things are apparent, all the above people are obviously Black people.
And you two guys have a very serious case of hypocrisy. Posted by BrandonP (Member # 3735) on :
None of those images are painted, so we can't determine their skin color.
However, I will say that the ancient Hebrews probably had a significant level of black admixture and therefore may have been darker-skinned and curlier-haired than the stereotypical Southwest Asian.
Posted by Jari-Ankhamun (Member # 14451) on :
I am waiting on the Scripture that says the Hebrews of the Bible were White people. White people especially the Nordics had nothing to do with the compilation of Torah and the Tenakh ...and the Greeks just translated the Epistles and converted when the Hebrews began to preach the Gospels to the Gentiles. The Hebrews are shown in the following Images...
Now where are the White Jews at??? Why is it that the Hebrew people live amoung nothing but Blacks(Hamites) From Abraham to Yahshaya(Jesus) the Messiah...The land of the Chaldees, Canaan, Egypt,?? Why were Hamite people put into the land of Israel the Northern Kingdom after the 10 tribes were expelled...
Why is it that a religion that was accepted first by Ethiopia/Nubia and Egypt before any European Empire is now a white Religion?? Is there evidence of people putting their pictures into the Torah..Painting images of themselves???
Lets ask O' Christians...Please explain who are the following being sealed Revelation 7
1And after these things I saw four angels standing on the four corners of the earth, holding the four winds of the earth, that the wind should not blow on the earth, nor on the sea, nor on any tree.
2And I saw another angel ascending from the east, having the seal of the living God: and he cried with a loud voice to the four angels, to whom it was given to hurt the earth and the sea,
3Saying, Hurt not the earth, neither the sea, nor the trees, till we have sealed the servants of our God in their foreheads.
4And I heard the number of them which were sealed: and there were sealed an hundred and forty and four thousand of all the tribes of the children of Israel.
5Of the tribe of Juda were sealed twelve thousand. Of the tribe of Reuben were sealed twelve thousand. Of the tribe of Gad were sealed twelve thousand.
6Of the tribe of Aser were sealed twelve thousand. Of the tribe of Nephthalim were sealed twelve thousand. Of the tribe of Manasses were sealed twelve thousand.
7Of the tribe of Simeon were sealed twelve thousand. Of the tribe of Levi were sealed twelve thousand. Of the tribe of Issachar were sealed twelve thousand.
8Of the tribe of Zabulon were sealed twelve thousand. Of the tribe of Joseph were sealed twelve thousand. Of the tribe of Benjamin were sealed twelve thousand.
9After this I beheld, and, lo, a great multitude, which no man could number, of all nations, and kindreds, and people, and tongues, stood before the throne, and before the Lamb, clothed with white robes, and palms in their hands;
10And cried with a loud voice, saying, Salvation to our God which sitteth upon the throne, and unto the Lamb.
11And all the angels stood round about the throne, and about the elders and the four beasts, and fell before the throne on their faces, and worshipped God,
12Saying, Amen: Blessing, and glory, and wisdom, and thanksgiving, and honour, and power, and might, be unto our God for ever and ever. Amen.
13And one of the elders answered, saying unto me, What are these which are arrayed in white robes? and whence came they?
14And I said unto him, Sir, thou knowest. And he said to me, These are they which came out of great tribulation, and have washed their robes, and made them white in the blood of the Lamb.
15Therefore are they before the throne of God, and serve him day and night in his temple: and he that sitteth on the throne shall dwell among them.
16They shall hunger no more, neither thirst any more; neither shall the sun light on them, nor any heat.
17For the Lamb which is in the midst of the throne shall feed them, and shall lead them unto living fountains of waters: and God shall wipe away all tears from their eyes.
Posted by BrandonP (Member # 3735) on :
Again, those images are unpainted. They don't prove what skin color the Hebrews had.
Posted by Jari-Ankhamun (Member # 14451) on :
quote:Originally posted by BrandonP: None of those images are painted, so we can't determine their skin color.
However, I will say that the ancient Hebrews probably had a significant level of black admixture and therefore may have been darker-skinned and curlier-haired than the stereotypical Southwest Asian.
??? Again Where is the scripture that says the Hebrews were nothing but Brown and Black skinned like the people they lived around with according to Torah...Sure there were Hebrews that looked lighter and more Asiatic...This is seen in Egypt too... http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ilh8QkjpCh8 Posted by BrandonP (Member # 3735) on :
You said the Hebrews were in the main black and posted those unpainted images as your "evidence".
I agree that the Hebrews were not white, and I agree that they were mixed with blacks, but show me good evidence that they were mostly black.
Posted by Mike111 (Member # 9361) on :
BrandonP - For the sake of levity, because you CAN'T be serious.
If they were NOT White, and Mongols are not known to have invaded until hundreds of years later. Two down, that leaves only Blacks mixing with Blacks. See how easy that is?
Posted by Jari-Ankhamun (Member # 14451) on :
quote:Originally posted by BrandonP: Again, those images are unpainted. They don't prove what skin color the Hebrews had.
10 “ And in that day there shall be a Root of Jesse, Who shall stand as a banner to the people; For the Gentiles shall seek Him, And His resting place shall be glorious.” 11 It shall come to pass in that day That the Lord shall set His hand again the second time To recover the remnant of His people who are left, From Assyria and Mizriam, From Pathros and Cush, From Elam and Shinar, From Hamath and the islands of the sea. 12 He will set up a banner for the nations, And will assemble the outcasts of Israel, And gather together the dispersed of Judah From the four corners of the earth. Zephaniah... 1 The word of the LORD that came to Zephaniah son of Cushi, the son of Gedaliah, the son of Amariah, the son of Hezekiah, during the reign of Josiah son of Amon king of Judah: 8 Therefore wait for me," declares the LORD, "for the day I will stand up to testify. [a] I have decided to assemble the nations, to gather the kingdoms and to pour out my wrath on them— all my fierce anger. The whole world will be consumed by the fire of my jealous anger.
9 "Then will I purify the lips of the peoples, that all of them may call on the name of the LORD and serve him shoulder to shoulder.
10 From beyond the rivers of Cush my worshipers, my scattered people, will bring me offerings. Posted by Jari-Ankhamun (Member # 14451) on :
quote:Originally posted by BrandonP: You said the Hebrews were in the main black and posted those unpainted images as your "evidence".
I agree that the Hebrews were not white, and I agree that they were mixed with blacks, but show me good evidence that they were mostly black.
Tacitus-Many assure us that the Jews are descended from those Ethiopians who were driven by fear and hatred to emigrate from their home country when Cepheus was king Exodus 2:18 18 When the girls returned to Reuel their father, he asked them, "Why have you returned so early today?"
19 They answered, "An Egyptian rescued us from the shepherds. He even drew water for us and watered the flock."
Acts 21:38 Art not thou that Egyptian, which before these days madest an uproar, and leddest out into the wilderness four thousand men that were murderers?
Posted by Ebony Allen (Member # 12771) on :
If they weren't black then how come the Egyptians didn't know Moses was really an Israelite? Can you answer that?
Posted by Ebony Allen (Member # 12771) on :
Oh God, shutup. Dummy.
Posted by Mike111 (Member # 9361) on :
^Actually that is a very good question Ebony, I have never heard anyone ask it before.
Posted by Brada-Anansi (Member # 16371) on :
Posted this on more that one occations:the remains found at Lakish:The excavacation uncovered a mass of human bones,which was estamated to from the remains of fifteen hundred individuals..remains of 695 skulls were brought to London by the British expidition...curiously,the crania indicate a close resemblance to the population of Egypt at this time...the relationships found suggest that the population of the town in 700 B.C was entirely of Egyptian origin..they show further,that the population of lakish was probably derived from upper Egypt.James e Brunson: Yesterday And today Posted by Agbaya (Member # 6729) on :
quote:Originally posted by Djehuti: It is a commonly known FACT, at least to Jews and those familiar with Biblical texts that the early Israelite people have mixed extensively with blacks, if one excludes Natufian (proto-Semitic?) African ancestry among the Israelites in the first place.
Excuse me, I thought the Israelites were "Blacks", which implies they were at least black hued originally. What do you mean by they "mixed extensively with blacks"?
Posted by Whatbox (Member # 10819) on :
They were probably every range of colour.
And maybe people should get of the identity of the Hebrews and answer the dude's question, cuz unlike the Egyptians / Kushites they did not call themselves black, similar to how my Arab buddies don't call themselves white and may even take offence (one of them calls himself black cuz of one of his parents -- grew up in the ghetto).
Maybe it'd be better were this thread entitled 'African', but then people would get on their African identity although it was already admitted even though "Africa" didn't exist back then or if it did, it signified known areas like the Maghreb and perhaps the actual kingdom Kesh (Cush may have been synonymous with the Greek Ettiopia though).
In short, i think the world then was the exact opposite then, and that the Hebrews were of all hues then, but out of Kemet they were definitely black (but this wasn't the question, which was how many cases do you know of them being with black women).
Posted by Brada-Anansi (Member # 16371) on :
Are you guys really reading this stuff? again about the remains of some the people living in the area.
The remains found at Lakish:The excavacation uncovered a mass of human bones,which was estamated to from the remains of fifteen hundred individuals..remains of 695 skulls were brought to London by the British expidition...curiously,the crania indicate a close resemblance to the population of Egypt at this time...the relationships found suggest that the population of the town in 700 B.C was entirely of Egyptian origin..they show further,that the population of lakish was probably derived from upper Egypt.James e Brunson
You guys understand the significance of the above? followed by this statement by Pliny The Elder-Roman Naturalist....
That Syria was once the domain of Cepheus, an Ethiopian king,Tacitus wrote that the Romans beleived that the Jews originated in Ethiopia but fled the persecutions of the King. Strabo,even earlier,stressed that that people of Western Judea was Africiod:
But although the inhibatance are mixed up thus,the most accerdited reports in regards to the people of Jerusalem reperesents the ancestors of the present Judeans as they are called Egyptians.
Posted by Djehuti (Member # 6698) on :
Brandon, I hope you did not miss my reply!
quote:Originally posted by Djehuti: It is a commonly known FACT, at least to Jews and those familiar with Biblical texts that the early Israelite people have mixed extensively with blacks, if one excludes Natufian (proto-Semitic?) African ancestry among the Israelites in the first place.
Abraham's maidservant and concubine Hagar who was mother of Ishmael was Egyptian. Joseph's wife, Asenat was Egyptian though I don't doubt his brothers and fellow tribesmen married Egyptian women as his sisters and Israelite women were disproportionately few. Moses's wife Zipporah was actually not a Kushite but a member of the Kenite tribe of the Sinai region. The label of 'Kushite' is actually a misnomer due to later translations of her Hebrew description 'kushi' meaning simply 'black'. Again, it should come as no surprise if native peoples in the Sinai or even Levant region were black. The Queen of Sheba is southern Arabian origins so she being black is no surprise, though if you are referring to the 'Song of Songs' passage, it wasn't the Queen of Sheba but a woman of the Shulamite tribe-- again the occurance of blacks in the Levant. Remember Biblical texts refer to Canaanite people in general as being the progeny of Ham, so that should give you a good idea as to how prominent blacks were.
Posted by Djehuti (Member # 6698) on :
quote:Originally posted by Mike111: Djehuti - at least BrandonP knows better, he is just PLAYING ignorant. So each time that nonsense is put forth, I will respond with this!
I don't think he's "playing" anything. He just asked a simple question. Why are you so quick to judge and be paranoid of one white boy's queries??
quote:BTW Djehuti, are you still promoting the Whites turned White suddenly in Europe nonsense?
Who said anything about "suddenly"? Whiteness in Europeans came to be out a gradual process called EVOLUTION. I suggest you look it up! But I take it you still believe whites aren't native to Europe but suddenly entered there from Asia which before that came from what outerspace??
quote:...Wall relief depicting Assyrian King Sennacherib’s Attack and conquest of the Judean City of Lachish. British museum, London.
Hebrews.
I will give you this ^ That studies of Judaean skulls in Lachish show African affinities as was discussed by Takruri on several occasians. Which really does not refute my point about black Canaanites or Levantine people at all that were infused into the Israelites and/or their ancestors.
Posted by alTakruri (Member # 10195) on :
Because he can't believe his deity inhabited the body of a black human being Brandon must make the Hebrews to have been other than black. Though a few were other than black the vast majority were black, the kind of black that inhabited the east end of the Mediterranean.
Brandon keeps bringing this issue up as if it hasn't been dealt with before like here for instance. He wants to wish it all away as whacky Afrocentrism never realizing his own Eurocentrism blinds him to the truth so he broaches this thread with its header that tries to make Hebrews distinct from blacks.
I'm pleased to see all the responses that set Brandon straight once again about the colour and phenotype of the Hebrews. Too many are aware of the facts and aren't sitting still for a coverup of the truth.
No matter what archaeological and ancient documents you show Brandon he will cling to his belief that the Hebrews were not black.
quote:Originally posted by BrandonP:
No matter what scientific data you show them, the Eurocentrists will still cling to their belief that the ancient Egyptians and Nubians were "Mediterraneanids". And no matter what scientific data you show them, the Afrocentrists will still cling to their belief that all historically significant peoples from the Hebrews to the Olmecs to the Chinese were black. Neither will listen to facts! It's like arguing with creationists!
Human beings are capable of great stupidity.
Posted by alTakruri (Member # 10195) on :
There are Roman catacomb paintings depicting Jews. Here's your boy Yoshke and his posse from Domitilla's catacombs.
Now that's how how early 'white' Italian Christians painted Jesus and his Disciples. Is that black enough for you? And that's centuries removed from the time of the Hebrews. Can you see why Tacitus wrote down the majority opinion that Jews were from Ethiopians?
Posted by Ebony Allen (Member # 12771) on :
Wow, Takruri. Are there any more?
Posted by kahanyah (Member # 16637) on :
the hebrews were black heh? tell me if blacks have this kind of hair trait...
1Cr 11:15 But if a woman have long hair, it is a glory to her: for [her] hair is given her for a covering.
In the above vrs., Paul refers to an hebrewess who is given a particular hair type that is likened to a veil. Now pay attn. to this photo -
Please show me a subsaharan afrikan woman (black woman) being able to do this with the type of hair she has.
Posted by kahanyah (Member # 16637) on :
Are you delusional? those do not look afrikan black. They look mediterranean.You can even see the curly hair of Jesus.
quote:Originally posted by alTakruri: There are Roman catacomb paintings depicting Jews. Here's your boy Yoshke and his posse from Domitilla's catacombs.
Now that's how how early 'white' Italian Christians painted Jesus and his Disciples. Is that black enough for you? And that's centuries removed from the time of the Hebrews. Can you see why Tacitus wrote down the majority opinion that Jews were from Ethiopians?
Posted by alTakruri (Member # 10195) on :
For those with attention deficit disorder or plain out disinformers:
quote:Originally posted by alTakruri: ... the kind of black that inhabited the east end of the Mediterranean.
Idiots and haters transform that into sub-saharan to fuel their own fires.
The Church of Corinth were once pagan Greeks, no Jews. Paul is inconsequential to Hebrews. If there were such a person (oto tamiydh) we have nothing from him written in Hebrew. Paul appealed to the non-Jews and made up a new religion for them. Hebrew women wore real veils woven from natural materials. To this day married Israelite women cover their hair revealing it only when at home among family. The brazen hussy in that pic is not the Hebrew ideal. The Judahite women of Lachish are properly veiled in the traditional Hebrew manner (looks like the headcover of a Catholic nun's habit).
An impeccable Hebrew source (not even Aramaic) is the Pirqe de Ribbi Eli`ezer who classed the entire Shemitic people as black.
Shem was especially blessed black and beautiful, Hham was blessed black like the raven, and Yapheth was blessed white all over.
There's only one authentic set of contemporary images of Judahites and that is Sennacherib's reliefs of the conquest of Lachish. The hair of the Judahites is nappy.
As a refresher of what was forgotten though only posted a few days ago by more than one member ...
Posted by alTakruri (Member # 10195) on :
Jewish folklore has it that a voice from heaven (bat qol) declared everything that Ribbi Eli`ezer said was correct.
Both white people and black people biased against Jews and even most European Ashkenazi Jews themselves hate to deal with the reality of the physical features of the Y*hudiym/Judahites/Jews in the 8th century BCE depicted above.
What serves to confirm the ethnic reality depicted by Judah's Assyrian conquerers is the discovery of an ossuary at Lachish dated to the time of the conquest. It is the largest sample of Israelite remains and comes from a city that was populated the previous 500 years by Israelites. 695 crania of all ages and both genders were uncovered.
D. L. Risdon in BIOMETRIKA 1939 31:99-166 reports the Lachish cranial series has its closest resemblance to the 4th dynasty series from Deshasheh and Medum in Lower Egypt and the 18th dynasty samples from Thebes and Abydos in Upper Egypt. Cranial samples from other Palestinian sites (Gezer, Megiddo) agree with the Lachish cranium. Thus we have a clear African "racial" continuum in the Hebrews and Egyptians.
The phrase "black and beautiful" ( sh*hhora w*nawa ) originates from a Hebrew document, Song of Songs 1:5, where an Israelite woman from Shunem exclaims her sun enhanced ebon beauty to some color and class struck dusky members of the royal household who kept themselves behind palace walls out of sunlight. For the Shulammite to have tanned black she must have already been very brown.
In the midrash (Hebrew legendary lore) Shem teamed up with Hham in the war against Yapheth, progenitor of the northern people of pallour. The PIRQE DE RIBBI ELI`EZER 28a classes Shem with people of colour. It says that Shem was especially blessed black and beautiful, Hham was blessed black like the raven, and Yapheth was blessed white all over.
Josephus, a Judahite writer of the 1st century CE, agrees with the Egyptian Cherilus' description of Israelites conscripted into Xerxes' army as having the visage of "smoke hardened horseheads." This refered to their high cheekbones and prominent jaws, as seen in the conquest of Lachish depictions, and their smokey "soot" dark complexions (Against Apion I.22).
Tacitus, a younger contemporary of Josephus, lists common Roman opinions on Jewish origins. He wrote that many were assured Judahites were descendents of Kushites (The Histories V.2). Is this a view lurking within Amos 9:7?
quote:Are ye not as children of the Ethiopians unto me, O children of Israel? saith the LORD. Have not I brought up Israel out of the land of Egypt? and the Philistines from Caphtor, and the Syrians from Kir?
The idea that the Israelites were some kind of Caucasian comes from viewing too many European Renaissance fanciful paintings of Bible stories and East Mediterranean idylls.
Though for the most part enjoying amicable relations today the still darker skinned Jews of the Maghreb, Ethiopia, Yemen, and India, occasionally suffer discrimination at the hands of the descendents of those who adopted the laws of the people and came, through the vicissitudes of history, to take over the leadership of `Am Yisra'el (the People Israel).
Posted by alTakruri (Member # 10195) on :
Catacomb frescos vary. The majority show whites. Contrast this Last Supper fresco to the one above
Biblical Archeaology Review or Bible Review had on article on Jesus the Magician (complete with magic wand) where I remember seeing him as a black eastern Mediterranean (as per the Roman artist who made the painting). I likewise remember a fresco of Moses also as an east Mediterranean black.
I'm sorry I no longer have the magazines but the Biblical Archaeology Society has put back issues on CD. This would be before 1995. Maybe you can get it via interlibrary loan at a university?
quote:Originally posted by Ebony Allen: Wow, Takruri. Are there any more?
Posted by BrandonP (Member # 3735) on :
quote:Originally posted by alTakruri: Both white people and black people biased against Jews and even most European Ashkenazi Jews themselves hate to deal with the reality of the physical features of the Y*hudiym/Judahites/Jews in the 8th century BCE depicted above.
What serves to confirm the ethnic reality depicted by Judah's Assyrian conquerers is the discovery of an ossuary at Lachish dated to the time of the conquest. It is the largest sample of Israelite remains and comes from a city that was populated the previous 500 years by Israelites. 695 crania of all ages and both genders were uncovered.
D. L. Risdon in BIOMETRIKA 1939 31:99-166 reports the Lachish cranial series has its closest resemblance to the 4th dynasty series from Deshasheh and Medum in Lower Egypt and the 18th dynasty samples from Thebes and Abydos in Upper Egypt. Cranial samples from other Palestinian sites (Gezer, Megiddo) agree with the Lachish cranium. Thus we have a clear African "racial" continuum in the Hebrews and Egyptians.
The phrase "black and beautiful" ( sh*hhora w*nawa ) originates from a Hebrew document, Song of Songs 1:5, where an Israelite woman from Shunem exclaims her sun enhanced ebon beauty to some color and class struck dusky members of the royal household who kept themselves behind palace walls out of sunlight. For the Shulammite to have tanned black she must have already been very brown.
In the midrash (Hebrew legendary lore) Shem teamed up with Hham in the war against Yapheth, progenitor of the northern people of pallour. The PIRQE DE RIBBI ELI`EZER 28a classes Shem with people of colour. It says that Shem was especially blessed black and beautiful, Hham was blessed black like the raven, and Yapheth was blessed white all over.
Josephus, a Judahite writer of the 1st century CE, agrees with the Egyptian Cherilus' description of Israelites conscripted into Xerxes' army as having the visage of "smoke hardened horseheads." This refered to their high cheekbones and prominent jaws, as seen in the conquest of Lachish depictions, and their smokey "soot" dark complexions (Against Apion I.22).
Tacitus, a younger contemporary of Josephus, lists common Roman opinions on Jewish origins. He wrote that many were assured Judahites were descendents of Kushites (The Histories V.2). Is this a view lurking within Amos 9:7?
quote:Are ye not as children of the Ethiopians unto me, O children of Israel? saith the LORD. Have not I brought up Israel out of the land of Egypt? and the Philistines from Caphtor, and the Syrians from Kir?
The idea that the Israelites were some kind of Caucasian comes from viewing too many European Renaissance fanciful paintings of Bible stories and East Mediterranean idylls.
Though for the most part enjoying amicable relations today the still darker skinned Jews of the Maghreb, Ethiopia, Yemen, and India, occasionally suffer discrimination at the hands of the descendents of those who adopted the laws of the people and came, through the vicissitudes of history, to take over the leadership of `Am Yisra'el (the People Israel).
I declare defeat. You've convinced me that the original Hebrews were indeed a black people. In fact, I think I might write another article discussing the Hebrews' phenotype using some of your sources.
Posted by Brada-Anansi (Member # 16371) on :
Bronon P
quote:I declare defeat
If we all gain then there is no defeat we all win. great write up Altakruri... It now seems if folks want to play the mixed cacassoid bit they may indeed have to travel well north.. outside the boarders of Kemet to find such. For although the inhabitance are mixed-up thus the most accredited reports in regards to the people of Jerusalem reperesents the ancestors of the present Judeans,as they are called Egyptians ; Strabo.
Posted by Marc Washington (Member # 10979) on :
Proof the real judeans were blacks? We can now officially classify those other "jews" as white people public service announcement
Posted by the lioness (Member # 17353) on :
This Assyrian carving at Lachish shows Jews being led inton exile by Sargon's son Sennacherib after Hezekiah's failed revolot (701 BC). This is one of the earliest images of the Hebrew people.
^^^^Assyrian with_______________^^^exact same features as Israelites captives styled beard and hair,
proves....
nothing
Posted by Zioncity (Member # 18034) on :
Lioness out of all the info why choose the wall relief alone to prove your point? You obviously are one of those white people I was referring to. What about the skeletons found at Lacish? Also as noted above
Pliny The Elder-Roman Naturalist....
"That Syria was once the domain of Cepheus, an Ethiopian king,Tacitus wrote that the Romans beleived that the Jews originated in Ethiopia but fled the persecutions of the King. Strabo,even earlier,stressed that that people of Western Judea was Africiod:"
So the bible says they were equal in appearance to Ethiopians and other kushittes. The Romans Historians who wrote about them say the same thing and the Anthropology prove it. There is no argument left only denial.
Posted by the lioness (Member # 17353) on :
quote:Originally posted by Zioncity: Lioness out of all the info why choose the wall relief alone to prove your point?
do you have eyes sir? there are five items there.
secondly, my point is not that they prove something. My point is that they don't.
All five are legitimate artifacts, deal with it. You prefer the guys with beards only? That's your problem. Check out the Assyrians, they have beards too
African cultures for some reason usually don't have beards but there could be exceptions
*ES doesn't recognize the term "Africoid" (variation of "Negroid")
native Israeli
Posted by Anglo_Pyramidologist (Member # 18853) on :
Ancient Mosaic of Galileans:
Nothing dark or black about them. They had fair skin and many with blonde or red hair.
The Afrocentrics really need to get out of fantasy-cuckoo land and actually look at the mosaics and physical types from ancient sources.
Posted by anguishofbeing (Member # 16736) on :
LMAO @ Lioness and her "native Israelis".
Posted by Djehuti (Member # 6698) on :
^ Plus those depictions Lyingass shows were presented countless times in this forum. She goes into "features" because they obviously are not painted and thus don't show any skin color let alone non-black.
quote:Originally posted by Anglo_Pyramidologist: Ancient Mosaic of Galileans:
Nothing dark or black about them. They had fair skin and many with blonde or red hair.
And what evidence do you have that these people were natives of the area as opposed to Greco-Roman colonists?? You realize that Galilee during the time of Jesus had a large immigrant community, do you? I guess not.
quote:The Afrocentrics really need to get out of fantasy-cuckoo land and actually look at the mosaics and physical types from ancient sources.
You idiot, such types of evidence you brought up was already cited! Or did you not bother to look at the entire thread??
Posted by lamin (Member # 5777) on :
UPDATE: Hebrews and Black Women
Dominique Strauss-Kahn and black chambermaid from Guinea, West Africa. This is not in the Bible--hence you get the raw truth.
The IMF has been raping Africa for decades now--so this rape is just another "plus ca change--plus c'est la meme chose...."
Posted by Bishop (Member # 16652) on :
The Bible is filled with so called negroes in it. Infact all the Israelites were black people.
Zephaniah 1
The word of the LORD which came unto Zephaniah the son of CUSHI.
Acts 13:1
Now there were in the church at Antioch prophets and teachers, Barnabas, Simeon who was called Niger, Lucius of Cyrene, Manaen a member of the court of Herod the tetrarch, and Saul.
Paul the Apostle was called an Egyptian:
Acts 21:38
Art not thou that Egyptian, which before these days made an uproar, and led out into the wilderness four thousand men that were murderers?
Anyone who uses this, either as pro or con African origin for (a portion of) the Israelites, is delusional. The only way for things to get slightly more ambiguous than it already is at present, is if the Hebrews had the same longer ''dots'' of hair as the Assyrians.
Posted by Bishop (Member # 16652) on :
The entire bible is a negro bible, the only whites it mentions are those whom were cursed.
Infact The Prophet Jeremiah in Lamentations 5:10 said that the entire nation of Israelites were black.
"Our skin was black like an oven because of the terrible famine."
Now we all know that black people turn darker because of sun.
Posted by Kalonji (Member # 17303) on :
Have you ever met a sane black person who connects his past tense blackness to his hunger?
I haven't.
Use your brain for a second.
Posted by Bishop (Member # 16652) on :
Have you ever met a sane person who speaks before he thinks?
Use your brain for a second
"black like an oven"
Posted by Kalonji (Member # 17303) on :
Good luck trying to keep people away from the following verses in your attempts to make all hebrews ''Negro'':
1 Samuel 16:12 1 Samuel 17:42 Song of Solomon 5:10 Lamentations 4:7-9 (the above passage of Lamentations rips your interpretation to shreds)
Posted by Bishop (Member # 16652) on :
Ruddy means to be youthful
1 Samuel 16:12
And he sent, and brought him in. Now he was ruddy, and withal of a beautiful countenance, and goodly to look to. And the LORD said, Arise, anoint him: for this is he.
1Sa 17:42
And when the Philistine looked about, and saw David, he disdained him: for he was a youth, and ruddy, and of a fair countenance.
He was a young handsome man. Why would the Philistines who are standing afar off be making fun of him because he is white. The scritptues purely say's that they were making fun of him becaue of his youth and he was a handsome young man out their trying to fight men. "You a pretty boy" lol Sorry but black people do that today. We say things like "he a pretty boy, i don't wanna have to bruise him up"
Europeans alway's trying to rewrite history LMAO!!
The LORD doesn't look at skin color He already knew they were black. Oh an incase you didn't know black people come in all shades of brown; from the darkest of browns unto the lightest of browns.
Amos 9:7
Are ye not as children of the Ethiopians unto me, O children of Israel? saith the LORD.
His son Solomon said:
I am black, but comely, O ye daughters of Jerusalem, as the tents of Kedar, as the curtains of Solomon.
Look not upon me, because I am black, because the sun hath looked upon me
And white in the below vs means to be pure/glow/shine/dazzling/clear.
Song of Solomon 5:10
My beloved is white and ruddy, the chiefest among ten thousand.
The word white there is not talking about skin use your brain. The hebrew meaning of the word is talking about him standing out amongest thousands.
Posted by Bishop (Member # 16652) on :
Lamentations 4:7-9
7Her Nazarites were purer than snow, they were whiter than milk, they were more ruddy in body than rubies, their polishing was of sapphire:
8Their visage is blacker than a coal; they are not known in the streets: their skin cleaveth to their bones; it is withered, it is become like a stick.
9They that be slain with the sword are better than they that be slain with hunger: for these pine away, stricken through for want of the fruits of the field.
Vs 7 is talking about righteousness
Vs 8 Key word "VISAGE" חשך chashak to have a dark colour,to be or become dark, grow dim, be darkened, be black, be hidden
VISAGE - the face, countenance, or appearance of a person
You just got knocked the **** out mannnnnneee!LOL
"Have you ever met a sane black person who connects his past tense blackness to his hunger?
I haven't.
Use your brain for a second."
lol...Hmmm I think i have
Posted by Kalonji (Member # 17303) on :
Your interpretations of the cited passages are willful and random. Basically, all you did was explaining the same word (ruddy) away with everything under the sun, as if its some kind of magical word that translates into everything other than what it means per definition; a red tone. This is what I mean with ''use your brain'', you quacks couldn't apply common sense if your life depended on it. You people are the reason Afrocentrism has become a bussword to make a charicature out of everyone who is genuine about studying black history. You don't even have your facts straight. The person who is described in SoS 5:10 is not Solomon
quote:Ruddy means to be youthful
quote:The hebrew meaning of the word is talking about him standing out amongest thousands.
quote:Why would the Philistines who are standing afar off be making fun of him because he is white.
Posted by Bishop (Member # 16652) on :
Reverse psychology is defined as telling a person something that is the opposite of what you want him to do or believe.
Come now, your trying to change the subject. Oh, but I want let you.
You said:
"Good luck trying to keep people away from the following verses in your attempts to make all hebrews ''Negro'':
1 Samuel 16:12 1 Samuel 17:42 Song of Solomon 5:10 Lamentations 4:7-9 (the above passage of Lamentations rips your interpretation to shreds)"
I stated "The entire bible is a negro bible"
You tried to do as all Europeans do, write themselves into other people's history. The only reason you posted those scriptures was because
a. Your white, an you have been taught all your life that the Israelites are white because the jews are white.
b. You wanted to persuade the audience that an entire history of people, going back thousands of years had to be white. This logic is based only on 4 quick verses, which are the same exact verses that every white person runs to, an quote just to "quickly" try and prove that the Chosen people were white. When infact they have NO CLEAR UNDERSTANDING OF THE BOOK.
c. a and b or right
lol
LMAO!!
Posted by Kalonji (Member # 17303) on :
What type of reasoning is that? I'm white because I disagree with you say? My ethnicity is irrelevant, what is relevant is that you don't even know who is being referred to in the scriptures you cite. I have no message for you, you're out of touch with reality.
Posted by Bishop (Member # 16652) on :
"You don't even have your facts straight. The person who is described in SoS 5:10 is not Solomon"
I'll GOOGLE this one for you, since I'm black and i don't know anything. Which i saw this when i read verse one. hehehe
"Author: Solomon wrote Song of Solomon, according to the first verse. This song is one of 1,005 that Solomon wrote (1 Kings 4:32). The title “Song of Songs” is a superlative, meaning this is the best one."
sigh
Posted by Kalonji (Member # 17303) on :
I'm not going to do your homework for you. Anyone with a working set of eyes (and brains) can tell from the first verse that the book describes a love story from multiple perspectives. Don't rear your head again after reading this until you've opened the book in question, and read the relevant passages in context, instead of reading from etnocentric Black Hebrew Israelite quack websites. After you've done this, I'll let your stance on the matter be the judge of whether you have the mental capacity to comprehend simple written words.
Posted by the lioness (Member # 17353) on :
^^^look at this Euronut trying to say the Hebrews weren't black
Posted by Confirming Truth (Member # 17678) on :
repost for logic and reason...
quote:Originally posted by kahanyah: the hebrews were black heh? tell me if blacks have this kind of hair trait...
1Cr 11:15 But if a woman have long hair, it is a glory to her: for [her] hair is given her for a covering.
In the above vrs., Paul refers to an hebrewess who is given a particular hair type that is likened to a veil. Now pay attn. to this photo -
Please show me a subsaharan afrikan woman (black woman) being able to do this with the type of hair she has.
Posted by Just call me Jari (Member # 14451) on :
Im telling you bro these people don't debate with logic and reason. Its a coping mentality for them. These people don't look at the evidence like you do. The best way to defeat them is using their own logic against them.
quote:Originally posted by Kalonji: What type of reasoning is that? I'm white because I disagree with you say? My ethnicity is irrelevant, what is relevant is that you don't even know who is being referred to in the scriptures you cite. I have no message for you, you're out of touch with reality.
Posted by Confirming Truth (Member # 17678) on :
The person described as swarthy (dark) in songs of solomon is the mistress, not solomon. Here is the hebrew verse so you can see that:
The first two words in the phrase are 'ani' and 'Shachoroh.' The verse is translated as "I am swarthy and beautiful, daughters of Yerusalom, like the tents of Qedar, like the curtains of Sholomoh ." If you notice, Shachor has the 'heh' (oh) suffix. That is what feminizes a word. So, it is either Solomon was transgendered or this was the female mistress. I strongly believe the latter is the case here.
If you want to see the description of Solomon provided in the book, please refer to 5:10 -
דֹּודִי צַח וְאָדֹום דָּגוּל מֵרְבָבָֽה
Translation:
"my love, clear [skin] and rosy complected, [is] regarded among many.
Solomon had a very flushed complexion, free of acne and blemish, a sign of good health and sexual attraction (refer to study - link)
quote:Originally posted by Bishop: "You don't even have your facts straight. The person who is described in SoS 5:10 is not Solomon"
I'll GOOGLE this one for you, since I'm black and i don't know anything. Which i saw this when i read verse one. hehehe
"Author: Solomon wrote Song of Solomon, according to the first verse. This song is one of 1,005 that Solomon wrote (1 Kings 4:32). The title “Song of Songs” is a superlative, meaning this is the best one."
sigh
Posted by Zioncity (Member # 18034) on :
@ Kaljoni
That verse in lamentations 4:7-9 has nothing to do with skin color. Thats a reference to purity and innocence the blackness symbolizing them losing it. It obvious the word ruddy had duel meanings Bishop was correct check it out
Read the caption for Lamentations 4:7 in the lexicon.
Also King Davids mother was a moabite of a different nation which might explain his different appearance. But to put things in perspective Esau was also described as "ruddy" in Gen 25:25 but Jacob who became the israelites was Not. Plus the scriptures make it clear the israelites were indistinguishable from indigenous Egyptians. The israelites also had converts and mixed with many nations i dont understand whats not logical about that.
Posted by Zioncity (Member # 18034) on :
Its way too many people stroking each others egos on this forum. And disrespectful **** talking responses that would get you punched in the mouth or a foot up your ass in real life. I thought knowledge was suppose to come with some type of humbleness? I expect that from white boys because they use the internet to voice the frustrations that dont have the balls to address in person but black men should know better.
Posted by Confirming Truth (Member # 17678) on :
You are incorrect. Lamentations 4 (7-9) is describing the physical features of the Nararites. The context of the chapter is the physical transformation of the Nazarites --their lost of beauty and health. The writer goes in detail to describe the emaciated condition of the Nazarites, specifially, the darkening of the face from malnutrition and extreme weight lost in contrast with their once healthy, robust and rosie appearance.
quote:Originally posted by Zioncity: @ Kaljoni
That verse in lamentations 4:7-9 has nothing to do with skin color. Thats a reference to purity and innocence the blackness symbolizing them losing it. It obvious the word ruddy had duel meanings Bishop was correct check it out
Read the caption for Lamentations 4:7 in the lexicon.
Also King Davids mother was a moabite of a different nation which might explain his different appearance. But to put things in perspective Esau was also described as "ruddy" in Gen 25:25 but Jacob who became the israelites was Not. Plus the scriptures make it clear the israelites were indistinguishable from indigenous Egyptians. The israelites also had converts and mixed with many nations i dont understand whats not logical about that.
Posted by the lioness (Member # 17353) on :
quote:Originally posted by Zioncity: Its way too many people stroking each others egos on this forum. And disrespectful **** talking responses that would get you punched in the mouth or a foot up your ass in real life. I thought knowledge was suppose to come with some type of humbleness? I expect that from white boys because they use the internet to voice the frustrations that dont have the balls to address in person but black men should know better.
cosign
Posted by Just call me Jari (Member # 14451) on :
Not that you are not on you stuff with the Hebrew, but honestly that is your interpretation. That is the problem with using the bible as your sole source, you can have one passage being quoted by White Supremists, Zionists, Black Hebrews, Christians, Muslims, etc.saying the passage proves their point. Its a matter of Interpretation.
You are not gonna convince anyone unless you can dig up the Prophets and scribes who wrote the scriptures themselves say it.
quote:Originally posted by Confirming Truth: You are incorrect. Lamentations 4 (7-9) is describing the physical features of the Nararites. The context of the chapter is the physical transformation of the Nazarites --their lost of beauty and health. The writer goes in detail to describe the emaciated condition of the Nazarites, specifially, the darkening of the face from malnutrition and extreme weight lost in contrast with their once healthy, robust and rosie appearance.
quote:Originally posted by Zioncity: @ Kaljoni
That verse in lamentations 4:7-9 has nothing to do with skin color. Thats a reference to purity and innocence the blackness symbolizing them losing it. It obvious the word ruddy had duel meanings Bishop was correct check it out
Read the caption for Lamentations 4:7 in the lexicon.
Also King Davids mother was a moabite of a different nation which might explain his different appearance. But to put things in perspective Esau was also described as "ruddy" in Gen 25:25 but Jacob who became the israelites was Not. Plus the scriptures make it clear the israelites were indistinguishable from indigenous Egyptians. The israelites also had converts and mixed with many nations i dont understand whats not logical about that.
Posted by Kalonji (Member # 17303) on :
quote:That verse in lamentations 4:7-9 has nothing to do with skin color. Thats a reference to purity and innocence the blackness symbolizing them losing it. It obvious the word ruddy had duel meanings
I never said it didn't. It's obvious that the full passage, which says that the same subjects (the princes) were both black and white, is figurative. Yet Biship would have us believe that the same figurative worduse elsewhere in that same book, is indicative for ''negro'' Hebrews.
quote:But to put things in perspective Esau was also described as "ruddy" in Gen 25:25 but Jacob who became the israelites was Not.
Where are you going with this, do you think a red Esau is supportive of Bishop ''Negro'' Hebrews?
quote:Plus the scriptures make it clear the israelites were indistinguishable from indigenous Egyptians.
Wrong. It never does. This is the type of shitty Black Hebrew Israelite quack reasoning I'm talking about.
quote:Its way too many people stroking each others egos on this forum. And disrespectful **** talking responses that would get you punched in the mouth or a foot up your ass in real life. I thought knowledge was suppose to come with some type of humbleness? I expect that from white boys because they use the internet to voice the frustrations that dont have the balls to address in person but black men should know better.
That’s what happens when you simply parrot idiotic black hebrew israelite garbage in response to me. If you make defective deductions from texts that are clearly unsupportive of such deductions, fueled by the same ethnocentric tendencies Eurocentrics make themselves guilty of, and a deadbeat laziness to go read the (context providing) surrounding passages that you're citing, I'll point that out. As a matter of fact, you'll get treated just like Eurocentrics, or do you Black Hebrew Israelites expect different treatment because you're dealing with fellow blacks? No wonder everyone who disagrees with you quacks ''must be white''.
Posted by Just call me Jari (Member # 14451) on :
What amazes me about this is how neither side wants to accept the truth. There were so called black Hebrews(Kushite) and so called White Hebrews(Asiatic or Eurasian) as demonstrated by me and Altakruri on numerous threads.(I hate to keep bringing Al into these mindless debates, sorry Al).
Ancient Israel was a Nation no different than Egypt, Greece, Assyria etc. Whats more is it was located in the Levant the place home for a Crossroads of Kushite and Eurasians, Israel also had connections to Africa(Egypt and Nubia), Mesopotamia etc. For instance you had a Jewish Community as far south as Elephantine in the Nile Valley. This is all attested to in the Hebrew Writings
I find your call for "Sub Saharan" women absurd. SSA do not represent all types of Blacks. In the Ancient world Black Extended far beyond Africa to places as far as Indo-China...
Yemeni's(Yemen has always had a strong Jewish community esp. in Ancient Times)..
Altakruri has posted some good images of Yemeni Jews that look no different than the above. If you don't consider those folks black thats your opinion.
Here are the Burial Grounds of some Jewish Communities in Rome..
quote:Originally posted by Confirming Truth: repost for logic and reason...
quote:Originally posted by kahanyah: the hebrews were black heh? tell me if blacks have this kind of hair trait...
1Cr 11:15 But if a woman have long hair, it is a glory to her: for [her] hair is given her for a covering.
In the above vrs., Paul refers to an hebrewess who is given a particular hair type that is likened to a veil. Now pay attn. to this photo -
Please show me a subsaharan afrikan woman (black woman) being able to do this with the type of hair she has.
Posted by Just call me Jari (Member # 14451) on :
If you are in reference to me, and you find my comments disrespectful toward you I apologize Im not attacking you personally. I don't think I have ever had a problem with you, and you seem respectable, Also You are etitled to your beliefs in my opinion as Anglo Pyramid to his, but the truth is truth.
In a last debate I experience first hand the mentality of people who ascribe to BHI, they believe that if Africans are not Jews we have "No History" so In my opinion if people who are of that mindset(Not saying you are) are no different than Anglo Pyramid and Ra-Whore-Tep and P7 who parrot the same sh#t.
If I were to say half of that ish that other posters said I would have Threads dedicated to me saying Im a White Youtube Poster, Im This and That.
I understand why its sound so nice, Growing up as a Xtian, always seeing whites and Jews on top. Like I said it helps to cope, and looking at other Heebs on youtube all most care about is "Ruling the world" or "Revenge on the Edomites"-Thats coping.
Again like I said on a past thread some BHI are not like that, they are nice down to earth people trying to preach Gods word without being biased. like The Khannest of Jesus, I agree alot with what they preach. I have no problem with them nor their beliefs.
I try to speak the Truth and try to analyze things unbiased, and the proof and evidence for the BHI beliefs are flimsy at best. Maybe some of us do have Jewish blood. Who knows but it is a minority.
In my opinion you should..
Research the evidence, look at the Tomb paintings, the Lacinsh Art and Remains, the Egyptians, Greek, Roman etc. Descriptions and images of Levantines.
Research history of who was enslaved during the slave trade, research the history of the Jews, Learn Hebrew and read the primary sources yourself.
Research the Genetic and Bio-Antro remains of Levantines during the time of Israel.
If you find info that supports your beliefs that thats good...let the evidence speak.
quote:Originally posted by Zioncity: Its way too many people stroking each others egos on this forum. And disrespectful **** talking responses that would get you punched in the mouth or a foot up your ass in real life. I thought knowledge was suppose to come with some type of humbleness? I expect that from white boys because they use the internet to voice the frustrations that dont have the balls to address in person but black men should know better.
Posted by Confirming Truth (Member # 17678) on :
Come on dude, from a literacy standpoint, my explanation is sound. I am not interpreting anything. The scripture is plain and all one needs to do is read within context and stick to definition of words, it's that simple. It is when one has an alterior motive and wants to construct a doctrine, then will you see this venturing outside context.
quote:Originally posted by Just call me Jari: Not that you are not on you stuff with the Hebrew, but honestly that is your interpretation. That is the problem with using the bible as your sole source, you can have one passage being quoted by White Supremists, Zionists, Black Hebrews, Christians, Muslims, etc.saying the passage proves their point. Its a matter of Interpretation.
You are not gonna convince anyone unless you can dig up the Prophets and scribes who wrote the scriptures themselves say it.
quote:Originally posted by Confirming Truth: You are incorrect. Lamentations 4 (7-9) is describing the physical features of the Nararites. The context of the chapter is the physical transformation of the Nazarites --their lost of beauty and health. The writer goes in detail to describe the emaciated condition of the Nazarites, specifially, the darkening of the face from malnutrition and extreme weight lost in contrast with their once healthy, robust and rosie appearance.
quote:Originally posted by Zioncity: @ Kaljoni
That verse in lamentations 4:7-9 has nothing to do with skin color. Thats a reference to purity and innocence the blackness symbolizing them losing it. It obvious the word ruddy had duel meanings Bishop was correct check it out
Read the caption for Lamentations 4:7 in the lexicon.
Also King Davids mother was a moabite of a different nation which might explain his different appearance. But to put things in perspective Esau was also described as "ruddy" in Gen 25:25 but Jacob who became the israelites was Not. Plus the scriptures make it clear the israelites were indistinguishable from indigenous Egyptians. The israelites also had converts and mixed with many nations i dont understand whats not logical about that.
Posted by Just call me Jari (Member # 14451) on :
I agree with your translation but as I said a BHI is going to interpret it differently.
quote:Originally posted by Confirming Truth: Come on dude, from a literacy standpoint, my explanation is sound. I am not interpreting anything. The scripture is plain and all one needs to do is read within context and stick to definition of words, it's that simple. It is when one has an alterior motive and wants to construct a doctrine, then will you see this venturing outside context.
quote:Originally posted by Just call me Jari: Not that you are not on you stuff with the Hebrew, but honestly that is your interpretation. That is the problem with using the bible as your sole source, you can have one passage being quoted by White Supremists, Zionists, Black Hebrews, Christians, Muslims, etc.saying the passage proves their point. Its a matter of Interpretation.
You are not gonna convince anyone unless you can dig up the Prophets and scribes who wrote the scriptures themselves say it.
quote:Originally posted by Confirming Truth: You are incorrect. Lamentations 4 (7-9) is describing the physical features of the Nararites. The context of the chapter is the physical transformation of the Nazarites --their lost of beauty and health. The writer goes in detail to describe the emaciated condition of the Nazarites, specifially, the darkening of the face from malnutrition and extreme weight lost in contrast with their once healthy, robust and rosie appearance.
quote:Originally posted by Zioncity: @ Kaljoni
That verse in lamentations 4:7-9 has nothing to do with skin color. Thats a reference to purity and innocence the blackness symbolizing them losing it. It obvious the word ruddy had duel meanings Bishop was correct check it out
Read the caption for Lamentations 4:7 in the lexicon.
Also King Davids mother was a moabite of a different nation which might explain his different appearance. But to put things in perspective Esau was also described as "ruddy" in Gen 25:25 but Jacob who became the israelites was Not. Plus the scriptures make it clear the israelites were indistinguishable from indigenous Egyptians. The israelites also had converts and mixed with many nations i dont understand whats not logical about that.
Posted by alTakruri (Member # 10195) on :
S'alright, I'm not dipping in this again. Plenty stuff by me out there on this for anyone who can use a search engine.
But if you're using Kushi then Ashkenazi is its opposite. One midrash makes Joseph an Ashkenazi. If mishnaic era Israelites are conceived boxwood in complexion by the rabbis of that time there's little reason to suppose biblical Israelites weren't on average the same. As late as the 10th century Palestinian Jewry sees their colour more in allignment with Hham then of Yapheth, the distinction being Hham was blacker than Shem thus why black rather than brown skinned Israel could get named Kushi.
Today the opposites are Kushi and Gingi (pink skin red hair). Though Kushi in modern Hebrew has become derogatory especially after Beta Israel migrated.
Seems back in Ethiopia the Beta Israel taunted their converts as Kushi and were insulted when Israelis naturally called all of them Kushi. African adjustment to European dominance has altered many peoples original ideas about who was called by a black sobriquet but the Beta Israel attitude is shameful and has brought discredit to the name of Kush making a liar out of Josephus who wrote "For of the four sons of Ham, time has not at all hurt the name of Cush;"
quote:Originally posted by Just call me Jari: There were so called black Hebrews(Kushite) and so called White Hebrews(Asiatic or Eurasian) as demonstrated by me and Altakruri on numerous threads.(I hate to keep bringing Al into these mindless debates, sorry Al).
Posted by the lioness (Member # 17353) on :
quote:Originally posted by alTakruri:
If mishnaic era Israelites are conceived boxwood in complexion by the rabbis of that time there's little reason to suppose biblical Israelites weren't on average the same.
Appearance:
The sapwood of brushbox is a pale geryish brown, while the heartwood ranges from a reddish to pinkish brown. The grain is curly & interlocked and the wood is even in texture. This species has a glossy appearance.
Distribution: Europe, northwest Africa, and southwest Asia
quote:Originally posted by Truthcentric: An online friend of mine drew this picture of Moses with the Pharaoh of Egypt at my request, and I wanted to share it with you guys because it's really cool and depicts the two figures relatively accurately:
Posted by Jari the Smiter (Member # 14451) on :
Thanks Al-takruri...
Some depictions of the Hebrews and Egyptians in the Box Office Animation, Prince of Egypt...Though Im not to sure if any Rabbinical or Orthodox Jews were part of the production and Animation..
Pretty accurate for an American Hollywood Animation geared toward American and English Speaking Caucasian Christians and Jews..
Posted by Zioncity (Member # 18034) on :
@kaljoni
Dude you said
quote:Good luck trying to keep people away from the following verses in your attempts to make all hebrews ''Negro'':
1 Samuel 16:12 1 Samuel 17:42 Song of Solomon 5:10 Lamentations 4:7-9 (the above passage of Lamentations rips your interpretation to shreds)
What does lamentations have to do with the Hebrews being negro or not if its not talking about skin color?
"Whiteness and ruddiness belong to the description of youthful beauty"
Thats not anyones private interpretation unless you have a more correct translation than the blueletter.
quote:Where are you going with this, do you think a red Esau is supportive of Bishop ''Negro'' Hebrews?
No i'm referring back to the post you made again above concerning King Davids description matching Esau but not jacob who the israelites came from.
quote:Wrong. It never does. This is the type of shitty Black Hebrew Israelite quack reasoning I'm talking about.
Watch your mouth BITCH when did you hear me say a follow any set BHI doctrine? Or even consider myself a "Black hebrew israelite". Which i pointed out in another thread is a government FBI term used to easily identify them. So Moses and Paul in the new testament were not mistaken for Egyptians? Exodus 2:19 Did not on the first page in this thread the evidence shows israelites were being compared to Kush and Ethiopia, Africoid by Strabo?
And I'll be disrespected like Eurocentrics by who? Some egghead keyboard warrior forum faggot on a ego trip lol. Please man I have turds that meant more to me than your ignorant preconceived judgements. You wouldnt last 5 minutes on the street talkin that nonsense.
Bishop was right when he said white and ruddy was talking about youthful beauty
Posted by Zioncity (Member # 18034) on :
@Just Call me Jarl
No that was not directed only at you. I don't visit this forum as much as most of you and I respect seniority and the work you guys have put in. I think I told you in another thread i do not believe or follow the typical "BHI" doctrine people have been exposed to on the internet. The ancient israelites definitely had converts from other nations. I believe the prophecy is the real meat to the scriptures alot of the other stuff is just is subject to interpretation as you pointed out earlier. Also any black man dissing Africa is out of his damn mind. Its all good I just hate seeing people on the best African/Nile Valley history site gang up on a brotha if they not a troll or being ignorant.
Posted by Kalonji (Member # 17303) on :
Jari, from what I recall, the people behind the scenes of that movie were knowledgeable about the debate around the biological affinity of the Ancient Egyptians, but they phucked up when they opted to not offend neither side, hence the ''mixed'' qualities of the characters.
Posted by alTakruri (Member # 10195) on :
18th Dynasty boxwood carving of a nude Nubian servant girl, carrying a large jar. Image courtesy of The Oriental Museum, Durham University Museum.
The above piece carved from boxwood imported from SW Asia.
Examples of boxwood's range of colors can be seen in masks manufactured in Japan. For a selection of them try an image search with this exact key: +boxwood masks
Posted by Bishop (Member # 16652) on :
@Kalonji, Kalonji, read it again. LOL, See, Israel this is proof Euronuts know nothing about scripture.
You think I'm going to waver? You think you have me in a corner you an your goons...Please. Now read it again untill the true meaning comes to you.
As Messiah said "the blind leadeth the blind into the pit'
@Jari the Smiter
You are right in a sense there where black hebrews Israelites (Children of the Promise, of the seed of Jacob) and White Hebrews(Not Israelites!, but Children of the Curse, of the seed of Esau)
Posted by Bishop (Member # 16652) on :
Again blacks come in all shades of "brown" as brother raieyez proves in this video.
It's funny that the term brown can't be listed as a color for so called blacks since it is trademarked LOL
I wonder why?
Europeans are alway's trying to deprive the so called negro in America. Isa. 60 is proof they(white's in America) will go into slavery for what they did unto the real Israelites.
Posted by Bishop (Member # 16652) on :
quote:Originally posted by Kalonji: I'm not going to do your homework for you. Anyone with a working set of eyes (and brains) can tell from the first verse that the book describes a love story from multiple perspectives. Don't rear your head again after reading this until you've opened the book in question, and read the relevant passages in context, instead of reading from etnocentric Black Hebrew Israelite quack websites. After you've done this, I'll let your stance on the matter be the judge of whether you have the mental capacity to comprehend simple written words.
What, your ???? LOL
Let's see you wished me luck on the following:
YOU SAID:
Good luck trying to keep people away from the following verses in your attempts to make all hebrews ''Negro'':
1 Samuel 16:12 1 Samuel 17:42 Song of Solomon 5:10 Lamentations 4:7-9 (the above passage of Lamentations rips your interpretation to shreds)
woooOOOHH I'm scared now.
And you got schooled in all of them.
THESE ARE MY question for you.
What happen to all the verses that you posted? YOU know, the ones you gave as being YOUR perfect/ultimate epitome of a white man/white race of Israelites? HMMMMMMMM???????
Why are you not defending them?
After you've figured this out, I'll let your stance on the matter be the judge of whether you have the mental capacity to comprehend simple written words. Posted by Bishop (Member # 16652) on :
quote:Originally posted by Bishop: Again blacks come in all shades of "brown" as brother raieyez proves in this video.
It's funny that the term brown can't be listed as a color for so called blacks since it is trademarked LOL
I wonder why?
Europeans are alway's trying to deprive the so called negro in America. Isa. 60 is proof they(whites an other nations) will go into slavery for what they did unto the real Israelites.
Posted by typeZeiss (Member # 18859) on :
quote:Originally posted by the lioness:
quote:Originally posted by Zioncity: Lioness out of all the info why choose the wall relief alone to prove your point?
do you have eyes sir? there are five items there.
secondly, my point is not that they prove something. My point is that they don't.
All five are legitimate artifacts, deal with it. You prefer the guys with beards only? That's your problem. Check out the Assyrians, they have beards too
African cultures for some reason usually don't have beards but there could be exceptions
*ES doesn't recognize the term "Africoid" (variation of "Negroid")
native Israeli
90% of modern israel is Ashkenazi Jews and Ashkenazi jews according to DNA testing are Slavic people. Outside of the priestly class they have about as much to do with the original Jews as African's do to neanderthals.
Posted by Kalonji (Member # 17303) on :
^Can you be more specific, what dna studies are you referring to?
Posted by Anglo_Pyramidologist (Member # 18853) on :
''If mishnaic era Israelites are conceived boxwood in complexion by the rabbis of that time there'slittle reason to suppose biblical Israelites weren't on average the same.'' =====
Jewish physiognomy changed during the Post-exilic period. This is because the Babylonians placed multiple races across the territory of the Kingdom of Judah when the Jews had been deported to Babylon. Most Jews on their return then intermarried with these other races (which was their sin). The entire book of Ezra concerns this degenerate act of intermarriage and the Book of Isaiah also refers to the change in facial 'countanance' of the Jews.
The Post-exilic Jews became a 'boxwood' colour via mongrelisation.
- This fact has been known by Jews for a very long time. Joseph ben Nathan, a jew in the 13th century wrote:
‘‘We are from a pure white seed, and our faces are dark''
Posted by Anglo_Pyramidologist (Member # 18853) on :
Sarah (wife of Abraham, mother of Isaac)
1QapGen or Genesis Apocryphon, Column XX, from the Dead Sea Scrolls, describes Sarah as follows (translation by Joseph A. Fitzmyer, The Genesis Apocryphon of Quaman Cave I, 2nd ed. Rome, 1971 p. 63):
''During the party, the Egyptians must have seen Saraii, and on their return they praised her to the king, saying "How beautiful is her face! How fine are the hairs of her head! How lovely are her eyes! How desirable her nose and all the radiance of her countenance. How fair are her breasts and how beautiful all her whiteness! How pleasing are her arms and how perfect her hands, and how desirable all the appearance of her hands! How fair are her palms and how long and slender are her fingers! How comely are her feet, how perfect ho thighs! No virgin or bride led into the marriage chamber is more beautiful than she; she is fairer than all other women Truly, her beauty is greater than theirs Yet together with all this grace she possesses abundant wisdom, so that whatever she does is perfect."
-- Sarah was a white woman. There is no way to take this out of the Dead Sea Scrolls (c. 100 BC) so laughably i have discovered some Afrocentrics on the internet claiming the Dead Sea Scrolls are fabrications/a hoax by ''eurocentrics''. Posted by Anglo_Pyramidologist (Member # 18853) on :
Another passage of the Genesis Apocryphon, from the Dead Sea Scrolls describes Sarah as having ''white breasts''. You can search for this and the translation online.
So of course the afrocentrics claim the dead sea scrolls are fakes. Anything which debunks their crap they will claim is a fraud or hoax, all apart of the grand 'conspiracy' against the negro...yawn.
Posted by Bishop (Member # 16652) on :
"The accident of the predominance of white men in modern times should not give us supercilious ideas about color or persuade us to listen to superficial theories about the innate superiority of the white-skinned man. Four thousand years ago, when civilization was already one or two thousand years old, white men were just a bunch of semi-savages on the outskirts of the civilized world. If there had been anthropologists in Crete, Egypt, and Babylonia, they would have pronounced the white race obviously inferior, and might have discoursed learnedly on the superior germ-plasm or glands of colored folk." Joseph McCabe
The shemites were negroes too. You white people are the rescent ones on the face of this planet. Even science backs me up my friend.
All Abraham's women were Black Sarah the shemite, Keturah the Ethiopian, Hagar the Egyptian.
Posted by Confirming Truth (Member # 17678) on :
According to Hanuk, semites were ruddy, ham was swarthy and Yafet was white.
***Surviving sons of the great flood***
CHAPTER LXXXV.i-viii.
i. And after this I saw another dream, and I will show the whole dream to thee, my son.
ii. And Enoch lifted up (his voice) and spake to his son Methuselah: 'To thee, my son, will I speak: hear my words--incline thine ear to the dream-vision of thy father.
iii. Before I took thy mother Edna, I saw in a vision on my bed, and behold a bull came forth from the earth, and that bull was white; and after it came forth a heifer, and along with this (latter) came forth two bulls, one of them black and the other red.
iv. And that black bull gored the red one and pursued him over the earth, and thereupon I could no longer see that red bull.
v. But that black bull grew and that heifer went with him, and I saw that many oxen proceeded from him which resembled and followed him.
vi. And that cow, that first one, went from the presence of that first bull in order to seek that red one, but found him not, and lamented with a great lamentation over him and sought him.
vii. And I looked till that first bull came to her and quieted her, and from that time onward she cried no more.
viii. And after that she bore another white bull, and after him she bore many bulls and black cows.
Posted by alTakruri (Member # 10195) on :
The colors in that text do not refer to complexion but only to major personality characteristics: white to purity holiness; black to perfidy violence; red to matyrdom.
It obviously alludes to these biblical persons Adam - a bull came forth from the earth, and that bull was white; Eve --- and after it came forth a heifer, and along with this (latter) came forth two bulls, Cain -- one of them black Abel -- and the other red. Seth -- And after that she bore another white bull,
Did the Enoch thing already, very tired of it. No need to redundantly resling the same hash when the more attentive can read it in full at the Check out what my friend drew thread.
BTW according to the midrash and even other people's usage of the namee Sarah as that of a moon goddess she would necessarily have a very light or white skin.
And Yafet Koto (the actor in the next post) claims direct Israelite descent and afaik never converted to any Judaism.
As stated many times before but still unclear to the obtuse, conversion can make one a Jew but it can not make one a member of any tribe of Israel. One must be born into a tribe.
Posted by the lioness (Member # 17353) on :
quote:Originally posted by typeZeiss:
quote:Originally posted by the lioness; native Israeli
90% of modern israel is Ashkenazi Jews and Ashkenazi jews according to DNA testing are Slavic people. Outside of the priestly class they have about as much to do with the original Jews as African's do to neanderthals. [/QB]
The native above is not part of the 90%. He is part of the 10% that lived there since ancient times. Ashkenazi and others including The Lemba of South Africa carry Y-chromosomal Aaron haplotype.
But it doesn't matter Judaism is a religion and people can convert to it
Posted by Anglo_Pyramidologist (Member # 18853) on :
REPOSTED -
Sarah (wife of Abraham, mother of Isaac)
1QapGen or Genesis Apocryphon, Column XX, from the Dead Sea Scrolls, describes Sarah as follows (translation by Joseph A. Fitzmyer, The Genesis Apocryphon of Quaman Cave I, 2nd ed. Rome, 1971 p. 63):
''During the party, the Egyptians must have seen Saraii, and on their return they praised her to the king, saying "How beautiful is her face! How fine are the hairs of her head! How lovely are her eyes! How desirable her nose and all the radiance of her countenance. How fair are her breasts and how beautiful all her whiteness! How pleasing are her arms and how perfect her hands, and how desirable all the appearance of her hands! How fair are her palms and how long and slender are her fingers! How comely are her feet, how perfect ho thighs! No virgin or bride led into the marriage chamber is more beautiful than she; she is fairer than all other women Truly, her beauty is greater than theirs Yet together with all this grace she possesses abundant wisdom, so that whatever she does is perfect."
-- Sarah was a white woman.
Sorry afrocentrics...try robbing someone elses history.
Posted by dub 6 (Member # 19342) on :
@Anglo
Regardless if Sarah was white or black, Abraham was black, and whatever you mix with black, you get black as in the case of President Obama and anyone else you can think of who is mixed. Your point is nullified.
Posted by dub 6 (Member # 19342) on :
Also, if the first Hebrews couldn't tell their own blood brother apart from a Black Egyptian, what does that tell you? They too were Black!
and how the hell are white people living in equatorial heat with the sun beaming on them and not dying from skin cancer? There was no sun screen back then. Everyone native to that region, including the what is now Arabian peninsula was of black skin, full of melanin, to combat the sun's rays.
Posted by dub 6 (Member # 19342) on :
Furthermore, Ashkenazi Jews take their name after the grandson of Japheth (NOT SHEM!) Ashkenaz. Why? Because they descend from the Khazar empire who adopted Judaism for political motivations. This is your eastern European jew of today.
Posted by osirion (Member # 7644) on :
quote:Originally posted by Ebony Allen: If they weren't black then how come the Egyptians didn't know Moses was really an Israelite? Can you answer that?
Read the Bible a bit better. Note that the Hebrew slaves knew that Moses was a Hebrew. Besides, this is also New Kingdom time and Egyptians were inter-marrying with Western Asiatics significantly. The Hyksos had already ruled Egypt for well over a 150 years. What it was to be Egyptian had changed.
Posted by Confirming Truth (Member # 17678) on :
first shyt you said that made some damn sense! Kudos!
quote:Originally posted by osirion:
quote:Originally posted by Ebony Allen: If they weren't black then how come the Egyptians didn't know Moses was really an Israelite? Can you answer that?
Read the Bible a bit better. Note that the Hebrew slaves knew that Moses was a Hebrew. Besides, this is also New Kingdom time and Egyptians were inter-marrying with Western Asiatics significantly. The Hyksos had already ruled Egypt for well over a 150 years. What it was to be Egyptian had changed.
Posted by Mike111 (Member # 9361) on :
quote:Originally posted by osirion:
quote:Originally posted by Ebony Allen: If they weren't black then how come the Egyptians didn't know Moses was really an Israelite? Can you answer that?
Read the Bible a bit better. Note that the Hebrew slaves knew that Moses was a Hebrew. Besides, this is also New Kingdom time and Egyptians were inter-marrying with Western Asiatics significantly. The Hyksos had already ruled Egypt for well over a 150 years. What it was to be Egyptian had changed.
No, Confirming Truth, it does NOT make sense to anyone other than revisionist idiots like you and osirion.
Egyptians forgot who the REAL Egyptians were!
How very stupid, I won't ask either of you to support that, because that would suggest that what you have said is in some way rational.
Posted by The Explorer (Member # 14778) on :
There is not an iota of evidence of Hebrews in dynastic Egypt before and in the supposed time frame of the Biblical exodus. There is not even a physical evidence of Moses as characterized by the bible, who has a European-corrupted Egyptian name.
There is no evidence of "Hebrew slaves" in dynastic Egypt before and during said time either.
There is no evidence that the Hyksos spoke Hebrew.
It's interesting how contemporary Jewish personalities today don't notice how strange the narrative is, to say that the Hebrew were slaves at the time of building the great pyramids, presumably because they were the slaves who were forced to build them, yet somehow managed to turn into rulers in the Hyksos--in the Delta region mostly--period from petty slaves, and then right back to slaves right before their exodus.
Posted by Mike111 (Member # 9361) on :
The Explorer - I think what is lost - because few people study ALL of the middle eastern civilizations - is that there were many types of Amorites.
There were nomads - originally from southern Anatolia - who harassed the Canaanites from the hills.
There were workers seeking employment - originally from southern Anatolia, and also those by way of Sumer.
But most importantly, there were skilled administrators and technicians from the former Hammirabi dynasty of Sumer - these were the Hyksos rulers.
They were allowed to migrate into Egypt because of the building booms of the 12th Dynasty.
Their successor state Aram: spoke Aramaic and wrote in cuneiform.
Posted by The Explorer (Member # 14778) on :
quote:Originally posted by Mike111:
But most importantly, there were skilled administrators and technicians from the former Hammirabi dynasty of Sumer - these were the Hyksos rulers.
1) And what physical evidence connects the Hyksos directly to the Hammirabi?
2) How is this relevant to the unsupported idea that the Hyksos were Hebrew speakers?
Posted by Mike111 (Member # 9361) on :
^Of course cassiterides rantings are those of a liar and a fool. But just out of curiosity I looked up the current state of the "Dead Sea Scroll"
It's still bullsh1t: But what caught my attention was THIS:
The significance of the scrolls relates in a large part to the field of textual criticism and how accurately the Bible has been transcribed over time. Before the discovery of the Dead Sea Scrolls, the oldest Hebrew manuscripts of the Bible were Masoretic texts dating to 10th century CE such as the Aleppo Codex. The biblical manuscripts found among the Dead Sea Scrolls push that date back a millennium to the 2nd century BCE. Before this discovery, the earliest extant manuscripts of the Old Testament were in Greek in manuscripts such as Codex Vaticanus Graecus 1209 and Codex Sinaiticus.
According to The Oxford Companion to Archaeology:
The biblical manuscripts from Qumran, which include at least fragments from every book of the Old Testament, except perhaps for the Book of Esther, provide a far older cross section of scriptural tradition than that available to scholars before. While some of the Qumran biblical manuscripts are nearly identical to the Masoretic, or traditional, Hebrew text of the Old Testament, some manuscripts of the books of Exodus and Samuel found in Cave Four exhibit dramatic differences in both language and content. In their astonishing range of textual variants, the Qumran biblical discoveries have prompted scholars to reconsider the once-accepted theories of the development of the modern biblical text from only three manuscript families: of the Masoretic text, of the Hebrew original of the Septuagint, and of the Samaritan Pentateuch. It is now becoming increasingly clear that the Old Testament scripture was extremely fluid until its canonization around 100 AD.
About 35% of the DSS biblical manuscripts belong to the Masoretic tradition (MT), 5% to the Septuagint family, and 5% to the Samaritan, with the remainder unaligned. The non-aligned fall into two categories, those inconsistent in agreeing with other known types, and those that diverge significantly from all other known readings. The DSS thus form a significant witness to the mutability of biblical texts at this period. The sectarian texts among the Dead Sea Scrolls, most of which were previously unknown, offer new light on one form of Judaism practiced during the Second Temple period.
I have posted many times that the "Dead Sea Scrolls" would NEVER be published, because to do so, would demonstrate the TOTAL "made-up" nature of modern Jewish and Christian religious scripts.
It seems they are already covering their asses by now claiming that the scripts they were working with were not old enough.
BTW - Speaking to the honesty of these people:
Before being forced to admit that their scripts were NOT ancient.
They previously claim that they were from as early as circa 800 B.C. Posted by Mike111 (Member # 9361) on :
quote:Originally posted by The Explorer:
quote:Originally posted by Mike111:
But most importantly, there were skilled administrators and technicians from the former Hammirabi dynasty of Sumer - these were the Hyksos rulers.
1) And what physical evidence connects the Hyksos directly to the Hammirabi?
2) How is this relevant to the unsupported idea that the Hyksos were Hebrew speakers?
physical????
No Explorer, it's a logical conclusion.
I made no claim that they spoke Hebrew.
Logically - there's that word again:
They spoke Anatolian, Sumerian, Canaanite, Egyptian, and Aramean. Perhaps Hebrew is a composite of those languages, don't know, don't care.
Posted by Mike111 (Member # 9361) on :
^Needless to say, those false Hebrews - the Khazar Jews - are scared sh1tless!
After further delays, public interest attorney William John Cox undertook representation of an "undisclosed client," who had provided a complete set of the unpublished photographs, and contracted for their publication. Professors Robert Eisenman and James Robinson indexed the photographs and wrote an introduction to A Facsimile Edition of the Dead Sea Scrolls, which was published by the Biblical Archaeology Society in 1991. As a result, the "secrecy rule" was lifted.
Following the publication of the Facsimile Edition, Professor Elisha Qimron sued Hershel Shanks, Eisenman, Robinson and the Biblical Archaeology Society for copyright infringement of one of the scrolls, which he deciphered (MMT). The District Court of Jerusalem found in favor of Qimron in September 1993. The Court issued a restraining order, which prohibited the publication of the deciphered text, and ordered defendants to pay Qimron NIS 100,000 for infringing his copyright and the right of attribution. Defendants appealed the Supreme Court of Israel, which approved the District Court's decision, in August 2000. The Supreme Court further ordered that the defendants hand over to Qimron all the infringing copies. The decision met Israeli and international criticism from copyright law scholars.
Posted by The Explorer (Member # 14778) on :
quote:Originally posted by Mike111:
physical????
No Explorer, it's a logical conclusion.
A "logical conclusion" about an ancient people you've never met that lacks supporting evidence. How does that work?
quote: I made no claim that they spoke Hebrew.
Well, then why did you even bother replying me, as I said there was no evidence that they spoke Hebrew to begin with?
quote: Logically - there's that word again:
They spoke Anatolian, Sumerian, Canaanite, Egyptian, and Aramean. Perhaps Hebrew is a composite of those languages, don't know, don't care.
Let me guess. Aside from possibly Egyptic, since the Hyksos were in ancient Egypt, you simply "logically" came to the conclusion that they spoke all these languages out of thin air, with no supporting evidence whatsoever. Right?
Posted by The Explorer (Member # 14778) on :
quote:Originally posted by bozo the clown: ^You fucking stupid asinine piece-of-sh1t wannabe forum scholar.
And you are a fucking stupid asinine heritageless piece-of-shyt that some white master pooped out and forgot in a slave barn. So what's your beef? That you are full of pork? LOL
quote: The Amorites started out in Anatolia - they spoke Anatolian.
What connection does this have to my post, you big clueless fruitcake?
quote: They established a dynasty in Sumer - they had to speak Akkaidian/Sumerian.
Relevence? you big sissy. Meaning, what evidence do you have connecting the "Hyksos" to a dynasty in Sumer, speaking that language? And your crack triggered faith-based "epiphanies" that you like to call "logical" does not count.
quote: They established themselves in Canaan and integrated with the Canaanites - they had to speak Canaanite.
"Canaanite" is not a language, you dumb uneducated slave.
quote: They lived in Egypt for hundreds of years - they had to speak Egyptian.
I already told your big sissy ass this, regarding the Hyksos. Learn to take a cue.
quote: They established a successor state called Aram - they had to speak Aramean.
Evidence? you stupid little fruity sap!
quote:
What a stupid uneducated little piece of sh1t you are, and YOU want to challenge????
Of course, I care to challenge you, goofball. Who doesn't. You are a Europeanized fuckheaded sap without a heritage. How can you not get that?
quote: That only proves just how stupid you are!
Where's this pending proof? Can you alert me to how a heritageless ape like you has miraculously managed to "prove" that it is actually possible for anyone else to be more stupid than you are.
quote:
BTW - Have you at least learned to respond to me in a respectful way?
Oh yes. Your safe-behind-the-keyboard internet etiquette tells me that you have no human home training. It also tells me that you are one of those cases of out-of-wedlock birth, and could only have come out of a prostitution mecca, which to dumb down to you, is my catchword for your mommy's dirty little fuckhole. Is that "respectful" enough for you?
Posted by typeZeiss (Member # 18859) on :
quote:Originally posted by BrandonP: Has anyone else noticed that several Hebrew characters in the Bible had relationships with black women? First, there's Joseph marrying an Egyptian. Then there's Moses marrying a Kushite. Third, there's King Solomon with the Queen of Sheba. It seems like there's a trend here.
Does anyone else know if there are other instances of Hebrew men with black women in the Bible?
From my research there was never a thing called "hebrew" during the time of those people of the bible i.e. Solomon, David, Jacob etc. They were the Hyksos that ruled northern egypt. Also from the stela in Egypt you see of Hyksos they were a mixed group of people black, white and mullatos from caanan I presume. It is highly possible that these rulers/prophets were just as black as the women they purportedly loved.
Posted by kikuyu2 (Member # 19316) on :
OP,I must ask what was your original intent? To question the presence of black women in the bible or the African nature of the Hebrews? Both questions have been settled beyond any reasonable doubt. You must have heard of the Lemba,a Southern Bantu people who if geneticists are to be believed have more of the priestly Cohen gene than the Khazars. Even in Kenya the Kalenjin have a very strong case for Hebrew origins
quote:
:Moses' Levites performed a mass ritual at Gilgal just before crossing the Jordan. Sambu writes: "[The Kalenjin] did not name the [corresponding] hill Gilgal.
But... it is interesting to note that one of the places the [Kalenjin] occupied twice while wandering in the plains [of the Rift Valley] was Gilgil."
Which Kenyan has never heard of Gilgil, the thriving trade centre between the lakes Naivasha and Elmentaita?
The Israelites then crossed a river called Jordan to take Jericho, just as the Kipsigiis crossed a river called Chooryan to take Kericho.
What can it mean? We now pronounce the "ch" in "Jericho" like the "k" in "Kenya". But the native Jebusites — a clan of the Canaanite natives — pronounced it like the "ch" in "church".
Jericho, therefore, rhymed with Kericho. Moreover, in the Kalenjin language, "k" is usually pronounced like a hard "g".
Kericho, therefore, may originally have been Gericho (which is not at all far from Jericho.) What a small world ours is!
The only question is: Who borrowed from whom?
The near-identity between Pisgah and Psigiis, Gilgal and Gilgil, Yordan and Chooryan, Jericho and Kericho, etc., and the circumstances in which those terms occur affirm at least a historical confluence. http://www.afroarticles.com/article-dashboard/Article/Kalenjin--Another-lost-tribe-of-Israel-/211006 In W.Africa the Yorubas and Ibos informed the first missionaries of their Hebrew history-unsurprisingly they suppressed the info. Those Africans,the world and the Khazars accept as black African Jews are seeing the true face of the Neanderthal Caucasoid chosenites.
quote:
NAZARETH, Israel // Health officials in Israel are subjecting many female Ethiopian immigrants to a controversial long-term birth control drug in what Israeli women’s groups allege is a racist policy to reduce the number of black babies.
The contraceptive, known as Depo Provera, which is given by injection every three months, is considered by many doctors as a birth control method of last resort because of problems treating its side effects. http://abbaymedia.com/News/?p=3491 Posted by osirion (Member # 7644) on :
quote:Originally posted by The Explorer: There is not an iota of evidence of Hebrews in dynastic Egypt before and in the supposed time frame of the Biblical exodus. There is not even a physical evidence of Moses as characterized by the bible, who has a European-corrupted Egyptian name.
There is no evidence of "Hebrew slaves" in dynastic Egypt before and during said time either.
There is no evidence that the Hyksos spoke Hebrew.
It's interesting how contemporary Jewish personalities today don't notice how strange the narrative is, to say that the Hebrew were slaves at the time of building the great pyramids, presumably because they were the slaves who were forced to build them, yet somehow managed to turn into rulers in the Hyksos--in the Delta region mostly--period from petty slaves, and then right back to slaves right before their exodus.
Hebrews were just a sub-group that was part of the Hyksos domination of Nothern Egypt. They were simply conquered by Southern Egypt after the latter assimilated Hyksos technology (Horses and Charriots).
And yes, Hyksos were enslaved but keep in mind that they had enslaved the indigenous Egyptians first.
As for Mike's point about Egyptians forgetting who they were. Not sure where this comes from. People who were not Egyptians would think the Hyksos were Egyptian because they dressed it and followed Egyptian customs.
For example, the Medjay were a Black Nubian Warrior group that protected Egypt. Medjay itself is a name of a land in Upper Nubia. However, Medjay stopped being a term used for Nubian-Egyptian soldiers and became a catch all that included non-African warriors in later periods. Terms are flexible. Just like today, African Americans are called American even though this is a White nation. We are called American because that is our culture and our home. Nationality does not equate to race just like there are White and Black Mexicans. The same can be said of Egypt by this time period. There were by this time White, Brown, and Black Egyptians.
Posted by The Explorer (Member # 14778) on :
quote:Originally posted by osirion:
Hebrews were just a sub-group that was part of the Hyksos domination of Nothern Egypt.
You are not getting it: There is no evidence of "Hebrews" in AE before and during the so-called Exodus, let alone them forming "part of the Hyksos domination".
quote: They were simply conquered by Southern Egypt after the latter assimilated Hyksos technology (Horses and Charriots).
If the Hyksos rose to power because of those weapons that the AE eventually adopted, then they must not have been the petty slaves who supposedly helped build the pyramids just prior. Bet you never take that bit of information into consideration, huh, when you come up with neat little stories about the Hyksos being petty slaves right before assuming power and then reduced back to petty slaves?
quote: And yes, Hyksos were enslaved but keep in mind that they had enslaved the indigenous Egyptians first.
When did the Hyksos "enslave the indigenous Egyptians", and according to what evidence?
quote: Medjay itself is a name of a land in Upper Nubia.
According to what?
quote:However, Medjay stopped being a term used for Nubian-Egyptian soldiers and became a catch all that included non-African warriors in later periods.
Again, evidence!
Posted by Brada-Anansi (Member # 16371) on :
Yeah Osirion explain this
However, Medjay stopped being a term used for Nubian-Egyptian soldiers and became a catch all that included non-African warriors in later periods. Are you going by that rather silly movie the The Mummy??
Posted by Brada-Anansi (Member # 16371) on :
Explorer the only thing I could think of is the name of a king called Yakub Har which is Semitic but not specifically Hebrew,I guess that equals the name Joseph a traditional Hebrew name but what do they make of the name Nahasi a king who ruled the delta during the Hyksos period.
quote:You are not getting it: There is no evidence of "Hebrews" in AE before and during the so-called Exodus, let alone them forming "part of the Hyksos domination".
Posted by The Explorer (Member # 14778) on :
Well, that the Hyksos could have been Semitic speakers is not much of an issue. However, that they were "Hebrews", that remains an issue.
BTW, on what records was this Yakub Har (Yakub Baal) mentioned?
Posted by Brada-Anansi (Member # 16371) on :
If I remember correctly it was Menetho's king list I first became aware of this in Bernal's Black Athena.
Posted by The Explorer (Member # 14778) on :
If it is authentic, then one would expect it to be duplicated in prior kings list, as have been in many cases. Can you vouch for that?
Posted by typeZeiss (Member # 18859) on :
From what I have read/listened to on the net is that the biblical people such as David, Solomon, yakob (jacob) were the Hyksos. SUPPOSEDLY the names are not 100% the same however life events match up with the biblical accounts. For example they said you wont find a David among the hyksos but you will find a Hyksos king whose life matches up with David. You also wont find a Solomon but you will find someone with a similar name. however the religion those people believed in really doesn't make up with the religion of the Jews. I don't believe the term Hebrew was being used back then nor was the term Jew. I have not looked to deep into the subject though so I could be wrong. I don't think its to hard to believe, I mean Christianity seems to be a extension of the Osirian religion (again from what I have read, have not research this thoroughly yet). Not hard to believe the present day Jews cooped their present religion based off of whatever the Hyksos/Egyptians believed mixed in with some Mesopotamian/caaninite beliefs.
Posted by TruthAndRights (Member # 17346) on :
quote:Originally posted by Zioncity: Its way too many people stroking each others egos on this forum. And disrespectful **** talking responses that would get you punched in the mouth or a foot up your ass in real life. I thought knowledge was suppose to come with some type of humbleness? I expect that from white boys because they use the internet to voice the frustrations that dont have the balls to address in person but black men should know better.
this is the best post in the whole dam thread.... Posted by The Explorer (Member # 14778) on :
quote:Originally posted by typeZeiss: From what I have read/listened to on the net is that the biblical people such as David, Solomon, yakob (jacob) were the Hyksos. SUPPOSEDLY the names are not 100% the same however life events match up with the biblical accounts. For example they said you wont find a David among the hyksos but you will find a Hyksos king whose life matches up with David. You also wont find a Solomon but you will find someone with a similar name.
I'm not sure how these were pulled off, when very little in detail is generally known about the Hyksos, aside from relics here and there, particularly at their capital in Avaris.
quote: however the religion those people believed in really doesn't make up with the religion of the Jews.
Indeed.
quote: I don't believe the term Hebrew was being used back then nor was the term Jew.
The advocates of a Hebraic Hyksos generally believe that the etymology of 'Hebrew' can be sought out in Dynastic Egypt before the so-called Exodus. The problem here is that many of the terms explained off as such turn out to have highly tenuous and questionable links with the term "Hebrew". And even if the term for "Hebrew" was not used during the Hyksos era, that doesn't excuse why evidence of Hebraic language in Dynastic Egypt dating to the Hyksos period has not been brought forth.
quote: I have not looked to deep into the subject though so I could be wrong. I don't think its to hard to believe, I mean Christianity seems to be a extension of the Osirian religion (again from what I have read, have not research this thoroughly yet). Not hard to believe the present day Jews cooped their present religion based off of whatever the Hyksos/Egyptians believed mixed in with some Mesopotamian/caaninite beliefs.
There is no apparent link between Hyksos and Judaism that has been brought to my attention. Nor is there any reason for "Hyksos" to be used interchangeably with "Egyptians". Sure, it is reasonable to expect the roots of Judaism to be sought in Egypt, since Jewish identity heavily relies on Jewish biblical narratives, which in turn places them in Egypt before their settlement in the Levant. As such, it is reasonable to examine connections between Jewish biblical traditions and AE politics and cosmological systems, as well as those of the Canaanite Levant. These two geographical elements would have helped shape contemporary Jewish identity.
Posted by Brada-Anansi (Member # 16371) on :
Wiki said it corresponds with the Turin Papyrus The list also is believed to contain kings from the 15th Dynasty, which were the Hyksos ruling Lower Egypt and the Delta. Although the Hyksos rulers do not have cartouches, a hieroglyphic sign is added to indicate that they were foreigners. Typically on King Lists foreign rulers are not listed. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Turin_King_List
The name does not appear on the Turin papyrus as it appears to have been damage or lost as many others were lost, but names such as Salitis and Khayan do appeared in both.
Explorer
quote:If it is authentic, then one would expect it to be duplicated in prior kings list, as have been in many cases. Can you vouch for that?
Posted by The Explorer (Member # 14778) on :
Okay, if the name doesn't appear on the Turin King list, then why refer to it?
So you say that "Salitis and Khayan do appeared in both". These names appeared in "both" what? And what about the name Yakub Har or Yakub Baal. I mean, like you said, these names will only suggest that the said people were likely Semitic speakers, and that's just about it, should they actually be Hyksos names.
Posted by Brada-Anansi (Member # 16371) on :
Both the Menetho King's list and the Turin Papyrus list,other names that have not been damaged or lost matches up, keeping mind the Turin papyrus is older.
quote:Okay, if the name doesn't appear on the Turin King list, then why refer to it? So you say that "Salitis and Khayan do appeared in both". These names appeared in "both" what?
Posted by The Explorer (Member # 14778) on :
Okay, let me see if I understand you correctly.
1) You are saying that the names "Salitis" and "Khayan" appear on both the Manetho Kings list and the Turin Kings list. Right?
2) You are also saying that the name "Yakub Har" (Yakub Baal) does not appear on the Turin Kings list. Correct?
Now, if #1 is correct, then why does one not find these names on the Turin list, according to data given in your cited link?
If you say that it is because the places wherein they are supposed to be listed are damaged, then you have no evidence that these names where listed in there, do you? If you disagree, then what evidence are you going by, to say that the names you don't find on the Turin Kings list, were actually once on the list?
And now for question #2:
If the name Yakub Har doesn't appear on the Turin King's list, then wouldn't that be a self-defeating move?...since it proves nothing.
Posted by Brada-Anansi (Member # 16371) on :
quote:If the name Yakub Har doesn't appear on the Turin King's list, then wouldn't that be a self-defeating move?...since it proves nothing.
This list is from another source other than wiki the name does appear but no dates Fifteenth Dynasty The Fifteenth Dynasty arose from among the Hyskos people: desert Bedouins who emerged out of the Fertile Crescent (modern Iraq) to establish a short-lived governance over the northern Nile region, and ruled from 1674 to 1535 BC. Name Comments Dates Sheshi Ruled either 1 or 3 years 1674- ? Yakubher - ? Khyan - 30-40 Years Apepi I - 40 Years or more Khamudy - ? -1535
Meruserre King Yakub-Her's throne name (seen within a cartouche in picture to the right) means - "Strong is the Love of Re". Practically nothing is known from the reign of this king (sometimes called Yakobner) and it's doubtful if he has left any remain beside being mentioned in king list written 1500 years after his time on the throne. His Aramean name is related to the biblical Jacob, and has made some groups see this as "evidence" that the Hyksos people were the Israelites. This theory has of course no scientific value. He is by some thought to fit into one of the gaps in the 14th dynasty along with some 11 other rulers with Hyksos names not present in the Canon of Turin. He seems in that case to place at the end of that dynasty, and if he is from dynasty 15 his reign might be 8 years around 1634-1626 BC. His remains are from scarab-seals only (about two dozens) found mostly in Egypt, but also a few from Palestine and a single one from Nubia in the south. http://aregy.blogspot.com/ " target="_blank">http://www.ancient-egypt-history.com/2010_08_01_archive.html http://home.utah.edu/~rld13760/scarabs.html Did not find his original seal only this for now
Posted by The Explorer (Member # 14778) on :
Brada,
I have not found any of your Hyksos names on the Manetho list, which are generally based on several individuals who presumably copied his work later on.
In the Turin list, only the Kamudi name appears therein, from the list of names you have provided.
This then begs the question of what you are relying on to come up with a Hyksos name under YakubHer.
Posted by Brada-Anansi (Member # 16371) on :
The First time I heard the name was in Bernal's Black Athena forgot the vol.
Posted by The Explorer (Member # 14778) on :
I have access to the list of names under Turin papyrus and the Manetho list "compilations" by Eusebius, Africanus, and Flavius. None of these compilations reveal the names of Hyksos kings. I've already told you about that one name, Khamudi, found on the Turin king list; that's it.
Posted by Brada-Anansi (Member # 16371) on :
Ok I will dig some more later, I am trying to find his seal in the original state and not a repo.
Posted by The Explorer (Member # 14778) on :
Okay, I dug around further, and this is what I came up with, courtesy of Gary Greenberg:
Africanus:
Hyksos Kings-
Saites 19 Years Bnon 44 Years Pachnan 61 Years Staan 50 Years Archles 49 Years Aphophis 61 Years
Josephus
Hyksos Kings-
Saites 19 Years Bnon 44 Years Apachnan 36 Years, 7 mos. Aphophis 61 Years Iannas 50 Years, 1 mo. Assis 49 Years
Eusebius
Hyksos Kings-
Saites 19 Years Bnon 40 Years Archles 30 Years ** Aphophis 14 Years **
If there is more to be found on the Kings lists that I haven't mentioned, I'd welcome them being brought to my attention, along with the names of the sources and kings list. But for now, these are the names I can get my hands on from Manetho "compilations"...and still no sign of 'YakubHer'!
Posted by typeZeiss (Member # 18859) on :
quote:Originally posted by The Explorer:
quote:Originally posted by typeZeiss: From what I have read/listened to on the net is that the biblical people such as David, Solomon, yakob (jacob) were the Hyksos. SUPPOSEDLY the names are not 100% the same however life events match up with the biblical accounts. For example they said you wont find a David among the hyksos but you will find a Hyksos king whose life matches up with David. You also wont find a Solomon but you will find someone with a similar name.
I'm not sure how these were pulled off, when very little in detail is generally known about the Hyksos, aside from relics here and there, particularly at their capital in Avaris.
quote: however the religion those people believed in really doesn't make up with the religion of the Jews.
Indeed.
quote: I don't believe the term Hebrew was being used back then nor was the term Jew.
The advocates of a Hebraic Hyksos generally believe that the etymology of 'Hebrew' can be sought out in Dynastic Egypt before the so-called Exodus. The problem here is that many of the terms explained off as such turn out to have highly tenuous and questionable links with the term "Hebrew". And even if the term for "Hebrew" was not used during the Hyksos era, that doesn't excuse why evidence of Hebraic language in Dynastic Egypt dating to the Hyksos period has not been brought forth.
quote: I have not looked to deep into the subject though so I could be wrong. I don't think its to hard to believe, I mean Christianity seems to be a extension of the Osirian religion (again from what I have read, have not research this thoroughly yet). Not hard to believe the present day Jews cooped their present religion based off of whatever the Hyksos/Egyptians believed mixed in with some Mesopotamian/caaninite beliefs.
There is no apparent link between Hyksos and Judaism that has been brought to my attention. Nor is there any reason for "Hyksos" to be used interchangeably with "Egyptians". Sure, it is reasonable to expect the roots of Judaism to be sought in Egypt, since Jewish identity heavily relies on Jewish biblical narratives, which in turn places them in Egypt before their settlement in the Levant. As such, it is reasonable to examine connections between Jewish biblical traditions and AE politics and cosmological systems, as well as those of the Canaanite Levant. These two geographical elements would have helped shape contemporary Jewish identity.
Explorer before we start, let me say I have not thoroughly investigated the Hyksos yet so what I am speaking on is what I have gathered from this book or that book.
Now, as I understand it, Jewish historical scholars agree the Jewish language, "Hebrew" is a pidgin language and was later development. By later development I mean it was not formed until MUCH later after the exodus from Kmt, so it wouldn't have been present in Ancient Egypt. My understand is, just as the Hyksos were a mixed group of people coming into ancient Egypt, they were a mixed group coming out of egypt and as such a pidgin language naturally formed around that community.
Also, the religion that is practiced today by those calling themselves Jews was not present during the time the "Jews", for lack of a better word, were in "captivity" in Egypt. The present day religion of Judaism was formed in its present incarnation in a few phases (again from what I have heard historians of that religion speak on). You have the phase when they left Egypt and stoped worshiping Apis, or what I assume was Apis (the golden calf). Some one from Kmt, i.e. "Moses" then gave them monotheism (maybe the religion of Akheneton)? Then you have a second phase when they came out of captivity and their holy books were then actually written out (wasn't written before this time). At that time supposedly things changed a bit because of their long captivity and because of supposed political pressure from the Persians. You then have further development during the time of the Romans and then again in the middle ages in Europe.
I don't pretend to be a scholar on ANY of this, I am just parroting what I heard some authors say/hypothesis. Supposedly (on the word of these authors) Manetho and Josephus both attributed the development of what would become Hebrews/Jews to the Hyksos.
Some of these scholars have also attributed "Zion" to the town in Kmt called Zoan (spelling). From my understanding there also isnt ANY physical evidence of a ancient state of Israel. They said when you dig down to the time Israel supposedly existed you find little more than huts and what looks to be small villages in the areas.
Posted by The Explorer (Member # 14778) on :
quote:Originally posted by typeZeiss:
Now, as I understand it, Jewish historical scholars agree the Jewish language, "Hebrew" is a pidgin language and was later development. By later development I mean it was not formed until MUCH later after the exodus from Kmt, so it wouldn't have been present in Ancient Egypt.
But it was "re-created" predicated on an ancient existence of "Hebrew" as a language in its own right. Advocates of the "Hebraic Hyksos" don't treat Hebrew as a contemporary development.
quote: My understand is, just as the Hyksos were a mixed group of people coming into ancient Egypt
From what source?
quote: , they were a mixed group coming out of egypt and as such a pidgin language naturally formed around that community.
There is no evidence that the Hyksos spoke a "pidgin language", at least none that has been brought to my attention, and there is no evidence that the decline of Hyksos power is coincidental with the "Exodus". In fact, there is a considerable gap between time frames of the decline of the Hyksos and that implicated in biblical traditions of the "Exodus".
quote: Also, the religion that is practiced today by those calling themselves Jews was not present during the time the "Jews"
This actually shoots down biblical traditions of their eponymous Hebraic ancestors, according to which, the belief in a single divine supreme being has always been in the Jewish lineage.
quote: , for lack of a better word, were in "captivity" in Egypt. The present day religion of Judaism was formed in its present incarnation in a few phases (again from what I have heard historians of that religion speak on). You have the phase when they left Egypt and stoped worshiping Apis, or what I assume was Apis (the golden calf). Some one from Kmt, i.e. "Moses" then gave them monotheism (maybe the religion of Akheneton)?
One that comes to mind that links "Israelite" origins to Akhenaten school of spirituality is the work of Gary Greenberg. IMO, he makes a pretty convincing case for how the Israelites originated from a sect of Egyptians shortly after Akhenaten's demise from cross-referencing biblical narratives with archeological evidence and Egyptic texts, and how their native Egyptian ideas later on molded with Canaanite ideas to create a new identity under 'Israelites', along with what was to develop into Abrahamic religion of Judaism.
quote:Then you have a second phase when they came out of captivity and their holy books were then actually written out (wasn't written before this time). At that time supposedly things changed a bit because of their long captivity and because of supposed political pressure from the Persians. You then have further development during the time of the Romans and then again in the middle ages in Europe.
That Hebraic biblical texts were generally written after the presumed facts of the bible, is not in doubt.
quote: I don't pretend to be a scholar on ANY of this, I am just parroting what I heard some authors say/hypothesis. Supposedly (on the word of these authors) Manetho and Josephus both attributed the development of what would become Hebrews/Jews to the Hyksos.
Where did Manetho link the Hebrews to Hyksos ancestry?
quote: From my understanding there also isnt ANY physical evidence of a ancient state of Israel.
Actually, there are actual archaeological evidence of an ancient state of Israel in the form of inscriptions with Israelite King lists. The name for Israel in fact also appears in Egyptian record sometime after the Merneptah era, where the name first appears in history.
Posted by Byron Bumper (Member # 19992) on :
BEEP BEEP SCREECH KISS CUSS
Posted by Fabbeyond @ (Member # 22299) on :
quote:Originally posted by alTakruri: Jewish folklore has it that a voice from heaven (bat qol) declared everything that Ribbi Eli`ezer said was correct.
Fig 1 Three "chief elders" of the Judaean city Lachish bow before Sennacherib. From James B. Pritchard's THE ANCIENT NEAR EAST VOL I net copyright 1997 al~Takruri
Figs 2&3 Defeated Judahite soldiery of Lachish (closeup profiles and fuller scene)
The first image doesn't show can you refresh it ? Also the link with Elamites being confuse with Israelites isn't opening
Posted by the lioness, (Member # 17353) on :
Samuel?
Posted by Tukuler (Member # 19944) on :
Original first page now back in place. A page labeled 0 and beginning at 27 May 2011 had replaced it. Will restore any images on request provided they're in my saved page.
![[Embarrassed]](redface.gif)
???? LOL![[Eek!]](eek.gif)
woooOOOHH I'm scared now.![[Confused]](confused.gif)
![[Wink]](wink.gif)
![[Roll Eyes]](rolleyes.gif)
![[Smile]](smile.gif)
this is the best post in the whole dam thread.... 
